21 replies to this topic

[e-botti]

from Uncut:

"REM bassist Mike Mills has revealed that he doesn't expect former frontman Michael Stipe to release any solo material in the near future.

The band announced their official split last month after 31 years together. The guitarist said that he believes that Stipe is more likely to work with art and photography instead of making music in the next chapter of his career.

Asked about the future plans of both his bandmates, he told Uncut: "Peter [Buck] enjoys collaborating with people and I see him doing a lot more of that. I think Michael [Stipe] wants to work with visual media, sculpture and photography".

Mills recently stated that REM are unlikely to ever share a stage together again in the future, but that he himself would most likely make a solo record.

He added: "I'm going to let the dust settle. I'll probably do a solo record at some point. There are a lot of musicians I want to work with and I see that happening soon."

The band are due to release a post-split hits compilation next month. They put the finishing touches to 'Part Lies, Part Heart, Part Truth, Part Garbage: 1982 – 2011' before they called it a day after 31 years in September.

The collection will include three new tracks recorded after the release of recent album 'Collapse Into Now', including their final single 'We All Go Back To Where We Belong'."


http://www.uncut.co..../rem/news/15223

[fanfan]

Thanks for sharing!

[thomas08]

cant wait for mike's solo album!

[REMCHICAGOBOY]

It sounds like they really thought it all through, and they just really want to pursue other interests at this point, and took R.E.M. as far as they could for 31 years.

I am soooo looking forward to a Mike Mills solo record (and maybe a tour!)

[stipeeyes]

As long as there are no songs about Eagles on the album.  Remember when MIke sang the Eagle song.  People were acting insane on this board over that.

It may start to be hard to find out news on the guys and what they are up to.

[Sweet Fanny Addams]

stipeeyes, on 28 October 2011 - 07:18 PM, said:

As long as there are no songs about Eagles on the album.  Remember when MIke sang the Eagle song.  People were acting insane on this board over that.

Oopsie, too late!
http://www.murmurs.c...ost__p__2069733

[Jutta Hemesath]

The "Eagle Song" wasn't a milestone in music history but despite this I'm looking forward to a solo album of Mike though

[charky]

I bet that on a mike solo-Lp there would be at least one track featuring Bill drums!

[mozzh]

Mike seems the most forthcoming about the split, seems clear that michael has drifted from music as a challenge over the years. I cannot wait to see what mike will get up to, some of the songs has done over the years are my favourite. Another reason to keep the murmurs going! What with mike doing an album and peter still touring.

[Colinzeal]

He says in Mojo that they considered a farewell tour but they didn't because it might have been considered "Mercenary".

Ridiculous reason if correct.

Who is important? The band themselves and the fans.

I am sure the fans would have loved one last opportunity to hear the songs played live if the band had felt they wanted to take their music out on the road one last time.

[stipeeyes]

Who would have considered it Mercenary?

You are most correct.  MANY of us would have loved that one last tour.   It would help those of us who are still sad about their decision to accept this more.  It doesn't always have to be a farewell tour.  It would have been a more proper way to end things.

I really wish Peter or Michael would talk to magazines too.  I think we heard enough from Mike on the subject.

[Eraserhead]

Colinzeal, on 02 November 2011 - 04:34 AM, said:

He says in Mojo that they considered a farewell tour but they didn't because it might have been considered "Mercenary".

Ridiculous reason if correct.

Who is important? The band themselves and the fans.

I am sure the fans would have loved one last opportunity to hear the songs played live if the band had felt they wanted to take their music out on the road one last time.

Well, I think they got that right!

It WOULD have been considered "mercenary", no doubt. And rightfully so. As with ANY farewell tour. As with any post-mortem, mostly unnecessary greatest hits (oops). Save for this minor mishap (expect due to 'contractual reasons', fulfilling of which could afford you an afterlife chasing the sun and losing the plot) they handled this alright. The press that queued to lambast R.E.M. for their recent past, now hails their illustrious career. As they should.

Yes, we would all have liked to see them live once again, but not even good friends come back to visit (and charge you for the benefit) once they passed away.

And sorry, but the fans are not important here. R.E.M. took a darn good care of them through the years. It is THEIR lives and THEIR decision. Stop the mourning.

[Colinzeal]

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

It WOULD have been considered "mercenary", no doubt. And rightfully so. As with ANY farewell tour. As with any post-mortem, mostly unnecessary greatest hits (oops). Save for this minor mishap (expect due to 'contractual reasons', fulfilling of which could afford you an afterlife chasing the sun and losing the plot) they handled this alright. The press that queued to lambast R.E.M. for their recent past, now hails their illustrious career. As they should.

Its a shame that people are so quick to judge when it comes to things like this. Yes it could be done for money but that is not always the case. I think it is a shame, if its the case that a band who had been together for 31 years fancied going out on the road and playing their songs one more time;decided not to because people might think they are doing it for the money.

[Sweden]

Colinzeal, on 02 November 2011 - 04:34 AM, said:

He says in Mojo that they considered a farewell tour but they didn't because it might have been considered "Mercenary".

Ridiculous reason if correct.

Who is important? The band themselves and the fans.

Ridiculous? I am so baffled by a lot of people's views of the band. Not only the infamous "entitlement" aspect but the general understanding of what this band tried to stand for during 31 years. I don't know for how long you've been a fan, but obviously for people who came on board maybe after Bill left they have quite a different band to be a fan of. Much more accomodating and much more "easy" to be a fan of. Requests through the website? Playing fanclub shows? Playing old chesnuts fans always had wanted to hear? Alsmost didn't happen before. This probably gave fans much higher expectations of, well, what they indeed could expect to be provided with as fans.

