Random Green Day Thoughts

[Beerjeezus]

1 hour ago, Hermione said:

I even like their structured show style and I'm not that bothered about rare songs but yeah. I don't think playing a couple more rarer songs or missing out a couple of American Idiot songs would have the devastating effect on the atmosphere of the show that they think. I remember one time when someone asked Billie in a Q&A if they might play 80 and he was like "there'd be 10,000 people who wouldn't have a clue what it was" and looked horrified imagining it . Like dude it wouldn't be that bad, your band's amazing live sound and your talent as a frontman counts for something as well as just whether people know the songs or not.

Absolutely. When they played Going To Pasalaqua and JAR at my show last year, I didn't see many people singing along, but I don't think it ruined the show for them while it was amazing for me and many others who knew it.

[The Grohl]

They've been around for so long....don't they think people will have gone through their entire catalog at this point? It's the same thing with Muse. I get it stuff from AI is a given, but can you switch out some songs and put in others even if you switch it up every night and see what sticks? I think it would make the shows more exciting.

[gaslight13]

I think they're hesitant to switch it up because if they use the same set every night they can practically do it in their sleep. I don't mean that as a laziness comment, more that they want to put on perfect show. 

8 hours ago, Hermione said:

I honestly think they could push it with playing less well known songs at a big show more than they do, I believe more people would be into it than they think. But they genuinely believe they can't, like when they talk about it it's clear they really think the show will suffer if they do it and are scared of it lol. Not talking a whole show of rarities, literally just 2 or 3 less American Idiot/Dookie songs replaced with songs from other albums or a couple of rarely played songs per show. But in interviews when they get asked about playing even one rare song they act like it's impossible. They're experts at putting together a good show but....I think with that one aspect of it if they tried it they might be surprised.

They absolutely could. Nearly every band I've seen has played at least one song that half the audience doesn't know or care for and it's never derailed the show. But you're right, it's very clear in how they talk about it that they think it will result in an awkwardly silent crowd, and kill the energy, and all that. If they played more of a variety and included some deeper cuts, you'd have casual fans walking away liking some songs they didn't know previously, maybe even leading to them becoming bigger fans, and you'd have die hards saying "ahh, they played a few songs I never got in the last 20 shows I went to. I have to go another night to see if they play more stuff like that!". Both lead to more ticket sales. When all you do is play the hits, people get their nostalgia fix and move on till you come back on their radar in a few years.

They ARE experts at putting together a great ONE-TIME show. It will be the best show you've ever seen the first time you see it. But if they challenged their audience more it would be the best show EVERY time. 

[Hermione]

31 minutes ago, gaslight13 said:

I think they're hesitant to switch it up because if they use the same set every night they can practically do it in their sleep. I don't mean that as a laziness comment, more that they want to put on perfect show. 

 

Agreed. I think putting on a guaranteed amazing show with great atmosphere throughout is what they love doing and more important to them than what songs they play. Some bands really really want to play deep cuts or certain songs etc (even if it's to the point of annoying the crowd) but I think it just isn't as important to them. They love playing songs that give them a great reaction from the crowd.

I don't even really mind that they don't change up songs much , I'll keep enjoying the shows whatever the setlist is as when I'm there at the show it's far from the most important thing. I just think they totally could pull it off if they wanted to. Maybe they don't though haha.

[gaslight13]

51 minutes ago, Hermione said:

Agreed. I think putting on a guaranteed amazing show with great atmosphere throughout is what they love doing and more important to them than what songs they play. Some bands really really want to play deep cuts or certain songs etc (even if it's to the point of annoying the crowd) but I think it just isn't as important to them. They love playing songs that give them a great reaction from the crowd.

I don't even really mind that they don't change up songs much , I'll keep enjoying the shows whatever the setlist is as when I'm there at the show it's far from the most important thing. I just think they totally could pull it off if they wanted to. Maybe they don't though haha.

It's my biggest complaint (as I've stated far more times than anyone cares, haha) but thankfully there isn't a single song in their typical set list that I DON'T want to hear. Just others that I desperately do. Oh well, it saves my wallet because 1-2 shows per tour is cheaper than going to like 5 (which I would if they changed it up).

I just want to point out the irony of them worrying about stalling a show with a song people don't know when I feel like that's exactly what happens when they drag out HAR and KFAD far too long. The momentum just gets thrown off. But they're still one of the best live acts in the biz .

