Anyone else think The Arcade Fire totally blows?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

'Cause I do. I stabbed a guy in the hand with a Bic for playing 'em in his apt. too loud last week. Then I grabbed all his Modest Mouse and Death Cab CDs and put 'em in the microwave and made one hell of a big-ass -BANG-. Everyone on the street could hear him bawling as he slowly rolled away on his skateboard.

― Shoes say, yeah, no hands clap your good bra. (goodbra), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:25 (nineteen years ago)

Welcome to 2004.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:28 (nineteen years ago)

I'll tell you something, I reckon those Strokes guys have a little bit too much hype about them for a band with no album out yet.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:31 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, right, and like the Flaming Lips are totally daisy-freshness.

― Shoes say, yeah, no hands clap your good bra. (goodbra), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:36 (nineteen years ago)

YES THAT IS INDEED WHAT THE ARGUMENT IS, CONGRATULATIONS

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:36 (nineteen years ago)

i think the arcade fire aren't as good as they're made out to be, sure.

talk about a poiseless, pole-stuck-up-the-ass vocal delivery. overly sincere and melodramatic at times without the charisma to pull it off.

that said, i like pretty much all of the songs on the record in one way or another. there is definitely nothing exceptional on there however.

― Charlie Howard (the sphinx), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:36 (nineteen years ago)

I like that one Arcade Fire that sounds like "Teenage Life" with all the fun removed from it.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:37 (nineteen years ago)

http://ilx.wh3rd.net/searchresults.php?board=2&mode=threads&q=&titlepart=arcade+fire&name=&email=&username=&dateafter=&datebefore=&catid=all

SEARCH FUNCTION = FRIEND

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:39 (nineteen years ago)

whats up the vines? they are like silverchair except instead of the lead singer being anorexic hes just an asshole.

― consigliere (consigliere), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:39 (nineteen years ago)

TS: "It's 2006 and I'm still a corny indie fuck" vs. "It's 2006 and I'm still bitching about corny indie fuxx"

― bernard snow (sixteen sergeants), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:39 (nineteen years ago)

Gotta be the latter.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

TS: 23 OTHER THREADS ON TIRED-ASS TOPIC VS. LET'S START ANOTHER ONE

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

should have held on one more day!

Arcade Fire’s ‘Funeral’ is one year old today, does it still hold up? (111 matching messages)

For me it's still the best album of last year and hasn't faded at all. I was struggling toward the end of last year to find my favorite album. Albums always hit me over the head and announce that it's my favorite for that year. In 2004 it was a different story as nothing really grabbed me and it was December already. I knew about the hype but didn't get around to listening to it until much later in that year. I remember sitting at my computer, stopping what I was doing and just listen to it. When it came around to the song "Wake Up" it gave me chills on the back of my neck. Of course I kept listening to it and listening to it but never play albums back to back. The one thing that struck me in the early going was that this album really makes the most sense when you hear it from start to finish.
Interestingly enough I starting listening to my second favorite album, of last year, the Fiery Furnaces Blueberry Boat right after I fully absorbed the Arcade Fire. That album has held up extremely well as well.

-- BeeOK (deons...), September 13th, 2005.

― a rapper singing about hos and bitches and money (Enrique), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:40 (nineteen years ago)

My pathetic attempt at thread-parody has utterly failed. I should have entitled it, Anyone else think The Flaming Groovies totally blow? Then maybe the tip-jar wouldn't be so...resonant.

― Shoes say, yeah, no hands clap your good bra. (goodbra), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:42 (nineteen years ago)

haha I wondered

― Matos-Webster Dictionary (M Matos), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:47 (nineteen years ago)

the mocker has become... the mock-ed

― bernard snow (sixteen sergeants), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:48 (nineteen years ago)

haha... i don't even know who wins this round.

― Charlie Howard (the sphinx), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 13:50 (nineteen years ago)

I liked Funeral a lot and still play it regularly. I bought Kelley Polar's album at the same time and I listen to that a lot as well!

― wogan lenin (dog latin), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

the flaming groovies don't blow, like, at all.

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 15:17 (nineteen years ago)

neither do the flaming stars!

