Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 20:28:58 GMT -5
Are you telling me that since they didn't want to appear in live footage in the documentary we won't be seing any release of 90's gigs in the future (whether it was planned or not)? Man, fuck them. I don't know, somebody started this theory. I thought that if Oasis already owned the show (Knebworth for example) they could release it. I don't think they would release Knebworth without Guigsy and Whitey. I don't like it when they are milking us with stupid overpriced 'super deluxe' boxes, but I would pay good money for some full 90's shows in high quality. Budokan, Exeter, G-MEX, Oakland, Loch Lomond, The Point and Japan '94 (was any of those gigs filmed properly? guigsysEstring) |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Mar 17, 2017 20:55:27 GMT -5
This thread is as good an excuse to post this video. Can't beat it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 21:24:51 GMT -5
This thread is as good an excuse to post this video. Can't beat it. Majestic. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 17, 2017 21:35:19 GMT -5
Maybe the footage....................sucked. Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 1:21:21 GMT -5
Are you telling me that since they didn't want to appear in live footage in the documentary we won't be seing any release of 90's gigs in the future (whether it was planned or not)? Man, fuck them. I don't know, somebody started this theory. I thought that if Oasis already owned the show (Knebworth for example) they could release it. I don't think they would release Knebworth without Guigsy and Whitey. I don't like it when they are milking us with stupid overpriced 'super deluxe' boxes, but I would pay good money for some full 90's shows in high quality. Budokan, Exeter, G-MEX, Oakland, Loch Lomond, The Point and Japan '94 (was any of those gigs filmed properly? guigsysEstring ) already replied to similar questions regarding the filming and quality here for releasing, including the G-Mex- Link to Post Budokan was a proshot which has been unofficially touted as a DVD for some time, similarly Oakland was filmed in it's entirety as far as I remember and I would imagine Loch Lomond was captured in some format but again it depends on the quality and format used as to whether anything is usable, as well as the copies surviving up to this point. |
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 1:25:45 GMT -5
Maybe the footage....................sucked. Just a thought.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 4:16:05 GMT -5
I don't know, somebody started this theory. I thought that if Oasis already owned the show (Knebworth for example) they could release it. I don't think they would release Knebworth without Guigsy and Whitey. I don't like it when they are milking us with stupid overpriced 'super deluxe' boxes, but I would pay good money for some full 90's shows in high quality. Budokan, Exeter, G-MEX, Oakland, Loch Lomond, The Point and Japan '94 (was any of those gigs filmed properly? guigsysEstring ) already replied to similar questions regarding the filming and quality here for releasing, including the G-Mex- Link to Post Budokan was a proshot which has been unofficially touted as a DVD for some time, similarly Oakland was filmed in it's entirety as far as I remember and I would imagine Loch Lomond was captured in some format but again it depends on the quality and format used as to whether anything is usable, as well as the copies surviving up to this point. Sorry, I knew about that post since I aaked that question to davidjay. Do you know if any of those Japan '94 gigs were properly filmed? |
|
|
|
Post by welshylad on Mar 18, 2017 6:00:22 GMT -5
I don't get why they both edited out of the gigs? Because they were both (well Alan) 100% in the film. They showed him walking backstage at Earls Court etc from what I remember.