[Squashie]

They could totally cut down KFAD. I almost went for water during that part at my show last Aug. 

[Montclare]

Casual fans who only know the singles won't know songs like Letterbomb or Are We the Waiting.  You could easily switch those out with, say, All the Time and Worry Rock (I'm still pissed Nimrod didn't get a 20 year anniversary) and they'd be none the wiser.

1 hour ago, gaslight13 said:

I just want to point out the irony of them worrying about stalling a show with a song people don't know when I feel like that's exactly what happens when they drag out HAR and KFAD far too long. The momentum just gets thrown off. But they're still one of the best live acts in the biz .

HAR and KFAD are perfection.   They're also example of songs the average person isn't going to know, but work because they encourage audience participation.

[Hermione]

Or they could totally cut out a couple of the seven (7) American Idiot songs including a 10 minute one . No cutting KFAD or HAR  

Also they've actually already trimmed down KFAD a bit. It was at its peak during the 21st CB tour with the whole band taking turns to do the "I want you to know" bit and stuff but the Rev Rad tour version was quicker.

[Montclare]

@Hermione I'd be in total support of cutting JOS.

[_Mace_]

Hate to sound ignorant, but at the mmoment I can't remember what HAR stands for??? Can someone please enlighten me? Sorry to be so annoying, I just couldn't find anything through google.

FUCK I just remembered it's hitchin' a ride....

[Hermione]

1 hour ago, Montclare said:

@Hermione I'd be in total support of cutting JOS.

My number one choice of song to cut . It will be interesting to see what they do on the next tour, they'll have SO many songs by that point it won't be an easy task. Hopefully they won't just remove the Rev Rad songs and replace them with the new album ones. I keep thinking they're surely going to have to cull some AI ones sooner or later...hasn't happened yet though  

[Montclare]

1 minute ago, Hermione said:

My number one choice of song to cut . It will be interesting to see what they do on the next tour, they'll have SO many songs by that point it won't be an easy task. Hopefully they won't just remove the Rev Rad songs and replace them with the new album ones. I keep thinking they're surely going to have to cull some AI ones sooner or later...hasn't happened yet though  

Yeah, I really want to see Forever Now stay in the set, but you'd figure the only way they could do that would be to cut JOS.

[The Bellie]

17 hours ago, greendepent said:

I agree with both statements They only play loads of "obscure" songs in a small show, when they can see that the crowd feels those songs. Regular listeners can't go outside American Idiot and the whatever song they are promoting. Sad but true.

That's funny, because when you become a Green day fan, I don't see how you could not want to discover their entire catalog at some point... But it's true that at each concert I've been to last year, many people (of my age mostly, or younger) seemed to know more some songs than others. Perhaps because they were recent fans, while GD's catalog is really big.

When I went to my 1st show, I only knew a little half of the songs that were played, because basically I had only listened to RevRad, 21st CB and AI, in a little 6 months of fandom. At the following shows, I know by heart all the songs (and most of the trilogy songs even though they weren't played) and I could enjoy it much better than the 1st one. So I won't say it's not worth to go to as many GD shows as possible just because in the same tour it's mostly the same setlist. Plus, the performance is different every time. And those songs they play all the time are really offering a great show. I think it's great that they can play the same songs every night and still perform better and better a the tour goes on. And one song is never really the same that way. That was really my feeling with RevRad.

And they have played several songs here and there that weren't on the core setlist; just to cite those I think of right now : Last Night on Earth, Jar, Going to Pasalacqua, Paper Lanterns, 86, Walk Away, 80, Wake Me Up When September Ends, Give Me Novacaine, Nuclear Family, Too Dumb To Die, Amy, Troubled Times, Armatage Shanks, F.O.D... Scattered, Welcome To Paradise and Christie Road that weren't on every show... 21 Guns that was added in place of Ordinary World (I love both songs equally, I had the luck to attend the Hyde Park gig where Billie was still in the switching process and played both!) That's not nothing. All these special moments were really badass, yeah (Australia, New Zealand and South America had some load of rare stuff played during that tour! ) and shows that it's important for them as well to play other songs here and there.