― M@tt He1geson: Real Name, No Gimmicks (Matt Helgeson), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 15:18 (nineteen years ago)

flaming ohs?

― consigliere (consigliere), Tuesday, 12 September 2006 16:11 (nineteen years ago)

Nor the Flaming Galahs.

― gentoo (gentoo), Thursday, 14 September 2006 16:31 (nineteen years ago)

Rather indifferent towards Arcade Fire. They are among the weaker acts within a genre that I love, but Flaming Lips and Polyphonic Spree do a lot better.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 14 September 2006 21:12 (nineteen years ago)

Btw Vines=Supergrass not Silverchair.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 14 September 2006 21:13 (nineteen years ago)

i thought Vines=Superlame?

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Thursday, 14 September 2006 21:17 (nineteen years ago)

haha arcade dire amirite

― electric sound of jim [and why not] (electricsound), Thursday, 14 September 2006 22:09 (nineteen years ago)

five months pass...

Yeah Arcade Fire are pretty vacuous. I don't think I'm going anywhere near neon bible (oooo nice album name, they're lit as).

― Drooone, Monday, 5 March 2007 22:27 (nineteen years ago)

eeew, don't get it at all. Thanks for asking!

― Saxby D. Elder, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 05:48 (nineteen years ago)

i can imagine liking them when i was a kid. like in a dream academy way. or a wire train kinda way. or something.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 05:55 (nineteen years ago)

no way they are better than the bolshoi though.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 05:56 (nineteen years ago)

50 Canadians + Bono = ICB (Ian Curtis Bummed)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGQWnbfFB6o

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 06:05 (nineteen years ago)

I bought the first album because D. Bowie raved about them. This was a peculiar repeat of my trusting the Dame's taste from when he (remotely) persuaded me to look at Placebo back in the day -- except, I did/do like Placebo, but AF... I mean, Wake Up? Yeah. Wake me up when it's over. Not a second before.

(I think the observation that the problem is lack of charisma is OTM. Histrionic bombast sans charisma tends to be incredibly ugly... can anyone cite an exception to this?)

― chrissie_, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 14:25 (nineteen years ago)

can we create a sticky thread that says their albums suck but they're good live? 'cause I'm tired of reading posts that say "you know, I bought this arcade fire album and I don't see what the big deal is, arrrrgggh matey I just turrrned into a pirrrate"

― Edward III, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 14:33 (nineteen years ago)

they got bob johnston to produce their new album? that's actually pretty cool. it should sound good anyway.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 14:36 (nineteen years ago)

I've heard that and I'd like to have an open mind on it. But I just don't like this Win guy at all. I'm not sure why, and I'm sure it's awful of me.

― chrissie_, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 14:37 (nineteen years ago)

(I was referring to live performances being good, BTW.)

― chrissie_, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 14:37 (nineteen years ago)

they got bob johnston to produce their new album?

I thought that the Great Satan called him back 70 or so years ago 'cause of mad guitar-chops abuse. Good to hear he's still around and producing New-York-Times-approved artrock.

Oh, wait. "Johnston". Sorry. Carry on.

― libcrypt, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 15:55 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, you know, legendary dylan/cohen/cash/etcetcetcetcetcadinfinitum producer god.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 15:57 (nineteen years ago)

i was just listening to the two albums he produced for long-forgotten 60's southern folk-rockers *WEST* this morning and then i read that he had produced the new fife & drum album by Arcade Fire. i'm sure he still produces stuff, but i don't hear his name every day.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 15:59 (nineteen years ago)

I'm sorry if yr autism prevented you from getting my very funnie joke.

― libcrypt, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 16:07 (nineteen years ago)

i get it now!

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

i wasn't really paying the closest of attention.

― scott seward, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 16:10 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 2375 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

― Mark G, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 16:12 (nineteen years ago)

I would link to the explanation of the bad joke humping the previous bad joke, but I think we're still munching GET URLs.

― libcrypt, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 16:13 (nineteen years ago)

But I just don't like this Win guy at all. I'm not sure why, and I'm sure it's awful of me.

no, I totally understand why someone would wanna slap the slouch off his doughy hangdog face. cheer up dude, you're gonna sell a bazillion cds at best buy this week.

but the band's energetic, not let's-jump-off-the-monitors-like-rock-n-roll-animals energetic, more like nerdy love-what-we're-doin' energetic. and their arrangements are good. I was braced to hate on 'em on snl but I couldn't do it.

