Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
... is 10 years old today, apparently.
And John Harris doesn't like it very much...
i remember waiting for this to come out. and being annoyed that it wasn't released ON my birthday.
i don't even know where it is now.
...the only Oasis album I own, and the only one I like. Shows around that time were shit though.
one of the few albums you can tell the release date of from the cover.
This also means this was filmed a decade to the day ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Quba72Xli8o
how adorable is he??
then barely if ever listened to it again.
and once during the present day?
And, of course, it's rubbish.
I was quite proud of that one!
night before, as my cousin worked in Woolowrths or something.
I always thought it was shit.
one of the best albums ever!
out of pure curiosity. It's not THAT bad really. There's one or two great songs there, like My Big Mouth and Stand By Me. Obviously, it's impossible to sit through the whole thing, but it's fascinating, in a bizarre way.
There is a quite good album buried underneath all the crap. I like Stand By Me, Don't Go Away and It's Gettin Better Man. And i REALLY like The Girl In the Dirty Shirt
You just need to trim about 6 minutes off the end of every song!
This thread has reminded me just how bad all Oasis covers are. Dire.
it's a pure snapshot of the time isn't it.. i think 'my big mouth' somes it all up!
some great b-sides over that period too, angel child my favourite...
ten years ago though, TEN!! thats mad!
i'm from inverness mate.. that's a great lyric...
It's just as bad as Harris says. I used to listen to it when I was depressed. Hilarious listening...
Arctic Monkeys debut, anyone?
It really was stupid amounts of hype.
From what I remember it was released on an odd day of the week too, wasn't it?
to coincide with GCSE results day.
"What was going on? There was, undoubtedly, a massed desire to somehow prolong the fun that Oasis had commenced in 1994. In several reviews, you could make out an obvious subtext bound up with the fact that many people had (rightly) thought that (What's The Story) Morning Glory? was not nearly as good as Definitely Maybe, but been wrong-footed by its sky-high sales figures."
Everyone said (correctly) that Morning Glory was rubbish, then quickly changed tack when it sold millions. So nobody wanted to have everyone laughing at them next time round. But albums 2 and 3 were both dreadful - and 4. I gave up after that.
Definitely Maybe's still great, mind.
things like 'Magic Pie' and 'All Around The World' on it would have been a really good album.
the more I amconvinced its their best.
MG - Good singles, shit everything else.
WTSMG - Bit better
BHN - Ludicrous. And thats good when you are as daft a band as Oasis
Not sure what happened after that.
I tried to listen to it once and just couldn't be bothered.
I still quite like Definitely Maybe, Shakermaker aside.
The reviews of Be Here Now (and the blatant critical revision of Morning Glory) were what first made me realise there was no integrity in music journalism. So I have Oasis to thank for that, at least.
There wasn't really any "revision" of the opinions about Morning Glory. It simply sold loads despite the lukewarm reviews. The public didn't take any notice of the reviews, that is all. And as for Be Here Now getting great reviews. I don't really blame them. You have to read the reviews in the context of the time. And there were some very well-respected journalists who gave it great reviews. Funnily enough, Sylvia Patterson gave Kula Shaker's "K" 9/10 at the time!
...and "Stay Young" definitely should have been on the album!
If an album originally reviewed in most quarters as "pretty disappointing" goes on to come first or second in end of year polls just two months later, alongside suddenly glowing appraisals, surely that's revisionism?
And I've always thought the rather, um, "kind" assessments of Be Here Now were a direct and somewhat cowardly reaction by journos scared they'd got it "wrong" over Morning Glory. The only chap I can remember who stuck to his guns about it was Swells!
You're too right that lots of "well-respected" journos gave Be Here Now great reviews - which just goes to show quite how little integrity or confidence in their own instincts even "well-respected" journos actually have.
But then you always have to remember that reviews are not the collective viewpoint of the magazine. A review is by one person only. Maybe everyone else that didn't review it liked it!
ten years on, Be Here Now is one of the most slated records of the decade.
However, let's take a second to look at 2007 so far. Has anyone released an album that even warrants any debate? No. Everything is utterly boring at the moment.
When it comes to popular guitar music, Be Here Now, despite having drawbacks, beats the current shitstorm hands down. If a record was released with songs as good as some of the ones on that album this year, it would be the only thing worth bothering about.
Apparently the worthiness of albums is how much people want to talk about them. I was under the impression that it was what the lead singer's wardrobe is.
it's how you tell them
but shouldn't it be 'Wrongylew?'
it should be Wrightyallthetimelew, and Silentcomwrong.
Be Your Own Pet - 9/10
We aren't going to get along when it comes to music taste, my dear.