That being said, I also think they just want a structure for shows on each setlist, (and from one tour to another, the setlist changes a lot, even though there are several unremovable classics), it makes sense for them and it totally works, and even though there are tons of other songs I would be amazed to see live, I wouldn't say a GD show is better just thanks to rare songs they played or could have played. The greatness of their shows mostly relies on the passion, badassness and joy they put in it, and that certainly hadn't decreased as the RevRad tour went on. When I see live footage of the same song played during RevRad with the same quality of footage I won't find all performances equal, I will have my favorites, through all the tour. And I love especially when they played Armatage Shanks, Going To Pasalacqua and Too Dumb To Die, for both of the 2 first ones it made me love the related album more than I would have otherwise, because those performances were so badass, but that goes to me as for any other song, rare or steady, they played. That means I'm glad to have heard every of their hits, 3 times in the tour because I appreciated them better that way.

That's just me but there are many songs I absolutely love as I only got to listen to them album version, while for the majority of songs GD have played live during RevRad, I wouldn't love them half as much if I hadn't seen them live. That goes for Dookie and AI hits and also my 2 favorite songs Still Breathing and Forever Now. So I support their choice of constant setlist, and I know the next GD tour setlist will be featuring several new songs, little changing and I'm glad with it. I know they will blow me up, that's the only certitude I need!

[Slave To The Network]

I'd love to hear more of their old songs like Disappearing Boy, 16, Words I Might Have Ate, Road to Acceptance, One for the Razorbacks, etc. And I miss the 21CB era songs! Or some songs from Shenanigans like Ha Ha You're Dead and Outsider.

And now for a random GD thought that popped into my head this morning: It'd be funny if a bug flew into Billie's mouth while he was singing at an outdoor venue. I wonder if that's ever happened to him. 

[Montclare]

40 minutes ago, Kuromignonne said:

When I went to my 1st show, I only knew a little half of the songs that were played, because basically I had only listened to RevRad, 21st CB and AI, in a little 6 months of fandom. At the following shows, I know by heart all the songs (and most of the trilogy songs even though they weren't played) and I could enjoy it much better than the 1st one.

Off topic, but this just reminded me- it's interesting how quickly people learn songs.  I went to the second Longshot show, before the album came out, and just based off of the video footage from 1234 Go, we were all singing those songs like we had been for years.  Amazing how the memory works.

[greendepent]

18 minutes ago, Kuromignonne said:

That's funny, because when you become a Green day fan, I don't see how you could not want to discover their entire catalog at some point... But it's true that at each concert I've been to last year, many people (of my age mostly, or younger) seemed to know more some songs than others. Perhaps because they were recent fans, while GD's catalog is really big.

For my experience with people, the regular listener is just a fan of certain styles of music, nor of bands. Is really weird anyway that Green Day choose to play rare stuff in places where the public doesn't care too much about them, like the Dreamforce Gala on 2013. 

But when they are in a large show like they use to do, they go with the most average sets. Even if they changed the setlist around the end of the tour, it feels like they are afraid that the crowd don't react well to uncommon songs. I was at two shows on the revrad tour and I'm glad that I got Armatage Shanks, Scattered, F.O.D, Stuck With Me, Geek Stink Breath and the snippet of 80. But I know that for most of the tour it wasn't the case, and compared when I saw them in 2010, I felt a bit disappointed. Not for how long it was, but how little change happened in a 7 year span.

I know there's room for improvement. Now is a matter for them push that limit up. If they can do a show without Wake me up, then they can do a show without Boulevard, American Idiot or Basket Case

[Guest]

My biggest issue with GD is that while their live shows are great, they are just too damn rehearsed and there's basically no surprises at all. You know which songs will be played, in what order, what Billie will talk about, and how the audience will be invited to interact with them.. I much prefer bands that switch up setlists, don't have any prepared speeches, and just basically go out on stage with the setlist being the only thing that's prepared (but also being open to that changing during the show). With that said I never miss out on the chance of seeing GD live and I don't expect them to change. They obviously enjoy doing it this way and thankfully there's other bands that perform the way I prefer. 

[pouty bitch]

My mam just started singing WMUWSE and she got the words wrong and that bothers me way more than it should.

 

Oh, and if KFAD gets cut before I get to see it live, I will personally hunt down whoever is responsible!

[pacejunkie punk]

1 hour ago, Montclare said:

Off topic, but this just reminded me- it's interesting how quickly people learn songs.  I went to the second Longshot show, before the album came out, and just based off of the video footage from 1234 Go, we were all singing those songs like we had been for years.  Amazing how the memory works.

That’s something that amazes me about Green Day fans. I had a similar thought watching shows from their first tour in 1990. They’re playing in towns around the country for the first time and the audience is singing along to every song. The record wasn’t even available in most stores, people had to mail order and physically share tapes and still their fanbase was already so dedicated that they knew all the words.

