|
|
Post by tam3 on Apr 4, 2022 21:50:03 GMT -5
At the end of the Supersonic Movie Bonehead says (with the obvious benefit of hindsight) that Oasis should have called it quits after Knebworth. In separate interviews, He said that it was very difficult to fly to the US and play in front of 8,000 people after playing to a quarter of a million fans at Knebworth.
So should Oasis have broken up after Knebworth? Simply realized they had taken it as far as it was possible to go and ended on top?? Easy to say now. But it certainly would have cemented their legacy.
Paul Arthurs continued to talk about his feelings surrounding Oasis by stating: “We should have bowed out but we didn't, we carried on. It was a bit of a struggle after Knebworth, to go over to America and play for a few thousand people.”
|
|
|
|
Post by girllikeabomb on Apr 5, 2022 2:15:22 GMT -5
At the end of the Supersonic Movie Bonehead says (with the obvious benefit of hindsight) that Oasis should have called it quits after Knebworth. In separate interviews, He said that it was very difficult to fly to the US and play in front of 8,000 people after playing to a quarter of a million fans at Knebworth. So should Oasis have broken up after Knebworth? Simply realized they had taken it as far as it was possible to go and ended on top?? Easy to say now. But it certainly would have cemented their legacy. Paul Arthurs continued to talk about his feelings surrounding Oasis by stating: “We should have bowed out but we didn't, we carried on. It was a bit of a struggle after Knebworth, to go over to America and play for a few thousand people.”
Bow out and do what, tho? That's what no one ever talks about. Sit around the house with crying fans lining up outside, counting their money and doing occasional ironic TV cameos? Ick. Much as I understand why the perfect dream of quitting on top is the rock and roll fairy tale, in actual practice, a) nobody knows for sure when they've reached the top and b) the only way to really get out clean like a legend is to die. Otherwise you still decline (and disappoint), you just do it without a bunch more albums and tours that made a lot of people happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Teotihuacan on Apr 5, 2022 2:22:27 GMT -5
It would have been stupid because they were the biggest thing since The Beatles and were often seen as their successors. After Knebworth management, with Noel support, felt they should try and be bigger worldwide aspiring to the "U2 level" enormity. Prestige was up for grabs, but 'breaking' the US meant they stood to make significant money, and better that cash go to Oasis than, say, Hootie and the Blowfish. It was worth a try and they probably would have regretted it if they hadn't tried to expend effort touring there. That immense success they were hoping for didn't sustain but it turned out it didn't matter how much they toured, they reached a plateau. It's possible touring helped BNH's later success though, it got no.2 on the Billboard chart in 1997.
I feel my favourite Liam quote applies here; "Would Jesus Christ have been a pervert if he had a crisp packet on his head..?", everything happened for a reason. The band was volatile, Liam would go on the piss and then not be able to give a professional performance, Noel walked off tours, Guigs wanted to stay home, McCleod quit on them, McCaroll 'had to go' (to use Mark Coyle's words) because he wasn't competent enough to play on MG.
All these things made the band what they were, I saw it all evolve in real time. I sometimes envy people with the luck to have things I don't - fancy cars, big houses, material happiness - but I honestly feel sad for any one who missed the rise of Oasis in the mid 90s. it absolutely was the best time of your life. The decline of rock music's relevance and the internet means there will never be another band like them. There (probably) won't be anyone with their charisma, spirit and infectious joy.
It helped that I was a teenager in 1994, it was perfect timing but I wouldn't trade the experience of seeing my favourite band's story evolve and all the inherent up and downs of a manic, eye of the huriicane lifestyle they led: bust-ups, divorces, cricket bats, fired members, drink fuelled mayhem, plus incredible music.
Somehow we still might have had the Noel songs that came out after Knebworth, but a split would have meant no BHN or SOSTSOG in the form we know them. For all the endless moaning that goes on about song lengths, brick wall production, and dubious song selection I would not change those songs and wouldn't trade those records for anything, they made me who I am as much as the first two did, even if no one rates them as highly.
