28 replies to this topic

[Driver Nate]

grandpaboy, on 23 March 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

No one will remember REM beyond 1995.

I'm sorry, but that's the way it will go down. No one remembers the band now after 1995 ffs.

The post-Berry years have actively hurt the band's legacy and it would be a fool to deny this. Too many years, too many mediocre albums, too many years of Stipe making a fool of himself. There's been a desperation or a want in Stipe as a frontman since 1998 and it pissed me off years ago.

If they had split on Dec 31 1999 they would be gods forever.

So people will remember Monster but not New Adventures In Hi-Fi even though Monster, at one time, was the number 1 CD found in used CD bins? I also know of some longtime hardcore R.E.M. fans that lost interest beginning with Monster. I ran into some people after they announced they were disbanding that said they didn't realize R.E.M. was even still together and these were music fans that actually keep track of what's going on in the music world. For an indication of how they will be remembered, I say look no further than all of the press reports that came flooding in after they made the announcement that they were disbanding. Yes, their post-Bill period was largely chalked up by most writers as inconsequential but I don't recall a single one of them saying they had tarnished their legacy by recording those albums. Like it or not, those albums are also part of what R.E.M. will be remembered for. I'm sure Bill leaving had a lot to do with how well (and/or how poorly) those records were received but you also have to factor in an ever changing musical landscape as far as how well those albums were known on a global scale. That ever changing musical climate (one that's still very much in flux) also had a lot to do with the demise of R.E.M. and is something every artist is still struggling with today. At least the ones that care about their music falling into the right hands and actually being heard. As far as their legacy is concerned post-Bill, those records may not have registered in the same way that their earlier work did but R.E.M. continued to maintain their prowess as a live band right up until the very end. What actually went on behind the scenes as far as inner band strife has only been hinted at as far as the final decision to call it quits. I'm sure that will all come out in the wash as soon as the inevitable biographies are written on the band that will be published in the years to come. The dust has barely had a chance to settle at this point.

[Remixomatosys]

Personally, I think that New adventures, Up and Reveal are up there among the band's best work.
R.e.m. gained many new fans with the mentioned albums (sure, the murmur/reckoning afficionados probably abandoned the band by 1995, but they had the courage to reinvent themselves - and continue to sell millions of albums, up to around the sun at least).
By the end of their career (and I'm talking about Collapse into now) they were tired of r.e.m., and it shows, in my opinion. Nontheless, even their last album has quality (I don't know if CIN will be remembered, but I'm sure that the post Berry catalogue will)

[Lori]

grandpaboy, on 23 March 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

too many years of Stipe making a fool of himself. There's been a desperation or a want in Stipe as a frontman since 1998 and it pissed me off years ago.

I'm sure there were times many people thought John Lennon was nuts and making a fool of himself,  like the famous bed-in with Yoko, and he even wrote about it in a  ballad.

[Driver Nate]

Anyone questioning R.E.M.'s legacy should take a gander at my Facebook feed today.

[rocket21]

grandpaboy, on 23 March 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

No one will remember REM beyond 1995.

I'm sorry, but that's the way it will go down. No one remembers the band now after 1995 ffs.

grandpaboy, on 23 March 2013 - 11:50 PM, said:

If they had split on Dec 31 1999 they would be gods forever.

I think there's something to be said about this.  I think I'd hold their body of work in higher regard had Up been their last album.

I suspect they could end up similar to the Moody Blues - an acclaimed and best selling band for almost a decade, some changes in line up and sound, a few later hits...but generally forgotten and not looked at in the same way as some other bands of that era that called it quits closer to their peaks.

[THE UNAFRAID]

Driver Nate, on 24 March 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

So people will remember Monster but not New Adventures In Hi-Fi even though Monster, at one time, was the number 1 CD found in used CD bins?

Yes. As the cd listened to once and then sold.

Myself, I like Monster even though it's a bit too linear. NAIHF is what Monster should have been imo.

[Driver Nate]

THE UNAFRAID, on 15 April 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

NAIHF is what Monster should have been imo.

Agreed and I believe Stipe has even said as much.

[stipeeyes]

I do too and think as a live band they grew even better.  Michael became a complete entertainer.  If you go back and watch past concerts you really see how he evolved into being one of the best front men alive.  At times he held the audience in the palm of his hand.
I hope their legacy grows.  Spinner.com did a worst to best of every R.E.M. album and I was surprised at how high they ranked Around the Sun and how they feel Out of Time is one of their worst albums. Monster came in as the best R.E.M. album.    

Every few weeks it seems I keep finding articles that randomly make references to Michael or R.E.M. I think they are missed so much that their fans who are journalists just cannot help but mentioning them.

[erock]

Related to the last several posts.....It's interesting that we are getting the GREEN 25th remaster now.  Green was actually the album that most of my R.E.M. loving friends jumped ship, had had enough, and considered R.E.M. officially lame / sold out.

Which blows my mind now of course.....so much greatness came afterwords.  Maybe even the best.