curefans.com

The Cure => General The Cure Discussion => Topic started by: Dillinger on April 14, 2007, 17:05:27

Title: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 14, 2007, 17:05:27
i was wondering, what do you as cure fans think of lol? what did you used to think of him? im not really sure. i think he was great up until about 1985 but after that he was completly redundent. its often said he contributed to all the albums up to disintegration but he doesnt seem to have done much on the head or kuiss me either, in the hot hot hot video for example he has a trumpet and ALL he done was that little bit at the end which i doubt he done in the studio and look at this clip from 1985/86 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OemNX-FPHrU he doesnt do anything for either track. he was good entertainment but pretty pathetic, and he would have recieved the same money as the others for playing live even though most of the time he wasnt the one playing the keyboard bits. what do you think?



by the way, im aware the above was probably really incoherrent
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 14, 2007, 18:13:04
i guess it's pretty obvious that lol's output was important in the early 80s. maybe he wasn't the greatest drummer in the world but he did what he needed to do and i think it worked perfectly for the band during that era. it's hard to imagine anyone else drumming there but lol. then he started to become less and less important after he (was) moved to keyboards.
i think this is pretty obvious especially concerning the output on live shows: and hmm, also proof that the keyboard parts at least up until 'wish' really aren't that demanding: lol could pull it, even when he was starting to be a bit of a wreck, then perry could do it very well although he hadn't even played keyboards before in his life. with lol, maybe the best example: just watch some video where lol is "playing" 'the hanging garden'. just watch what he's doing... his output famously is huge there - well ok, that's a bit cruel to say, i know.

anyway, i think lol managed to pull some live keyboard playing mostly because the keyboard parts were so simple anyway. they pretty much are: whereas keyboards as an intrument might widely be recognized as being an important part of the "classic" cure sound, yet the parts themselves aren't very demanding at all. it's actually very easy stuff, most of the time. and even though i've never liked roger as a person, it's of course evident that neither of those two (lol or perry) couldn't ever have managed to play any of the stuff on 'bloodflowers' for instance - they needed a "proper" keyboardist for that.

anyway, i guess it's easier to figure out what lol' output for live shows was than how much he contributed on the albums. i guess robert generally (used to be) quite dictatorial over the material ending up on the album. then again, KMKMKM is said to have included more output from several band members - i remember porl and simon being mentioned with several tracks but how about lol? i doubt it, yet i admit i can't remember right now... sorry.


anyway, one just cannot look at the promo videos or some mimed performances in order to figure out what everyone's output on the recording session was: all those mimes are completely crazy most of the time - because come on, they are only mimes!
(even when they weren't as dead-drunk as during that dreadful bananarama episode)
listen to the proper live performances in order to find out about the live output.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 14, 2007, 18:55:17
the reason i mentioned  hot hot hot was because it looks like they just gave him something to do for the sake of it. i still doubt he put much into kmkmkm
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 14, 2007, 19:05:27
the reason i mentioned  hot hot hot was because it looks like they just gave him something to do for the sake of it.

yeah, lol & the trumpet: just watch any of those millions of WCIBY? mimes that they did around 1987 and lol has the trumpet in every one of them. so it was already "customary" by the time they did the promo video for hot hot hot!!!: lol & the trumpet - even when they were miming outdoors...

(http://www.picturesofyou.us/photos/87-89/p-87-5-cannes-wciby-3.jpg)
... there he is!  ;)

surely trumpet was an easy choice on songs like WCIBY? & hot hot hot, which do have those synth-trumpet sounds anyway. so you could say they gave it to him because it would look better on stage than standing behind keyboards.
anyway i think they probably gave it to him so that he'd look like a complete dumbass - you know they were sort of constantly bullying him by that time, weren't they?

poor lol. i don't really want to laugh at him, since there was a time when he was surely sharp too.
let's laugh at this dude instead - because i bet he can't play that trumpet either!!

(http://www.picturesofyou.us/photos/85-86/p-86-robert-trumpet.jpg)

 :-D

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 14, 2007, 19:48:37
wheres that picture of them by the sea from? i wear ive seen a video of porl actually playing it but i might be wrong on that. i dont want to laugh at him either but he always seems to amuse me when he's drifting round all these videos like a drunk at a party
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 14, 2007, 20:06:10
the mime by the sea: they were in cannes film festival, promoting 'in orange' in may '87.
the mime was shown on french TV in a show called 'zénith'.
it's this one:
http://www.impressionofsounds.com/tvsion/23-87-88-09.html

you'll find more stills/pics from there from www.picturesofyou.us (just look at the pictures/photos from 1987).

about lol: i used to think he was kind of unintentionally funny in some of those mimes from that era. or tragically funny. or just tragic. i mean i guess after one's seen enough of them i guess it ceases to be funny.
anyway, one thing that's kind of funny for sure is that he was certainly wearing some awful clothes in 1987. ok the whole band   were wearing those utterly dreadful suits back in '85 so everyone looked pretty bad. but not in '87 anymore. robert was actually kind of stylish at times (in his very own unstylish way haha: i mean a white shirt and a black jacket - but with sneakers).
anyway, i was reminded by an interview on 'select' magazine from august 1991 where robert commented all of their promo videos. about 'catch' he said:

"It cost twice as much as any other video we've made: £120,000. Lol ruined it. We made this beautiful video and this old bastard in coalminer's jeans wanders down the spiral staircase not even bothering to pretend he's playing the violin."


uh. there you go, what comes to both how lol was dressed up and how well he managed to fake he was actually playing something there.  :?
anyway this was around '91 so it's not surprising.


i wear ive seen a video of porl actually playing it but i might be wrong on that.

sorry, you mean playing what?
i'm afraid i didn't quite understand what you meant.