But anyway...It would look a bit weird, but I would like a release of the Knebworth gig even if they are both edited out. I'm sure the editors would make it look good. Most people won't even notice them missing, I didn't
|
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 6:02:23 GMT -5
davidjay already replied to similar questions regarding the filming and quality here for releasing, including the G-Mex- Link to Post Budokan was a proshot which has been unofficially touted as a DVD for some time, similarly Oakland was filmed in it's entirety as far as I remember and I would imagine Loch Lomond was captured in some format but again it depends on the quality and format used as to whether anything is usable, as well as the copies surviving up to this point. Sorry, I knew about that post since I aaked that question to davidjay. Do you know if any of those Japan '94 gigs were properly filmed? I don't off hand but I would assume if they were it would have either been proshot or similar, perhaps in the way Tim Abbot captured early footage on a camcorder. Jim or davidjay will probably have a better idea on early footage than me to be honest  |
|
|
|
Post by freddy838 on Mar 18, 2017 7:58:18 GMT -5
I don't understand why Alan and Guigsy would refuse to be in any footage, it's basically free money for doing nothing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 8:19:59 GMT -5
I don't understand why Alan and Guigsy would refuse to be in any footage, it's basically free money for doing nothing. would they actually get paid though? or would just be a case of permission? with the circumstances surrounding both guigsy and alan leaving and their subsequent relationship with Noel they might of simply refused out of principal. |
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 9:08:07 GMT -5
I don't understand why Alan and Guigsy would refuse to be in any footage, it's basically free money for doing nothing. would they actually get paid though? or would just be a case of permission? with the circumstances surrounding both guigsy and alan leaving and their subsequent relationship with Noel they might of simply refused out of principal. I would presume they would get royalties assuming they were not brought out of their original contract/partnership rights, which I don't recall either of them having been reported as so. In terms of permission it depends if on the legalities of the situation, given that unlike the 'Supersonic' footage which was in a documentary format they will have been paid for the original gig which may have included within the original partnership paperwork the rights to release an audio/visual record at an agreed royalty rate which would probably have been along the lines of the recording and touring split at the time. They could if this is the case argue it in a civil matter but this could be costly to both parties and with the value of the royalties now it wouldn't be worth it financially for either party to fight such a case. I've said it before but if a Knebworth set had been released in Autumn 1996 the band could well have had a 'Frampton Comes Alive!" style success with a live recording, especially in the UK although I concede it may have been harder to shift 8,000,000 copies Stateside as Peter Frampton did in the 1970's! Whatever the reasons for not releasing the show as an LP or VHS set it was IMO a missed opportunity to showcase the band as a successful live proposition to the USA which may have been possible if the band had done 'MTV Unplugged' successfully to promote a beginning of 1997 tour of the USA continuing the WTSMG? tour and rebuilding their name in the USA. The 1997 launch of the DVD format with the decrease in price over the next few years would also have offered opportunities for a celebratory style anniversary deluxe set with additional footage not available on VHS. All a case of "what if?" sadly and obviously the DVD element especially could not have been foreseen, but I think depending on the reasoning for not releasing the footage that it was probably a bad decision. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 18, 2017 9:53:28 GMT -5
would they actually get paid though? or would just be a case of permission? with the circumstances surrounding both guigsy and alan leaving and their subsequent relationship with Noel they might of simply refused out of principal. I would presume they would get royalties assuming they were not brought out of their original contract/partnership rights, which I don't recall either of them having been reported as so. In terms of permission it depends if on the legalities of the situation, given that unlike the 'Supersonic' footage which was in a documentary format they will have been paid for the original gig which may have included within the original partnership paperwork the rights to release an audio/visual record at an agreed royalty rate which would probably have been along the lines of the recording and touring split at the time. They could if this is the case argue it in a civil matter but this could be costly to both parties and with the value of the royalties now it wouldn't be worth it financially for either party to fight such a case. I've said it before but if a Knebworth set had been released in Autumn 1996 the band could well have had a 'Frampton Comes Alive!" style success with a live recording, especially in the UK although I concede it may have been harder to shift 8,000,000 copies Stateside as Peter