not logged in
| re: Meat back on the road.......... | |
Posted by:  |
Klasien 07:23 am UTC 03/03/08 |
| In reply to: | re: Meat back on the road.......... - ricgough 03:37 am UTC 03/03/08 |
| He's booked for that night... whether he actually shows up remains to be seen... but I doubt they would be selling tickets for a show that they know will never take place... K. > I hope your info is reliable. It'd be a shame to see him > bowing out the way he did at Newcastle - no matter how > much some on here would love it. > > I Just hope the marathon tours are a thing of the past. > For a man of his age they're just unsustainable, > especially the way he performs > . > For an artist of his stature it's quality rather than > quantiy that's important. Both he and Jim should be > thinking in terms of legacy now, be it together or in > persuit of seperate projects. > > I just want something of quality that will stand the test > of time. I think that's what most fans want of both the > Stein and loaf variety. > > I'm not nescessarily sure a 'jukebox musical' is the way > forward, but knowing Jim's work, he'll have something up > his sleeve that's a bit special that isn't just 'bells and > whistles'. > > As for Meat, god only knows how he'll produce something > 'world class' without the help of his mentor, but it's > more important now than ever before, if he wants to be > taken seriously that is. > > One thing though, if Jim was willing to work with Meat 2 > years ago, then Meat's ability to record a decent album > hasn't deteriorated that much since then, especially with > the multi-layering and pitch-corrective techniques that > are now available. > > To then go and tour it may be a different matter but I > can't see Jim and his backers thinking it better to > promote a 'bat' musical without Meat than with him. > > After all a lot of 'bat' fans will see Meat as the public > face of the franchise, rightly or wrongly. > > I would suggest that this is good news for the success of > that project, but personally I'd like to see Jim have that > stab at 'neverland' or a project unrelated to the whole > 'bat' saga. It was a flawed plan for Meat to put 'bat 3' > in action without Jim and for the same reasons it would be > a mistake for Jim to do a 'bat' musical without Meat, > after all they're the two elements that make 'bat'. > > I think the BOOH handle has been used to sell too much > sub-standard material in the past and I include the 'bad > for good/Deadringer campaigns in that. One truly special > album would have sold more than the two combined in that > instance, I guaruntee it. > > A Steinman 'bat 3' would've given it some relevance to to > the music of the era as Bat 2 did, with it's imaginative > use of electronicly produced sound and the latest > production techniques. > > Both proper 'bat' albums were first and foremost produced > for their time; they were very much 'now' albums yet > managed to achieve timelessness as well rather than just > harking back to the late 80's early 90's as the Child > effort invariably does. > > they might as well have called it 'permenant vacation 2'. > The irony is that 'bat's' unique selling point was it was > so different to the mass produced stuff that was endlessly > churned out in the late 80's. It made Meat sound his age, > Bat 2 made him sound ageless. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Meat back on the road.......... - ricgough 03:37 am UTC 03/03/08 |
| Next: | Just to start conversation - Belmont 05:34 am UTC 03/02/08 |
| Thread: | |