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 14, 2007, 20:59:43
haha, that quotes great, il go find the catch video now

i mean the trumpet.



edit: hmmm i dont really see where all the extra money went. the mimes are generally good to watch anyway because none of them can do it particularly well, the best is in the hanging garden video  :lol:
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Bloodflower on April 15, 2007, 04:53:26
I think Lol, in his prime (1979 - 1982), was important in The Cure, and a worthwhile individual in regards to the band. But after PORNOGRAPHY, I think he sort of became unimportant; from what I've read, he had almost nothing at all to do with the Japanese Whispers / The Top era. And I also doubt he had much to do with The Head on the Door.

I think his musical usefulness was never that high, though, unless he had more to do with the writing process than I'm aware of. And I don't believe his claim to have written the words to All Cats are Grey. It just doesn't seem likely to me in the least. And I also kind of wonder if Robert would have even allowed it, even then; as far as I'm aware, none of the other members had anything to do with lyrics until Kiss Me, when Simon gave Robert a line for A Chain of Flowers, the line being "All I want is summer."

Generally, though, I think Lol was utterly replacable, except in his limited drumming ability; without Lol's inability to drum well, the band likely would not have been the minimalist operation they were. But then, if Boris had self-control, it would have worked even better -- because who doesn't prefer real drums to the tape for One Hundred Years?

That last bit -- about self-control in music -- also applies to Porl, whom I disapprove of because he now seems to lack completely the ability to play songs like One Hundred Years without turning it into a "guitar song." It's not to me; it's just not. The same applies to Faith, where I thought his creeping guitar effect was really badly done on the Festival DVD (you know, where he slides his fingers up the fretboard to make that odd, spidery-crawling kind of sound -- he does it on The Drowning Man and others, too). 

I long for a four-piece Cure with self-control... and keyboards.... So that they can play songs like The Figurehead and Plainsong alike, without butchering one for the sake of the other....
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 15, 2007, 06:25:43
i mean the trumpet.

you've probably seen porl miming trumpet, surely not playing it. there are some mimes where they  fooled around and started switching instruments etc.. like the famous azzurro '87, 2nd night: i think most everyone was running around with a trumpet in hand there (except robert).
anyway, i'm pretty positive none of the guys know how to play trumpet in earnest.

@bloodflower: once again you have the patience to put it properly into words while the rest of us are just fooling around with a trumpet.  ;)
it's really hard to even imagine boris drumming on the early cure stuff(!). maybe his personal style is too strong, i mean maybe it would be somehow distorted even if he'd put himself under such self-control required(?). anyway, maybe the whole thing is too imaginary since he's not even in the band anymore.

porl is surely another artist with a strong sense of personal style. he pretty much takes a songs and plays it in his own style, whatever the song was... maybe i do not miss the "authentic" cure style as much as other do. i guess i'm much more interested in hearing these today's reworkings of the old songs being performed by people who do have a strong sense of personal style, rather than let's say hearing them being played by people who'd more or less just try to "do it as it should be/as it originally was", who don't go for putting they own personal fingerprint on the material. like perry on guitar compared to porl - there was no fingerprint on perry's playing. and so i guess i can pretty much enjoy their "product" now, since i can appreciate and enjoy the personal styles being strongly displayed there in the music - even when they are maybe not always my favorite versions what comes to arrangements. the truth is i maybe don't always agree with every arrangement idea they have now - maybe there's too much porl and his guitar on some songs: yet, i can marvel and enjoy the sheer skill of it, hearing such skilled individual displaying such a highly personal style. i mean the fact that porl does all these things, whatever the song was, seems to me indicate that he's so self-secure and so comfortable with his own style. i think it's totally different from a person who only knows one style of playing and then plays everything in this style - just because he doesn't know any other way to do it. i don't think this is the case with porl though. there's nothing fake like that in his way of playing, hw does what he does because it just comes out so naturally. and that's maybe the main reason i like porl so much - i'm generally not that much into guitarists that prefer that sort of style. but for me the style itself doesn't matter that much, the musicianship does. maybe i like to observe to that more than the style. and porl's just such a completely natural musician, it's generally a pleasure to observe what he's doing, whatever it was, whatever the song. even when i sometimes find myself thinking "ok now he's totally over the top there!" on some oocasions i can still be totally captivated by him. then again, on a bad day he can suck even on songs where his style is most essentially at home - the style doesn't save anything if he's simply not playing well.
uhm, sorry to wander off there.... i guess we were supposed to talk about lol. :lol:
anyway, i can enjoy and appreciate the fact that the cure today is trying to do it differently and not just copying the old blueprint there. i do understand your point of wishing to hear a four-piece cure with self-control. i would be curious to hear it too but i also consider it to be a kind of imaginary wish, a "what if" kind of thing only. because even if they replaced a few musicians there... i'm not sure that would do the trick. i'm not sure they'd do really well nowadays if they (anyone of them) tried to restrain themselves and "force" themselves back into the old minimalist style. it might be an interesting one-off experiment to try but to make it a style... in my opinion it might just be a bit artificial, trying to revert back to a certain previous style. because it's not just porl, everybody's style has evolved and developed since those early days. they are not the same minimalist musicians anymore... so why try to go back there?
hmm i'm not sure if i can explain myself properly... maybe i'm just rambling....

anyway, in comparison with porl: simon on the other hand seems to be able to move back and forth between the styles of the old cure / newer cure more easily, more "authentically" so to speak, no?

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Bloodflower on April 15, 2007, 08:35:20
I have to start by addressing your signature, Marika:

This song is about me.

Isn't it?

Moving on....

Perhaps, Farquad, you're thinking of the saxophone? Porl certainly played some sax.

I think everything I think of regarding The Cure is, at this point, somewhat imaginary. But I don't think it's any more imaginary than the people who lust after the thought of another Disintegration. I honestly think that Jason is on the way out, and I think Boris (who spent a fair deal of time at The Cure sessions, if I've been properly informed) is a decently likely candidate for drummer; this assumes, though, that there isn't some kind of huge bad-blood thing between Porl and Boris. I say between Porl and Boris, because, as I said, Boris spent a good deal of time with the band during The Cure sessions; now that doesn't necessarily mean that he was only there when Porl wasn't, to be clear.