Frampton did in the 1970's! Whatever the reasons for not releasing the show as an LP or VHS set it was IMO a missed opportunity to showcase the band as a successful live proposition to the USA which may have been possible if the band had done 'MTV Unplugged' successfully to promote a beginning of 1997 tour of the USA continuing the WTSMG? tour and rebuilding their name in the USA. The 1997 launch of the DVD format with the decrease in price over the next few years would also have offered opportunities for a celebratory style anniversary deluxe set with additional footage not available on VHS. All a case of "what if?" sadly and obviously the DVD element especially could not have been foreseen, but I think depending on the reasoning for not releasing the footage that it was probably a bad decision. I think the only problem with this plan is that by September 1996, over saturation and exposure was setting in. |
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 9:59:31 GMT -5
I would presume they would get royalties assuming they were not brought out of their original contract/partnership rights, which I don't recall either of them having been reported as so. In terms of permission it depends if on the legalities of the situation, given that unlike the 'Supersonic' footage which was in a documentary format they will have been paid for the original gig which may have included within the original partnership paperwork the rights to release an audio/visual record at an agreed royalty rate which would probably have been along the lines of the recording and touring split at the time. They could if this is the case argue it in a civil matter but this could be costly to both parties and with the value of the royalties now it wouldn't be worth it financially for either party to fight such a case. I've said it before but if a Knebworth set had been released in Autumn 1996 the band could well have had a 'Frampton Comes Alive!" style success with a live recording, especially in the UK although I concede it may have been harder to shift 8,000,000 copies Stateside as Peter Frampton did in the 1970's! Whatever the reasons for not releasing the show as an LP or VHS set it was IMO a missed opportunity to showcase the band as a successful live proposition to the USA which may have been possible if the band had done 'MTV Unplugged' successfully to promote a beginning of 1997 tour of the USA continuing the WTSMG? tour and rebuilding their name in the USA. The 1997 launch of the DVD format with the decrease in price over the next few years would also have offered opportunities for a celebratory style anniversary deluxe set with additional footage not available on VHS. All a case of "what if?" sadly and obviously the DVD element especially could not have been foreseen, but I think depending on the reasoning for not releasing the footage that it was probably a bad decision. I think the only problem with this plan is that by September 1996, over saturation and exposure was setting in. I agree to a point but it wasn't helped by making a hash of the MTV appearance or falling apart touring the US as 'another band' without having had any break from the high of being the biggest band of a generation in the UK. A key factor in the decision to enter Abbey Road so soon was to counter tabloid rumours that the band were going to split up, and Owen Morris as an example has talked about how bad the atmosphere was while recording some of that album. I know they were all over the UK press but I don't recall so much fuss in the USA (could be wrong there) and taking three months out, buggering off on holidays or whatever before embarking on a North American tour would have perhaps calmed the UK hype a bit after Knebworth as well as keeping the promotion ongoing in the US where they had a profile but nothing like the UK. If they had done that until say March/April 1997 they could still have had a post tour break and returned to recording in the late summer/early Autumn of 1998 with either what became 'Be Here Now' or possibly a different set of songs depending on how the reaction to the US tour, etc. went. All "if's and buts" as I said but it is one of the Oasis subjects I do wonder about. |
|
|
|
Post by Lennon2217 on Mar 18, 2017 12:57:35 GMT -5
I think the only problem with this plan is that by September 1996, over saturation and exposure was setting in. I agree to a point but it wasn't helped by making a hash of the MTV appearance or falling apart touring the US as 'another band' without having had any break from the high of being the biggest band of a generation in the UK. A key factor in the decision to enter Abbey Road so soon was to counter tabloid rumours that the band were going to split up, and Owen Morris as an example has talked about how bad the atmosphere was while recording some of that album. I know they were all over the UK press but I don't recall so much fuss in the USA (could be wrong there) and taking three months out, buggering off on holidays or whatever before embarking on a North American tour would have perhaps calmed the UK hype a bit after Knebworth as well as keeping the promotion ongoing in the US where they had a profile but nothing like the UK. If they had done that until say March/April 1997 they could still have had a post tour break and returned to recording in the late summer/early Autumn of 1998 with either what became 'Be Here Now' or possibly a different set of songs depending on how the reaction to the US tour, etc. went. All "if's and buts" as I said but it is one of the Oasis subjects I do wonder about. Late summer 1996, Oasis was huge in America. None of the bad vibes had begun yet. The music press dug the cute Beatles comparison and thought their quotes hysterical but rude. They had hits which gave them slack. Wonderwall. Supernova. Don't Look Back In Anger. Couldn't turn the radio or MTV on that summer without running into one. Then August came and they crossed some mysterious line never to return back. MTV Unplugged debacle. Delayed USA tour. MTV Music Awards fiasco. Huge swirl of negative press that would linger with Oasis forever in America. It stained their reputation fair or unfair. |
