Random Green Day Thoughts

[cayo]

why didn't they release more singles to dos and tre?

[Hermione]

7 hours ago, cayo said:

why didn't they release more singles to dos and tre?

First because Billie went into rehab just as Uno came out so the band were out of the public eye and not available to promote singles or make videos. Second because, largely due to the first thing, the albums didn't do very well.

[PurpleIron1039]

I saw some moderately negative reviews of Heart Like a Hand Grenade when it came out, but I just got around to watching it today, and I'm not sure what the criticisms are. I loved it.

[cayo]

1 hour ago, PurpleIron1039 said:

I saw some moderately negative reviews of Heart Like a Hand Grenade when it came out, but I just got around to watching it today, and I'm not sure what the criticisms are. I loved it.

where can you go watch it?

[Fab Grisi]

6 minutes ago, cayo said:

where can you go watch it?

I think that you can rent it or buy it here: 

 

[Chin for a Day]

8 minutes ago, cayo said:

where can you go watch it?

I have a copy of the dvd, I'll pay you 10 to take it off my hands.  It was not great.  They threw in alot of concert footage that was nothing different than what we have seen.  The footage in the studio was pretty disjointed and didn't tell us or show us anything we didn't already know.  There was nothing special about it.  I am not a fan of John roeckers work at all.  However, every gd fan should probably see it once.  IT was available on vimeo.

If yiu haven't seen them, cuatro and broadway idiot are much, much better

[Maddie86]

I wonder if they're documenting the making of their new album

[cayo]

3 minutes ago, JJ1964 said:

I have a copy of the dvd, I'll pay you 10 to take it off my hands.  It was not great.  They threw in alot of concert footage that was nothing different than what we have seen.  The footage in the studio was pretty disjointed and didn't tell us or show us anything we didn't already know.  There was nothing special about it.  I am not a fan of John roeckers work at all.  However, every gd fan should probably see it once.  IT was available on vimeo.

If yiu haven't seen them, cuatro and broadway idiot are much, much better

was most of the footage from bullet in a bible and the vh1 sessions?

2 minutes ago, Kyle Serlington said:

I wonder if they're documenting the making of their new album

I hope so, and the documentary would be even if the album was top tier green day material

[Chin for a Day]

3 minutes ago, cayo said:

was most of the footage from bullet in a bible and the vh1 sessions?

 

No, it was footage from when they were recording, bit it was nothing special.  I forgot, but they also threw in some weird dance scenes that had nothing to do with the album or gd

[cayo]

Just now, JJ1964 said:

No, it was footage from when they were recording, bit it was nothing special.  I forgot, but they also threw in some weird dance scenes that had nothing to do with the album or gd

Sounds pretty lame tbh, is there a lot of in depth coverage on the meanings of songs and other stuff along those lines?

[Chin for a Day]

8 minutes ago, cayo said:

Sounds pretty lame tbh, is there a lot of in depth coverage on the meanings of songs and other stuff along those lines?

No, not at all which is exactly what I was expecting

[PurpleIron1039]

3 hours ago, JJ1964 said:

No, not at all which is exactly what I was expecting

I feel like I liked it because I hadn't seen footage of the band for awhile and I was just happy to see their faces and to hear their voices again.

[UNICORN VOMIT]

1 hour ago, PurpleIron1039 said:

I feel like I liked it because I hadn't seen footage of the band for awhile and I was just happy to see their faces and to hear their voices again.

Yep that's how I felt. 

[Hermione]

7 hours ago, PurpleIron1039 said:

I saw some moderately negative reviews of Heart Like a Hand Grenade when it came out, but I just got around to watching it today, and I'm not sure what the criticisms are. I loved it.

I think a lot of it was because expectations had built up very high over the years we'd been waiting for it so unless it was pretty much the greatest thing ever people were going to be disappointed. Obviously some just didn't like it as well, but I think that was a big part of it. I liked it, it's very rare you get to see footage of the band naturally chatting/making jokes/going about things in the studio outside of a formal interview setting, and we already saw an exhaustive amount of the band explaining the album/songs when it came out so I didn't need more of that.

6 hours ago, Kyle Serlington said:

I wonder if they're documenting the making of their new album

Seems like they document almost everything so I wouldn't be surprised. Whether they actually ever let it see the light of day is another matter though haha. Hope they do.

[Chin for a Day]

4 hours ago, PurpleIron1039 said:

I feel like I liked it because I hadn't seen footage of the band for awhile and I was just happy to see their faces and to hear their voices again.

