84 replies to this topic

[Sweet Fanny Addams]

I don't think it would be terrible if they did some gigs, for charity or just for old times sake. It wouldn't have to be a tour. Just a few club dates. If they felt like it. That wouldn't be bogus.

ETA- I would dearly love to see them perform live one last time. So I'm not entirely impartial. The caveat " if they feel like it" is key. They shouldn't do it out of obligation.

[fanfan]

Sweet Fanny Addams, on 02 October 2011 - 06:26 AM, said:

I don't think it would be terrible if they did some gigs, for charity or just for old times sake. It wouldn't have to be a tour. Just a few club dates. If they felt like it. That wouldn't be bogus.

ETA- I would dearly love to see them perform live one last time. So I'm not entirely impartial. The caveat " if they feel like it" is key. They shouldn't do it out of obligation.

I would be really pleased if they did that-

[stipeeyes]

robbbin, on 29 September 2011 - 10:13 PM, said:

I sent a christmas card each year for 30 years and never got so much as a reply.

I used to send each individual christmas cards and birthday cards. I than cut down and only sent all of R.E.M. and the staff one card. The last few years I only sent Michael a birthday card.  Then Ethan started sending our birthday wishes to David at the fanclub so that's just as good or better than a card.   Mike sent me two postcards thanking me for the cards I sent him back in 97 or 98.  I never got a reply from the others but never expected too.  No one would be able to respond to that many people writing or sending them cards. Around Christmas they must get thousands of letters and cards.
There is no other artist or band alive that I know of who has charged 10 and 12 dollars a year and never raised it for 27 years.  I think R.E.M. and Pearl Jam are one of the very few bands/artists to start their own Fan Clubs and hire their own staff.  I think the fanclub gives us(soon to be gave us) more than enough.

[EphSooner]

Stoffel, on 02 October 2011 - 01:19 AM, said:

this is exactly what i have been thinking, it would be against everything they stood for to do that.
like mike said on the simpsons once "it's not the R.E.M. way"
and i would seriously dissapointed if they ever did one.
it's been a nice career, looking fwd what any of them might do along the way.

Why would that be any worse than announcing the breakup one week, then promoting a career-spanning greatest hits record the next?

As if the underwhelming live album (R.E.M. Live, not the Olympia, which was quite good), the IRS greatest hits, the Warner greatest hits, and the new re-re-reissued IRS albums weren't enough of a cash grab?

I'm not sure what the "R.E.M. way" is any more.

[Driver Nate]

EphSooner, on 03 October 2011 - 09:26 AM, said:

I'm not sure what the "R.E.M. way" is any more.

Not doing a "farewell" tour in support of yet another greatest hits collection.

[BarteredLantern]

i agree with the others that i hope they do get together at some point for maybe a benefit gig or charity concert.  Even though i expressed my anger/disappointment earlier, i'm happy they didn't go out with a Farewell concert.  that was never an issue with me.  I suppose I was just mainly pissed that one of my favorite things to look forward to ( a new REM album) was not gonna happen possibly again, and perhaps I didn't like receiving the news through a quick message on their website.  But I never expected a farewell tour because honestly that would have been too much and too draining for them and for us.

But I certainly can see them coming together, perhaps spontaneously, once in a blue moon for a special event.  Even though Mike says it won't happen, I think it could.  C'mon, Pink Floyd did a few shows together if I'm not mistaken and those guys hate each other, or at least Waters and Gilmour do.  I like what Anthony DeCurtis had to say  and it would be nice to see it come true.  I certainly don't need a farewell tour, because the last thing you want is to be like the Eagles, with their various farewell tours.

and back to the original point of this thread, I really think these guys have reached a mid-point in their lives where they don't want to be confined or defined by REM.  and to be perfectly honest, if in their shoes, i'd probably feel the same way.  there's so much to life I'd like to make sense of or realize on my own, that I wouldn't want my entire existence to be defined by this one aspect of my life, in REM's case being in a band they started in their early 20s.  So even though it sucks not having a new REM to look forward to, I certainly wouldn't want myself or them to feel suffocated by this thing they created.  And in a way, as someone on here mentioned, it does remove that burden and adds some grace to the previous albums.

besides, perhaps getting away from this thing will allow them to rediscover their original joy or purpose for doing it in the first place.  never say never.

