not logged in
| re: Jim makes and appearance in Dublin | |
Posted by:  |
pidunk 12:46 am UTC 06/06/07 |
| In reply to: | re: Jim makes and appearance in Dublin - Klasien 01:08 pm UTC 06/05/07 |
> > > > > > > > > I do believe Meat is trying to save face by including Jim > > > and his music as much as possible in this current tour, I > > > have been told by people who have seen various shows in > > > this tour that he has indeed used the clip before. This > > > reeks more of a return to the glory of Bat II, when I > > > think he used the clip in many shows as well than of > > > anything else? > > > > > > Why do you suppose, after the making of Bat2, he went and > > did Welcome To The Neighborhood, at all, without pushing > > the Bat reference, and then now, pushed the Bat reference > > with so much awful vibes connected with it? If the title > > is the thing, rather than the involvement, where does this > > logic come from? I have the feeling like the use of the > > title is exploitive, the behavior tantrumic, and the > > publicity is diluting Jim's authority. Why is it that Meat > > can't have his cake and eat it too, without adding a bat > > to the recipe? > > > > Because back in the days of WTTN Meat could afford to wait > for Jim? Because back then his body and voice were less > unpredictable and he felt he had time? The time of WTTN production for that 1996 release would have been about 1994-1995, if I estimate according to the Desmond Child calendar of music 1989, and at that time, Jim did not believe that he was being sought out for anything with the demand that had existed before. Jim was seeking to find projects which fit his own realistic life structure, and Meat had this project which was done. Even if people performed Jim's songs then, they did not need Jim's involvement for that. However, previously Jim was in the studio in 1992 working on a project with someone, and I do not know for sure what that relates to in reference to Meat's or to this timeline. Of course we do know that WDTW came along in the period, as Jim was interested in working on scores he said for movies but apparently this one for live stage "snuck through" as he did not describe it to me. In this particular period when it was between 1994 and 1996, my phone contact with Jim was a blend of sporadic and daily. When it was not sporadic, it was daily. I can tell you that he was exhausted working all hours of day and night, living much like a mole in hiding, and getting things done. He did more than you would be able to imagine, and more than I then knew. The point is, that Meat still had his name, his persona, his hits and his recording royalties from previous works, and WTTN was done with the understanding that his name would carry it through. After all, how could he not assume that after the BAT2 success? The problem was, that Meat did not realize then, the weight that the theme of BAT, as it related to Jim's blend with Meat, was the formula that made the difference. He only had the chance to figure that out, after seeing the difference between BAT2 and WTTN. Meat has many contradictions in resolve. If, taking the way he described himself in 1978, as a train, he felt he had the drive to make any obstacle disappear and the album a hit, he could and should have applied those energies to his own works such as WTTN. There wasn't a marketing machine the likes of what is being employed at this time. And the only drive he is having now, is making sure he mentions Jim in this process. When Jim sent the email to Meat suggesting a third installment, it was not Meat's hand that pressed "enter" and it was not Meat's idea. It was also replete with assumptions. But it was Meat's ticket. We could surmise all this: Germinating in this mind of comparisons between relative successes and relative failures, there was a reason to use BAT3 because both BAT1 and BAT2 worked for him. He liked the hype, he liked it that his train had a locomotive that had its own steam. He wasn't tired of waiting, he was tired of being the train. When Jim said he would be unavailable for a period of time, it did not matter the reason. And, if Jim was really ill as has been believed, if the elder Jim was ill for example, while my Jim was okay, or if there was one Jim and Jim was ill, it does not take a sophisticate to realize how crass it is to spit in the face to do the project in the face of that.....and then later call it impatience and selfishness to the media. When the ticket came out of the toaster (using Sabrina The Teenage Witch as analogy) Meat's own senses of his own purposes made their resolve that it was going to give him that blood-pumping adrenaline of excitement, a reason to be there, to be hyped, to