And, the band is of course more important than the fans in this sense. I could never ask them to do anything they feel would risk negtivaly affect their legacy just to accomodate my desire to see them live one more time. As has been pointed out...as odd as it may seem, many fans would actually probably have been oddly dissapointed with them doing a big farewell tour. Simply because it's not the R.E.M. way. Snobby and elitist? Maybe, but who cares. I want to stay a proud R.E.M. fan. I would have been less proud if they had done a farewell tour, notwithstanding how much I would have loved to see them.

/D

[Sweden]

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

Well, I think they got that right!
It WOULD have been considered "mercenary", no doubt. And rightfully so. As with ANY farewell tour. As with any post-mortem, mostly unnecessary greatest hits (oops). Save for this minor mishap (expect due to 'contractual reasons', fulfilling of which could afford you an afterlife chasing the sun and losing the plot) they handled this alright. The press that queued to lambast R.E.M. for their recent past, now hails their illustrious career. As they should.
Yes, we would all have liked to see them live once again, but not even good friends come back to visit (and charge you for the benefit) once they passed away.
And sorry, but the fans are not important here. R.E.M. took a darn good care of them through the years. It is THEIR lives and THEIR decision. Stop the mourning.

I fully agree.

[Eraserhead]

Colinzeal, on 02 November 2011 - 04:34 AM, said:

He says in Mojo that they considered a farewell tour but they didn't because it might have been considered "Mercenary".

Ridiculous reason if correct.

Who is important? The band themselves and the fans.

I am sure the fans would have loved one last opportunity to hear the songs played live if the band had felt they wanted to take their music out on the road one last time.

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 01:05 PM, said:

Well, I think they got that right!
It WOULD have been considered "mercenary", no doubt. And rightfully so. As with ANY farewell tour. As with any post-mortem, mostly unnecessary greatest hits (oops). Save for this minor mishap (expect due to 'contractual reasons', fulfilling of which could afford you an afterlife chasing the sun and losing the plot) they handled this alright. The press that queued to lambast R.E.M. for their recent past, now hails their illustrious career. As they should.
Yes, we would all have liked to see them live once again, but not even good friends come back to visit (and charge you for the benefit) once they passed away.
And sorry, but the fans are not important here. R.E.M. took a darn good care of them through the years. It is THEIR lives and THEIR decision. Stop the mourning.

Colinzeal, on 02 November 2011 - 05:19 AM, said:

Its a shame that people are so quick to judge when it comes to things like this. Yes it could be done for money but that is not always the case. I think it is a shame, if its the case that a band who had been together for 31 years fancied going out on the road and playing their songs one more time;decided not to because people might think they are doing it for the money.

Is it my 'quick judgement' that is shameful, or could it also be yours above, calling their decision "ridiculous"?  Peace... Or else.  

[Colinzeal]

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 06:11 AM, said:

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 01:05 PM, said:

Well, I think they got that right!
It WOULD have been considered "mercenary", no doubt. And rightfully so. As with ANY farewell tour. As with any post-mortem, mostly unnecessary greatest hits (oops). Save for this minor mishap (expect due to 'contractual reasons', fulfilling of which could afford you an afterlife chasing the sun and losing the plot) they handled this alright. The press that queued to lambast R.E.M. for their recent past, now hails their illustrious career. As they should.
Yes, we would all have liked to see them live once again, but not even good friends come back to visit (and charge you for the benefit) once they passed away.
And sorry, but the fans are not important here. R.E.M. took a darn good care of them through the years. It is THEIR lives and THEIR decision. Stop the mourning.




Is it my 'quick judgement' that is shameful, or could it also be yours above, calling their decision "ridiculous"?  Peace... Or else.  

I think it is ridiculous for a band to make a decision based on what other people think especially a band like REM.

If they wanted to tour they should have, if they don't then fair enough.

I don't think we are entitled to anything from them and I did say in my initial post if they wanted to.

[Sweden]

Colinzeal, on 02 November 2011 - 07:32 AM, said:

I think it is ridiculous for a band to make a decision based on what other people think especially a band like REM.

Again we're back to them protecting their legacy. Just as much as they would not like to do something they themselves see as mercenary, I am not surprised if they also wish to avoid doing what others may feel would be. I would say this is an aspect of their "image" that they have been very conscious about from the start. They have also never been much for nostalgia in term of their own history.

[gregmcg1983]

2008 tour: untoppable. not to mention everything else about the period leading up to CIN. Dublin/Accelerate/2008 tour/Live At The Olympia? we were spoiled rotten. and i soaked up every second of it (and tried to not spend too much time reading people complain about every detail of the band online).

farewell tour would be cheesy and sad. i know the music journalism narrative of R.E.M. is that their peak was about 1992, but we know they had many. i saw one of them on the last tour, and i'm more than comfortable with that being the last memory.

(although meeting Peter and Mike over the subsequent years was fun, too)

"remember every moment" - JMS

next order of business: finish MY "box set." bring on the album outtakes!! so far, it takes longer to listen to than their official discography does. heheh.

[stipeeyes]

Eraserhead, on 02 November 2011 - 05:05 AM, said:

Yes, we would all have liked to see them live once again, but not even good friends come back to visit (and charge you for the benefit) once they passed away.

And sorry, but the fans are not important here. R.E.M. took a darn good care of them through the years. It is THEIR lives and THEIR decision. Stop the mourning.

NO ONE DIED.  The fans should be important.  We have a helping hand in giving them the life they have and their millions.  It is unfair to the fans if they simply decided not to do one more tour because of what some journalist thinks.