[Penguin Puffball]

 Does anyone else get kinda uneasy at the fact that Green Day won't always be a thing? I mean, sure they may keep rocking well into their 70's-80's, like Roger Waters or the Stones, and we'll always have their previous albums to listen to. But like, someday Billie's gonna die (and the band wouldn't be the same without him), or the band could break up (doubtful, but still a possibility). Someday, Green Day's going to release their last album. And that makes me sad.

[Montclare]

11 minutes ago, pacejunkie punk said:

That’s something that amazes me about Green Day fans. I had a similar thought watching shows from their first tour in 1990. They’re playing in towns around the country for the first time and the audience is singing along to every song. The record wasn’t even available in most stores, people had to mail order and physically share tapes and still their fanbase was already so dedicated that they knew all the words.

I had a similar thought when watching the 1993 McGregors show.  They were still an underground band, yet everyone there, halfway across the country, knew all the words.  The other interesting thing about that show to me was how everything was right on the edge of fame.  People were still going right up to them throughout the show (giving Mike lost keys), there was no real stage, just a rope between them and the audience, the audience went up with them at the end, yet you had an at capacity (probably overcapacity) crowd that knew all the words.

[pacejunkie punk]

34 minutes ago, Montclare said:

I had a similar thought when watching the 1993 McGregors show.  They were still an underground band, yet everyone there, halfway across the country, knew all the words.  The other interesting thing about that show to me was how everything was right on the edge of fame.  People were still going right up to them throughout the show (giving Mike lost keys), there was no real stage, just a rope between them and the audience, the audience went up with them at the end, yet you had an at capacity (probably overcapacity) crowd that knew all the words.

Kind of reminds me of the Longshot shows now 🙂

[gaslight13]

48 minutes ago, Penguin Puffball said:

 Does anyone else get kinda uneasy at the fact that Green Day won't always be a thing? I mean, sure they may keep rocking well into their 70's-80's, like Roger Waters or the Stones, and we'll always have their previous albums to listen to. But like, someday Billie's gonna die (and the band wouldn't be the same without him), or the band could break up (doubtful, but still a possibility). Someday, Green Day's going to release their last album. And that makes me sad.

Kinda uneasy? The thought literally makes me nauseous. I can’t imagine they’d continue without him. At least not under the same name/songs. Mike better be the singer if they do bc no outsider should take over singing those songs. I feel like a horrible person (to the other guys) for saying this but I really hope Billie isnt first. Anyway, I hope to be senial by the time this is an issue, so they’ve got at least another 50 years 🤞

[Penguin Puffball]

1 minute ago, gaslight13 said:

Kinda uneasy? The thought literally makes me nauseous. I can’t imagine they’d continue without him. At least not under the same name/songs. Mike better be the singer if they do bc no outsider should take over singing those songs. I feel like a horrible person (to the other guys) for saying this but I really hope Billie isnt first. Anyway, I hope to be senial by the time this is an issue, so they’ve got at least another 50 years 🤞

If Billie goes first, I very highly doubt Mike and Tre would continue without him. Actually, with how close the band seems, regardless of who goes first, I think they'll be done. Sure, bassists and drummers are replaceable (looking at you, John Kiffmeyer ) but they seem so close I think they'd just call it quits when that happens. And I hate to say it but with the history of drugs, booze, smoking, what have you, that seems like it might be sooner rather than later. Or they might get lucky and be like those people doing smack well into their 90's with no issues.  

[gaslight13]

4 hours ago, Montclare said:

Casual fans who only know the singles won't know songs like Letterbomb or Are We the Waiting.  You could easily switch those out with, say, All the Time and Worry Rock (I'm still pissed Nimrod didn't get a 20 year anniversary) and they'd be none the wiser.

HAR and KFAD are perfection.   They're also example of songs the average person isn't going to know, but work because they encourage audience participation.

Don’t get me wrong, I love both. HAR is one of my favorite songs. But he breaks for a little too long without doing anything and the crowd kinda doesn’t know what to do for a bit because no one can cheer nonstop for 5 minutes or however long that break is. So the momentum dies for a bit. And KFAD is fun but I’d rather they drop those tags of other songs. I imagine both are built into the set partly to give Billie a break, but I’d rather see him sing a slow song instead. they’ve got more than a few great ones and honestly I could use the break in the middle too.