― Edward III, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 19:47 (nineteen years ago)

I kinda liked that SNL performance, I was impressed. don't think i would buy an album, but i get the appeal.

― Stormy Davis, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 20:07 (nineteen years ago)

yeah, they "totally blow" compared to the tripe that is obsessed over here regularly.

― Dr Morbius, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 20:21 (nineteen years ago)

BOXCAR

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 20:22 (nineteen years ago)

They're my cherry Lozengezes. I know it's bad for me. You eat them because they taste red but you know they're never really the remedy. Just good for some sugar.

― mox twelve, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 22:02 (nineteen years ago)

yeah me too. except whenever i eat a cherry lozenge i choke on it and die in an overly dramatic 11th grade drama club high school kind of way.

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 7 March 2007 22:07 (nineteen years ago)

Skipping 96 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

Also, dude, is it possible you are projecting like a motherfucker and you have ZERO IDEA what is going on inside this guy Win's head? I am not a huge fan of either record, but you seem to be assuming a LOT of stuff here.

― Scott CE, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 03:41 (nineteen years ago)

Nathan--do you think maybe it's possible that, uh, Butler just kept writing the same lyrics he always has, and this time you interacted with them differently? Like, just because you find them worse doesn't mean that all of a sudden he doesn't feel them (alternately, maybe he's never "felt" the lyrics!).

― max, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 04:01 (nineteen years ago)

I think the essence of what Nathan's saying is that the dude's realised the album (its style) is profitable, so making an album of that same style equates to more Bunsen Burner Nice Little Earner.

the fame and success were causal, not coincidental to the samey songs. I think Nathan really wasn't saying "And the second album was "fake" somehow because he got popular in the interim" at all.

Not what I believe, but y'know, whatever.

― Drooone, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 04:07 (nineteen years ago)

the flaw of course is that both albums are awful npr fodder.

― Jack Cole, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 07:49 (nineteen years ago)

YOU KNOW WOH ELS IS OVER-RATED. THE BEETLES. ONLY OLD PEOPLE LISEN TO THE BETELS.

― max, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 08:48 (nineteen years ago)

haha, so your argument is that the dude had a style, and he released an album that was genuinely based on that style. Then he became popular (relatively) as a result of that style. Then he released another album in the same style. And the second album was "fake" somehow because he got popular in the interim. Do I have that right? - ScottCE

No.

Nathan--do you think maybe it's possible that, uh, Butler just kept writing the same lyrics he always has, and this time you interacted with them differently? Like, just because you find them worse doesn't mean that all of a sudden he doesn't feel them (alternately, maybe he's never "felt" the lyrics!). - max

It's definitely possible. But I do think that they're a lot worse, and that there's a reason behind it.

I think the essence of what Nathan's saying is that the dude's realised the album (its style) is profitable, so making an album of that same style equates to more Bunsen Burner Nice Little Earner.

the fame and success were causal, not coincidental to the samey songs. I think Nathan really wasn't saying "And the second album was "fake" somehow because he got popular in the interim" at all. - Droone

Yes, that's basically my argument.

I don't think this is projection or speculation or craziness - as I said before, it doesn't seem far-fetched to me that Win would recognize he had a money-making songwriting formula and want to continue writing those kinds of songs instead of what he'd write if he weren't trying to earn money/praise. The result is a blander, less sincere version of mostly the same kind of music.

― Nathan, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 12:41 (nineteen years ago)

I wish I could read minds. On the other hand, it seems to spoil music for people who can.

― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 13:20 (nineteen years ago)

my suspicions re:the jobs that we call blow are always raised when a band a)gets seemingly universal criticial hosannas and b)are compared to bruce springsteen. sooner or later I'll give it a listen anyway.

― m coleman, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 13:23 (nineteen years ago)

This is why I hate them bullshit pictures like this

http://www.avclub.com/content/files/images/Arcade_Fire-hf.homepage_featured.jpg

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 13:54 (nineteen years ago)

I wish I could read minds. On the other hand, it seems to spoil music for people who can.