In some ways I liken Porl Thompson, in his current incarnation, as The Cure's Yoko Ono. I certainly like some of the stuff they've done since his reentry, but I feel that he's turned The Cure into something that it's never been to me: A hard rock band. It's like an eternity of Never Enoughs. I like the song decently, but compared to the rest of the catalogue, it pales to me.

Porl is amazingly talented and creative, but his lack of restraint has really depressed me. Maybe I wouldn't feel this way if he went to keys, leaving Robert as sole guitarist, or if Robert went to keys, leaving Porl. Or maybe this all stretches from my infatuation with the three-piece of Jason, Simon, and Robert. The versions of the songs they played were so perfect. I get goosebumps at the thought of them playing a song like Cold (whose intro on The Prayer Tour drives me mad -- the bass is so incredible when it's playing those opening notes).

I would love to have seen reinterpretations of newer (post PORNOGRAPHY) songs done by a three-piece, or four-piece. If they did it right, I think a song like Bloodflowers could be really interesting with a three-piece, without keys and with only one guitar. I'm not a (talented) musician. I'm not able to say whether it could really be pulled off, I can't say how important the second guitar is to the song; but I think if a song like Plainsong can be redone without keyboards, then Bloodflowers can be pulled off without keys and a second guitar. And then, who's to say they can't play keys the way they did in The Dark days? Simon stepping on things....

I certainly do not want the band to sound live like they do in the studio, don't get me wrong. I think some of the things played after The Cure album were really static and boring, because everything (with the exceptions of the vocals) sounded just like the studio versions. Porl's ability for improvisation (which I don't feel we've really seen much of in his latest stint) is something I laud greatly, but I don't think that a three-or-four-piece would be incapable of improvisation. My favourite versions of Forever, for instance, are from '80-'82.

There is definite beauty, I feel, in a band playing within certain sonic boundaries. And while I enjoy very much Porl's solo notes on The Blood, as an example, I find him persona non grata on tracks like At Night and The Figurehead, neither of which require a second guitarist.

I think Robert and Simon both still have it in them for minimalism. I definitely think they still have it in them. Just two years ago they were playing it masterfully. The bass was so heavy and prominent... it just blows me away. And it's probably that which gets me so badly -- I want so fully for them to do something like that again that the introduction of a 'noise-guitarist' kind of tears asunder my dreams.

Hoping for something forever gone
But something we will always want

PS. Oh, and Simon can definitely move back and forth between minimalism and... well, whatever its antonym is ... with ease.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 15, 2007, 15:18:37
i dont think they would let boris back, simply because that would then be thecure again, all the members the fans love back together and what if they released a crap album? it would disapoint alot of fans and some would lose all hope with them and robert wouldnt risk it. that said i would like boris back and for them to make another head on the door or kiss me kiss me kiss me. i wouldnt want to see them go back and start pretending they were still at the same musical level of 17 seconds and try and emulate it, they could go for another kmkmkm or the head though i think. the problem there though is the question of roberts song writing ability, bloodflowers was amazing and i prefer it to disintegration even but i dont think he could write another just like heaven, inbetween days, close to me etc. he is too old to write those type songs now i think


and yeah i guess i got conmfused and porl was playing sax then
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on April 15, 2007, 23:26:55
 :smth023


I LOVE LOL!

I WAS ALWAYS INTO THE BAND
NOT SO MUCH INTO ROBERT SMITH
I BELIVE THE CURE ARE THE BAND THAT ALWAYS HAS A CERTAIN CHEMISTRY
THROUGH THE YEARS THE PEOPLE CAME AND WENT AND ALL OF THEM CONTRIBUTED THE ELEMENTS THAT MADE UNIQUE THE CURE SOUND
THATS THE REASON PORNOGRAPHY SONGS SOUND LESS PERFECT THESE DAYS
AS A MATTER OF FACT I THINK PLAYING 100 YEARS NOW IS A BIT LIKE CHEARING BECAUSE ROBERT CLEARLY DOESN FEEL LIKE THAT SO THERE CAN NEVER BE THAT LEVEL OF ENERGY

LOL WAS ONE ELEMENT THAT WAS A GREAT PART OF THE BANDS SOUND AND WHEN HE STOPPED PLAYING DRUMS (BECAUSE HE COULDNT PLAY THAT DISCO RHYTM FOR "LETS GO TO BED", I THINK) THAT ELEMENT WAS FOREVER LOST

ALCOHOLISM IS A SERIOUS DISEASE. LOL WAS ILL. SO IT IS A BIT CRUEL TO THINK OF HIM AS A HOPELESS LAZY DRUNK... AND THEN AGAIN HE DRIED UP IN TIME...

ANOTHER THING IS THE FACT THAT LOL WAS FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE CURE AND HE DID HAVE PRETTY GOOD CASE IN 1993...

WHEN LOL LEFT THE BAND, THE CURE BECAME MORE ROBERT SMITH'S PROJECT

P R E S E N C E WERE A GREAT BAND AND THEIR SONGS ARE PREMIUM QUALITY!

ALSO, LEVINHURST ARE GREAT BAND! GREAT SONGWRITING!

...

ALL IN ALL, NOONE SHOULD DISMISS LOL
HE'S A GREAT GUY!

 :smth023
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 16, 2007, 00:12:36
i dont know why but that was a really nice post.


i dont agree about 100 years though, if he only sung what he really felt then basically the entire catalogue would be unplayable
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 16, 2007, 00:29:52
i dont know why but that was a really nice post.

it was! and that's why i said let's rather laugh at robert with a trumpet than at lol. :-D

then basically the entire catalogue would be unplayable

i don't think so.
there's a notable emotional difference in robert's singing on 'pornography' and on other recordings.
nowhere else does he manage to "sing with such power and also sound like he was about vomit at the same time" like i remember one reviewer somewhere said - if that was what janko meant, then i agree: he just can't do 'pornography' material like that anymore.
but it certainly doesn't apply to their entire catalogue - that would be almost like saying they only have one kind of songs...
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 16, 2007, 01:37:45
well he has been happily married for twenty years now, has had break downs, no further drug troubles he is now a fully fledged star with legions of followers. so that rules out tall the ones about failed love, ones influenced by drugs or about experienceas from them, any looking for love ones or "im an outsider" type ones. i read it differently to you i think, i thought he meant lyrical content rather than the actual music. in that case i agree that *some* of the early stuff isnt "right" anymore. its a shame, especially with the hanging garden  :( i would rather they didnt play it then play it badly though. however, i think 100 years can still be done.

i also wonder if his voice could do it properly anymore...
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Bloodflower on April 16, 2007, 08:06:05
Robert's voice in recent years has been a source of mild depression for me, along with the backing track stuff....
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 16, 2007, 14:10:06
Robert's voice in recent years has been a source of mild depression for me, along with the backing track stuff....

