Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

NEW ALBUM: Western Stars - June 14


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Eden said:

Peter Gabriel  has toured with an orchestra.

Orchestras without pop/rock artists tour the world all the time.

Maybe Bruce is keeping Western Stars for a LV residency.

Wasn't aware of Peter Gabriel's tour, but I do know that classical orchestral tours are quite limited in many ways, number of concerts, touring days, countries visited... 

A mini tour or another residency would displease most of the fans and that helps explain the movie and soundtrack. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bobfan1976 said:

Don't tell The Who that. They've been touring with an orchestra for the past two years.

I wasn't aware of the Who tour, you never stop learning. 

What I found is a north american tour, a month in May, a month in September and two weeks in October after a two week break. 

And Roger Daltrey played 12 Tommy shows with orchestra on a June 2018 US tour. 

Still nothing comparable with an average Springsteen tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jerseyfornia said:

If there were a Western Stars tour, this situation wouldn't have happened. He's said many times the film is for those who wanted to see the album toured live.

Something must have gone wrong down the road then, because we agreed that very few fans are actually going to see the movie in theaters.

It's either there wasn't this big demand for a concert-movie or somebody wasn't interested in giving it a bigger visibility.

In both cases the movie turned out to be quite a poor substitute of a tour, no matter the quality of the performance.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its the grey men behind the sceens

the promoters and managers 

the movers and shakers

i mean Bruce was on Norton and no advertising for his product through the episode on tv here

 

Blinded by the light - which played for at least 4 weeks here and again no advertising of Bruce related product

is it because our demographic (as Bruce fans).is now mostly too old to matter ?

yet so many are at an age and stage in life where disposable income is more available 

 

at least Mr Nuggs sends me an email once a month

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Eileen said:

The movie is to add another string to his bow. Fair play.

I think they thought it would be a sell-out - I doubt money is spent, thinking they may not get it back tenfold.

have they even heard of advertising to increase market shear ?

how can people buy your product if they don't know about it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Eileen said:

The movie is to add another string to his bow. Fair play.

I think they thought it would be a sell-out - I doubt money is spent, thinking they may not get it back tenfold.

sell out was never going to happen, one night only here a monday at that for £20 a ticket, although it seems its about half sold at minute, i guess £15 for a dvd will make his money i would think, not sure i will bother though, 3 versions of the same thing seems a bit excessive i think

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, 100yrsOld said:

Wasn't aware of Peter Gabriel's tour, but I do know that classical orchestral tours are quite limited in many ways, number of concerts, touring days, countries visited... 

A mini tour or another residency would displease most of the fans and that helps explain the movie and soundtrack. 

I was just making the point it can, and has, been done. I don't expect to see long tours anymore anyway. I think we'll see a similar approach to how The Rolling Stones tour these days, but you never know. I just think it's a shame he won't tour this album, a first set focusing on the album, then a second playing E-Street material could have been amazing. Instead we're going to get E-Street greatest hits in a stadium again.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bobfan1976 said:

I just think it's a shame he won't tour this album, a first set focusing on the album, then a second playing E-Street material could have been amazing

On this I this I totally agree. It would've been something really new and a real thrill for us fans. 

But no chance of it happening I'm afraid, if we're really really lucky we'll have a couple of WS songs with the full band. 

I've got the feeling they'd be even better in an ESB version... (hope nobody 's listening... ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The interesting thing about the heroes, who come to the fore in Springsteen's latest album, is not that they are alienated (who are not?), but that they cannot stop rationalizing their alienation. Let's take the Hitchhiker as a representative example.

You can hitchhike to get where you want; you then hitchhike to reach a goal. One can also have the hitchhiking as such as a goal. Of this latter kind of hitchhiking, there are at least two different kinds: either it is the result of rejecting all the goals and values that society otherwise holds as important; and then only a life without a goal remains, i.e. hitchhiking; or is the hitchhiking itself is the basis, and the rejection of the goals of society the result; then the hitchhiker has a life without goal as a goal.

Hitchhikers of the former kind (because the reason for their hitchhiking is clear to them), rest safe in themselves, and hitchhiking is for them a conscious decision; they may therefore be silent about why they are hitchhiking; the alienation is to them an accepted consequence of a conscious rejection.

