not logged in
| re: I care, yes. | |
Posted by:  |
pidunk 09:20 am UTC 09/05/07 |
| In reply to: | re: I care, yes. - Jacqueline 11:12 pm UTC 09/04/07 |
In this thread I agree with things said by both you and Bright_Eyes, each respectively specific and general, and on opposite sides of the spectrum. In terms of acknowledgement by Meat Loaf, I agree that there should be mention, but at the same time I have been insensed by the gratuitious nature of some of those, with the melodramatic which we saw in May of this year in England. So, whether Meat mentions Jim in passing, or Meat mentions Jim with a gusto of flare, it seems to me somewhat like he is staging something, and when it would come from the heart is a time that I feel would be obvious. It just seems to me like there is too much "effort" which has left the stage and found its way to the category of the tired. Maybe there is too much emphasis on Jim, maybe there is too little. Maybe there are too many rumors about why there is either situation. The whole thing here is blown way out of proportion, so much so that a writer had to write, that Jim was mentiond in passing. The writer would better had left it alone, and if the writer cared, take that "in passing" and expand it....to its maximum, which a good writer could do. A writer makes the spin, and whether it really is true or not has not been the priority of many a good number of recent journalists. There is alot to care about, and mention of Jim is the smallest part of it, when dealing with third hand accounts and the ramblings of Meat Loaf. > Meat deserves a ton of credit for the success of the > "Bat(s)" - it was his voice and image and efforts that > brought Jim's songs and vision to life. Meat's not a lazy > man and his efforts know no end (for better or worse). > > If this was a documentary filmed during WTTN, I'd have no > issue. But, when you build a live show around the 3 Bat > albums - then film a documentary during it - I think it's > fair to mention, with some thanks and respect the man > that wrote the vast portion of the songs. The writer who > gave you the material and concept that made the > difference. > > That's my opinion. It's fine for people to disagree. > > I've seen Meat live dozens and dozens and dozens of times. > Many, many times he's mentioned Jim on stage - with > thanks. It seemed to make both Meat and the audience > happy. I wish he'd taken the opportunity here. Maybe he > did and some dumb editor clipped it. I don't know. > Still, I'm not happy to see a Variety review that claims > Jim is mentioned "once in passing." Clearly the reviewer > thought it odd on some level as well. > > xxx > Jacqueline | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: I care, yes. - Jacqueline 11:12 pm UTC 09/04/07 |
| Next: | re: I care, yes. - Pudding 10:18 am UTC 09/05/07 |
| Thread: |
|