Varis wrote:I think that live you'll be in for a great show regardless, their earlier stuff is stellar and they have certainly proven their chops as a live act.
Ha! "Proven their chops"! Wtf?
I'm as annoyed about missing these guys as I am about missing PJ at the BDO. Oh well.
I saw them in 2007 and it was a pretty good show. I like the first 2 albums a lot and The Suburbs is okay.
Maybe it's my frame of mind but I will continue with this album as I do like the band.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Wed November 20, 2013 2:40 am
by stip
harmless wrote:
stip wrote:
theplatypus wrote:
Strat wrote:How is humiliating a person dying for attention and flashing her tits at a show even remotely pretentious or in the same league as making your audience show up in specific well dressed attire?
Making fun of the size of a girl's breasts is several dozen notches above implementing a dress code for your show in the asshole scale.
absolutely! but it is NOT pretentious.
I see strat had this covered.
You want to read my post on that, because whatever else it was, it was pretentious also.
I did, and it wasn't pretentious.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Wed November 20, 2013 4:22 am
by spike
i hate them now.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Wed November 20, 2013 3:07 pm
by given2trade
lol dress codes
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Wed November 20, 2013 3:36 pm
by mastaflatch
given2trade wrote:lol dress codes
yeah, that's a fucking idiot thing to ask for the great unwashed that brought your little indie band to this level of success. anyway they were way better on their first 2 albums.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Wed November 20, 2013 9:48 pm
by harmless
stip wrote:
harmless wrote:
stip wrote:
theplatypus wrote:
Strat wrote:How is humiliating a person dying for attention and flashing her tits at a show even remotely pretentious or in the same league as making your audience show up in specific well dressed attire?
Making fun of the size of a girl's breasts is several dozen notches above implementing a dress code for your show in the asshole scale.
absolutely! but it is NOT pretentious.
I see strat had this covered.
You want to read my post on that, because whatever else it was, it was pretentious also.
I did, and it wasn't pretentious.
Damn it, stip.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 1:27 am
by Harry Lime
I'm sorry a lot of you don't like this new album. I listened to it 5x when it was leaked. I took two weeks off, then came back to it, and for some reason it just sounded even better. Overlong, but some special stuff.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 1:56 am
by BurtReynolds
Its pretty good. I've always found Arcade Fire to be kinda cold and silly, and this one is no different, but I enjoy a lot of it anyway.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 1:56 am
by offhegoes 38
BurtReynolds wrote:Its pretty good. I've always found Arcade Fire to be kinda cold and silly, and this one is no different, but I enjoy a lot of it anyway.
i want to cum between ur toes
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 2:01 am
by BurtReynolds
offhegoes 38 wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:Its pretty good. I've always found Arcade Fire to be kinda cold and silly, and this one is no different, but I enjoy a lot of it anyway.
i want to cum between ur toes
i've been told that i have very beautiful feet.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 2:08 am
by given2trade
i've prob listened to this 50x now. it's absurdly addicting but it's not as good as the first 2. that's just how this band thing works i think. it's still better than just about everything that's come out this year and 1000x better than pearl jam's trash.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 4:02 am
by Norah
given2trade wrote:i've prob listened to this 50x now. it's absurdly addicting but it's not as good as the first 2. that's just how this band thing works i think. it's still better than just about everything that's come out this year and 1000x better than pearl jam's trash.
So where does The Suburbs fall for you?
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 4:14 am
by given2trade
cutuphalfdead wrote:
given2trade wrote:i've prob listened to this 50x now. it's absurdly addicting but it's not as good as the first 2. that's just how this band thing works i think. it's still better than just about everything that's come out this year and 1000x better than pearl jam's trash.
So where does The Suburbs fall for you?
I think it's great. And better than almost all the stuff I've hard from other bands in the last 5 years. But not as good as 1&2.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 21, 2013 4:15 am
by given2trade
To me, a great or even a good album is one I want to listen to again...duh right...and I still go and listen to Suburbs. I haven't put on Pearl Jam's latest in weeks and haven't put on the previous 2 in 12+ months...lol
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Sat November 23, 2013 2:25 am
by spike
Harry Lime wrote:I'm sorry a lot of you don't like this new album. I listened to it 5x when it was leaked. I took two weeks off, then came back to it, and for some reason it just sounded even better. Overlong, but some special stuff.
yeah, i've been spinning this again the last couple days and it's just terrific.
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Sat November 23, 2013 2:26 am
by spike
BurtReynolds wrote:
offhegoes 38 wrote:
BurtReynolds wrote:Its pretty good. I've always found Arcade Fire to be kinda cold and silly, and this one is no different, but I enjoy a lot of it anyway.
i want to cum between ur toes
i've been told that i have very beautiful feet.
super symmetrical?
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Sun November 24, 2013 11:00 pm
by Harry Lime
I'm a sucker for smooth transitions.
My Body is a Cage/Orpheus
Re: Arcade Fire
Posted: Thu November 28, 2013 4:28 pm
by Kral
Gonna give these guys another try from the beginning. Discovered them around Neon Bible, but couldn't get into them that much, minus a few really great songs.