They're kind of pathetic

Stone Roses Discussion
User avatar
candy_floss_girl
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 11:37 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by candy_floss_girl » Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:49 pm

Reni is definitely a bit of an enigma. I remember that in the early days he was quoted as saying that for the band he aspired to 'the integrity of Echo and the Bunnymen and the bank account of Wham!'. He seemed to have no problems with bands that made it big (like Van Halen or U2) while the others liked to portray the band as the antithesis to said bands. At the same time, he appeared to be the most private and elusive of the four. He seemed to be driven by the idea of commercial success on one hand, but at the same time not really working towards that goal.

atrack
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 6:44 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by atrack » Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:28 pm

I agree, and it baffles me. I cannot for the life of me figure out why they decided to come back with AFO after so long. I can;t believe any of them thought that was a good song, or a good idea. I can only imagine it was a contractual obligation and they just basically knocked the two songs out quickly. It's a shame.

JSquire's Plectrum
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 1:23 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by JSquire's Plectrum » Sun Feb 11, 2018 8:18 pm

I always viewed AFO as a quick turn around single, get in - get it out
I remember the press conference they did and the talk about the riots and wanting to put the news out then of them reforming.
The sentiment of AFO rings true in that context (maybe it was written around then?).
I expected to see and hear alot more (of everything, music, gigs, interviews), making AFO an opening gesture of goodwill whilst waiting for the feast.

But then i think most of the band expected or hoped for this too. Still pleased i got to see them showcase their talent live tho

The biggest 'what if' band ever

nebristolred
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon May 15, 2017 1:40 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by nebristolred » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:38 am

The mental thing is that if Beautiful Thing was released as the comeback single, I think it would have been really well received. Granted it wouldn't have been everyone's cup of tea, but it certainly would have had good reviews. And then if you release AFO as the B-Side, it would have less significance and people would enjoy it as a less-than-serious song with a catchy riff.

Context in this case is everything.

atrack
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2017 6:44 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by atrack » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:51 am

BT was pretty good compared to anything else they've done, and was a masterpiece compared to AFO, which makes it even more baffling that they chose to release that first, after all these years. I find it hard to believe that collectively they are so out of touch with their own talent that they thought it was a good idea.

Ed Waterfall
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 2:07 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by Ed Waterfall » Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:48 am

I've just started listening to the La's again after 27 years. They make the Roses look like amateurs when it comes to unfulfilled potential! They had material as good as the Roses in 1990, in fact listening to it back I can't believe there were two bands that were that good down either ends of the East Lancs road at the same time. That's another conversation though.

I don't think the Roses are that lazy as individuals. Brown continued to work hard on his solo stuff and produce some brilliant work. John is an accomplished artist. Mani continued working hard in a band and touring with Primal Scream. Reni is the mystery. I don't know how he got that good so young, but you don't get that good without serious hard work. After the Roses though, it's hard to know what he was doing.

What we do know is something was off and still is with the four of them. Which is gutting, but there you go. Maybe one day we'll hear the scrapped album that was hinted at, or at least a few songs.

jblack
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed May 17, 2017 11:12 am

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by jblack » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:01 am

Ed Waterfall wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:48 am
I've just started listening to the La's again after 27 years. They make the Roses look like amateurs when it comes to unfulfilled potential! They had material as good as the Roses in 1990, in fact listening to it back I can't believe there were two bands that were that good down either ends of the East Lancs road at the same time. That's another conversation though.
I like the La's songs but they never really had the alchemy of the Roses' golden era. They basically had a (slightly) updated 50s/60s sound. No disrespect, I like their album. But the Roses were one of the very few traditional four pieces that didn't sound like anyone else before or since. I don't really think you can compare the bands in terms of import or, for that matter, potential. If the Roses had made two more albums with their classic 89 sound, even if the songs weren't as perfect as the first record, I think they would be considered as important as The Smiths/Clash/Who/Kinks bracket of British bands. I think even a prolific La's would have been a big step below that. They just weren't original or unique enough.

thewiseman
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:00 pm

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by thewiseman » Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:13 pm

In many ways the La's are even more of a frustrating waste than the Roses as they had at least an album of songs ready to go in 1990, probably of better quality than the debut.
And the Roses spent 4 years labouring over the likes of 'Good Times'...


Btw, did you say this with a straight face?
But the Roses were one of the very few traditional four pieces that didn't sound like anyone else before or since

the cotton clouds
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 9:12 am

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by the cotton clouds » Wed Feb 14, 2018 9:48 am

All For One should never have even been released. Its categorically one of the worst songs I've ever heard by a band which writes its own songs.

thomas
Posts: 80
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:38 pm
Location: Tyne paradise

Re: They're kind of pathetic

Post by thomas » Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:17 pm

jblack wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:01 am
Ed Waterfall wrote:
Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:48 am
I've just started listening to the La's again after 27 years. They make the Roses look like amateurs when it comes to unfulfilled potential! They had material as good as the Roses in 1990, in fact listening to it back I can't believe there were two bands that were that good down either ends of the East Lancs road at the same time. That's another conversation though.
I like the La's songs but they never really had the alchemy of the Roses' golden era. They basically had a (slightly) updated 50s/60s sound. No disrespect, I like their album. But the Roses were one of the very few traditional four pieces that didn't sound like anyone else before or since. I don't really think you can compare the bands in terms of import or, for that matter, potential. If the Roses had made two more albums with their classic 89 sound, even if the songs weren't as perfect as the first record, I think they would be considered as important as The Smiths/Clash/Who/Kinks bracket of British bands. I think even a prolific La's would have been a big step below that. They just weren't original or unique enough.
The La's album, although mindblowing, is not a fair representation of their work or what they were about. And frankly, getting the same fella who produced the stone roses to work with a quintessentially grass roots group was a blunder. The La's are the gold standard. The roses didn't come close to their integrity, not that it's any kind of contest. Mavers didn't even want the album released. He is such a perfectionist that he slags off everything he has ever (studio) recorded. The bootlegs and radio sessions from 90/91 are incredible. I think there was always frustration on their part too at the fact that the manchester groups got most of the attention from the press. I don't want to sound like having a go at the roses though, still up there.
Glesga '13
Council house stadium '16

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests