| re: Its interesting | |
|
Posted by: |
Vin 02:31 pm UTC 03/08/07 |
| In reply to: | Its interesting - rockfenris2005 12:53 pm UTC 03/08/07 |
| I guess there's two ways to look at it: Your way: anything written by Jim belongs on a Bat album. The other way: anything good written by Jim, in the same stylistic vein as previous Bat songs. Jim is quite capable of writing a sub-par song now and then, and of writing good songs in a somewhat different style. I subscribe to the latter. > > I don't get all these comments about "it's not worthy of a > Bat album." Meat Loaf, himself, goes by this theory. > > As far as I'm concerned what's "worthy of a Bat album" is > songs by Jim Steinman related to the Neverland saga. That > means songs like "Dance In My Pants" and "Stark Raving > Love" should be included, not to mention all of those Meat > turned down for "The Final At Bat" which included some > rippers. > > The only thing that's "not worthy of a Bat album", to me, > is songs that haven't been written by Jim Steinman. That's > why I refer to TMIL as Meat Loaf's vanity project, having > nothing to do with what BAT III is, essentially, and > hiring other songwriters who didn't even make an attempt > to emulate the Neverland story. But, then again, why would > they? Still, they missed the whole point of a BOOH album > in the first place, by my understanding anyway. It was > always, to me, and to Jim and God knows who else, a > recording based on songs written for "Neverland". > > I think everything on the 2 Bats could fit into > "Neverland" in some way. Not necessarily as Peter and > Wendy songs but Captain Hook and other characters as well. > I know I see "Paradise" as a Hook song recalling the > conception of Wendy because he's Wendy's father. Still, > all this paragraph just remains my opinion and I'm > extrapolating from the point. > > I think anything works on a BAT album just as long as it's > written by Jim. And I'd still love for Meat to come here, > personally, and explain why so many of those songs were > rejected. > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | Its interesting - rockfenris2005 12:53 pm UTC 03/08/07 |
| Next: | re: Jim's Worse Song - Smeghead 11:45 am UTC 03/08/07 |
| Thread: | |