[stipeeyes]

So I guess this greatest Hits album was going to come out even if the band didn't split?    The guys didn't give themselves much time after Collapse to decide what do do next.  To break up just over 6 months after a new album comes out could make one think that there are more reasons than they are letting on.  Peter in his statement on remhq was the one who sounded like he didn't want to break up and really sounded like he would miss it.
I hope eventually someone interviews Michael.  I'd love to have a better understanding of why he no longer wants the job, he used to say was the best job in the world.

[Driver Nate]

I'm sure in the years to come we will all learn much more about why they decided to hang it up after 31 years. I'm quite alright with it myself, even knowing there may never be another R.E.M. concert or album. I was 20 when I heard "Laughing" for the first time back in 1983. I'm 49 now, that's one huge fucking chunk of my life and R.E.M. were a very large part of it and not just from a musical perspective. In a lot of ways, they helped me to think for myself as a very young man of 20 years old, even if I didn't always agree with them.

[BarteredLantern]

stipeeyes, you're probably correct in saying that Buck was the least willing to call it quits.  I still believe that all the guys in the band felt constricted by this thing.  I'm sure they loved it too, obviously it's been a very fruitful relationship for them.  But for something that happened spontaneously in their youth, I do wonder if they didn't want their entire adult lives to be defined by it.  This is just my own personal feeling and also based on blurbs I've read over the years.  As for Buck, he is a true musician who lives for music.  He just seems happy to play or create music in some form, whether that be for REM or any of his million side projects.  Plus this was a good gig for his musician buddies like Scott McCaughey or Bill Rieflin, so that could be why he seems the most saddened.  I imagine Stipe doesn't feel that loyalty to music or musicians like Buck does.  Mills is harder to read, not sure what he's looking for, but then again I don't even know what I'm looking for most of the time lol.

driver nate is correct, we'll eventually get a more complete view from them.  And I also agree that while I don't always agree with their politics, I always respected their sincerity.

If I had anything to tell REM it is that they made it cool to be yourself and to care.

[stipeeyes]

I agree with your last statement.  It reminds me of what Nicole Kiddman said when she introduced R.E.M. on the MTV 10 show in 1991.  She said how R.E.M. respect all people.  There is nothing but truth to her words.

[RoachTK72]

Michael was correct. It was time to leave the party.  Yes, we are sad, but we will always have their music. No one has passed on just R.E.M. as we know it. Who knows in 5 maybe 10 years they decide why not lets do a few shows and the faithful and you know who you are myself included will be there just as we were in the past.  They are not going anywhere physically it was just time for the party to end. All good things...must come to an end.

[GabrielTripaldi]

I think most of you nailed it.
I can add that I had the feeling that something was wrong among them because for example, there were no interviews together fo Collapse into Now and in the videos as well, there was only Michael.
I must admti it seems strange to me to have called a day few months after the release of a new album.
And I know I will be proabably hated for this (which is quite a record, cuz this is my third post and maybe it doesn't have to do with anything) but Michael's voice was creaky during the last tour (especialy on Fall on Me)

[stipeeyes]

Fall on Me hasn't sounded the same since Bill left. I think its just one of those songs where its hard to capture that original vocal.    Out of the tours I saw I found that Michael's voice in 2003 seemed the roughest.  Smoking and drinking straight alcohol can do that.  2004 on I thought his voice sounded great.  I never cared much if his voice was more raw.  It has a certain sexiness to it especially on songs like Drive.

