MERGED ---> Rock Star: INXS + Rock star INXS + And the new lead singer of INXS is... - Page 24 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-21-2005, 05:50 PM   #346
Refugee
 
oktobergirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the middle
Posts: 1,874
Local Time: 07:52 AM
While I was rooting for Marty to win, I am not suprised they picked JD.

That said, I do call myself a real diehard original INXS fan and the only reason I tuned in to watch this series was to see how INXS had fared after Hutch died.

Sadly, not very well. And yeah, they're new song sucks, and sounds to me like a very bad rip off of "What You Need" ( same guitar riff, exactly!!)

If Marty had been picked as the singer, I would have maybe bought tickets to see them again, because I think he is a true artist.

JD? no way.
__________________

__________________
oktobergirl is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 06:11 PM   #347
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by timothius


Could you articulate why it's repulsive?

I lean more to the cheesey side.
What if, 10 years ago, Neil Finn smoked his way into a coma he never returned from, and then Crowded House decided the best way forward was to go on a tacky US REALITY TV SHOW to replace him?

What if Bono drunkenly decided to see if he actually was God and jumped out the door of the Vertigo plane mid flight? You think U2 would get a wonderous reception should they try and replace him via a shithouse reality tv show? I'd suggest that 99.9% of this site would be repulsed by the idea.

INXS & Michael Hutchence hold a place in Australia similar to the place U2 hold in Ireland or someone like Bruce Springsteen holds in the US. Everyone here kinda respectfully averted their attention and sort of understood while INXS fumbled around with a few truly awful replacement singers, but the reaction here to this show is the end of any respect they had left.

It is MUSIC BUSINESS, but it's one of it's very lowest points.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 06:56 PM   #348
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers


What if, 10 years ago, Neil Finn smoked his way into a coma he never returned from, and then Crowded House decided the best way forward was to go on a tacky US REALITY TV SHOW to replace him?

What if Bono drunkenly decided to see if he actually was God and jumped out the door of the Vertigo plane mid flight? You think U2 would get a wonderous reception should they try and replace him via a shithouse reality tv show? I'd suggest that 99.9% of this site would be repulsed by the idea.

INXS & Michael Hutchence hold a place in Australia similar to the place U2 hold in Ireland or someone like Bruce Springsteen holds in the US. Everyone here kinda respectfully averted their attention and sort of understood while INXS fumbled around with a few truly awful replacement singers, but the reaction here to this show is the end of any respect they had left.

It is MUSIC BUSINESS, but it's one of it's very lowest points.
The situation that INXS was in when Hutchence died is nearly the polar opposite of where U2 has been at for the past 18 years. U2 has been the most popular band in the world since 1987, while INXS's popularity completely fell apart after 1990.

8 years after Hutchence death, INXS needed a way to re-introduce INXS to people who had either forgotten or never even heard of INXS. This is not a problem U2 would ever have at this stage no matter what happened. But even if U2 did the same thing, even though they would not need to, I would get over it and respect their decision and continue to follow the band. Some people can't get over the U2 tie in with APPLE and the I-Pods, which is a shame, because this has just been a fantastic year for U2 concerts and the album is awesome. At the end of the day, the people of Australia don't get a vote in the matter because their not in the band. What matters most is the music the band produce together, and that alone should be the determining factor of whether or not people continue to follow the band.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 07:07 PM   #349
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by KhanadaRhodes

hmmm, thanks for quoting my post and not actually replying to anything i said! and also twisting everything i said around to the point where your reply bears little resemblance to what i actually said. i don't recall stating that i preferred mig because he was from australia. i just happen to prefer mig over jd and marty.

Wow, what a way to go off topic. I never would of guessed I'd get attacked for making a simple response in a thread like this. There is nothing wrong with what I posted.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 07:11 PM   #350
Paper Gods
Forum Administrator
 
KhanadaRhodes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: a vampire in the limousine
Posts: 60,607
Local Time: 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Wow, what a way to go off topic. I never would of guessed I'd get attacked for making a simple response in a thread like this. There is nothing wrong with what I posted.
all i did was ask you why on earth you quoted me given that you weren't really replying to me at all? and uhh yeah, my post was on topic.
__________________
KhanadaRhodes is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 07:22 PM   #351
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by KhanadaRhodes

all i did was ask you why on earth you quoted me given that you weren't really replying to me at all? and uhh yeah, my post was on topic.
Explain to me how the following quote has anything to do with the topic of this thread:

"hmmm, thanks for quoting my post and not actually replying to anything i said! and also twisting everything i said around to the point where your reply bears little resemblance to what i actually said."