Bottom line, the band was about love, "Because we need each other" was the closest Noel could come in sharing with us the depth of feeling of he and Liam's incredible bond. They made it easy for fans to love them as they rewarded us with great music over and over for 15 years. Those years soundtracked my journey from adolescence into adulthood and beyond. The songs and their journey are as much old friends as any I know in real life.
There is not much essential from Oasis Mark 2 2002-09, and obviously far more clunkers than 94-96 but there isn't shame in that. Only a few bands stay relevant past their initial flourish of success. Oasis were never going to re-invent their sound and persevere like a Radiohead, Beatles etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by megyesitomate on Apr 5, 2022 2:41:29 GMT -5
Well, in that case they would’ve had 14 years until Beady Eye with nothing to do. So a dumb idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Apr 5, 2022 7:33:44 GMT -5
It would have been stupid because they were the biggest thing since The Beatles and were often seen as their successors. After Knebworth management, with Noel support, felt they should try and be bigger worldwide aspiring to the "U2 level" enormity. Prestige was up for grabs, but 'breaking' the US meant they stood to make significant money, and better that cash go to Oasis than, say, Hootie and the Blowfish. It was worth a try and they probably would have regretted it if they hadn't tried to expend effort touring there. That immense success they were hoping for didn't sustain but it turned out it didn't matter how much they toured, they reached a plateau. It's possible touring helped BNH's later success though, it got no.2 on the Billboard chart in 1997. I feel my favourite Liam quote applies here; "Would Jesus Christ have been a pervert if he had a crisp packet on his head..?", everything happened for a reason. The band was volatile, Liam would go on the piss and then not be able to give a professional performance, Noel walked off tours, Guigs wanted to stay home, McCleod quit on them, McCaroll 'had to go' (to use Mark Coyle's words) because he wasn't competent enough to play on MG. All these things made the band what they were, I saw it all evolve in real time. I sometimes envy people with the luck to have things I don't - fancy cars, big houses, material happiness - but I honestly feel sad for any one who missed the rise of Oasis in the mid 90s. it absolutely was the best time of your life. The decline of rock music's relevance and the internet means there will never be another band like them. There (probably) won't be anyone with their charisma, spirit and infectious joy. It helped that I was a teenager in 1994, it was perfect timing but I wouldn't trade the experience of seeing my favourite band's story evolve and all the inherent up and downs of a manic, eye of the huriicane lifestyle they led: bust-ups, divorces, cricket bats, fired members, drink fuelled mayhem, plus incredible music. Somehow we still might have had the Noel songs that came out after Knebworth, but a split would have meant no BHN or SOSTSOG in the form we know them. For all the endless moaning that goes on about song lengths, brick wall production, and dubious song selection I would not change those songs and wouldn't trade those records for anything, they made me who I am as much as the first two did, even if no one rates them as highly. Bottom line, the band was about love, "Because we need each other" was the closest Noel could come in sharing with us the depth of feeling of he and Liam's incredible bond. They made it easy for fans to love them as they rewarded us with great music over and over for 15 years. Those years soundtracked my journey from adolescence into adulthood and beyond. The songs and their journey are as much old friends as any I know in real life. There is not much essential from Oasis Mark 2 2002-09, and obviously far more clunkers than 94-96 but there isn't shame in that. Only a few bands stay relevant past their initial flourish of success. Oasis were never going to re-invent their sound and persevere like a Radiohead, Beatles etc. Spot on! If they had taken an extended break after Knebworth to regroup, polish the songs Noel had, etc it still would have lost some of the magic. People forget and move on quickly to the next big thing. When Noel wrote the bulk of the songs from the "glory years" he was skint, hungry for success and hell bent on getting there. I'm sure he's said it himself, it's hard to motivate yourself when you've got millions in the bank and nothing left to chase. |
|
|
|
Post by jezza2 on Apr 5, 2022 9:34:32 GMT -5
It's easier to say "We should've never done that tour in America and should've focused on writing the album."
