So after the news of a Stone Temple Pilots tour in the pipeline i was pondering to myself how many bands split up only to "reform" a matter of a few years later (Pitchshifter, Rage Against The Machine, Will Haven, Smashing Pumpkins to name a few).
So the question lies here: does a band splitting up then reforming irritate you or are you all game for it? Do you congratulate Rage Against The Machine or are Tom Morello et al hypocrites with dollar signs glistening in their irises?
DiScuss
Depends on the band
I've always hated RATM (musically and for Morello's/De La Rocha's petulant politics and hypocrisy) so I'd quite like them to go away.
Rage hypocrisy??
explain.
^
Yes, please explain.
seems obvious
I think of they reform it should be under a different name.
In case they spoil the reputation of the band.
*if they reform
^ but there are bands
who reform only for tours, too, so the re-naming wouldn't work.
Will Haven admittedly released a great new album, albeit with a different singer. However, they released an album under a different name without Grady before this and then subsequently decided to write a new one under the Will Haven monicker. Whilst i love them, i can't help but be cynical...
Reforming for tours is fine.
Dog Fashion Disco came by the way sounds decent although I haven't even had a chance to hear it all the way through yet.
If a band reforms
it should be with all original members (or those that were in the band during the period of the material that they will be playing).
In general against but depends on circumstance
I think it's fine if it's a natural progession in someone's life - they start spending time with people they spent time with when they were younger and feel like making music togther again so it all comes together.
I'm against it when it becomes a forced thing and someone trying to recapture their past rather than trying to move toward the future.
i def see your point
but things like R.A.T.M. and Pumpkins it seems so transparent:
solo/side projects didn't work so well + reforming the original, highly popular band = Ch-CHING $$$$$
As somebody who...
... is seeing The Smashing Pumpkins, Duran Duran and Jesus and Mary Chain on Saturday... no. I don't have a problem with it.
I don't have a problem with it.
No one is forcing me to go to anyone's shows or buy their CD's.
It can be fun sometimes,even with only a couple of original members.
I've seen some great reformations in recent years including Bauhaus,Penetration,The Rezillo's,Claytown Troupe, King Kurt, The Members The B-52's, and My Life Story.
I'm sure I've forgotten several too.
I was also gutted I missed 80's Goth rockers - Salvation playing at the end of last year.
i always wanted to see
RATM, so I'm happy with that. However, I wouldn't be that fussed about a Shed7 gig.
The Wildhearts split up
all the time and then get back with a slightly different line-up and to be fair I've never really missed anyone who used to be there.
It used to sadden me when they split up even though they'd get back together, sadly the samritans never set any wildhearts phone lines up for me.
I hate stuff like the spice girls reforming just because take that did well out of it. but what am i gonna do about it?
If you are reforming
To make new music with your old buddies then that's cool. if you are pretending it's not about the money and raking it it from lucrative festival appearances and merch... this is bad.
Cud - yes
E.Y.C. - maybe
The Way We Work It
Baby
^ the first single i ever bought
E.Y.C. ya!
the saddest thing I heard
was thurston moore saying that if SY had split up in the late 90's and reformed now they would be in a hell of a lot better financial situation than they were having stayed together and kept recording/touring - that just shows how promoters are throwing money at whoever to tempt them into reforming as that's where they believe the money is, so it's so hard to not be cynical about the exercise. The results vary so much as well, from all accounts Slint may as well have mimed Spiderland onstage but the Pixies reunion seems to have reinvigorated Frank Black and Kim Deal into action again so...
I don't have a problem with bands reforming at all
whether for love or for money....as someone said above, i'm not being forced to buy gig tickets or new albums etc.....why the hell not.
Why wouldn't you reform if you needed the cash...I would....beats working in an office instead or a shop.
I don't think it's about
simply buying CDs gig tickets it often dampens the whole spirit of the band and spoils their legacy.
Apparently the clash were going to reform at Joe Strummers request but one of them wouldn't do it (then he died). If that had happened it would have spoilt them for me.
yeah, i quite like
when a band knows it's time to call it a day. At least the dreaded word 'hiatus' leaves the door ajar, but when you say "we're splitting" then come back a few years later it doesn't seem right
I can't think of a reformation
that has been very good...
Some have been decent ( like 3cr ) but most of the time, it's just to cash on some tour and the albums eventually released are often an insult of what the band was...
its ok
if they tour
if they write new music and its shit no
why is everyone so concerned about money?
if they reform to make good music then who cares?
because they don't make good music
in 99% of the reformations...
It bugs me ….
And I’m dead against it. I am a total hypocrite though, saw Gang of Four, Mission of Burma and am dead excited about MBV. I think I just worry about a great band sullying their legacy.
On a tangent do the Pumpkins count as a band that reformed? There are too many members missing, right?