I did reply to your post mentioning that my friends and I were dedicated INXS fans and that those OZ only releases were actually released in the USA.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 07:30 PM   #352
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the late 70s, early 80's...
Posts: 8,465
Local Time: 02:52 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
What if, 10 years ago, Neil Finn smoked his way into a coma he never returned from, and then Crowded House decided the best way forward was to go on a tacky US REALITY TV SHOW to replace him?


Elements of truth (Although I'd like to think that Neil has layed off some forms of smoking after certian events this year). My first reaction to that would be... "Good God I hope Tim wins".

Replacing Neil in CH would be a much more difficult task than Hutchance in INXS, because Neil was the singer/songwriter, wheras (despite the credits) Hutchance was really the singer & Andrew was the songwriter.

If INXS's overall focus was on songwriting then Hutchance's death isn't a major blow to a goal of music excellence. The problem is, I argue, that INXS's main aim from about 1985 has been popularity, and from that context, Hutchance death was devestating. And could only be remidied (as Sting2 I believe is arguing) by somthing like this.

Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
What if Bono drunkenly decided to see if he actually was God and jumped out the door of the Vertigo plane mid flight? You think U2 would get a wonderous reception should they try and replace him via a shithouse reality tv show? I'd suggest that 99.9% of this site would be repulsed by the idea.
I think U2's motivation to replace Bono would be different to why INXS wants to replace Hutchance. Despite the last 2 albums, outside of Bono I don't believe any members of the band have a profound need to public adoration and popularity. The reason why such an idea would repulse them is because it runs completely against U2's nature.

Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
INXS & Michael Hutchence hold a place in Australia similar to the place U2 hold in Ireland or someone like Bruce Springsteen holds in the US. Everyone here kinda respectfully averted their attention and sort of understood while INXS fumbled around with a few truly awful replacement singers, but the reaction here to this show is the end of any respect they had left.
Personally, INXS's place in Australia baffles/baffled me. They go completely against the grain of what Australia professes to be, this down-to-earth equal group of blokes etc. Sure they grew up on the pub-circuit (as did most other bands) but from about before What You Need on, their sole aim was to succeed overseas, which while fine in itself lead to them becoming a complete group of posers thinking they were God's musical gift to the world.

And it's not as though INXS are unique in having to replace band members, I'm hardpressed to find a 1980's Australian band that didn't have to replace a band member at some point or another.

Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
It is MUSIC BUSINESS, but it's one of it's very lowest points.
Oh I agree. But it's cheesey, obviously driven towards popularity and not producing good music. Too be repulsive it would have to run completely against the grain of what the band was about - which I really don't think it did.

I'm honestly not ripping on INXS for the sake of it, they have a decent collection on them and Andrew isn't a half-bad songwriter and Hutchance was a great lead singer.
__________________
timothius is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 07:32 PM   #353
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 04:52 PM
I was only bringing up Australia as a way of explaining why there may be a difference of feeling from (some or most but not all) Australians here on the matter. What I mean is, yes internationaly INXS as a band dropped way off after 1990, but in Australia they hold a bit of a higher cultural place as a band like U2 does to Ireland. That's all.

Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
What matters most is the music the band produce together, and that alone should be the determining factor of whether or not people continue to follow the band.
Sting, it's a REALITY TV SHOW. You really think it's about the music? Not simply about squeezing the brand for more $$$? If it was 'about the music' then I'd suggest that trawling the depths of a crappy reality tv karaoke contest wouldn't even be considered as an option...
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 09:49 PM   #354
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 12:22 PM
White
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 10:19 PM   #355
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 07:52 AM
it not my usual style to give a thumb's up post

but, I think most everything Sting has posted is correct
an objective, unemotional take on this whole affair

I wish INXS and JD success

there are so many more crappy bands out their making money
these guys deserve a fair shake
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 11:22 PM   #356
War Child
 
thatsnotmypuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 909
Local Time: 03:52 PM
I must say the new "world premiere" song 'Easy Easy' sounds just like a song they premiered on the 'Full Moon Dirty Hearts' tour back in 1993/1994(?). It is almost identical - so yeah - it sounds like INXS, JD sounds like Michael Hutchence - but who here finds INXS' sound really relevant these days?

I'm all for 80's throwbacks - but I dont get why they are trying to dress up the old INXS and sell it as the new INXS.

Poor JD - welcome to cover band hell...
__________________
thatsnotmypuppy is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 11:32 PM   #357
War Child
 
thatsnotmypuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 909
Local Time: 03:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers

INXS & Michael Hutchence hold a place in Australia similar to the place U2 hold in Ireland or someone like Bruce Springsteen holds in the US.
Bullshit.