Absolutely right. His voice has become increasingly annoying, and don't get me started about those idiotic backing tracks!

I think that Lol represented the human factor of The Cure. I think he did a pretty good job as a drummer back then, although Andy and especially Boris were far better. I'd rather see Lol playing the drums instead of Jason, though.

It's obvious that RS wanted to get rid of Lol, he just didn't have the courage to tell him. But the way he treated him when he was still in the band would have driven any of us into alcoholism or worse. Did anyone notice how RS is spitting on Lol's head in the Hot Hot Hot video? I'm sure that wasn't part of the deal, and I always found it disgusting.

It seems to me that Lol's biggest problem was RS. I used to think that he was right with all his Anti-Lol-Propaganda, but now I'm not sure anymore. He is just not the lovable guy his fans think he is. He's a selfish egomaniac, and friendship is a virtue that obviously doesn't rank too high in his personal beliefs. I surely wouldn't turn my back on him ...
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: splitmilk34 on April 16, 2007, 15:07:09
Lol was never much of a musician, but he gave us "Pillbox Tales" (so says Robert in the Join the Dots notes).  His drumming was a huge part of the early-Cure sound, but as I remember reading, Robert and Simon had to teach Lol his parts... so I doubt he even "wrote" the drum bits.  He was good for taking the piss though.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: splitmilk34 on April 16, 2007, 15:24:44
Oh, and let's not kid ourselves with all this Lol loving/Robert hating shit.  I think Levinhurst is a fine enough band, and can recognize the impact he had on The Cure but for anyone to think The Cure is ANYTHING but Robert's band is just plain blind.  There certainly has been contributing members (Simon definitely comes to mind), but when the day is done it's Robert's decision what the final product is.  You should be happy that a 48-year old man is still making music for you - and doing it much better than other "aging" rock groups (Rolling Stones, New Order, Morrissey, etc).  In fact, outside of Robert Smith and his band of merry men, the only other people from the post-punk period still doing anything worthwhile are Echo & the Bunnymen (who resuscitated a flailing career with the brilliant Siberia album) and Johnny Marr (who, despite working with the croak named Bernard Sumner, has managed to attach himself to Isaac Brock of Modest Mouse - one of this generations more important, impressive and talented songwriters).
The Cure will NEVER make Pornography, or Faith, or Disintegration or even Wish ever again... it just won't happpen.  No one should expect them to, either.  What they are going to do is put out a few more albums (maybe this next one will be the last, who knows) that will be better than 90% of the drivel that is being unwillingly pumped through radio speakers all day long.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 16, 2007, 15:45:22
The Cure is ANYTHING but Robert's band is just plain blind.

I know. I just think that The Cure was a lot better when RS had some kind of counter balance, which I think used to be Chris Parry. That might have been the last person on Earth who was able to get RS down to reality. Leaving RS completely alone to his own decisions only makes him more delusional than he already is. I mean, he's slowly becoming the Michael Jackson of goth pop!

Quote
You should be happy that a 48-year old man is still making music for you


For me?

Quote
and doing it much better than other "aging" rock groups (Rolling Stones, New Order, Morrissey, etc).

Morrissey has aged better than RS ever will!
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on April 16, 2007, 22:36:15

THE CURE WOULD NEVER BE THE BAND YOU LIKE IF ANY OF ALL THOSE PEOPLE NEVER HAD ANY SERIOUS INPUT...

 :smth023
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 16, 2007, 22:42:12
personally i think it breaks down something like lyrics 95% robert 5% others, and the music about 60% robert, 40% everyone else.


didnt he meet up with lol in 2005?  i now think differently of lol thanks to janko's earlier post. now a full supporter, even if we all did laugh at him  :lol:
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on April 16, 2007, 23:15:43


didnt he meet up with lol in 2005?    :lol:



I THINK THEY MET IN LOS ANGELES DURING DREAMTOURWHEN LOL VISITED THE GIG WITH HIS FAMILY OR SOMETHING...

THERE WAS A GREAT PHOTO OF THE TWO CHUBBY MIDDLE AGE GUYS SMILING...

 :D
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 16, 2007, 23:36:09
anyone have this? :) whenever they do finally all it a day it would be awesome if they could get all the former members back together on stage to play an epic version of lullaby or something :D something with alot of layers in it anyway. that would be amazing
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 17, 2007, 06:44:07
(there were other photos than this too, i just can't find them on my HD now)
anyway, it was in los angeles, 2000.02.19

(http://www.picturesofyou.us/photos/00/p-00-2-la-lolrobert.jpg)


good that they could meet and look each other in the eye again. 

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: splitmilk34 on April 17, 2007, 14:09:09
The Cure is ANYTHING but Robert's band is just plain blind.

I know. I just think that The Cure was a lot better when RS had some kind of counter balance, which I think used to be Chris Parry. That might have been the last person on Earth who was able to get RS down to reality. Leaving RS completely alone to his own decisions only makes him more delusional than he already is. I mean, he's slowly becoming the Michael Jackson of goth pop!

Quote
You should be happy that a 48-year old man is still making music for you


For me?

Quote
and doing it much better than other "aging" rock groups (Rolling Stones, New Order, Morrissey, etc).

Morrissey has aged better than RS ever will!

