Quote
vermontoffender
I don't know anyone who thinks Arcade Fire is trendy or lacking in soul. It's OK if you're ignorant concerning popular, current, bands, but it's best to not try and seem like an authority on them in that case.

Seriously, Arcade Fire....trendy and soul free? That's an incredibly misinformed statement.

Quote
vermontoffender
Also, I'm not the biggest Foo Fighters fan, but the concept that Grohl is riding on Cobain's posthumous coattails is ridiculous.

Quote
Justin

Quote
flacnvinyl
Why do SNL?

Still with the "why?"

Mick himself stated he was going to live in NY for a period of time. Perhaps Lorne Michaels simply reached out to him and brought up the idea of hosting since he was going to be in the neighborhood. To promote what? Nothing. It's a one time deal...a legend hosting SNL...you don't really need a why. When it's all said and done...it's Mick Jagger performing with two of the most 'in" bands in music today to create some quality must-see-TV..or rather must-see-Hulu viewing. He has no product to push...there is no "then what" after this. It's your basic "well that was random!" TV spot. An extended cameo appearance, if you will.

Quote
vermontoffender
If SNL was going to break a "ratings record" by having the Stones on, they would have to be promoting it as "The Stones on SNL". You know, funny little promos with Mick and Keith. Maybe Charlie and Ronnie with another cast member....stuff like that.

So far, it seems like that kind of thing isn't happening. It could be because SNL doesn't promote shows more than a week in advance, or it could be because, you know, all of the parties involved are saying it's going to be Jagger with the Foo Fighters and Arcade Fire.

There has been no mention, whatsoever, of the Stones being on SNL next week.

Also, I'm not the biggest Foo Fighters fan, but the concept that Grohl is riding on Cobain's posthumous coattails is ridiculous. Two very different audiences for two very different bands and Cobain himself stated how incredibly talented he though Dave Grohl was. Also, Nirvana was hardly firing on all cylinders before Grohl's arrival. The Foo Fighters have gone out of their way to distance themselves from Nirvana's legacy and carve out their own niche. Even during their earliest tours, the Foo Fighters were teaming up with musicians like Mike Watt and Eddie Vedder and never playing Nirvana tunes. The fact that Grohl is now, at least, equally known as the lead singer/songwriter/guitarist for the Foo Fighters as he is the drummer for Nirvana speaks volumes about his ability to move on.

Quote
stupidguy2

Quote
vermontoffender
If SNL was going to break a "ratings record" by having the Stones on, they would have to be promoting it as "The Stones on SNL". You know, funny little promos with Mick and Keith. Maybe Charlie and Ronnie with another cast member....stuff like that.

So far, it seems like that kind of thing isn't happening. It could be because SNL doesn't promote shows more than a week in advance, or it could be because, you know, all of the parties involved are saying it's going to be Jagger with the Foo Fighters and Arcade Fire.

There has been no mention, whatsoever, of the Stones being on SNL next week.

Also, I'm not the biggest Foo Fighters fan, but the concept that Grohl is riding on Cobain's posthumous coattails is ridiculous. Two very different audiences for two very different bands and Cobain himself stated how incredibly talented he though Dave Grohl was. Also, Nirvana was hardly firing on all cylinders before Grohl's arrival. The Foo Fighters have gone out of their way to distance themselves from Nirvana's legacy and carve out their own niche. Even during their earliest tours, the Foo Fighters were teaming up with musicians like Mike Watt and Eddie Vedder and never playing Nirvana tunes. The fact that Grohl is now, at least, equally known as the lead singer/songwriter/guitarist for the Foo Fighters as he is the drummer for Nirvana speaks volumes about his ability to move on.

I agree. I always respected Grohl for finding his own thing. He's never lived on Nirvana's coattails. If anything, he's moved beyond it.

Quote
Green Lady
Just as a matter of interest - I know a Proper Fan ought to know this, but I don't - when was the last time that the band played on live TV? In a studio, I mean, not a televised concert?

This is probably way out but it'll start the ball rolling if nothing else.

Quote
More Hot Rocks
As far as the Foo Fighters guitar playing. Grohl should stick with the drums. I never heard so much nonsence out of a guitar. NO rhythm licks. So distorted that ALL chords sound the same. All shaking his head around like a horse and no playing. He sucks as a guitarist.

Quote
dcba

Quote
More Hot Rocks
As far as the Foo Fighters guitar playing. Grohl should stick with the drums. I never heard so much nonsence out of a guitar. NO rhythm licks. So distorted that ALL chords sound the same. All shaking his head around like a horse and no playing. He sucks as a guitarist.

Mmmmmm.... you're not 17 aren't you? ><

Quote
dcba

Quote
More Hot Rocks
As far as the Foo Fighters guitar playing. Grohl should stick with the drums. I never heard so much nonsence out of a guitar. NO rhythm licks. So distorted that ALL chords sound the same. All shaking his head around like a horse and no playing. He sucks as a guitarist.

Mmmmmm.... you're not 17 aren't you? ><

Quote
Max'sKansasCity

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
MickRichards
Foo Fighters and Arcade Fire. Neither are R & R bands. Pop bands at best.

Foo Fighters are a pop band?!? are you kidding me?!? Why are there so many misinformed people on this message board? I suggest you watch them in action, especially the drummer Taylor Hawkins. He is one of the best around. He is HEAVY. A monster. Watch them and then come back and tell me that it's pop.

I've seen them in concert...they are so boring. Radiohead opened for and completely eviscerated them.

The Foos rock