Red Mosquito
http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/

Foo Fighters
http://forums.theskyiscrape.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=952		 Page 13 of 60
Author:  verb_to_trust [ Wed August 23, 2017 9:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
guestT wrote:
Nate Mendel is too good for this shit.


I thought I read the SDRE singer said once that the only reason Medel didn't leave the Foos to do more SDRE is because Grohl paid him a ton of money to stay.
Author:  bodysnatcher [ Wed August 23, 2017 9:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
verb_to_trust wrote:
guestT wrote:
Nate Mendel is too good for this shit.


I thought I read the SDRE singer said once that the only reason Medel didn't leave the Foos to do more SDRE is because Grohl paid him a ton of money to stay.


probably. would be hard to turn down.
Author:  BurtReynolds [ Wed August 23, 2017 10:08 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
The Foo Fighters sucked from the start, yet somehow get worse every year. It's really quite incredible.
Author:  verb_to_trust [ Thu August 24, 2017 1:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
I watched the video for this song on the FF Facebook page. The responses were overwhelmingly positive. What the hell is wrong with people?
Author:  96583UP [ Thu August 24, 2017 1:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
BurtReynolds wrote:
The Foo Fighters sucked from the start, yet somehow get worse every year. It's really quite incredible.


and here i was clicking on this thread planning to simply post that they suck

and then you just totally blew my mind
Author:  MadTIGERmaN [ Thu August 24, 2017 2:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Foo's always remind me of CCR. They both have tons of songs everyone knows, but no one you know ever says "that's my favorite band" and, some of your friends will give you shit for even liking them.
Author:  verb_to_trust [ Thu August 24, 2017 2:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Fogerty never wrote shit like this in CCR. Take it back.
Author:  tragabigzanda [ Thu August 24, 2017 4:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
verb_to_trust wrote:
Fogerty never wrote shit like this in CCR. Take it back.

Seriously. And while I may not hold Kurt Cobain's opinion on things in especially high regard, it's worth mentioning that he would have almost certainly hated the Foo Fighters.
Author:  VinylGuy [ Thu August 24, 2017 2:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Its been a while since something from dave really clicked on me. This is another generic rock song from them.
I hated the video more than the song though.
Author:  Superblood Wolfmoon [ Thu August 24, 2017 6:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
I feel like they've hit the same plateau that Pearl Jam has hit. Approaching (or in) middle age, have had a ton of success and for the most part stick to the formula that made them successful. I don't feel either band "sucks," and I still enjoy seeing both of them in concert immensely, but it's just hard to get excited about the newer stuff for more than a few listens. But you know what? That's OK. It's their band and their creative outlet so more power to them if that's what scratches that itch. As someone pointed out, plenty of their fans think it's great, and while people who were along for the ride from the start may drop off over time I'm sure they pick up plenty of newer, younger fans along the way.
Author:  tragabigzanda [ Thu August 24, 2017 6:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Is it lame that I still buy into the whole "art isn't a commodity" mindset of my younger years?
Author:  Norris [ Thu August 24, 2017 7:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
yes
Author:  bodysnatcher [ Thu August 24, 2017 7:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
in some way, i feel they are on a higher level than PJ, simply bc I feel like they are a much more successful band. Feels like PJ is trying to hit that plateau that the Foo Fighters are on, but i don't know if they ever will.
Author:  Birds in Hell [ Thu August 24, 2017 8:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Yeah, and I feel like Foo Fighters can hang as a stadium-level band a lot more comfortably than Pearl Jam, as they have plenty of songs that are naturally loud, simple and fun. Pearl Jam try to crack into that same vibe but their strengths as a band trend towards being weightier and broodier, so they have to rely on uninspiring, utilitarian new songs and hoary classic rock covers to fill in the gaps. Most of Pearl Jam's best loud songs are too angry or gloomy, and their best lighter moments too delicate or too weird, to pull off the "good time party band" thing as effortlessly as Foo Fighters.
Author:  Jorge [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
bodysnatcher wrote:
in some way, i feel they are on a higher level than PJ, simply bc I feel like they are a much more successful band. Feels like PJ is trying to hit that plateau that the Foo Fighters are on, but i don't know if they ever will.

PJ peaked much higher, popularity-wise, but the Foos have been much more consistently popular
Author:  tragabigzanda [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Those last three posts are all right on the money, guys.
Author:  gardenparty [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
You could also say Dave puts a lot more in to the Foos than Ed does PJ at this point. Regardless of the quality of work
Author:  tragabigzanda [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
On the flipside, a live Foos track is virtually identical to the studio cut. Not true with PJ.
Author:  Jorge [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Don't they inject a bunch of jam sections and stuff? I remember seeing a live version of "My Hero" that ended with a jam section
Author:  Jorge [ Thu August 24, 2017 9:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Foo Fighters
Also Dave screams a lot
Page 13 of 60 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/