be extolled, to have a generation behind him, like he is one of their gods. His train had gone, and Jim's inability to do that, did not stop his train. Meat was going to do that, be that, and be there, extolled, adrenalined, and hyped. He devised a story then, that HE was about BAT and BAT was about HE, and nothing would get in his way. It was his justification, in order to get those things he wanted. It isn't about age. It isn't about the music. It isn't about the voice. It is about the glory. >Or perhaps because > Meat wanted to create his own persona rather than going > around being the Monster to Jim's Frankenstein? Jim has > often been introduced as the man who created Meat Loaf, > and, true as that may be, Meat hated it. So in that > respect even the subtitle to Bat III makes sense. Even > when he used WTTN to partially break free he kept the door > open for Bat III. There'd been so many albums between BAT and BAT2, that before BAT2 and after Dead Ringer (someone please explain to me why "Dead Ringer" came out the same year as Bad For Good, when Meat's voice was supposed to have been like lawnmower blades at the time? Are all the sites wrong about 1981 as its release date? And why, in the 1999 Bat Out Of Hell documentary is Meat saying he "still" sounded the way he did twenty years earlier, rather than saying he sounded that way "again"?) there would hardly have been a thought of any resurrection of Bat Out Of Hell in any context whatever. There were two sequels to Bat Out Of Hell, one performed by Jim, one performed by Meat, and that they neither had the BAT title, did not disappoint anyone's expectations. Meat had always until then taken the back seat to Jimmy's lead, and made proper acknowledgement in the press to Jim's participation and direction. It only came about when Meat saw he was independent of Jim, that he began seeing himself as his own creation, as would be the case of anyone who leaves their coach, but that the coach was the coach, is still the truth. Meat could have been told he had a reason to be more pumped than he had a moral right to be, and that provoked Jim to maintain his role as coach. It is not that Meat was upset at Jim's claims. Jim reacted to Meat's new claims. Meat is presenting himself as like the plant in Little Shop Of Horrors. "Feed me". I daresay I'm not the first to think of that analogy: look at his television interview recently. > > > > > > > > > Then again, if you are doing the 3 bat albums in one tour > > > and are trying to be as close to the originals as you can > > > be, you would expect the Jim intro on You Took The Words, > > > now wouldn't you... So perhaps he is just doing what he > > > thinks does the Bat Trilogy most justice? > > > > Why did it become his mission to do the Bat Trilogy at all > > when it was Jim's vision? I know these questions have been > > asked and re-asked on this board throughout all the > > production time, but I think an assumption has been made > > somewhere wrongly that it was for him to be the ultimater > > of the theme? Clearly, Jim has a vision. There is no > > validity to the taking of Jim's visions and calling it > > Meat's. > > Meat has a tendency of thinking he is as important to the > Bat Trilogy as Jim is, seeing as he is the main face for > the music? Jim may write it but without Meat there would > be no more Bats?? So it might have become as much Meat's > intention as it was Jim's to finish the Bat cycle? There was no "bat cycle" until Meat declared there is a Bat cycle, even though Jim said he thought of it as a trilogy. As of 1987 Jim was prepared to lay it down in favor of real life pressures and other directions. The only life that breathes in the Bat Out Of Hell theme, comes from Jim. Call it that, claim it to be that, but if there is no Jim in its very core, it is not Bat. It is not sentiment, it is real because a singer does not make it. A singer is a singer. There is no other singer that carries a songwriter's legacy, not even Dionne Warwick. Dionne Warwick cannot take any recording studio and say she is recording San Jose 2. But her voice is on San Jose, the song is her song, and there is no other recognition of the song without thought of her voice and so it is her franchise. NOOOOOOO. Doesn't exist. Burt has his own reputation, and San Jose is his. Not hers. Not even Ronnie Spector can claim she holds the monopoly on Be My Baby. Meat's people, Meat's statements, and his marketing and public relations is in a twilight of fantasy. | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Jim makes and appearance in Dublin - Klasien 01:08 pm UTC 06/05/07 |
| Next: | re: Jim makes and appearance in Dublin - Klasien 02:11 pm UTC 06/06/07 |
| Thread: |
|