Sign In:

105 users online Sign Up! (forgotten password?)

Boards Blogs User Profiles

Boards

Music Social Article Comments More…
My Posts Radar

jools holland

fishplums [Edit] [Delete] 93 replies 23:45 May 13th, 2005
re: the girl from black eyed peas' outfit.
what the fuck is it? it looks like leftover curtains.
and the foo fighters weren't as bad as i thought they'd be.
come on arcade fire!
View NestedLinear
  • Relevant artist taggings:
  • None

  • Re: jools holland

    i fucking detest the black eyed peas. they are a formless pack of fucking cliches.
    random | 13 May '05, 23:47 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    urgh his pointless wankery over countless tedious world music artists is so depressing. i know i'm sounding unenlightened here but that woman should be singing in the background to a sting song or something.

    and the arcade power thing is almost as bad as when at the drive-in were on tfi friday and donna air said they were called one armed scissor and their single was at the drive-in. jools was probably more busy drooling over that twatting woman he so obviously wants to grope.

    arcade fire were truly ace though. as expected.
    and ry cooder rocks my ass. i want him and tom waits and marc ribot to team up for a crazy cuban masterpiece, but it'll never happen.

    Jamie
    Jamie_Summers | 14 May '05, 00:07 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      the black eyed peas,utter nonsense

      why oh why oh why oh why


      i know the show is supposed to show different aspects of modern music,but its not supposed to make you feel like throwing up!!

      i cant wait till next week with mark e smith,the last great englishmen indeed.

      viola! the sons of temperance




      jeffreylarue @Jamie_Summers | 14 May '05, 00:20 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      the black eyed peas,utter nonsense

      why oh why oh why oh why


      i know the show is supposed to show different aspects of modern music,but its not supposed to make you feel like throwing up!!

      i cant wait till next week with mark e smith,the last great englishmen indeed.

      viola! the sons of temperance




      jeffreylarue @Jamie_Summers | 14 May '05, 00:21 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      "countless tedious world music artists " What's the fuck is "world music"? Artists from Canada?
      JDTraynor @Jamie_Summers | 14 May '05, 00:41 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    black eyed peas make me want to puke.
    prole-art-threat | 14 May '05, 00:09 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    oh my GOD!!! is there anyone more self-serving than Jools Holland! I can't believe he orchestrated him playing boogaloo backing piano for that woman he obviously wants to molest after the show
    random | 14 May '05, 00:35 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      "hey crowd, do you want to hear me do some frank sinatra?"
      what do you think, jools?
      fishplums @random | 14 May '05, 00:38 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      random, you have written a lot of dick on this thread. I'm sure your views of Mr. Holland would be different if he wasn't in his forties.
      JDTraynor @random | 14 May '05, 00:43 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        i don't think his age is really anything to do with it.
        if you look for a model of jools holland in his 20s, who do you have?
        Matt Bellamy.
        Later with Matt Bellamy would be just as excruciating in places, but at least he wasn't in Squeeze.
        fishplums @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 17:23 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        no, you twat, they wouldn't. the man is a fool, which is a non age-specific term of abuse. i also think dick and dom are wankers and they're what - 12? (are you, by any chance, in your forties? if so, do you maybe think that you should stop taking everything in the world so personally and try to get a bit of perspective?)
        random @JDTraynor | 15 May '05, 13:59 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    I think arcade fire where awe inspiring as usually no kings though. It was nice to seee them surrounded with different muscians for once besides the normal


    yet that final number with mariza was amazin, I feel they were shown up, a brave 2nd to her though...What is up with people saying she should sing in the back ground you guys she go out get som camila or seu jorge tomorrow
    Mungo | 14 May '05, 00:43 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      she was great. WHY did ry cooder not actually play anything? NNGGH. three black eyed peas songs, each worse than the last, and nothing by him at all. how utterly depressing. hard fi were laughable. p-u-b-r-o-c-k.
      -gen- @Mungo | 14 May '05, 00:50 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      I listen to music all night thru my headphones, and I had Jools Holland on the tv, the only time I lifted my headphones was to listen to the foos, they rock. Out of interest I'd listen to the other acts only to find their music is truely forgettable.
      Pablo77 @Mungo | 14 May '05, 00:57 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    i thought she was being devoured by some big jellyfish. especially the way it kept jiggling around.