First - what I meant by making music "for you" was "making music for himself that you can still listen to."
Second - Morrissey has AGED better than Robert, but his music is unlistenable drivel.
Third - It is only when Robert Smith has a vagina for a nose that I will ever call him the Michael Jackson of goth pop.

I don't know - am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with what The Cure are doing?  Sure, sometimes I'm disappointed, but who cares?  I'm not in the damn band - and if it ever got to the point where I felt they were useless (and able to be compared to Michael Jackson) I would just assume FIND ANOTHER BAND!
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 17, 2007, 15:12:09
Second - Morrissey has AGED better than Robert, but his music is unlistenable drivel.

i totally have to agree. :smth023

Third - It is only when Robert Smith has a vagina for a nose that I will ever call him the Michael Jackson of goth pop.

:smth043

I don't know - am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with what The Cure are doing?  Sure, sometimes I'm disappointed, but who cares?  I'm not in the damn band - and if it ever got to the point where I felt they were useless (and able to be compared to Michael Jackson) I would just assume FIND ANOTHER BAND!

no i don't think you're the only one.
the cure has given us so many great moments, they have been around for long and kept going. of course, not every period was every fan's favorite but still i don't think they ever really sold out or really let their fans down big time. sometimes i'm not totally excited about everything they do either, sure. yet i find myself not too worried about how they'll turn out next or how the next album will be or this or that - yes i am happy if they  put out something i can truly enjoy but i don't lose my sleep over it, nor does it really agitate me. i don't feel "betrayed" - i guess that with all they've done they've managed to convince me, they have credibility that some silly co-performances with korn & co. cannot shake. sure those are silly things for them to do but i can take it because still they never crossed that line that makes people turn into clowns. so i don't have to like their every move but i can skip those that aren't my cup of tea without having to judge them, i don't have to be ashamed - and that's a good sign, a sign of that this artist still cares about what he's doing. their stamina and self-respect is still intact - unlike with people like michael jackson, who are nothing but pointless useless utter clowns.
so i just can't see any kind of similarity between the two. 
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 17, 2007, 18:55:57
I think Simon has aged better than RS or Morrissey.

Eerily so.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 17, 2007, 21:46:21
thanks for finding that picture, anyone got the others?


if the next album is a really good one i hope they just stop and go out with a bang, just concentrating on playing shows. that wont happen though. i wish the stand alone single would come back too (and i dont mean stupid mp3s to download)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on April 17, 2007, 22:53:55
 :-D

COME ON!
THIS IS ABOUT LOL!

IF SOMEBODY SAYS THAT MORRISSEY AGED BETTER OR THAT HE HAS BETTER ALBUM OUTTHERE (WHICH IS TRUE) THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT THE CURE ARE CRAP AND THAT ROBERT LOOKS LIKE SOME OLD GRANNY...

I LIKE THEM BOTH ALMOST EQUALLY AND I HOPE THEY WILL WORK UNTIL THEY DIE!

AND THEN AGAIN MARK E. SMITH IS MORE INOVATIVE THAN MOZ OR BOB AND HE LOOKS GREAT, EVEN IF HE'S TOOTHLESS DRUNK... WHITH MARK THERE IS NO FEAR THAT HE WILL BECOME CRAP ONE DAY!

AND IT IS INTERESTIG HOW SLOWLY BUT SURELY BOTH MORRISSEY AND MARK E. SMITH BECAME BRITISH ICONS WHILE ROBERT STILL DOESNT GET THE MENTION...

 :smth023
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 18, 2007, 00:33:19
And it could be worse - he could be Shane McGowan (google image search, any of the results... third row is the worst).

Although I have not heard him recently, he supposedly he still "has it". And by "it", I do not mean a full set of gleaming white teeth, but rather his voice, his ability to perform, etc, etc.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 18, 2007, 00:45:19
And it could be worse - he could be Shane McGowan (google image search, any of the results... third row is the worst).

...or again, youtube can be your friend:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0xSNrFXacM

a jolly good fellow!  :smth100
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 18, 2007, 01:14:11
yes, it is a shame that the cure will not get the full recognition they deserve until robert is dead  (sorry to be blunt but its the sad truth)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Bloodflower on April 18, 2007, 06:09:15
Upon Robert's death, everything will be reevaluated. My life will be reevaluated....
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 18, 2007, 09:22:12
Morrissey has AGED better than Robert, but his music is unlistenable drivel.

The last two Morrissey albums were better than anything The Cure have done in the last then years.

I LIKE THEM BOTH ALMOST EQUALLY AND I HOPE THEY WILL WORK UNTIL THEY DIE!

I used to like them equally, but it's clear to me now that Morrissey has won.

AND IT IS INTERESTIG HOW SLOWLY BUT SURELY BOTH MORRISSEY AND MARK E. SMITH BECAME BRITISH ICONS WHILE ROBERT STILL DOESNT GET THE MENTION...

I think that RS used to be a British Icon as well, but he is fading away and is slowly becoming an embarrasment to Britain. I mean, he looks like a silly clown and his music becomes more and more boring and uninspired. Not to mention that RS as a person doesn't have any charisma left whatsoever. Maybe that's what you get for drug abuse: To shine bright and then burn out. I honestly don't think that The Cure will ever be able to make a truly outstanding album that makes people go "Wow!".

Now, take a look at Morrissey. He came back with a bang after seven years of silence. He put out two great albums within two years (not counting a live album and a live dvd). He did some incredible live shows and is still touring, and his shows are always a memorable experience. The audience is alive and is celebrating him, while the Cure audience seems to be mostly bored. Morrissey still has that magic that RS lost a long time ago.

I just hope that RS will never take off his shirt to throw it into the audience, that's the last ting I want to see *shudder*.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 18, 2007, 09:23:45
Upon Robert's death, everything will be reevaluated. My life will be reevaluated....

