Jools Holland - Saint or W#*&er?

Saint, if only for his role in the late, lamented American tv program "Night Music".

Tragic as it is, if you want to see anything outside of top 20 chart music on terrestial TV, you're going to have to turn to the web- footed boogie-woogiest.

Later does have strong line-ups sometimes, even if it does come across as a sorta televised issue of Q magazine. And he definitely has the "range", as they say. He may go to hell for that So Solid performance on their show a few weeks back. I mean, I thought they were shit before I saw that, and now I think they're on a whole new level of shittiness, previously occupied solely by My Life Story and Bis.

jools is really really bad, you know this. all the bands are tedious, and if they're not, this programme makes them tedious. the cretinously reverent atmos, jools plinky plonkying alongside. stereolab (w/ sonic boom) circa 96 were good though, and there was a decent clip of Bo Diddley doing some freak out thing (from late 60s??? haven't a clue to be honest), but, by and large, bah.

oh, and the audience? don't even get me started...

Jools' music sucks the shit out of a horses ass, but it must be said that he gets some good acts on his show. Too much shite world music, though, and there's a real cold, sterile atmosphere in the studio.

whatever happened to the jam at the start(the most pointless section of any tv show ever) wasn't that supposed to be 'hit the road..'?? what else is there on terrestial uk tv besides it? 4music! shite as well, bring back snubtv!!

... yeah, or even 'The Tube'

And why, on 'Later', does he now have to do those clumsy, awkward, utterly pointless interviews with 'celebs' or somesuch that have nothing to do with the show but are out to plug something? The interview with Jamie Oliver a year back was particularly excrutiating.
'Later' is frequently disappointing, but where's the alternative?

The truth lies halfway between, doesn't it. The jam at the start is pointless, Jools is annoying, the interviews are tedious and you have to sit through 10 minutes of bland world music waiting for Mercury Rev to come on, but salute the man, he doesn't half get some good bands on. It also brings out some incendiary performances. Appearances by The Hives and Portishead are surely now classic footage, and did anyone see when At The Drive-In ripped the place apart. Now that was rock and roll TV.

you have to sit through 10 minutes of bland world music waiting for Mercury Rev to come on

What a payoff eh readers.

"What a payoff eh readers." says Tom.

Well, yes, actually, it is. Mercury Rev being the best band on the planet, and all that.

Did you actually get to see them back when David Baker was in the band? If so, I hate you. They *never* played LA, that incarnation, and I was obsessing over Yerself is Steam back in 1992 like you wouldn't believe.

Back in 1992 I was ten years old and was probably obsessing over U2 and Queen like you wouldn't believe. I dont think David Baker-era Mercury Rev would have sat too comfortably with my musical tastes back then. Haw! Haw! Put simply, no I didn't!

Back in 1992 I was ten years old

Ah, I see, you're another one of those reprehensible YOUTHS I hear about. Bah!

You missed the just-pre-grunge era of the strangely floppy all-around fringe with the lower part of the hair in the back shaved very close. To be worn by impassioned youths stage-diving at Jesus Jones shows.

"You missed the just-pre-grunge era of the strangely floppy all- around fringe with the lower part of the hair in the back shaved very close. To be worn by impassioned youths stage-diving at Jesus Jones shows."

Yeah, I know, and it tears me up inside. :(

Somehow I doubt your grief.

Floppy fringes? Bad dancing? Jesus Jones! I was there, I was there, at the school disco when I was 13! WOW! Muse were at that very same school disco.

he's a soppy wanky ponce.

Appalling interviews, terrible piano, lots of rotten bands (booked with stupid, outdated notions of authenticity and rootsiness - it's today's Old Grey Whistle Test), and a few years ago he introduced Horace Andy as one of reggae's great new voices when he's been recording since the early '70s.

On the other hand, some great bands. And I was once watching, back in the '80s, Video Vote at the end of whatever Saturday morning show it was. The act under review was Arthur Baker and Al Green. Philip Scofield rattled off the press release info about Arthur Baker. Then he said "Al Green is a bit of a mystery - we can't find anything out about him. We think this is his debut." I assume the record company hadn't thought it necessary to include any info. Jools was one of the panel, and he was at least able to give the godlike Reverend Al his due credit. That gets Jools a lot of credit from me.

However, those compulsory boogie jams on Later damn him to eternal torture, without doubt.

Do you remember Mark Radcliffe's programme 'The White Room' some years back? It offered a similar oasis of decent music in an otherwise barren pop landscape. He's now forced to work with Radio One's appalling play-list, but his old late night slot was great. Something similar to 'Later' but with Radcliffe substituted for Holland, no boogie-woogie keyboard masturbations and an audience strictly vetted for muso ponces and cheesy celebrities would be cool. Get him and Lard to take over, I say.

150th Later show on now...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/later/

One of the UK Digital channels has a special on The Tube this weekend. Dunno if its all day or just a few programmes.

I thought he did very well with Howard Tate. Or was Howard Tate doing very well with him. Either way, that was the only thing worth stopping up for.

I enjoy his piano work on The The's "Uncertain Smile".

I once saw Air do a stonking speed metal version of "Kelly Watch the Stars" on Later.

But one look at that smug face tells you he's a wanker.

It's the best there is. It can be dull and a bit Q, but there have been some classic performances and it's definitely worthwhile as pretty much the only decent music show on TV.

I once interviewed Jools Holland. He was very sweaty and mentally disengaged. He left sharpish claiming to be feeling 'peculiar'. I suspect he was a coke head. I also suspect that he thinks any line of questioning not involving "why are you so brilliant", "when did you first realise you were brilliant", "what brilliant song are you going to play next" and "do you mind if I join in on the piano" can't possibly be an interview.

Miller is spot on. Howard Tate was the highlight; well, that and 'This Must Be The Place'. The rest was self-parodically dull. No, worse than that -- it was a lot duller than usual.

I quite like "Later", despite its faults. Partly because I like some kinds of music played live that I wouldn't be interested in on record and the opposite also applies. OK, a lot of the music doesn't interest me (including sometimes entire shows). But it's meant to appeal to a wider audience than just me and that is inevitable.

What isn't inevitable is the way that the show is more and more a vanity project for JH. The intrusive appearances on piano with (no doubt often resentful) guests, the regular appearance of his beyond-dreary band, the halting of the music so he can suck up to minor celebs in the audience. If the BBC's budget only runs to one live music show it shouldn't be allowed be turned into a "look at me" affair by a mediocrity like Holland.

both my brother and his girlfriend made a point of pointing out the (critical) review of "later.." in this week's time out this weekend, which seemed a little excessive, perhaps

is a live music tv show of any sort actually desirable? really? at all?

improv-headz feel free to fantasize here -