The second kind of hitchhiker, on the other hand, must constantly reject for themselves and others the goals and values that bind other people to a permanent existence; to them, rejection is a consequence of alienation, not the other way around; he or she can therefore never be silent, must constantly reject society's goals. Such an existential hitchhiker must all the time repeat that he is not following a map, but is aimlessly driving in accordance with the powers of the weather. Since the hitchhiker's existence in the hitchhiking is not the result of a rejection of the goals and values of them, who he travels with, but in the telling of this rejection, the hitchhiker can neither categorically deny (his existence requires someone to give him a lift) or categorically confirm (his existence also requires the rejection of of these values and goals) the values and important goals that they have, that gives him a ride. So even though he agrees that their goals (property, family, children) are positive, he also makes it clear that they are positive only in their world, not in his. So he has to constantly repeat to himself and others his mantra, which is not: "I am a hitchhiker", but: "I am a hitchhiker all day long", which has a childish tone, and may well be interpreted as: "I rejecting your life, which consists of working all day long ”. Of course, he wants to escape the alienation which he rationalizes and maintains in his words, but since he rejects all goals, his liberation can only happen in an alienated way: just like he is carried around in his alienation by external powers (weather and wind), he can be brought out of his alienation only by one likewise external power: another human being. "Catch me now, because tomorrow I will be gone" is therefore a necessary complement to "I hitchhike all day long". The latter mantra preserves and defends his alienation, the former pleads for liberation from the same alienation. Both are equally necessary, and both must necessarily be repeated.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2019 at 1:16 AM, Jerseyfornia said:

If there were a Western Stars tour, this situation wouldn't have happened. He's said many times the film is for those who wanted to see the album toured live.

Or maybe "they" were thinking of the fans' desire for a tour so they gave us the next best thing. I'm sure the profits from a DVD and live CD won't come close to what they would make off a tour.

It's interesting how some folk apply a negative shade to so many moves the man makes.

I think we should define better what is 'negative' and what isn't.

At some point the words 'strange' and 'weird', used as a comment on the choice of a live album after 4 months, have been condemned as an unfair criticism. If this is the case, then it's really all about every reaction that is not ravenously enthusiastic being deemed as negative by a blindfolded fan base.

Unacceptable but sadly pointless to even try discussing it.

The second 'negative' issue is about the money grabbing accusation and it's a tricky one.

I think it's arguably easy to say that around Bruce, there's a whole plethora of subjects that prosper around his musical and non-musical output. 

This said, my personal opinion is that Bruce is at a point of his life in which he just does what he likes to do or is willing to try and experiment with, and can afford to. 

If he cashes in a few bucks in the meantime, all for the best. 

But all around him I'm not so sure that there aren't people who's in it only to exploit Bruce's output in every possible way, and why shouldn't they? 

This is what all our economy is about, in this case, try to cash in what you can from the fans, from us. As it seems we're very happy to comply too. 

So it's seems to me that the use of the word 'negative' is just the same unacceptable. 

I think we should all consider this point when addressing a community of true fans as we are and I am. 

And I'm saying this with high consideration and respect of all the opinions expressed so far in this regard. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never condemned you for calling it weird. I disagreed with it being weird and attribute it to the lack of a tour. Simple as that.

As far as the money grabbing comments go, there's a subset of fans here who seem to think everything he releases is a moneygrab. Maybe we should just get everything for free.

Why is this post in two threads? I'm confused.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jerseyfornia said:

 

I never condemned you for calling it weird. I disagreed with it being weird and attribute it to the lack of a tour. Simple as that.

As far as the money grabbing comments go, there's a subset of fans here who seem to think everything he releases is amoneygrab. Maybe we should just get everything for free.

 

Same and absolutely right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jerseyfornia said:

As far as the money grabbing comments go, there's a subset of fans here who seem to think everything he releases is a moneygrab. Maybe we should just get everything for free.

No. It would be far better to underline a simple fact: where there is who sees moneygrabbing, some others think of it as the joy of giving  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the past week I have come to the conclusion that Stones is one of the most beautiful songs Bruce has ever written.  The music, the imagery, everything. It has the same haunting feel, and simplicity, of Wreck on the Highway, another of my all-time favourites.

I imagine it being sung as a round. In fact, I hope to get my sisters into trying it with me. (Now I just have to get the other sister to listen to the album :mellow: )

  • Like 6
  • Bruuuuce! 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the imposter said:

To whom it may concern:

Drive Fast (the Stuntman) is the greatest Springsteen song since The Ghost of Tom Joad.

IMO (aka FACT).

I mentioned a while ago that Drive Fast is the hidden/underrated gem on the album.  Love it.

Not sure if someone on here (?) said it was plodding and just another The Wrestler.  Maybe I saw it on BTX though. I think it's miles better than The Wrestler, which I find repetitive (and I don't like the one-legged dog quote, just silly :lol:).

My opinion only.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, janeymarywendy said:

I mentioned a while ago that Drive Fast is the hidden/underrated gem on the album.  Love it.

Not sure if someone on here (?) said it was plodding and just another The Wrestler.  Maybe I saw it on BTX though. I think it's miles better than The Wrestler, which I find repetitive (and I don't like the one-legged dog quote, just silly :lol:).

My opinion only.

even though i love the wrestler im still 'liking' your post :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...