|
|
|
|
Post by tam3 on Apr 5, 2022 9:35:17 GMT -5
It would have been stupid because they were the biggest thing since The Beatles and were often seen as their successors. After Knebworth management, with Noel support, felt they should try and be bigger worldwide aspiring to the "U2 level" enormity. Prestige was up for grabs, but 'breaking' the US meant they stood to make significant money, and better that cash go to Oasis than, say, Hootie and the Blowfish. It was worth a try and they probably would have regretted it if they hadn't tried to expend effort touring there. That immense success they were hoping for didn't sustain but it turned out it didn't matter how much they toured, they reached a plateau. It's possible touring helped BNH's later success though, it got no.2 on the Billboard chart in 1997. I feel my favourite Liam quote applies here; "Would Jesus Christ have been a pervert if he had a crisp packet on his head..?", everything happened for a reason. The band was volatile, Liam would go on the piss and then not be able to give a professional performance, Noel walked off tours, Guigs wanted to stay home, McCleod quit on them, McCaroll 'had to go' (to use Mark Coyle's words) because he wasn't competent enough to play on MG. All these things made the band what they were, I saw it all evolve in real time. I sometimes envy people with the luck to have things I don't - fancy cars, big houses, material happiness - but I honestly feel sad for any one who missed the rise of Oasis in the mid 90s. it absolutely was the best time of your life. The decline of rock music's relevance and the internet means there will never be another band like them. There (probably) won't be anyone with their charisma, spirit and infectious joy. It helped that I was a teenager in 1994, it was perfect timing but I wouldn't trade the experience of seeing my favourite band's story evolve and all the inherent up and downs of a manic, eye of the huriicane lifestyle they led: bust-ups, divorces, cricket bats, fired members, drink fuelled mayhem, plus incredible music. Somehow we still might have had the Noel songs that came out after Knebworth, but a split would have meant no BHN or SOSTSOG in the form we know them. For all the endless moaning that goes on about song lengths, brick wall production, and dubious song selection I would not change those songs and wouldn't trade those records for anything, they made me who I am as much as the first two did, even if no one rates them as highly. Bottom line, the band was about love, "Because we need each other" was the closest Noel could come in sharing with us the depth of feeling of he and Liam's incredible bond. They made it easy for fans to love them as they rewarded us with great music over and over for 15 years. Those years soundtracked my journey from adolescence into adulthood and beyond. The songs and their journey are as much old friends as any I know in real life. There is not much essential from Oasis Mark 2 2002-09, and obviously far more clunkers than 94-96 but there isn't shame in that. Only a few bands stay relevant past their initial flourish of success. Oasis were never going to re-invent their sound and persevere like a Radiohead, Beatles etc. Spot on! If they had taken an extended break after Knebworth to regroup, polish the songs Noel had, etc it still would have lost some of the magic. People forget and move on quickly to the next big thing. When Noel wrote the bulk of the songs from the "glory years" he was skint, hungry for success and hell bent on getting there. I'm sure he's said it himself, it's hard to motivate yourself when you've got millions in the bank and nothing left to chase. Agree. Needed to strike while the iron was hot. From my perspective, living in the US, they should have held back there Epic B sides (Talk Tonight, acquiesce, masterplan) or put them all on Morning Glory. Either move puts them over the top in the US. I did not hear those songs until after their peak, well after. Morning Glory would have been the greatest album in decades if they had. Also easy for me to say. Regardless of songs, there was a certain fortune to be made. Noel talks about BHN as a massive missed opportunity. I’m sure it bothers them all to this day. Unfortunately, You only get you only get one chance to get it all right. And given the times, the end of the “pre internet” era, that was especially true for oasis. |
|
|
|
Post by tiger40 on Apr 5, 2022 13:11:27 GMT -5
No, certainly not. It would have been stupid for them to split up as what would they have done. Noel might have had a solo career but Liam and and the rest of the band would probably just have faded into the back ground never to be heard of again.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Apr 15, 2022 15:10:24 GMT -5
Liam would probably just have faded into the back ground never to be heard of again. ? |
|
|
|
Post by themanwholivesinhell on Apr 15, 2022 15:29:34 GMT -5
I get his logic but I disagree. Be Here Now isn’t perfect, but to me there’s about 75% of a really great album there in terms of material, and the biggest problem was the length/overproduction which could’ve been averted.