    what sort of former breakdancers were they anyway?
    that guy with the mohawk sucked.
    Alexander | 14 May '05, 01:30 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    Next week will be unforgetable!! It's the 'mighty' Fall!!!!! Apparently MES is the first person to draw up a contract ensuring that Jools doesnt play boogie woogie piano during their performance!! Also, he kept calling Robert Plant 'Cunty'!! I guess thats been edited out tho
    karl | 14 May '05, 02:07 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      Playlouder have got a full article on it, they're almost unrivled for Fall news at the mo
      karl @karl | 14 May '05, 02:08 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        No everyone doesn't use backing tapes thats bollocks, just in the context of tonights show look at the arcade fire who utilised about 10 different insrtuments and backing vocals, the bird was switching from glockenspiel to organ whilst singing, whilst hard fi couldnt even be arsed to sing their own backing vocals its just lazy.
        Fortune_Favours @karl | 14 May '05, 02:32 | X | ^ This | Reply

        • Re: jools holland

          Glad to see the Foos have found some tunes again - the last album was a bit shitty, IMHO. I really wasn't sure about Arcade Fire before the show, but i've got to admit they blew me away - one of those great bands you just can't tie down to any particular sound. Hard-Fi were aweful, as were the Black Eyed Peas- i really can't see why people fancy the tits off the woman- she's not all that by any stretch of the imagination.

          Still pisses all over TOTP - mind you, a guest slot from little miss Cotton would be nice every few weeks, just so Uncle Jools can get a bit of a rest - and try and remember the names of the bands playing. Arcade Power indeed!
          mooseman @Fortune_Favours | 14 May '05, 09:28 | X | ^ This | Reply

        • Re: jools holland

          "insrtuments" eh?you've proved my point 10 or more is just too confusing.i admit i'm biased and do not like bands with too many people in them.a lot of bands agree its either have some poor musicians off stage playing other parts(placebo)or backing tapes.
          i agree that vocals should pretty much always be sung live.
          cigmoney @Fortune_Favours | 14 May '05, 10:43 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    Funny review in the Guardian guide today... Were the Peas not already Black Eyed, you would much wish to render them so.
    Carian | 14 May '05, 09:57 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      It might just be me but I thought the Black Eyed Peas were really good, the first song was fantastic and throughout they showed real enthusiasm about their music. Arcade Fire were of course excellent, Rebellion especially, the Portugese women was suprisingly good, Hard Fi were better than expected and the Foo Fighters were absolute shit. Mmmm, imagine if Ry Cooder had played.
      smallpox_champion @Carian | 14 May '05, 10:51 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        i think arcade fire and mariza blew everyone else away. i was incredibly dissapointed by the foos, and hate to say it but they were boring! i think they've been past it since one by one :(
        devendra @smallpox_champion | 14 May '05, 12:21 | X | ^ This | Reply

        • Re: jools holland

          strange- i thought the Foos were probably the most fired up for it. Still, i guess we'll all find out when the new album comes out.
          mooseman @devendra | 14 May '05, 12:29 | X | ^ This | Reply

          • Re: jools holland

            Arcade Fire.....as has already been established, were awesome. The Foo Fighters were surprisingly good, I liked the first tune they did, and really liked the acoustic number Grohl did. At last he's finally showing that he's not just a great drummer. I thought Mariza was top too. The insincerety of Jools Holland made me want to puke in the nearest shoe.....Ha ha "Lord Toad"...ha ha heee!
            Kleeb @mooseman | 14 May '05, 12:36 | X | ^ This | Reply

            • Re: jools holland

              i liked the bit on the first black eyed peas song were there were like four vocals overlapping, i like stuff like that. rest was terrible of course tho.
              and im noticing something with canadian bands on tv, the vocals are terrible. was same with the dears. the music is brilliant and on record is good but thought the live vocals disappointing.
              good to see the arcade fire showin no enthusiasm between songs tho :)
              Jordan_229_2 @Kleeb | 14 May '05, 13:33 | X | ^ This | Reply

              • Re: jools holland

                I'd never heard the Arcade Fire, but after that performance I was quite shocked. I wasn't expecting violinists and the like. Very different, not what I'd go for, but they did play very well.

                Hard Fi. The name's almost as bad as the band.
                wrightylew @Jordan_229_2 | 14 May '05, 13:35 | X | ^ This | Reply

                • Re: jools holland

                  How could Ry Cooder not play!!!??

                  I thought the Acoustic Foo Fighters song was pretty good, and I don't like them at all really...

                  The Black Eyed Peas weren't that bad, you bunch of miserable sods. I'd rather "the kids" were listening to that kind of pop-hip-hop rubbish than I dunno......Steps.

                  The portuguese woman had a decent voice, but the songs were a bit backround music-y.

                  Hard-Fi were mediocre, but better than the Kaiser Chiefs at least. The guy's eyebrows worried me though.