[RoachTK72]

You are so correct, S.E. Fall on Me w/o Bill is like a jelly sandwich w/o the peanut butter.  But I do admit, the last time I saw them in concert, Jones Beach, June 14, 2008, was the first time for me Fall on Me live, I broke down, right there in the 2nd row.  It just hit me, maybe it was the show that night, maybe, just maybe, it was the only time in recent memory it actually sounded good despite the fact Bill was not there. Oh how I would have loved to have heard Michael do Oh My Heart live. Chilling.    Talk about pure raw, sexiness. Oh My Heart.

[Colinzeal]

Blackbirds Backwards, on 28 September 2011 - 07:09 AM, said:

I was there at Twickenham and although it wasn't quite capacity (Twickenham is huge after all), there was an enormous crowd.  I completely cannot see how that gig was any sort of disappointment.

Check out this video.  Absolutely no issue with the size of the crowd.

Just reading this article in the Irish independent kind of confirms what I said about the Twickenham gig. Although it looks like the promotor got it wrong rather than the band. Even so I reckon this played a big part in the decision.

"Although Mills is clearly proud of their recent work, he's also alluding to the fact their 2008 show at Twickenham Stadium was poorly attended, while tickets for a planned concert at Cardiff's Millennium Stadium (capacity 80,000-plus) sold so badly that the event was downsized to the city's nearby arena, a space fit for a mere 7,500 people.
While Mills rebuts the allegation that bruised egos led to the band's break-up, he wasn't unaffected by the events.
"As a human being, you feel those things," he says, before quickly coming up with reasons for what happened. "The economy was bad, we weren't having hit singles on the radio, and the promoter might have had misguided ideas of how big we were at the time. There are a lot of factors that go into that."

[Pilgrimager]

stipeeyes, on 05 October 2011 - 08:09 PM, said:

So I guess this greatest Hits album was going to come out even if the band didn't split? The guys didn't give themselves much time after Collapse to decide what do do next.  To break up just over 6 months after a new album comes out could make one think that there are more reasons than they are letting on.  Peter in his statement on remhq was the one who sounded like he didn't want to break up and really sounded like he would miss it.

I've not seen anyone else point out that it's only Mike and Michael doing the interviews for the new album. I wonder what that silence from Peter means!

[Sweden]

Pilgrimager, on 01 December 2011 - 03:04 AM, said:

I've not seen anyone else point out that it's only Mike and Michael doing the interviews for the new album. I wonder what that silence from Peter means!

It's been discussed in numerous threads...

Peter was preparing for a JWH tour, and was then on said tour. Peter dieslikes interviews. Peter couldn't stand sitting around repeating the same mantra about how they did "on their own terms" for weeks on end. Mike and maybe Michael are much more conscious about how the band is perceived than Peter. Etc, etc...

I also think Peter would have been more comfortable continuing that Michael and maybe Mike, but that probably had little influence on the interview aspects, I think.

/D

[fanfan]

Pilgrimager, on 01 December 2011 - 03:04 AM, said:

I've not seen anyone else point out that it's only Mike and Michael doing the interviews for the new album. I wonder what that silence from Peter means!

I guess he preferred to be touring and making music than saying the same thing over and over again.

[stipeeyes]

Mike said they will still continue to work on the packaging for the rest of the IRS 25 year Deluxe releases still to come out.  I suppose they may promote them too.
I've listened to so many Mills and Stipe interviews I can't remember which one.  Maybe it was the one they showed at the listening party.

I still have not listened to the NPR one and I tried to watch Michael's interview with Jo Wiley but the video HQ linked is all distorted.

It's probably a hope gone sour but I do hope a few years down the line the guys reconsider and play together again.  Concert life is going to be so lonely without one of the few bands who does it right.

[Driver Nate]

The only I.R.S. reissue due to be released is Document. In one of the interviews Mills did in promotion for Collapse Into Now, he said Dead Letter Office would not be receiving the deluxe reissue/remaster treatment.