Maybe then we'll get all the demos and the unreleased stuff that should have been on the deluxe editions instead of the "live bootlegs".
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 18, 2007, 13:21:50
Now, take a look at Morrissey. He came back with a bang after seven years of silence. He put out two great albums within two years (not counting a live album and a live dvd). He did some incredible live shows and is still touring, and his shows are always a memorable experience. The audience is alive and is celebrating him, while the Cure audience seems to be mostly bored. Morrissey still has that magic that RS lost a long time ago.

honestly to me, morrissey's as boring and as arrogant as he always was. his musical output compared to the smiths - johnny marr was where the one there with something to say musically. the smiths had something to say, even though morrissey was already ruining a lot of it.
he's totally impossible to watch/listen as a live performer.

about audiences "celebrating" morrissey: hmm. just when was such a "surface" reaction in the audience something that could be used as a direct measuring tool for the quality or the performance? all kinds of silly bands have fanatic followers but that doesn't mean they were worth shit. a lot of indie rock groups have extremely intense audiences, yet nothing's really happening there in the crowds after all. when you look at it from the outside it might look like everyone's just standing there "being bored" - but go there yourself and you should notice the difference, the intensity's there.
different artists have different udiences. i guess morrissey's persona appeals to a lot of people who like to adore someone who's openly highly narcistic and takes his (imagined) superiority as a fact. and nothing bad in that, whoever likes it may like it, i don't mind.  i on the other hand don't see anything universally adorable or extremely entertaining and memorable on his live performances.

i've been in a few recent cure audiences and i wouldn't actually say people were being bored. it looked kind of contrary to me.
and whereas the cure still reaches a lot of new younger fans, it's a fact that their audiences have matured and aged. maybe their audience now consist more of people who don't have to jump around, go stagediving or be throwing knickers on stage or whatever. but that doesn't mean they weren't truly and intensely enjoying the show or that they were bored.

moreover, the cure/RS never acted like complete clowns like morrissey. sure, a 50-year old guy in make-up looks kinda weird - but so what? just like i can't be interested in RS the man or details of his personal life i don't really care how he decides to look like. the attitude towards one's work is what matters to me. on live shows i appreciate it that there's no narcistic fooling around catwalk kind of "ah, me!!" stuff taking place there but concentrate on playing the songs.
RS is not a clown on the inside, like morrissey more or less always is/was and wanted to be.


I just hope that RS will never take off his shirt to throw it into the audience, that's the last ting I want to see *shudder*.

:?: why should you fear that? or hehe maybe you secretly wish to see it because you even mention it. :)

anyway, i'd rather watch a poor ugly old shirtless robert on stage (although that would surely be dead-ugly hehehe! :lol:) just because he still doesn't try to pretend or act he's something he's not when he's there on stage - compared to geeks like that pelvis-swinging conceited clown called morrissey for instance. or all those millions of other geeks out there who think they are so very interesting just because they have a slogan for life like "everybody look at me, i am me, i'm here, i'm so great, it's so great to be me, me me meeeee". christ!
 :smth001

I honestly don't think that The Cure will ever be able to make a truly outstanding album that makes people go "Wow!".

yes, maybe not. but to be honest: so what?
 i actually find it very hard to believe either, i'm sure they've well way past their heyday now. but i don't have to feel frustrated over it, it really doesn't matter. it doesn't change or diminish anything they did earlier or undo all the good stuff they (obviously) gave us.
and why should they have to be accused in advance for "probably never making a truly outstanding album again" anyway?
let's wait and listen to it first. maybe it's carp, who knows - but so what. :)

I think that RS used to be a British Icon as well, but he is fading away and is slowly becoming an embarrasment to Britain. I mean, he looks like a silly clown and his music becomes more and more boring and uninspired. Not to mention that RS as a person doesn't have any charisma left whatsoever. Maybe that's what you get for drug abuse: To shine bright and then burn out.

for me, one of the first artists that come to mind when i think of the word 'embarrassing' is definitely mr. morrissey, not RS.
strange, no? i guess.

anyway, i'm sorry to notice it if you really seem to feel so bad about the cure these days. and i'm really not sure what you expect any of us to say to it.
and don't take this as an offense (because it isn't meant to be one), but maybe it's time to move on to a morrissey forum then?
would simply sound like a lot less frustration to me, i guess.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: splitmilk34 on April 18, 2007, 15:05:05
Well, japanesebaby basically said everything I was going to, so...
let's just remember that this is CUREFANS.COM, not BLOW-MORRISSEY.COM.  Sorry you feel so down about the band Oso, but I don't think they need to make another life altering record ... and can you honestly tell me that the last Cure album, along with all of the BSides, didn't have any interesting moments?  In my opinion, songs like Lost, Going Nowhere, The Promise, This Morning, Why Can't I Be Me?, and alt.end are among some of the better Cure songs. 
Anyway, we've all gotten away from the original thread here (which was about Lol Tolhurst) so if this discussion must rage on we can start a new "Robert vs The World" thread or something.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 18, 2007, 19:46:41
I don't think they need to make another life altering record ...

Then why make a new record at all?

Quote
and can you honestly tell me that the last Cure album, along with all of the BSides, didn't have any interesting moments?  In my opinion, songs like Lost, Going Nowhere, The Promise, This Morning, Why Can't I Be Me?, and alt.end are among some of the better Cure songs.

The last album was average at best. This Morning and Why Can't I Be You were annoying and The Promise must be the worst Cure song ever. Alt.End and Taking Off were okay, but nothing special at all.

Not only was the music completely spiritless, but the lyrics were meaningless as well. Think about Morrissey as you wish, you don't HAVE to like him. But at least still he has something to say. RS on the other hand is putting the new album on hold because of a writers blockade! If he has nothing to say, why doesn't he make it an instrumental album? Could be a much better album ... at least the last album would have been a lot better without his vocals.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on April 18, 2007, 20:08:04
I don't think they need to make another life altering record ...