Arguably Midnight Oil would be held in such high esteem - but even here in Australia the last two INXS Michael Hutchence albums died in the arse. 'Full Moon..' and 'Elegantly Wasted' were both flops. Even 'Welcome To Wherever You Are' didnt sell more than 70,000 copies.

Michael Hutchence's solo album went gold - but only on shipments to stores - actual sales were very low - and it debuted at number 2, dropped to number 47 and was out of the top 100 in 4 weeks.

Even their greatest hits collections werent huge sellers, 'Rock Star INXS' was passed on by every commercial network - and Foxtel only took up the show when the broadcast rights cost was lowered.

Basically INXS were over in Australia by 1992. The tours weren't sell outs (and I know this - having been to a number of post 'X' tour shows in Syd, Melb and Bris) and the tour that was cancelled due to MH death was also far from sold out.

Also the reaction to INXS fronted by Terence Trent D'Arby, Suze De Marchi and Jon Stevens was far from positive.

It will be really interesting to see where the "new" INXS plays in Australia. With the series not rating well, but with consiuderable publicity, they may try to book the Entertainment Centres or The Domain/Music Bowl etc - but I doubt they'd sell out. I can see theatre shows only.
__________________
thatsnotmypuppy is offline  
Old 09-21-2005, 11:47 PM   #358
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In the late 70s, early 80's...
Posts: 8,465
Local Time: 02:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by thatsnotmypuppy


Bullshit.

Arguably Midnight Oil would be held in such high esteem - but even here in Australia the last two INXS Michael Hutchence albums died in the arse. 'Full Moon..' and 'Elegantly Wasted' were both flops. Even 'Welcome To Wherever You Are' didnt sell more than 70,000 copies.

Michael Hutchence's solo album went gold - but only on shipments to stores - actual sales were very low - and it debuted at number 2, dropped to number 47 and was out of the top 100 in 4 weeks.

Even their greatest hits collections werent huge sellers, 'Rock Star INXS' was passed on by every commercial network - and Foxtel only took up the show when the broadcast rights cost was lowered.

Basically INXS were over in Australia by 1992. The tours weren't sell outs (and I know this - having been to a number of post 'X' tour shows in Syd, Melb and Bris) and the tour that was cancelled due to MH death was also far from sold out.

Also the reaction to INXS fronted by Terence Trent D'Arby, Suze De Marchi and Jon Stevens was far from positive.

It will be really interesting to see where the "new" INXS plays in Australia. With the series not rating well, but with consiuderable publicity, they may try to book the Entertainment Centres or The Domain/Music Bowl etc - but I doubt they'd sell out. I can see theatre shows only.


I've heard the Concert For Life constantly referenced as a turning point for their popularity in Australia.

And I think they'll be luck to pull the Horden.
__________________
timothius is offline  
Old 09-22-2005, 02:57 AM   #359
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:52 AM
That's possibly why they are trying to cash in on America, more asses to put in the seats, more ears for listening and more pockets for doling out cash for albums and t-shirts etc.

It's clearly a commercial move, I couldn't fathom an argument otherwise, if you have one I'd love to read it.

INXS has been dead here too for years. About all they had left was the integrity of what they had done with Hutch and a pretty damn good back catalog of songs.

Really, the only path I see to relevance would have been to change it up, stir the pot and go at it differently.

Clearly they chose the guy who could mime Hutch the best because it was the path of least resitance and at the same time it's an acknowledgement that people don't think much of them (on a mass scale) without Hutch.

At the end of the day this was the easiest way to gain a spike of popularity in an effort to give them momentum for the future. Look, I am an INXS fan but they are all but over creatively and are basically relegated to 'hits' band. People in America know who they are, they just don't care. Lots of people know who U2 are and don't care either, look at their singles chart success in America over the last several years, abyssmal. It's not unique to U2, it's the apathy of the music buying public. YOu have to have the image to be popular, this is why coveting popularity is such a bastard. It doesn't make good sense, creatively or musically the only thing that fuels it are ego and commercialism.

The only people buying loads of digestable pop fluff and rock pop redundancy are those who digest it and toss it away. The people who aren't music fans with 500 CD's and albums in their collections, these are the people who only buy compilations with the "hits" on them. INXS wants another hit, like a crackhead needs another hit as Chris Rock once said. A total commercial move. This is what is repulsive to some people, that music is not good enough to stand on it's own merits, it insults the listener that they need to be "sold" into thinking somethings good.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 09-22-2005, 04:13 AM   #360
War Child
 
thatsnotmypuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 909
Local Time: 03:52 PM


If anyone cares - the man on the far left is Mig. This is back in his dark days of kids TV here in Australia!!

Cringe!
__________________

__________________
thatsnotmypuppy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com