I personally think they should’ve held off BHN until summer 1998. After Knebworth, take a break ‘til spring 1997, all get clean, and come back more focused on refining the album’s material, length and sound.
In the meantime, issue The Masterplan in 1997 and maybe release Stay Young and Going Nowhere as standalone singles to maintain interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Apr 16, 2022 3:10:49 GMT -5
I get his logic but I disagree. Be Here Now isn’t perfect, but to me there’s about 75% of a really great album there in terms of material, and the biggest problem was the length/overproduction which could’ve been averted. I personally think they should’ve held off BHN until summer 1998. After Knebworth, take a break ‘til spring 1997, all get clean, and come back more focused on refining the album’s material, length and sound. In the meantime, issue The Masterplan in 1997 and maybe release Stay Young and Going Nowhere as standalone singles to maintain interest. Yep. |
|
|
|
Post by tiger40 on Apr 16, 2022 13:38:31 GMT -5
Liam would probably just have faded into the back ground never to be heard of again. ? But back then what would have Liam done? I mean we know that he's not really a song writer apart from now and again when he does decide to write a song and back then he wasn't really writing as it was always done to Noel. |
|
|
|
Post by darmin on Apr 16, 2022 21:28:42 GMT -5
But back then what would have Liam done? I mean we know that he's not really a song writer apart from now and again when he does decide to write a song and back then he wasn't really writing as it was always done to Noel. He actually was writing songs, well at least was trying to do it, it was mentioned in Forever the People(?) I think. Anyway other songwriters existed. And labels and managers who would like to capitalize on his fame, popularity, youth and voice. Some band maybe or solo pop singer route. Success wasn’t guaranteed of course but was very much possible in this scenario. |
|
settingson
Oasis Roadie
I live my life in the city. There's no easy way out.
Posts: 451
|
Post by settingson on Apr 17, 2022 2:15:55 GMT -5
Agree with most of what is said above. Would have been crazy for them to stop completely. The way they chose to go on post-Knebworth was a mess, but shutting up shop? Nah.
I think what Bonehead is really saying is that he should have called it quits after Knebworth. That makes a lot more sense. I think he'd achieved all he wanted to achieve, unlike Noel and Liam, who were just settling in.
|
|
|
|
Post by themanwithnoname on Apr 17, 2022 2:25:09 GMT -5
Owen Morris always says they should have recorded Be Here Now during the break they had in 1996 between the massive gigs as the vibes and sound were so much better. Would have been good to hear that version.
|
|
|
|
Post by GlastoEls on Apr 17, 2022 5:05:16 GMT -5
But back then what would have Liam done? I mean we know that he's not really a song writer apart from now and again when he does decide to write a song and back then he wasn't really writing as it was always done to Noel. He’d have been snapped up. Singer of The Seahorses? Something like that. He’d have been the world’s biggest singer on a free transfer. |
|
|
|
Post by themanwholivesinhell on Apr 17, 2022 7:02:19 GMT -5
Agree with most of what is said above. Would have been crazy for them to stop completely. The way they chose to go on post-Knebworth was a mess, but shutting up shop? Nah. I think what Bonehead is really saying is that he should have called it quits after Knebworth. That makes a lot more sense. I think he'd achieved all he wanted to achieve, unlike Noel and Liam, who were just settling in. Yeah I guess. And he also likely remembers being 99% sure that 1996 would never be topped. And I hate to admit it, but Id agree. Even if they’d got a “perfect” version of BHN (release date/production/length/b-sides used), i couldnt see it outselling MG. Wouldve done more than it did, maybe about 10x platinum at home and 2x platinum in the US. But 14x platinum within a year, 4.5M in the US and the demand for 20 sold-out Knebworth gigs just wasn’t happening again. Ive always said MG was the epitome of “right place, right time, right album”. So many acts have several massive sellers, but one still towers above the rest. The Beatles with Sgt Pepper, Fleetwood Mac with Rumours, Michael Jackson with Thriller and so on. |
|
|
|
Post by The Chief on Apr 17, 2022 9:32:03 GMT -5
It depends on why. What would have been the goal? Noel wishes Be Here Now was better so, would a break have helped that? Probably. Would a break have helped Oasis in the US? Maybe. Would a break have prevented Bonehead and Guigs from leaving? Maybe. There's a lot of maybes. I would have liked for Bonehead to explain his thoughts further. We've heard Noel say the same thing and it was mostly linked to Be Here Now. Other than that, from what I can tell, they have no regrets on how things went.
