guestT wrote:Nate Mendel is too good for this shit.
I thought I read the SDRE singer said once that the only reason Medel didn't leave the Foos to do more SDRE is because Grohl paid him a ton of money to stay.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Wed August 23, 2017 9:49 pm
by bodysnatcher
verb_to_trust wrote:
guestT wrote:Nate Mendel is too good for this shit.
I thought I read the SDRE singer said once that the only reason Medel didn't leave the Foos to do more SDRE is because Grohl paid him a ton of money to stay.
probably. would be hard to turn down.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Wed August 23, 2017 10:08 pm
by BurtReynolds
The Foo Fighters sucked from the start, yet somehow get worse every year. It's really quite incredible.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 1:49 am
by verb_to_trust
I watched the video for this song on the FF Facebook page. The responses were overwhelmingly positive. What the hell is wrong with people?
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 1:51 am
by 96583UP
BurtReynolds wrote:The Foo Fighters sucked from the start, yet somehow get worse every year. It's really quite incredible.
and here i was clicking on this thread planning to simply post that they suck
and then you just totally blew my mind
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 2:27 am
by MadTIGERmaN
Foo's always remind me of CCR. They both have tons of songs everyone knows, but no one you know ever says "that's my favorite band" and, some of your friends will give you shit for even liking them.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 2:38 am
by verb_to_trust
Fogerty never wrote shit like this in CCR. Take it back.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 4:04 am
by tragabigzanda
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 2:53 pm
by VinylGuy
Its been a while since something from dave really clicked on me. This is another generic rock song from them.
I hated the video more than the song though.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 6:46 pm
by Superblood Wolfmoon
I feel like they've hit the same plateau that Pearl Jam has hit. Approaching (or in) middle age, have had a ton of success and for the most part stick to the formula that made them successful. I don't feel either band "sucks," and I still enjoy seeing both of them in concert immensely, but it's just hard to get excited about the newer stuff for more than a few listens. But you know what? That's OK. It's their band and their creative outlet so more power to them if that's what scratches that itch. As someone pointed out, plenty of their fans think it's great, and while people who were along for the ride from the start may drop off over time I'm sure they pick up plenty of newer, younger fans along the way.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 6:56 pm
by tragabigzanda
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 7:12 pm
by Norah
yes
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 7:14 pm
by bodysnatcher
in some way, i feel they are on a higher level than PJ, simply bc I feel like they are a much more successful band. Feels like PJ is trying to hit that plateau that the Foo Fighters are on, but i don't know if they ever will.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 8:49 pm
by Birds in Hell
Yeah, and I feel like Foo Fighters can hang as a stadium-level band a lot more comfortably than Pearl Jam, as they have plenty of songs that are naturally loud, simple and fun. Pearl Jam try to crack into that same vibe but their strengths as a band trend towards being weightier and broodier, so they have to rely on uninspiring, utilitarian new songs and hoary classic rock covers to fill in the gaps. Most of Pearl Jam's best loud songs are too angry or gloomy, and their best lighter moments too delicate or too weird, to pull off the "good time party band" thing as effortlessly as Foo Fighters.
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 9:12 pm
by Jorge
bodysnatcher wrote:in some way, i feel they are on a higher level than PJ, simply bc I feel like they are a much more successful band. Feels like PJ is trying to hit that plateau that the Foo Fighters are on, but i don't know if they ever will.
PJ peaked much higher, popularity-wise, but the Foos have been much more consistently popular
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 9:14 pm
by tragabigzanda
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 9:21 pm
by gardenparty
You could also say Dave puts a lot more in to the Foos than Ed does PJ at this point. Regardless of the quality of work
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 9:25 pm
by tragabigzanda
tragabigzanda wrote:
tragabigzanda wrote:Top 10 maybe?
Hello Morning
Close Captioned
The Kill
Place/Position
Do You Like Me?
Latest Disgrace
Recap Modotti
Nightshop
Break
Life & Limb
I'd maybe bump Life & Limb for Epic Problem
Re: Foo Fighters
Posted: Thu August 24, 2017 9:54 pm
by Jorge
Don't they inject a bunch of jam sections and stuff? I remember seeing a live version of "My Hero" that ended with a jam section