Noticing differences in the quality of music and trying to understand why != reading minds.

You've got it backwards. I didn't try to "read" Win's mind and then become disappointed with Neon Bible. I was disappointed with Neon Bible and, in an attempt to figure out why it wasn't as good as Funeral, offered an explanation based upon Win's possible mindset. I can't imagine why this bothers people so much.

― Nathan, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:10 (nineteen years ago)

Intentional Fallacy

― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:12 (nineteen years ago)

What people are forgetting is that the first album was shit too.

― Scik Mouthy, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:20 (nineteen years ago)

OTM

― unfished business, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:35 (nineteen years ago)

I didn't say the album was bad because it lacks meaning. I said it had trite lyrics, bad arrangements, and no subtlety - criticisms which are all rooted in the music itself. I said that the cause of these might be that the songs are formulaic and meaningless, but whether they are or not doesn't change the fact that I don't think they're very good. I like Funeral because I think it's well-written, and I don't know if it is ultimately meaningful to the writer (but I have a hunch it is.)

― Nathan, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:56 (nineteen years ago)

southall, jagger, my office, monday morning at nine.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 14:56 (nineteen years ago)

'rebellion (lies)' is a good song but one swallow doth not a bukkake session make.

― unfished business, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:02 (nineteen years ago)

Nathan's talking about intentionality. It's a perfectly valid way to look at why art succeeds or fails. Sure, it's not objective, and for that reason risks confusing projection with analysis, but we shouldn't put the intangibles totally off-limits.

It's a mistake to chalk the forced inentionality [Nathan thinks he perceives*] in Neon Bible up to "success". That's where the projection comes in. All we can say is that we perceive this kind of intent-to-seem, or intent-to-be, or whatever. In general, it's best to describe intentionality as something that arises from awareness. When the band made the first record, they didn't have a clear idea of what an "Arcade Fire record" was. There wasn't an established set of rules for such an object in the world. Same goes for the lyrics.

Now that Funeral is out there, however, the playing field has been delineated. The Arcade Fire are now painfully aware of what is they do. And it's perfectly reasonable to think that art fails due to a slavish imitation of its own conventions. Lots of artists seem to ossify in the shadow of what they think they're supposed to do. And it's hard to say why or how, exactly, in purely objective terms.

***

* I disagree, but that's beside the point.

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:11 (nineteen years ago)

I learned one thing from this thread:

Arcade Fire makes people retarded.

― M@tt He1ges0n, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:14 (nineteen years ago)

The amount of ill-informed pretentious bilge on this thread is mind-boggling.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:24 (nineteen years ago)

no shit.

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:25 (nineteen years ago)

Hey, if anyone's got a problem with the cog-psych intentionality I'm talking about, just address it. If not, then carry on...

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:39 (nineteen years ago)

Your comments are just an obfuscatory way of saying that you think that the second album isn't as fresh as the first because now they know what they're doing. Consider them "addressed."

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:41 (nineteen years ago)

i'm not talking about intent to seem, i'm talking about shitty songs and a shitty image

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:43 (nineteen years ago)

Nobody's talking to you.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:46 (nineteen years ago)

i was talking to pye poudre, sweetcheeks

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:47 (nineteen years ago)

The thing is, nobody's talking to you.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:48 (nineteen years ago)

oh wait, are you doing the grumpy thing again?

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:48 (nineteen years ago)

you should warn us when you do that

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:49 (nineteen years ago)

However, nobody's talking to you.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:50 (nineteen years ago)

But Marcello, I don't think this a worse album than the first. I think it's better. I don't think it suffers from intentionality or anything else. In fact, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that it's a great album (listening to it now, for the third time in a week).

I was presenting (perhaps pretentiously) a dictionary-style definition of "perceived intentionality" for Nathan's benefit, 'cuz I thought that's what he was getting at but failing to actually say.

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:50 (nineteen years ago)

perhaps?

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:51 (nineteen years ago)

dude you just rewrote the bullshit manual on writing about music

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:51 (nineteen years ago)

Neon Bible was never going to be Funeral II, and I suspect would have sounded an awful lot more contrived if it had tried to do so.