                  The Arcade Fire had a great sound, but I wasn't hugely impressed by the songs and/or the David Byrneyelp... They sounded like a better version of Modest Mouse
                  with strings.

                  Don't hurt me. Maybe they'd sound better on record, there was too much stuff going on that got lost because of the rubbish sound.
                  Jesus_Quintana @wrightylew | 14 May '05, 13:55 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    The foo fighters were ok...neither song was amazing or groundbreaking but they were ok (i missed the first song so i don't know what that was like).

    Hard-fi were dull. They reminded me very strongly of something (not sure what) and unfortunatly i'm fairly sure i don't like whatever it was they reminded me of.

    Arcade fire were awesome but the vocals could be accused of comeing across poorly at times.

    The portageese person was good but stuck to traditional styles too much to be too relevant or worthwhile.

    Black eyed peas were ok. Better then expected.

    Jools holland was irritating as normal. Why the hell did he keep talking to that catherine tate person? Yeah, but no, but yeah got annoying quickly when the little britian did it. The last thing the world needs is her cover version!
    really_inspired_username | 14 May '05, 13:54 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      She was doing that character before Vicky Pollard...

      And her show is much much funnier than Little "One joke League Of Gentlemen rip-off" Britain.

      It was annoying though.

    • Re: jools holland

      "The Portugeese person was good but stuck to traditional styles too much to be too relevant or worthwhile. " So, are you saying that every performer of traditional music around the world has to make their music sound like every dumb pop record.
      JDTraynor @really_inspired_username | 14 May '05, 14:29 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        No. I think music should adapt and change over time. I said hard-fi was too derivitive of other bands so it would be hypocritical to then hold up something which is following in an either longer line of very similar artists as amazing. Is it in some way wrong to hope for people to put their own individuality and originality into music? How does it make it more "pop" to encourage new ideas? I liked it but its too reliant on traditional arrangements to be a major inovating and exciting piece of music.
        really_inspired_username @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 14:40 | X | ^ This | Reply

        • Re: jools holland

          "I liked it but its too reliant on traditional arrangements to be a major inovating and exciting piece of music. " Traditional music is by definition, traditional. You seem to not like it because it is traditional. Perhaps you'd like to see a remix of Blue Danube Waltz?
          JDTraynor @really_inspired_username | 14 May '05, 14:44 | X | ^ This | Reply

          • Re: jools holland

            "I liked it". This means i'm not saying i don't like it. The opposite in fact.

            At the end of the day traditional artists are good in some ways but i like to see people being progressive and having their own elements to bring to a record and took some incentive to be progressive.

            I'm not saying its bad (because its not bad) just that it could be better in my opinion if it was less reliant on other peoples work and injected more individuality to make it stand out from a lot of other similar artists.

            In answer to your question: Yes, if it was good.
            Does this make the original any worse or in my opinion bad? No.
            really_inspired_username @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 14:55 | X | ^ This | Reply

            • Re: jools holland

              really_inspired_username, I understand your point, but if all living artists interpreted and changed traditional music, then the music would be lost. I like to hear an orchestra perform Beethowven as the composer wanted it performed, I like to hear folk music from around the world performed as the original performer performed it.

              If every new artist performing traditional music updates it then it disappears. This applies even if it is a new song. What's wrong with a composer writing a piece of music that could have been written a few hundred years ago?

              A traditional style of music needn't disappear just because everybody who was around at the time is now dead.

              Pop music evolves, traditional music needn't do so.
              JDTraynor @really_inspired_username | 14 May '05, 15:38 | X | ^ This | Reply

          • Re: jools holland

            If only those hard-fi chaps had got the royal philamonic orchestra to play with them, then they wouldnt need those backing tapes.
            Maybe you know it all gentlemen should go and watch them before criticising them, it was totally obvious the sound for both hard-fi and Arcade fire was very poor, in fact everytime ive seen the arcade fire on television they sound terrible compared to what they are like live, so please only put down bands once youve seen them in the flesh.
            Lord_Snooty @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 14:59 | X | ^ This | Reply

            • Re: jools holland

              Arcade Fire were absolutely brilliantamazingfantastic...I could go on! I only heard them for the first time last week after EVERYONE has been talking about them, and was immediately impressed. One thing I noticed though is that the singer sounded worringly like Jack White sometimes!

              Black-Eyed Peas weren't as terrible as I imagined they would be.

              Hard-Fi singer reminded me of Freddie Mercury with 'the Teeth'

              Mariza was ok.