But if we're talking about Be Here Now and the future of the band, then I should they have broken up? No. But taken a break? I think so. Because by that point, Oasis were a money printing machine made up of young lads surrounded by yes men and drug dealers and that resulted in Be Here Now being what it was and everything that followed.
Sometimes, it's a good thing to let the dust settle.
|
|
|
|
Post by standbymoi on Apr 17, 2022 11:44:21 GMT -5
I think Noel should of left the band after Heathen Chemistry Tour IMO.
That way Gem & Andy would of have at least done one album as Noel didn’t want people thinking them being in the band was just a sham.
Then he could of used Liam’s fight where he got his teeth knocked out as an excuse.
Then Importance of Being Idle would of been on his first solo album
|
|
|
|
Post by garylineker on Apr 18, 2022 17:02:49 GMT -5
The break up after Knebworth thing seems to be one of them Noelisms that stick as an opinion amongst fans sometimes. It's pretty apparent watching any Oasis interview from 96/97 that he wanted to take them that step further and there is no way they'd have stopped.
Noel wasn't anywhere near a good enough singer or performer to go solo either. He knew he had the best frontman in the world and a much better chance of success with the current formula. Why risk all that to go it alone?
Noel wasn't 20 or 21 either, he was already 30ish by the time of Knebworth. Imagine his thoughts about leaving it a few years and potentially looking older and being a forgotten relic of a bygone era. He wanted to strike while the iron is hot. There is absolutely nothing to suggest leaving it say 5 years and made a comeback would have amounted to any more success. In fact the songs could potentially have been way worse if he was just sat around counting his money on holiday. People live in this fantasy world that he'd have undoubtedly written the combination of Be Here Now, Go Let It Out, Fuckin In The Bushes, Gas Panic and the singles off Heatehn Chemistry and we'd have the ultimate oasis comeback album.
It's all easy to say in hindsight but imagine if Be Here Now was just as good as Morning Glory. No one would be questioning anything. The question is more what could have been done to make Be Here Now a success and we've all debated that a million times.