Then why make a new record at all?

hmm yes of course. why bother. well, why do we do all the things we do in our lives? why are we here on this forum? etc.

i don't think RS or any other artist who are at the same point of career as he is really cares about what we think or whether or not we demand him to make a new album or not to make one. he'll make an album if he feels like it and it serves some purpose for him. artists are not waiters carrying food on our table when we happen to order a bite.

and why make an album if it's not going to be mind-altering? well i'm sure no artist ever especially tries to make a crap album. i'd like to think they try to do their best. sometimes they manage, sometimes they fail miserably. but only in business worlg there's this illusion that the economy can grow and grow and grow infinitely - it's almost sweet how they blindly seem to believe so in those circles. everyone with some brains knows that's impossible: you can't just grow and grow and grow all the time without crashing a bit (or more) every once in a while. that's only natural. so, an artist about to create art cannot think: "oooh maybe i won't make this after all, maybe it comes out all crap... maybe it's better to shut up, just to make sure". one has to take the risks, and boldly go... even if one fails. a negative attitude won't take it anywhere.

The last album was average at best.
yes i actually agree that i wasn't overly overwhelmed by it either. yet it certainly had it's moments. there are things that i have since become very fond of and which also work like all the good cure-songs always did: they remind me of certain passages and times and places of my own life. and some of them are even good pieces of music at the same time. :)
it could have been better, it could have been worse. for me, that's it - let's wait for the next one.

Not only was the music completely spiritless, but the lyrics were meaningless as well. Think about Morrissey as you wish, you don't HAVE to like him. But at least still he has something to say. RS on the other hand is putting the new album on hold because of a writers blockade! If he has nothing to say, why doesn't he make it an instrumental album? Could be a much better album ... at least the last album would have been a lot better without his vocals.
yes sure, i don't have to like morrissey, just as you don't have to like the cure anymore, right? mmmm.... i mean, where's the fuss?

just a few points: personally, i haven't found that morrissey really has anything much to say. certainly less than the cure.
i guess i could write an essay about it and give good reasoning for a lot of my opinions (if i may say so without sounding pompous), but let's leave it for now.

and robert's writing block.... well, "you can't order the rooster to crow" like they say. it'll crow if it'll crow and that's it.
does he have anything to say anymore? i don't know yet. why doesn't he make an instrumental album? well maybe he ends up doing it, who knows. i mean, since we don't know anything about it yet so what's the point of making assumptions about how this or that things is already completely wrong and how they already failed - they haven't done anything just yet! 
maybe RS makes a dead-boring album. maybe he surprises us all and makes something marvellous. who can tell?
our ranting about some speculations won't certainly accelerate the process... so why worry about it, there are other things that are hurting our blood pressure on a daily basis anyway.
let's rant about it when we have something to rant about! :-)

but hey: how's LOL doing?? ;)
let's talk about him, this is his thread!
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 18, 2007, 20:33:53
Tangentally related to Lol, I always thought that it would be really cool for a handful of the "ex-Cure's" to work together, even if just to play drawn-out live instrumentals. Their time in the Cure has certainly given them enough practice, and allowed them to develop and pick up all sorts of neat tricks.

Although, now that Porl is back in the Cure, that idea has dropped a few notches on the "cool-o-meter". It's still up there with "Slash, Duff & Izzy re-record 'Appetite for Destruction' with Barry Gibb", although for entirely different reasons.

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Bloodflower on April 19, 2007, 00:26:57
Oso, if you really think the Cure so empty and artistically bankrupt, then what are you doing here? Go to a Moz forum if you like him and not The Cure anymore, but I don't see where you get off bashing them.

If you really disliked the last album, then what were you doing here in the first place? Curefans.com was launched after The Cure's 2004 LP. If you've got no purpose here but to whine on and on.... Ah, and now I understand why you like Morrissey.

Sorry, really do want to get back to Lol, but I couldn't pass this up... it's too patently ridiculous....

Mr Tolhurt, to you I yield the floor....
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on April 19, 2007, 03:56:32
1) HEY, WHAT DOES BANANARAMA TAG MEAN?!

2) PRAISING MORRISSEY DOESNT MEAN BASHING ROBERT!

3) BRITISH ICON SMITH:


(http://www.visi.com/fall/gigography/image/07apr15_observer.jpg)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 19, 2007, 04:31:48
Bananarama = There was a HOTD-era TV appearance where the band was doing one of those playback/mime performances. Bananarama was also on the bill. On their second song, the band shows that they are clearly drunk as Robert is VERY half-heartedly lip-synching and playing (I think he had an acoustic with him), and Simon is dancing with one of the girls from Bananarama.

If memory serves, Lol was still trying his best to look as if he was playing the keyboards.

And had unfortunate hair.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 19, 2007, 09:54:37
Tangentally related to Lol, I always thought that it would be really cool for a handful of the "ex-Cure's" to work together, even if just to play drawn-out live instrumentals. Their time in the Cure has certainly given them enough practice, and allowed them to develop and pick up all sorts of neat tricks.


Now, that would be a GREAT idea! Put Boris or even Andy in that band, and The Cure would have a real drummer again!

Although, now that Porl is back in the Cure, that idea has dropped a few notches on the "cool-o-meter".

Yes, without Porl something important would be missing.

It's still up there with "Slash, Duff & Izzy re-record 'Appetite for Destruction' with Barry Gibb", although for entirely different reasons.

They don't really, do they?
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 19, 2007, 19:43:24

It's still up there with "Slash, Duff & Izzy re-record 'Appetite for Destruction' with Barry Gibb", although for entirely different reasons.

They don't really, do they?

I wish. It would be miles better than Axl's freakshow. And their band with Scott Weiland. It would so ridiculously funny. Try listening to "Appetite" and think "Bee Gees".

As for Jason, I can't find much wrong with him, aside from him not being Boris. And no one is Boris...
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Dillinger on April 19, 2007, 20:06:23
the bananarama tags there as theres a link to the video in the first post and lol is making even less effort than the others in it.


so is boris the only drummer not to have played 100 years with a backing track then or something?
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: rjl on April 19, 2007, 20:16:02
Oops! I was getting that video confused with something else. I have it on a DVD somewhere, as filler. I do remember one playback/mime performance where he really got into it. Almost like his trumpet playing.

