Metallica 2014

[sparkythetortoise]

But Metallica is also as dull as dishwater to fans of those bands, which is a big part of the reason why the older metallers in the early/mid 80s predominantly had no interest in Metallica.

Spot on - there is understandable assumption that they will at least appeal to us older rockers, staggering our way through the mud with our zimmer frames while nodding our balding heads. The reality is that for the average Hawkwind fan, Metallica are a tad mainstream, thank you very much, and we'd just as soon see Gong at the Glade Stage, or Hillage doing his System 7 thing.

...now if it had been Motorhead, that's an entirely different pint of snakebite

[Osama Jim Laden]

no the crux of my argument is that metal is shit, you know - intrinsically shit. that's why they don't have it at glastonbury....it's a festival that has good taste in music. you wander the site and hear good sounds day and night, not shit metal.

you think metal is shit and thats why glastonbury shouldn't have it? have the eavii upset you by not contacting you to arrange your perfect lineup? how sad, what a pickle..

as you state, its a festival that has good taste, which means, if you DO turn up to a stage and see/hear 'shit metal', if you turn around and walk away, it'll slowly fade away til you stumble across some other 'shit' music..

your arguement is is rubbish, your opinions worse..

glastonbury is the biggest & best festival in the world, ALL the biggest & best acts, no matter what genre deserve the chance to perform there and the crowd be entertained by them, metallica will do that.. probably not for me personally, i'm not much of a fan but to be so one-eyed about it is ridiculous..

good day old bean

[monkey1989]

the first 4 metallica albums are excellent , I dont understand why anybody would compare them to hawkwind ?? In what way are they similar

[math125]

Genuine question here. Isn't saying 'Glastonbury needs some metal bring on Metallica' a bit like saying 'Glastonbury needs some rock bring on Nickleback' or is that unfair due to their pre black album work? To put it another way how are metallica thought of within metal circles?

[CaledonianGonzo]

the first 4 metallica albums are excellent , I dont understand why anybody would compare them to hawkwind ?? In what way are they similar

It was me that brought up Hawkwind, but I didn't say they were similar or compare them - only that they were both operating in the area of 'heavy' music.

[FloorFiller]

Genuine question here. Isn't saying 'Glastonbury needs some metal bring on Metallica' a bit like saying 'Glastonbury needs some rock bring on Nickleback' or is that unfair due to their pre black album work? To put it another way how are metallica thought of within metal circles?

been talked about a few times on here and i think the general consensus is, even though they may have released some garbage in the past few years, their early work is seminal to the genre. those first four albums are some of the best in the thrash metal genre (and they were the first to break through properly to the mainstream - not necessarily a good thing by many people's books but an impressive feat for such a niche genre non the less)

[dan273]

Genuine question here. Isn't saying 'Glastonbury needs some metal bring on Metallica' a bit like saying 'Glastonbury needs some rock bring on Nickleback' or is that unfair due to their pre black album work? To put it another way how are metallica thought of within metal circles?

I don't think they can even be called "Metal". I mean... Really??? Heavy rock at best.

[dentalplan]

I don't think they can even be called "Metal". I mean... Really??? Heavy rock at best.

Are you talking about Metallica?

[Gnomicide]

Genuine question here. Isn't saying 'Glastonbury needs some metal bring on Metallica' a bit like saying 'Glastonbury needs some rock bring on Nickleback' or is that unfair due to their pre black album work? To put it another way how are metallica thought of within metal circles?

As a 47 year old who grew up listening to rock/metal and still has a soft spot for it, in my circles thety are very much loved. I don't know what the younger metal fans think.

When they first came along it was a bit of a shock to the system, faster and heavier than almost everything that was already out there but they are probably seen as quite tame by today's standards. I honestly don't know as I don't keep up with the newer bands.

[dan273]

Are you talking about Metallica?

Yes.

[FloorFiller]

Are you talking about Metallica?

Hardrockica

[dan273]

Hardrockica

LOVE IT!

