And people bitched about Jonathan Ross ....

Al Jarvis wrote:

Hans Jugger wrote:

Al Jarvis wrote:

Tarbox23 wrote: .... some folks are no longer laughing with them, but AT them...

Then those folks have missed the point entirely, surely?!

Sorry, but what point have I missed entirely?

That this is New Order with a couldn't-give-a-fcuk attitude. Same attitude they've always had. Same attitude they had when they butchered Blue Monday on TOTP or indeed Barney danced like a gimp on Fine Time. That point.

I think the point is - New Order are no longer in a position where they can have a "couldn't give a fcuk attitude". Years ago they could get away with it, but nowadays they don't have the charisma, the coolness or the songs (Jetstream?!)

oldmonkey wrote: Well yes, they have always taken the piss in some way or other, by refusing to play ball in the early days when asked for interviews, refusing to play the accepted game when it comes to releases, promotion etc, doing everything their own way if they felt like it, and to an extent they are continuing to this day along contrary lines by doing the exact opposite of what they always stood by. But, and this is possibly where some people are missing the ironic point a bit, the current cycle of contrary behaviour (i.e. playing the media game) is actually rather sad, and smacks a bit of desperation. Bernard is acting the goat to overkill proportions these days, and this "pisstaking" is now a bit lame.

I'd say people are missing the point because the parody is no longer recognizable as a parody, at which point said parody runs the risk of not being taken seriously anymore, and has the likelihood of alienating the viewer.

Al Jarvis wrote:

Hans Jugger wrote: I think the point is - New Order are no longer in a position where they can have a "couldn't give a fcuk attitude". Years ago they could get away with it, but nowadays they don't have the charisma, the coolness or the songs (Jetstream?!)

Soooo, no one's actually forcing you to listen to them these days, are they?! Which is more to the point, surely?!

Did they ever? The only thing that ever forced me to listen to New Order was the fact that they made good records, and listening to them was the only way of getting to experience anything to do with them, they were rarely in the press and comparatively rarely appearing live.

Al Jarvis wrote:

oldmonkey wrote: Did they ever? The only thing that ever forced me to listen to New Order was the fact that they made good records, and listening to them was the only way of getting to experience anything to do with them, they were rarely in the press and comparatively rarely appearing live.

Not the point I was making, Tim. If someone doesn't like Jetstream why then post continually that they don't like Jetstream?

Maybe some people aspire to be a low life or a dead soul? Good point though. There are alternatives these days for those that want them. I guess there always were. Leave your baggage behind, as the sample says!

you guys all need to chill out a bit.

skin up a fat one, put Technique on the stereo and feel the love :-)

Al Jarvis wrote:

little boy lost wrote: Then you should have changed the subject of this thread. You are comparing oranges and lemons now.

Jan, to the best of my knowledge Bernard Sumner has NEVER tried out for Sigue Sigue Sputnick. It was a JOKE! That picture was NEVER taken from a Sigue Sigue Sputnick audtion. It ... simply ... NEVER ... happened (to the best of my knowledge).

Next time I'll start a thread with "And people bitched about Jonathan Ross," but then simply add in the text, "And quite rightly too. Bernard is an absolute disgrace because he can't dance and can't sing and he now looks his age. Ian Curtis would be spinning in his grave." That way we can perhaps keep the miserablists amongst us happy. Well, not happy, per se, because miserablists don't do 'happy'. Perhaps just less miserable instead?

Enjoy.

Al, if you really think you made me think that Bernard ever tried out for SSS, I'm insulted.

But anyway: by combining your subject line with a picture from the "Touched" video shoot, you effectively suggest that both appearances operate on the same level, quod non. Which brings me back to the point I've made above about the parody: the "Touched" video was/is instantly recognizable as a heavy metal spoof and is consequently hilarious to watch, whereas Bernard's "impersonation" of an over-eager aging rock star hammering it up before his audience to many people makes him look like a berk.

You can probably tell I still haven't fully recovered from the one time I viewed my copy of the 511 DVD.

Lunatic Fridge wrote: Can anybody be certain that Barney's antics on Jonathon Ross were not a piss take. Big Al J is spot on again - NO still have that "couldn't give a fcuk" attitude they always have had, and we love them for it.

So you and Al Jarvis like new order because you believe that they don't care about the music (or their fans)?

yes, I will grant you that their backs to the audience mentality and rough interviews and too cool for mainstream attitude was part of their appeal. but just a small PART of it.

the MAIN part of their appeal was that they clearly pour their hearts and souls into their music. their music is not lazy. sometimes the machines would break down, sometimes someone would have too much drink, sometimes they'd be in a lousy mood and put on a crappy live show. sometimes.

they played a phenomenal live show in NYC this month. I love the band. But I love the band because they care about the art of the music, not because they are perceived as lazy or too cool for their fans.

the whole reason I post here and occasionally point out aspects of the band that worries me, is that I love them SO much. a few tough questions about them does not equal hatred for the band. quite the opposite in fact.

you guys sound like the rightwingers who say anyone criticizing the Iraq War must hate the troops, hate the country, should pack up and move out, be ashamed...

so, yeah, if I see a crappy live tv performance, I am gonna call them on it. No, that does not mean new order are finished and will never play live well again... it just means that I love em and want to see them do the best they can.

trying to defend a crappy performance, with "new order are cool cause they suck" like you and aj do, is lame.

yeah, they sucked in the 80s a few times too. so what? nobody is perfect. but that doesn't mean we should worship their bad nights.

the NYC Hammerstein show is one of the best live performances I have ever seen, and I've been to many. Why was that show good? Because they played great music, connected with the crowd, and didn't act like losers. It was a memorable night.

This Ross show was memorable for exactly the opposite reasons. A true fan can accept that, can accept that new order can be equally spectacular as shitty live, but never mediocre. Well, Ross was shitty.

Stop making excuses, stop telling us that you like new order because they suck, because they "don't care". They DO care. They don't go up on a stage and TRY to suck. So stop worshipping the band and acting like they never mess up, that the only times they mess up "they meant to do that"...

Get real.

i can admit that new Order are slowly decaying while still loving their music. it's not tough. they have moments of beauty and moments of shame, nowadays in near equal parts. they've always been terrible musicians but were able to construct some magic in the studio and could stir emotions on stage despite their technical shortcomings. the performance on JR is just another example of them not being good "live". it may be fun to be there but when you're at home listening or watching a live performance, you better have your ear plugs and your book of excuses ready.