|
|
|
|
Post by garylineker on Apr 18, 2022 17:11:22 GMT -5
I think Noel should of left the band after Heathen Chemistry Tour IMO. That way Gem & Andy would of have at least done one album as Noel didn’t want people thinking them being in the band was just a sham. Then he could of used Liam’s fight where he got his teeth knocked out as an excuse. Then Importance of Being Idle would of been on his first solo album Importance of Being Idle was on his solo album. He just added a brass section and called it something else. |
|
|
|
Post by themanwholivesinhell on Apr 18, 2022 17:31:54 GMT -5
The break up after Knebworth thing seems to be one of them Noelisms that stick as an opinion amongst fans sometimes. It's pretty apparent watching any Oasis interview from 96/97 that he wanted to take them that step further and there is no way they'd have stopped. Noel wasn't anywhere near a good enough singer or performer to go solo either. He knew he had the best frontman in the world and a much better chance of success with the current formula. Why risk all that to go it alone? Noel wasn't 20 or 21 either, he was already 30ish by the time of Knebworth. Imagine his thoughts about leaving it a few years and potentially looking older and being a forgotten relic of a bygone era. He wanted to strike while the iron is hot. There is absolutely nothing to suggest leaving it say 5 years and made a comeback would have amounted to any more success. In fact the songs could potentially have been way worse if he was just sat around counting his money on holiday. People live in this fantasy world that he'd have undoubtedly written the combination of Be Here Now, Go Let It Out, Fuckin In The Bushes, Gas Panic and the singles off Heatehn Chemistry and we'd have the ultimate oasis comeback album. It's all easy to say in hindsight but imagine if Be Here Now was just as good as Morning Glory. No one would be questioning anything. The question is more what could have been done to make Be Here Now a success and we've all debated that a million times. I reckon even if Be Here Now had been better than and sold as much as Morning Glory, it still wouldn't be as iconic now as MG and DM. The hype, at least in the UK, around BHN was just too big to ever live up to. Ive read some pre-release articles, and they discuss it like it was going to be the biggest rock album of all time, this era's Sgt Pepper, the next this or that; just escalating artistic and commercial expectations that could never be reached. That doesn't mean it's secretly as good as the first two. But it does make it underrated overall, as its still 7.5-8/10 for me. |
|
|
|
Post by garylineker on Apr 18, 2022 18:41:56 GMT -5
The break up after Knebworth thing seems to be one of them Noelisms that stick as an opinion amongst fans sometimes. It's pretty apparent watching any Oasis interview from 96/97 that he wanted to take them that step further and there is no way they'd have stopped. Noel wasn't anywhere near a good enough singer or performer to go solo either. He knew he had the best frontman in the world and a much better chance of success with the current formula. Why risk all that to go it alone? Noel wasn't 20 or 21 either, he was already 30ish by the time of Knebworth. Imagine his thoughts about leaving it a few years and potentially looking older and being a forgotten relic of a bygone era. He wanted to strike while the iron is hot. There is absolutely nothing to suggest leaving it say 5 years and made a comeback would have amounted to any more success. In fact the songs could potentially have been way worse if he was just sat around counting his money on holiday. People live in this fantasy world that he'd have undoubtedly written the combination of Be Here Now, Go Let It Out, Fuckin In The Bushes, Gas Panic and the singles off Heatehn Chemistry and we'd have the ultimate oasis comeback album. It's all easy to say in hindsight but imagine if Be Here Now was just as good as Morning Glory. No one would be questioning anything. The question is more what could have been done to make Be Here Now a success and we've all debated that a million times. I reckon even if Be Here Now had been better than and sold as much as Morning Glory, it still wouldn't be as iconic now as MG and DM. The hype, at least in the UK, around BHN was just too big to ever live up to. Ive read some pre-release articles, and they discuss it like it was going to be the biggest rock album of all time, this era's Sgt Pepper, the next this or that; just escalating artistic and commercial expectations that could never be reached. That doesn't mean it's secretly as good as the first two. But it does make it underrated overall, as its still 7.5-8/10 for me. Very true about the expectation levels. But at least give yourself a chance. It's probably the first moment in Oasis where they didn't benefit from having Noel run everything. Who's gonna turn round and say Fade In Out, Girl In The Dirty Shirt, Magic Pie and an overblown production has no place on one of the most anticipated albums ever? You'd lose your job more than likely. Everyone at that point was probably realising it was the last big cash in before it all went tits up. I refuse to believe people were thinking that album was going to live up to any hype. I love My Big Mouth, I Hope I think I Know, Stand By Me, D'you Know What I Mean, Don't Go Away and It's Gettin Better Man (minus about 3 minutes). But i come to Oasis as a fan in 2005 listening to all them songs for what they were. Not in the way a teenager for the first time was listening to them expecting Morning Glory x2. I can 100% see why you'd be massively disappointed. Even if you liked the songs, it's extremely hard to say they add more diversity to the Oasis cannon than the first 2 albums. It gave every critic plenty of rope to hang them with, and let's face it they tried to do that with Morning Glory. It's only because that was so undeniably good they couldn't. |