I get that part of it, I liked it for that reason as well.  But overall, I just felt it was a very poorly made film.

2 hours ago, BillyjoelxkidXx said:

Yep that's how I felt. 

And we know how often you are right.  

[WhiteTim]

I wholeheartedly agree with @JJ1964 tho she may been a lil too nice with her review 

[UNICORN VOMIT]

7 minutes ago, JJ1964 said:

I get that part of it, I liked it for that reason as well.  But overall, I just felt it was a very poorly made film.

And we know how often you are right.  

Well actually I did know yknow ? But I will thank you for your viewing code ? Love ya bitch

[localinsomniac]

How much different is this film from the version screened in 2009? Can't help but wonder if WB was censoring Roecker, forcing him to cut certain material for wider distribution.

[PurpleIron1039]

I'm pretty sure that the topic has already been discussed to death, but I guess that I just started really thinking about this recently. When Green Day was inducted into the RNRHOF, I was ecstatic and defended them against any criticism online. Now, looking back, I wonder if it was the right call to make to let the band in first ballot. I almost wish, in a way, that GD hadn't got in so early. It made a lot of miffed metalheads use the induction of the band as a way to convey the unfairness of the Rock Hall. I was reminded of this when I was browsing Facebook this morning and saw a news story covered by several metal magazines that greatly interested me, naturally: "Rob Halford: Rock hall recognition for Judas Priest would be a real treat", based on a recent interview he did. Anyway, I somehow made the mistake of going to the comments even though I knew what I was going to find there. I felt really uncomfortable as I scrolled through comment after comment about how GD is a terrible band and etc. I personally don't think that they should have gotten the nod before Maiden and Priest, because that just seems...wrong, in a way, but reading vitriol spewed by metalheads whose own favorite bands hadn't gotten in about my favorite band made me a little pissed. (I also want to make perfectly clear that I don't usually like to seek out GD hate at all, because it obviously doesn't interest me, and I would also like to establish that I don't take the Rock Hall very seriously but respect its importance because some people do.) I don't like it, I guess, when GD is compared to other bands, because I feel as if one can't really understand what's so great about their music that well on a surface level. They aren't going to hold up against may metal groups in terms of speed, technicality, progginess (which some fans seem to take as a measure of the quality of the music; I find that so wrong), or virtuosity because they don't show off (which I like about the band a lot; I feel as if the metal community has gotten so self-indulgent lately that plenty of solos are injected into songs not because they fit but for the sole purpose of displaying the guitarist's chops). I personally feel as if Green Day is a band with that rare talent of actually being able to hit some emotional buttons in listeners, and that that's ultimately more important than ostentatious instrumental wankery. 

So, I reread this monstrosity, and I realized that it doesn't really have a specific focus or direction. But hey, this is "Random Green Day Thoughts" after all, and I suppose that this more than qualifies as a "random Green Day thought".

Edited June 23, 2016 by PurpleIron1039

[Chin for a Day]

23 minutes ago, PurpleIron1039 said:

I'm pretty sure that the topic has already been discussed to death, but I guess that I just started really thinking about this recently. When Green Day was inducted into the RNRHOF, I was ecstatic and defended them against any criticism online. Now, looking back, I wonder if it was the right call to make to let the band in first ballot. I almost wish, in a way, that GD hadn't got in so early. It made a lot of miffed metalheads use the induction of the band as a way to convey the unfairness of the Rock Hall. I was reminded of this when I was browsing Facebook this morning and saw a news story covered by several metal magazines that greatly interested me, naturally: "Rob Halford: Rock hall recognition for Judas Priest would be a real treat", based on a recent interview he did. Anyway, I somehow made the mistake of going to the comments even though I knew what I was going to find there. I felt really uncomfortable as I scrolled through comment after comment about how GD is a terrible band and etc. I personally don't think that they should have gotten the nod before Maiden and Priest, because that just seems...wrong, in a way, but reading vitriol spewed by metalheads whose own favorite bands hadn't gotten in about my favorite band made me a little pissed. (I also want to make perfectly clear that I don't usually like to seek out GD hate at all, because it obviously doesn't interest me, and I would also like to establish that I don't take the Rock Hall very seriously but respect its importance because some people do.) I don't like it, I guess, when GD is compared to other bands, because I feel as if one can't really understand what's so great about their music that well on a surface level. They aren't going to hold up against may metal groups in terms of speed, technicality, progginess (which some fans seem to take as a measure of the quality of the music; I find that so wrong), or virtuosity because they don't show off (which I like about the band a lot; I feel as if the metal community has gotten so self-indulgent lately that plenty of solos are injected into songs not because they fit but for the sole purpose of displaying the guitarist's chops). I personally feel as if Green Day is a band with that rare talent of actually being able to hit some emotional buttons in listeners, and that that's ultimately more important than ostentatious instrumental wankery. 

