Accelerate - REM album - March 31 2008

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I think he's a very good singer. He has a lovely, warm voice.

Trouble is, he's doing more and more yelling of random lyrics.

I'll tell him what I damn well feel like telling him.
 
Lynching? That's not the REM way. I will prepare for mild eye-rolling and perhaps a few tsks. Maybe a lecture on recycling.
 
here, If Mr. Buck will sit on you the only recycling you'll be doing is ashes to ashes, dust to dust
 
corianderstem said:
Lynching? That's not the REM way.

Well, Georgia WAS part of the Confederacy... :ohmy:

I have to agree with Cori, though. The "WOOOOORRRRLLD" on I'm Gonna DJ really bugs me, though not as much as the live Man on the Moon shenanigans. Of course, I tend to skip through R.E.M.'s big hits when listening to live stuff because they don't do anything very interesting with them, or infuse them with the kind of power U2 puts into some of their overplayed material.

I bought this today, I figured $9.99 was about as much as I should pay for 35 minutes. I'm warming up to Horse to Water, Until the Day is Done still has terrible lyrics and is a poor, poor imitation of Swan Swan H (among others). Houston is still too short, and now I think Mr. Richards and Sing For The Submarine are the two best tracks.

One last thing: Why didn't Staring Down The Barrell Of The Middle Distance not make the album? We know it wasn't cut for time. It's probably better than half the songs that did make it.

Any takers?
 
I just got this today. It usually takes me a while to digest a new album, and I have a feeling this one will be exactly the same.

Man-Sized Wreath and Accelerate seem like standouts so far. :heart:
 
corianderstem said:


Dude. Stop yelling instead of singing on the uptempo songs. It's seriously fucking annoying.

He really yells on Living Well is the Best Revenge and at first I was wondering if he is losing his voice like someone else we all know and love. But apparently he just likes yelling these days. (But he better not let me hear him yelling These Days.)
 
lazarus said:



I have to agree with Cori, though.

You agree with someone besides yourself for once? That's a first.


lazarus said:




One last thing: Why didn't Staring Down The Barrell Of The Middle Distance not make the album? We know it wasn't cut for time. It's probably better than half the songs that did make it.

Any takers?


Never 'eard it.....
 
joyfulgirl said:


But apparently he just likes yelling these days. (But he better not let me hear him yelling These Days.)

Joyful, I Believe Cujo may be posting with your name.....

:wink:
 
Intedomine, just because I rarely agree with your awful tastes doesn't mean I don't see eye to eye with anyone else here.

"Staring" was one of the new songs played several times during the Dublin rehearsal shows.

If I gave more of a shit, I'd upload it somewhere.
 
Lancemc said:
OMG, Stephen Colbert wearing Accelerate digipack as a codpiece. God I love this show.

I just saw it. It was brilliant! :lmao:

Stipe's not in good voice, though--or not in great voice anyway. Sounds tight on the upper range, just like on the record. :sad:

But they all look great. :up:
 
One last thing: Why didn't Staring Down The Barrell Of The Middle Distance not make the album? We know it wasn't cut for time. It's probably better than half the songs that did make it.

Any takers?


Mike was asked about this in an interview lately and said he doesn't know why it didn't make it. He would have preferred to leave something else off. Seems like he didn't want it to be taken off.

Then in another interview the other day he said that something just had to go but it could have easily been anything else. They wanted the record to be 11 songs because "10 seems like too few and 12 seems like too many". He said he know's lots of his favourite albums that are only 11 tracks.

I would have preferred Mr. Richards being left off for it(I know it's your favourite but it's the only song on the album I don't like). I'm sure it'l make a future album though.
Mike even said in the first of those interviews that they're not finished with it. Expect to see it in the future. Knowing R.E.M. though, it'll probably get lost and completely forgotten about.
 
Mr Richards is a remarkable song that chugs along very nicely, took me a while to get into, but it's a very important part of the album. Fits in very nicely.
 
I can't wait to see them again

only got to see them once (the tour that supported their best of Warner) as they cancelled Monster tour over here twice and they didn't bother showing up during their other tours :D

REM rules
 
I bought it last night and have only listened to the whole thing once, I will listen numerous times before I decide how much I like it. I do agree that he sounds like he's yelling.
 
Final Straw said:
Then in another interview the other day he said that something just had to go but it could have easily been anything else. They wanted the record to be 11 songs because "10 seems like too few and 12 seems like too many". He said he know's lots of his favourite albums that are only 11 tracks.


This is the same kind of irrational bullshit we get from Bono.

If that's the reason, I'm even more pissed they didn't keep it on there.
 
The reason for trimming HTDAAB down to 11 songs was to keep it from running over an hour, no such problem with Accelerate.
 
lazarus said:



This is the same kind of irrational bullshit we get from Bono.

If that's the reason, I'm even more pissed they didn't keep it on there.
I think their only reason to not include it was to piss you off

though I'm sure about 30 other things could have had the same result
 
If U2 and REM toured stadiums together, the tickets would cost like $200. And we'd have to see REM play in the daylight, which would suck. However, I would die and go to heaven to see these 2 bands play together.
 
I don't think R.E.M. would necessarily be a poorer experience during the day. Their more organic style lends itself to natural light a lot more than U2's does (though it was cool to see that afternoon set from the Tibetan Freedom Concert back in '97).

If the bands are still each charging $50 for a significant portion of their seats, then there's no reason they couldn't have the lowest tickets at $75-$80. The big costs are for putting on the show itself, and renting the venue, I imagine, so by playing together some of that has to be defrayed. It's then a matter of how greedy each of the bands are, and I don't know if we want to open up that can of worms again.
 
U2 R.E.M. tour would mean R.E.M. playing support band to U2 for a whole tour. I can't imagine R.E.M. doing this! Nor would I want them to!

2 seperate shows were we get to see them both in their full glory is much better IMO.
 
Last edited:
Theoretically R.E.M. could still play a 90 minute opening show, though that may be pushing it. There have been big double headlines in the past: Elton John/Billy Joel, Bob Dylan/Van Morrison, Bob Dylan/Paul Simon, etc.

I could live with a 75 minute R.E.M. set without any breaks.
 
lazarus said:
Theoretically R.E.M. could still play a 90 minute opening show, though that may be pushing it. There have been big double headlines in the past: Elton John/Billy Joel, Bob Dylan/Van Morrison, Bob Dylan/Paul Simon, etc.

I could live with a 75 minute R.E.M. set without any breaks.

R.E.M.'s full shows these days(going by the ATS tour) are about 2 hours 15 minutes. I wouldn't want 45 minutes cut short when I could go and see over 2 hours from both bands at different dates.

And again. why would R.E.M. want to play second fiddle? They're not exactly struggling to draw in the big crowds. At least not here in Europe.
 
Thanks for posting that link, Lila! :bow: I was kinda upset that I missed the interview. Man, Colbert is so freakin funny! And I love those 3 guys! :love:
 
Back
Top Bottom