              I worry about the Foo Fighters these days. 'The Colour and the Shape' is occasionally my favourite album ever, but I don't really like much of the other Foo Fighters' stuff. Going by last night, I think the acoustic part of the new album will be much better than the rest, which seemed either average or dull, or both.

              I don't think I've ever seen a crap *performance* on Later, just ones by groups/artists that I don't like, or songs that I don't like. Now if they only got someone who could actually interview people and not just, I don't know, confuse them for 2 minutes, then the show would be great.
              MegaHyper @Lord_Snooty | 14 May '05, 16:45 | X | ^ This | Reply

              • Re: jools holland

                Does anyone know where there is some Arcade Fire live footage on the internet, apart from the KCRW one.
                smallpox_champion @MegaHyper | 14 May '05, 17:00 | X | ^ This | Reply

              • Re: jools holland

                Arcade Fire were fantastic, his voice was a bit out of tune in parts though.
                Hard-Fi were just boring. Did anyone see on Popworld where Simon took the piss out of the record company press release thing describing them?
                Black Eyed Peas were okay, they were semi-interesting to watch.
                Mariza had a good voice but I didn't find the songs that interesting.
                Foo Fighters were okay, I liked the acoustic song.

                *considers career in music journalism*
                KayB @MegaHyper | 14 May '05, 23:11 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    I'm still unconvinced about Arcade Fire. They seem to be a one-song band. Why did they look so intense on stage when the technical proficiency required to play the songs was fairly straightforward for competant musicians? Their performance on Later... was half-way between Belle And Sebastian and The Polyphonic Spree.
    JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 17:14 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      Why did they look so intense on stage when the technical proficiency required to play the songs was fairly straightforward for competant musicians?

      So you think that bands should not move on stage unless their songs are really musical challenging? So the Ramones should have stood still?
      smallpox_champion @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 17:18 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland

        "So you think that bands should not move on stage unless their songs are really musical challenging?" I never said that.
        JDTraynor @smallpox_champion | 14 May '05, 18:33 | X | ^ This | Reply

        • Re: jools holland

          No, you said why did they look so intense on stage when the technical proficiency required to play the songs was fairly straightforward for competant musicians? Now to me that is saying that a band whose songs are simple (technical progiciency required to play the songs was fairly straightforward) should not be energetic or "intense" on stage.
          smallpox_champion @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 18:45 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      So you've made your assumption about this band, and their 'ones song' from 2 songs on Later....? Do you own their album or EP?
      Perhaps they looked intense on stage because they inject their music with a passion and energy which comes from truly believing in and actually enjoying what they do.
      Kleeb @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 17:22 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      and two of them "fell over" and smiled at the end.
      JDTraynor @JDTraynor | 14 May '05, 18:55 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    I thought Hard-Fi were pretty good.
    The_Glory | 14 May '05, 18:53 | X | ^ This | Reply

  • Re: jools holland

    Hard-Fi are just a poor man's Supergrass...
    Did anyone else think that Win from Arcade Fire looks a bit like Rik Mayall? lol.
    Carian | 15 May '05, 12:34 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      ha! my dad said exactly the same thing :S
      he's much more dreamy eyed though, methinks.

      after seeing them on jools, i am absolutely gutted to have missed them live, they were breathtaking.

      can't believe they had ry cooder on, ry cooder! and he didnt perform!

      the foo fighters were a bit rubbish really

      and the black eyed peas were god awful. miserlou! christ.
      pretty_vacant @Carian | 15 May '05, 16:16 | X | ^ This | Reply

    • Re: jools holland

      Hard Fi are like a Tornado.

      They blow AND suck.
      homesick_alien @Carian | 16 May '05, 11:00 | X | ^ This | Reply

      • Re: jools holland


        Black Eye Peas were shite, and for some reason they played 3 songs. Rubbish rapping over stollen riffs whilst making kerrrazy faces at the camera does not a good band make.

        Hi-Fi were gash and boring.


        The Portugese woman whose name I can't remember had a good voice and the flamenco style guitar was nice but other than that it was pretty boring as well.

        The Arcade Fire were superb, the vocals started off a bit shakey on Power Out (maybe because they had to cut the intro due to time restrictions) but they soon got in their flow and sounded great (the vocals have never been particulary their strongest element anyway).

        Thought the two Foo rock songs were a bit formulaic but I liked the acoustic one by Grohl on his own.

        Jools was his normal buffleheaded self. The mans a shrub
        Jack_the_Biscuit @homesick_alien | 16 May '05, 12:23 | X | ^ This | Reply
View NestedLinear
« Back to Music forum
 

Thread not appearing correctly? Click here to rebuild | Report this