So, I reread this monstrosity, and I realized that it doesn't really have a specific focus or direction. But hey, this is "Random Green Day Thoughts" after all, and I suppose that this more than qualifies as a "random Green Day thought".

I absolutely feel they should have been in on first ballot, and that is an attempt to look at them not as a fan, but by what they have accimplished.  I find that alot of people like to compare their favorite bands but not compare what a band has actually accimplished.  It isn't all about creating great music.

I can probably write a 500 page essay on this, but quickly

They made an entire genre mainstream and opened the doors for many similar bands.

They have constantly reinvented themselves. They went from 3 power chord punk songs, to a politically inspired rock opera to broadway

They are one of the best live bands ever

They have been a huge inspiration for people to take music lessons. Where I take lesson it is a requirement to know gd because that is what most people want to learn.  Their songs are easy enough that people get them, but have some twists thrown in that take some time, thus people feel an accomplishment and keep playing

I can go on and on but unfortunately I'm about to get two root canals

[Libertine Angel]

The Hall of Fame does have a problem with treatment of niche genres, but Green Day getting in isn't a symptom of that.

[PurpleIron1039]

I may be a bit biased here because, as I think that I've stated, I'm not really into much pop punk---most of it (e.g. Blink-182, Sum 41, etc.) never really appealed to me in the first place, so I may not be able to appreciate the extent of Green Day's influence on a genre. However, I am a very big metal fan, so naturally I don't see much of GD's influence in that genre. I'm trying to look at this from both perspectives, I guess, both as a a huge GD fan and as aa huge metalhead. I can relate to metal fans' anger, frustration, and indignation at the genre's being snubbed (mostly, with the exception of Black Sabbath and Deep Purple, which I consider proto-metal), but I can also understand Green Day fans' reasons for GD's first ballot induction. I'm just not too sure where I fall more on the spectrum of the argument.

 

EDIT: How did I forget that Metallica was inducted???? Silly me.

Edited June 23, 2016 by PurpleIron1039

[Hermione]

3 hours ago, localinsomniac said:

How much different is this film from the version screened in 2009? Can't help but wonder if WB was censoring Roecker, forcing him to cut certain material for wider distribution.

Apparently he lost the original version, so it was a whole new version made out of the 300 hours of footage he had. Despite this I think a lot of the same stuff was in it based on what people who've seen both said, although the show footage was new and I can think of at least one thing I was looking forward to seeing that wasn't there (namely the band slagging off Sonic Youth ). I think it must have been in some way compromised to make it more mainstream friendly/an acceptable length. I'm pretty sure the hot tub scene is censored and possibly shortened and the making fun of another band is gone, that leads me to think that's probably not all. He's talked about wanting to release a longer version "one day" so there must be more stuff he wanted in it even if most is there.

[localinsomniac]

10 minutes ago, Hermione said:

Apparently he lost the original version, so it was a whole new version made out of the 300 hours of footage he had. Despite this I think a lot of the same stuff was in it based on what people who've seen both said, although the show footage was new and I can think of at least one thing I was looking forward to seeing that wasn't there (namely the band slagging off Sonic Youth ). I think it must have been in some way compromised to make it more mainstream friendly/an acceptable length. I'm pretty sure the hot tub scene is censored and possibly shortened and the making fun of another band is gone, that leads me to think that's probably not all. He's talked about wanting to release a longer version "one day" so there must be more stuff he wanted in it even if most is there.

Interesting info, thank you for that! I will be looking forward to that extended version of it in 2027 

[alienlifeform]

4 hours ago, localinsomniac said:

How much different is this film from the version screened in 2009? Can't help but wonder if WB was censoring Roecker, forcing him to cut certain material for wider distribution.

We made an interview with John Roecker to our fanpage, GreenDayBrasil.com , and asked him this question. About it he said:

The 2009 version was the first version. I was never happy with the film because the live tracks from the first show went missing. So I had to cut the film to the album which I hated. Then the Henry Fonda tapes were discovered so I was finally able to cut the live music to the actual concert. So now I have the film that I am 100 percent happy and proud of as do the boys.

The full interview can be read here: http://greendaybrasil.com/exclusive-interview-with-john-roecker/