[math125]

been talked about a few times on here and i think the general consensus is, even though they may have released some garbage in the past few years, their early work is seminal to the genre. those first four albums are some of the best in the thrash metal genre (and they were the first to break through properly to the mainstream - not necessarily a good thing by many people's books but an impressive feat for such a niche genre non the less)

I was interested to see on the Sonisphere forum there is a thread asking which artists would they swap with Download and most often it was Metallica. Maybe it's because the Sonisphere crowd have seen enough of them. I reckon it's fair to say though they 'broke through' but not with thrash metal, they sold out man lol

[kbearne]

Has speculation about many bands reached over 100 pages on a thread? I'm curious

[dentalplan]

Yes.

Oh right. Well yeah, they're absolutely metal. Not 100% all the time and albeit watered down, but mostly.

Edited May 1, 2014 by dentalplan

[Gnomicide]

... they sold out man lol

The furore when they announced Bob Rock was producing the Black Album It was very funny. I'm sure they were gutted when it went on to sell a gazillion copies.

[math125]

As a 47 year old who grew up listening to rock/metal and still has a soft spot for it, in my circles thety are very much loved. I don't know what the younger metal fans think.

When they first came along it was a bit of a shock to the system, faster and heavier than almost everything that was already out there but they are probably seen as quite tame by today's standards. I honestly don't know as I don't keep up with the newer bands.

That's fair enough though. Similar could be said about what younger fans really think of The Stones?

[cwaite123]

Has speculation about many bands reached over 100 pages on a thread? I'm curious

Arcade Fire has reached 154, pretty sure it was around 100 when they got announced.

[Yesiamaduck]

Arcade Fire has reached 154, pretty sure it was around 100 when they got announced.

Lets be honest though thats mostly anoraks posting setlists

[kbearne]

Arcade Fire has reached 154, pretty sure it was around 100 when they got announced.

Ah yeah, well its bloody good publicity anyway even if they aren't playing (which I'm now convinced they are), not that they need it

[spikepacy]

This whole stream is amazing and the good thing is nobody really knows how it will go down. Personally I think they are definitely an appropriate band to headline as they've proved they put on a show at many of the biggest events across the planet and also because Glastonbury is a Festival of Contemporary Performing Arts. The moment it starts to become to formulaic with it's lineup it will lose part of what makes it special. Personally for me, Beyonce headlining was a WTF moment, but it didn't matter as I was off watching motorcyclists trying to kill each other riding on walls at the other end of the site. There are lots of opinions on whether it will work or not and the good thing is, we'll all find out in less than 2 months! \m/

[bekimo]

Metallica have played 3 out of the 5 Sonisphere Knebworth events. And when they weren't doing that they got in at download. The rock festivals love them. They always get packed out crowds and even the repeated headliner thing at Sonisphere doesn't seem to matter to them. But I think if you tried to put them at somewhere like bloodstock, the metal snobs may have something to say about it as to those metal fans, Metallica are just too commercial/mainstream!

[autoinflate]

you think metal is shit and thats why glastonbury shouldn't have it? have the eavii upset you by not contacting you to arrange your perfect lineup? how sad, what a pickle..

no, i think metal is shit which is why glastonbury _doesn't_ have it....until now.

as you state, its a festival that has good taste, which means, if you DO turn up to a stage and see/hear 'shit metal', if you turn around and walk away, it'll slowly fade away til you stumble across some other 'shit' music..

but you don't really find shit music very often....you certainly don't find much, if any, metal....

[kbearne]

Doesn't any band that is good and becomes popular become mainstream in the end though? I don't care if they are, all I care about is if I like the music which I do, I'm also watching them at Soni this year and looking forward to it

[autoinflate]

In your opinion. in my opinion charty dance music is shit. but this is Glastonbury and there is something for everyone, you want your dance all over the shop do creamfields, I want my heavy rock / metal acts I'll go to download. Glastonbury inst about one genre - that's prob we all go, and why we all constantly talk about it on here. Each to their own, go and be somewhere else Saturday night and enjoy, leave the people who want to enjoy Metallica to it. personally I wont be anywhere else, I am so buzzing about Metallica its untrue. But the Sunday I will be elsewhere enjoying myself in the many sights / sounds Glastonbury has to offer

yes, and have a great time, but don't expect to find any metal when you're out and about....they don't really have it for some reason