Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Makes £185 quid look like a bargain.
Need to make sure I pack my white t-shirt, jeans and all stars. Dancing in the dark type dancing all weekend long.
the Boss > Kings of Leon + Jay-Z + the Verve
but his music doesn't appeal to me at all. fortunately a lot of acts still to be announced... :)
I'm really indifferent to him, but I'm not very big on dad-rock anyway. Come on orbital for saturday night! :)
but get in Bossman
are basically stupid. well done!
well average stadium rock then of some 60 year old whom stopped being relevant a looooong time ago.
more fail for using "relevent" as if it meant something.
How long do we reckon he'll get to play for though? I hope Eavis structures the timetable carefully so that he gets at least 2 1/2 hours.
play for the entire weekend. well, that may be going over the top. but i am so unbelievably excited about this.
High fives all round!
Really can't stand 'The Boss'. Over-sentimental, fake portrait of working class America enjoyed by middle classes who have never done anything exciting in their lives.
You are an idiot.
Just don't like Springsteen and you couldn't pay me to go and watch it. Yawn.
Variety is the spice of life and all that. But the generalisation about who listens to him and the middle classes is perhaps a tad wrong.
but it's different to slating him. He's not over sentimental, it's not a fake portrait of working class america and I seriously doubt it's only enjoyed by middle class people who "have never done anything exciting in their lives"!
I never understand how people who profess to hating an artist with such a vast and diverse back catalogue manage to hear enough of it to criticise! There's a lot of springsteen records that are very different to eachother so you'd have to spend a hell of a long time listening to something you hate to have an informed opinion on his back catalogue!
oh wait, you already did
and i love springsteen. its not over sentimental. he sings about the man, man. and hes a great performer, even if you dont like the songs. hes been my favourite since i was a kid and i havent tired of him yet. but thats just me innit.
I would love to see that. Shame it's Glastonbury.
Glastonbury is brilliant
and I can't take holiday at that time. And I won't like the rest of the lineup
even with the headliners this year it just doesn't appeal.
they announced the headliners before releasing tickets :(
but not with 50,000 coked up cockney accountants on their annual bender, through a clockradio-esque PA system.
I wouldn't buy a ticket just on the basis of Springsteen, and I'm not even confident now that the whole triumvirate will play, never mind how I felt a couple of months ago or whenever it was tickets went on sale.
If it isn't those three, I will be VERY surprised.
More tickets on sale April 4
Even now, it's only hearsay and not something I'd particularly want to risk £150+ on. I know this is the way they always do it, but I think it's really poor form on the organisers' part to think the name of the festival should be enough to convince people to buy tickets, irrespective of which bands play.
It came from efestivals, and they are right 95% of the time
"but I think it's really poor form on the organisers' part to think the name of the festival should be enough to convince people to buy tickets, irrespective of which bands play."
But it is. Glastonbury 2009 will be amazing, even if The Enemy and Robbie Williams are the other headliners.
but yes, I have listened to The Wild, the Innocent & the E Street Shuffle, Born To Run, Darkness on the Edge of Town, The River, Nebraska (which I think I dislike the least), Born In The USA, Tunnels of Love, The Rising and a couple of compilations so don't think this is based on not liking "Dancing in The Dark" and more of me genuinely considering him the most over-rated highly acclaimed artist in popular music.
Agree to disagree, I find his portrait of Working class America, or however you want to describe it (which didn't move far beyond NJ until at least 1980), to be lacking an inauthentic when compared to someone like say Tom Waits, Lou Reed or even Iggy Pop. I don't feel anything connection to the characters in his songs, nor do I find them interesting per se. I can't hear beyond the 80's production on the later 80's stuff not because I'm incapable in doing so for other acts more as it sits so jarringly against how he sounded before and since. To me seeing a new Springsteen album praised is just the same as the inevitable five stars for U2 from Rolling Stones and his best since Scary Monsters type of music press that passes for criticism from that generation.