It's different and bigger but not necessarily in a bad way. The Springsteen comparisons have perhaps been overstated generally but they are relevant - just not in the sense that critics initially seem to have thought (and I would estimate that everyone has missed the point of "(Antichrist Television Blues)" which isn't a Born In The USA pastiche, but more of an enlargement of the ceaseless running away, even from one's own body, at the heart of that equally misunderstood record).

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:55 (nineteen years ago)

yeah dude have you heard the Nebraska demo verison of Born in the USA???????

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 15:57 (nineteen years ago)

"dude you just rewrote the bullshit manual on writing about music"
- Mr. Que

I talk rong? Okay, fine. I can live with that. If you've got issues with the content of what I said, then lay 'em out. But fuck off if you just wanna zing me for the tone.

FWIW, I regret the word "painfully". In retrospect, that, more than anything else, seems pretentious. And a cliche besides...

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:02 (nineteen years ago)

Lots of artists seem to ossify in the shadow of what they think they're supposed to do. And it's hard to say why or how, exactly, in purely objective terms.

Because they found a winning formula and they can make a living off it? And ditch their artistic side and just become another cog? Not really hard to see here.

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:08 (nineteen years ago)

Hell hath no fury like an indie kid scorned.

― Noodle Vague, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:11 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, but "sell out" accusations are usually just assumptions. And none of what you said sounds particularly objective, esp. with regard to the Arcade Fire.

Anyway, it's probably hard for the naysayers to point out the objective differences between the lyrics on Funeral and those on Neon Bible. I'm just saying that while I don't perceive any sudden lack of "sincerity" in the material (it seemed kinda insincere before, it seems kinda insincere now, and I don't give a shit), I'm not offended by the opinions of those who do.

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:16 (nineteen years ago)

That last post goes out to the esteemed Mr. K, obv.

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:17 (nineteen years ago)

Everyone misses the obvious Springsteen-ripoff parallel: "Keep the Car Running" sounds exactly like John Cafferty's "On the Dark Side."

― Matos W.K., Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:17 (nineteen years ago)

Make me feel so crazy, make me feel so mean . . . On the dark side! Aw, yeah-ah-eah-ah! On the daaaark side!

― Matos W.K., Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:18 (nineteen years ago)

Fair enough - we didn't get Mr Cafferty here in Angleterre.

― Marcello Carlin, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:23 (nineteen years ago)

Yeah, it's uncanny. And kinda hilarious. Still love the song. "Keep the Car Running", I mean, 'cuz the John Cafferty thing makes me wanna tear my hair out.

― Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:24 (nineteen years ago)

Sam's Town was never going to be Hot Fuss II, and I suspect would have sounded an awful lot more contrived if it had tried to do so.

It's different and bigger but not necessarily in a bad way. The Springsteen comparisons have perhaps been overstated generally but they are relevant - just not in the sense that critics initially seem to have thought (and I would estimate that everyone has missed the point of..

er.... sorry.

I keep getting tricked by the radio too :/

― fandango, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 16:47 (nineteen years ago)

you must be thinking of bens

REALLY??? I am so much happier now. Ben's might be worth a song on EP, but not to me.

They say it fades if you let it,
Lox was made to forget it.
I carved pastrami across my table,
you pray for rain I pray for bagels.

If you still want meat, please give smoked meat,
the pastrami has fallen from me.
If you still want meat, please fork smoked meat,
because St Viateur is not within reach.

― Mr Noodles, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:00 (nineteen years ago)

at the end of the day,
all this arcade fire business just means
mac from superchunk is countin' mad bank.

and there ain't a thing wrong in the world w/that.

― M@tt He1ges0n, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:24 (nineteen years ago)

i agree with that!

― Mr. Que, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

He can finally whoop it up in a hot tub on blow.

― Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:26 (nineteen years ago)

at least Radiohead don't have all that worry about being the biggest rootin' tootin "most important" band in the world anymore...

― fandango, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:28 (nineteen years ago)

What will Thable Thom do now?

― Mr Noodles, Wednesday, 14 March 2007 17:45 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.