|
|
|
Post by theyknowwhatimean on Mar 18, 2017 13:07:09 GMT -5
This thread is as good an excuse to post this video. Can't beat it. This ain't bad either... The picture is great. The sound is great. The band were cookin'. So get it fucking RELEASED! |
|
|
|
Post by guigsysEstring on Mar 18, 2017 13:21:44 GMT -5
Late summer 1996, Oasis was huge in America. None of the bad vibes had begun yet. The music press dug the cute Beatles comparison and thought their quotes hysterical but rude. They had hits which gave them slack. Wonderwall. Supernova. Don't Look Back In Anger. Couldn't turn the radio or MTV on that summer without running into one. Then August came and they crossed some mysterious line never to return back. MTV Unplugged debacle. Delayed USA tour. MTV Music Awards fiasco. Huge swirl of negative press that would linger with Oasis forever in America. It stained their reputation fair or unfair. Tallies with Noel's memories in 2014 talking with Nicky Wire which was after the airport fiasco before the first gig in Chicago when Liam left to allegedly go house hunting Epic Records essentially lost interest in trying to break the band anymore than had already been achieved- It got reported at the time in the UK with stories of American fans asking for refunds due to Liam's absence- ITN 1996 |
|
|
|
Post by welshylad on Mar 18, 2017 13:53:42 GMT -5
Those Cast No Shadow and Morning Glory videos have Guigsy and Alan in. Whats the difference? How come that was allowed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2017 15:13:52 GMT -5
Those Cast No Shadow and Morning Glory videos have Guigsy and Alan in. Whats the difference? How come that was allowed? Are they officially released? I don't think it would be any problem if they want to release it. They also released Champagne Supernova live. |
|
|
|
Post by globe on Mar 20, 2017 12:14:52 GMT -5
I don't get why they both edited out of the gigs? Because they were both (well Alan) 100% in the film. They showed him walking backstage at Earls Court etc from what I remember.But anyway...It would look a bit weird, but I would like a release of the Knebworth gig even if they are both edited out. I'm sure the editors would make it look good. Most people won't even notice them missing, I didn't Like I say, you don't need permission to use footage of somebody walking about/talking etc, but you do need permission to show a musician performing. |
|
|
|
Post by welshylad on Mar 20, 2017 18:03:39 GMT -5
I don't get why they both edited out of the gigs? Because they were both (well Alan) 100% in the film. They showed him walking backstage at Earls Court etc from what I remember.But anyway...It would look a bit weird, but I would like a release of the Knebworth gig even if they are both edited out. I'm sure the editors would make it look good. Most people won't even notice them missing, I didn't Like I say, you don't need permission to use footage of somebody walking about/talking etc, but you do need permission to show a musician performing. Aaah ok. Didnt realise that |
|
|
|
Post by mossy on Jul 14, 2017 9:51:47 GMT -5
Late summer 1996, Oasis was huge in America. None of the bad vibes had begun yet. The music press dug the cute Beatles comparison and thought their quotes hysterical but rude. They had hits which gave them slack. Wonderwall. Supernova. Don't Look Back In Anger. Couldn't turn the radio or MTV on that summer without running into one. Then August came and they crossed some mysterious line never to return back. MTV Unplugged debacle. Delayed USA tour. MTV Music Awards fiasco. Huge swirl of negative press that would linger with Oasis forever in America. It stained their reputation fair or unfair. Tallies with Noel's memories in 2014 talking with Nicky Wire which was after the airport fiasco before the first gig in Chicago when Liam left to allegedly go house hunting Epic Records essentially lost interest in trying to break the band anymore than had already been achieved- It got reported at the time in the UK with stories of American fans asking for refunds due to Liam's absence- ITN 1996Never heard the story about a crack-addled Mark Lanegan threatening to kill Liam before! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2017 16:55:06 GMT -5
28 voted 'never'?
|
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Jul 14, 2017 17:52:15 GMT -5
@tjalke is getting Knobworth. Good tidings x. |
|
|
|
Post by bringmethemonkey on Jul 14, 2017 18:10:42 GMT -5
Has anyone got any screen grabs from Supersonic where people's faces are masked out? Only saw it once at the cinema and didn't notice it at all! I bought the dam thing and have watched it like 5 times and haven't noticed .....guess I'm not looking their way |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5