I've always seen Springsteen's music as a ongoing soundtrack to American Graffiti just without the bit where you know they'll be going to Vietnam soon. Too many songs about cars and girls, too much sentimentality and a way of looking at the world that I can't imagine too many of his fans have really thought like in the best part of three decades. Yes, most artists write songs about pure escapism and so on but schlepping the same stuff around for decades, someone leaves the band get a replacement in get Miami Steve back have three guitarists no seven, play for three hours in a massive stadium. Not for me.
I don't like being negative about music as I don't see the point, especially when so many people are going to enjoy this but there we go. I don't like Bruce Springsteen's music and what he represents. This is where the middle class comment comes from , in my head I hear the words Bruce Springsteen concert and I imagine a bunch of 50 year olds who took a picnic with them and Bobby and Mary are taking turns sitting on dad's shoulders and well I could go on, but I won't.
nor whitman please.
His live persona makes me feel ill.
i would have thought that bruuuuuuuce was more down with the average man than someone who spent his youth rolling in drugs with warhol?
"He's also a Barack Obama supporter, which makes two headliners in a row who've backed the new President."
give him a break!
He will get slated like jay z last year, but the act will come out on top again.
he's exactly the kind of music you can sell to glastonbury's demographic.
Bonus points if he comes out and plays Can't Knock The Hustle.
Springsteen is a typical Pyramid Stage headliner.
Surprise surprise - Jay Z isn't. Which explains why the tickets didn't sell out, and why hardly anyone was watching him.
Eavis has evidently learnt his lesson that such a stupid ploy to attract children will never work for Glastonbury.
But Jay-Z put on a show which people raved about by all accounts.
Springsteen playing will be great either way.
The reviews were already written. Everything was so romantic.
Small-minded idiots say he doesn't belong. He comes out and proves them wrong.
Hell it even rhymes. I was there. It didn't work. I was even drunk, and I remember thinking just before he came on, all excitedly: "Wow, this could turn out to be one of those amazing Glastonbury moments." It soon turned to indifference and boredom, and that's about when I noticed he'd pulled about half the KoL crowd of the night before.
You can't really say "hardly anyone was watching him". I was there too, and there was a massive crowd for him. A year on, I still think Jay-Z headlining was a great choice. It created a big discussion, and has to go down as one of the most memorable Glastonbury headliners in recent times, regardless of whether or not you're in to hip hop. Ten years from now, how many people are going to be looking back saying "oh yeah man, Kings of Leon in 2008 was incredible"? People are going to look back now and blame Jay-Z for the slow ticket sales, especially when compared to this year. But this year selling out early is pretty much solely down to the new deposit scheme, as opposed to the fact Springsteen is playing (which, as we all know, hasn't been announced until the tickets already sold out)
And obviously, when I say "hardly anyone", I'm speaking relatively. You've been more times than me - surely you have a better idea of the usual Pyramid crowd.
Weller in 07 had more than Jay Zed, and he wasn't even headlining.
The fact the choice of a rapper was 'memorable' is totally irrelevant. Bowie and Jagger's cover of "Dancing In The Street" is memorable.
The most talked-about musician at Glastonbury 08 was Noel Gallagher. Why? First of all because literally everyone in the music world was outraged at his comments, including the guy himself, who pathetically responded literally to Noel in his performance. Secondly because he was proved right.
"Jay Z at Glastonbury?" said Noel. "No thanks." So did the thousands of people who stayed away.
Jay Z + Glastonbury = mistake.
doesnt matter if the headliner kept people away, it made the festival really good- uncrowded, unmuddy, yeah, maybe unprofitable, but I nver had that moment that usually comes sunday afternoon when you just want to nuke the festival site and be done with it.
But you might want to consider the weather as a factor that kept you sane by Sunday.
What's it like being in a majority of about one (or at least very few) with that opinion. You have to be pretty blinkered to say that Noel Gallagher was proved right, what did the entire press and anyone who was there or talked about the whole thing do, engage in a super secret conspiracy to make it out like Jay-Z was a big success.
If you say anything detrimental of hip-hop in general, it's met with that old "narrow-minded" response. Everyone wanted to be seen as much the opposite of that as they could.
i think it will be amazing, i was just saying that i think it will split opinion like Jay Z did. I dont think that makes me a moron.