|
|
|
Post by themanwholivesinhell on Apr 19, 2022 6:38:48 GMT -5
I reckon even if Be Here Now had been better than and sold as much as Morning Glory, it still wouldn't be as iconic now as MG and DM. The hype, at least in the UK, around BHN was just too big to ever live up to. Ive read some pre-release articles, and they discuss it like it was going to be the biggest rock album of all time, this era's Sgt Pepper, the next this or that; just escalating artistic and commercial expectations that could never be reached. That doesn't mean it's secretly as good as the first two. But it does make it underrated overall, as its still 7.5-8/10 for me. Very true about the expectation levels. But at least give yourself a chance. It's probably the first moment in Oasis where they didn't benefit from having Noel run everything. Who's gonna turn round and say Fade In Out, Girl In The Dirty Shirt, Magic Pie and an overblown production has no place on one of the most anticipated albums ever? You'd lose your job more than likely. Everyone at that point was probably realising it was the last big cash in before it all went tits up. I refuse to believe people were thinking that album was going to live up to any hype. I love My Big Mouth, I Hope I think I Know, Stand By Me, D'you Know What I Mean, Don't Go Away and It's Gettin Better Man (minus about 3 minutes). But i come to Oasis as a fan in 2005 listening to all them songs for what they were. Not in the way a teenager for the first time was listening to them expecting Morning Glory x2. I can 100% see why you'd be massively disappointed. Even if you liked the songs, it's extremely hard to say they add more diversity to the Oasis cannon than the first 2 albums. It gave every critic plenty of rope to hang them with, and let's face it they tried to do that with Morning Glory. It's only because that was so undeniably good they couldn't. I heard it for the first time at about 7, around a year after becoming a fan. Id already heard DM, MG, TM and HC, but at that age i didnt know what order they came out in, and that TM wasnt a studio album. So i had no expectations really. I do remember my reactions in those early years being like “it sounds a bit messy, and too many songs want to be long. It has better songs than HC but not as good as the first two and TM”. I think my favourites on it back then were DGA, AATW and IHITIK. Quite a few songs took til my teens to grow on me, in particular SBM. Now the only song I really dont rate at all is FIO. MP has some crap lyrics and the verses are a tad dull but I admittedly do like the chorus. Aside from that i think the only other one i dont spin much is the title track but its not awful. I think DYKWIM, IGBM and to some degree AATW needed shortening, and much of the album remixing, but FIO and MP are the only ones Id outright remove. |
|
|
|
Post by The Chief on Apr 19, 2022 6:46:13 GMT -5
The break up after Knebworth thing seems to be one of them Noelisms that stick as an opinion amongst fans sometimes. It's pretty apparent watching any Oasis interview from 96/97 that he wanted to take them that step further and there is no way they'd have stopped. Noel wasn't anywhere near a good enough singer or performer to go solo either. He knew he had the best frontman in the world and a much better chance of success with the current formula. Why risk all that to go it alone? Noel wasn't 20 or 21 either, he was already 30ish by the time of Knebworth. Imagine his thoughts about leaving it a few years and potentially looking older and being a forgotten relic of a bygone era. He wanted to strike while the iron is hot. There is absolutely nothing to suggest leaving it say 5 years and made a comeback would have amounted to any more success. In fact the songs could potentially have been way worse if he was just sat around counting his money on holiday. People live in this fantasy world that he'd have undoubtedly written the combination of Be Here Now, Go Let It Out, Fuckin In The Bushes, Gas Panic and the singles off Heatehn Chemistry and we'd have the ultimate oasis comeback album. It's all easy to say in hindsight but imagine if Be Here Now was just as good as Morning Glory. No one would be questioning anything. The question is more what could have been done to make Be Here Now a success and we've all debated that a million times. That's all true but Bonehead isn't going to blindly repeat a Noelism. I think he also believes it. |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5