While on the topic of those cheesy mime performances, I was watching one recently... Italy 87, either Toccata or Azzurro, and the funniest thing happened: Simon switched basses between songs. Why?  ;)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Oso Blanco on April 21, 2007, 03:43:25
so is boris the only drummer not to have played 100 years with a backing track then or something?

Boris and Andy.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Carnage Visor on June 29, 2007, 04:43:26
I HAVE MIXED FEELINGS...
Lol, although very funny in music videos and good at drums and keyboards, didn't really fit in with The Cure's image (like that's important, right? What's gotten into me?)
There's always that one guy in the band who doesn't really seem in place, and Lol was that guy. I mean, he also seemed a bit rude...
But boy is that dance in "Let's Go To Bed" hilarious! ;)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Janko on July 01, 2007, 15:52:52
DAMN YOU LOL FOR DISBANDING PRESENCE!!!!

 :smth011 :smth011 :smth011
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: japanesebaby on July 01, 2007, 20:33:15
DAMN YOU LOL FOR DISBANDING PRESENCE!!!!

 :smth011 :smth011 :smth011

oh poor lol. people always blame it all on him, whatever it was. :lol:
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: MeltingMan on April 18, 2014, 18:08:16
I think his creative input on the early Cure albums was decisive and
his dismissal tragic and from my point of view only partially caused by
his own faults. The decision that he took over keyboard duties after
Pornography was long-termed fatal. He's inextricably linked with
the eighties period of The Cure without any doubt the most important
decade for the band. Good to know that he's still in touch with Robert
and even Simon. I like him as person and musician. ;)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: plasticpassi0n on January 25, 2015, 17:21:36
I have no qualms with him as a person. I speak to him quite regularly through social media and he seems genuinely lovely! As for his part in the band, I don't feel like he did work as hard as the others on the albums towards the end of the 80s but he was seriously ill. As much as I love the band, I also think that they contributed towards Lol's disengagement. I recall him being described as 'the band's punchbag' a few times and I know that he wasn't taken seriously by other members. Personally, I don't think the rest of the band realised how ill Lol actually was with his drugs/alcohol addiction. Maybe if they had been a little more aware of how serious it was they could have helped him.

I don't feel as though I know enough about it to go any further but all I know now is that Lol is a nice bloke and has been on the straight and narrow since 1990.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: mooki on January 26, 2015, 09:38:36
Lol, sadly, does nothing for me. He didn't virtually nothing for the Cure, in my opinion. I think he wrote the lyrics for All Cats Are Grey or something, but he didn't do much.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on January 26, 2015, 13:44:57
He didn't virtually nothing for the Cure, in my opinion. I think he wrote the lyrics for All Cats Are Grey or something, but he didn't do much.

How do you know? Lol is mentioned as the co-author of many songs (incl. Lovecats, The Caterpillar...)!
I don't know about his real contribution, but if Robert gives him a co-credit, I think he would've contributed at least a little?
Also, Lol played drums on many tours and all singles & albums from 1978 until 1982 (when the band wasn't that popular at first, often playing in small clubs or supporting other bands).
Then he switched to keyboards and toured & recorded with the band until 1987.

I would agree that in the end he didn't contribute much any more (he admits so himself, I guess), from 1985 onwards. However I found this quote by Lol from the book "Never Enough" by J. Apter:

"I remember Dave Allen saying to me on Disintegration that I'd played more on that album than the last couple, but I don't remember it."

For me, Lol as a founder member, did play an important part in the early Cure. (What would 17 Seconds & Faith be without his rather minimal drum sound?) Also, he was important to the band in many ways, e.g. as a "buffer" between the egos of Robert & Simon.
Of course, towards 1988, from all stories told, Lol had become "unbearable" for a band of that size.  :(
For more on this, there is an interesting topic:
http://curefans.com/curenews/lol's-thoughts-on-the-25th-anniversary-of-disintegration/ (http://curefans.com/curenews/lol's-thoughts-on-the-25th-anniversary-of-disintegration/)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: dsanchez on January 27, 2015, 18:10:56
What would 17 Seconds & Faith be without his rather minimal drum sound?

I just wanted to point out the same. I think Lol's contribution in these albums was essential to shape that rhythm and sound.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: simons-sideburn on December 06, 2016, 16:32:21
Lol was a useless keyboard player.
If you watch carefully some live videos,he couldn't play even a cord or to use both hands.He was like Andy Fletcher of Depeche mode.Only decoration and because of him Porl ( a great guitar player) had to support him.2 keyboard playes in a rock band  :D
BUT
as a drummer he was great.Not technically but just because he contributed at the first 4 albums.
The  rhythms are simple but very catchy like in your house,the pornography album.You listen only the beginning and you can not imagine other rhythm thats why i respect him.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Snow on December 06, 2016, 23:33:44
Lol was a useless keyboard player.
If you watch carefully some live videos,he couldn't play even a cord or to use both hands.He was like Andy Fletcher of Depeche mode.Only decoration and because of him Porl ( a great guitar player) had to support him.2 keyboard playes in a rock band  :D
BUT
as a drummer he was great.Not technically but just because he contributed at the first 4 albums.
The  rhythms are simple but very catchy like in your house,the pornography album.You listen only the beginning and you can not imagine other rhythm thats why i respect him.


I think Lol was integral to the band in those early years and his drumming was energetic and he was a good timekeeper.  I guess he should/could have bettered himself or applied himself more but drink affected him really badly, much more so than the others, and his dependence developed into chronic illness. Alcoholism isn't just about getting drunk and falling over.   It's a mental illness.   He needed help but nobody seemed either bothered or able to do that, most likely as they were all battling their own issues and demons.

I read recently that Robert Smith said that, had he been Lol's lawyer when Tolhurst tried to sue him, he'd have won the case...as RS and the rest of the band mentally tortured Lol to such an extreme. But due to his drink problem he couldn't remember and it never came up in court.   I think Robert was more than happy to accept Lol's friendship again when the olive branch was offered because he knew what a twat he'd been to him in the past when he should really have helped him more.  Allowing Lol to stay in the band even though he contributed very little wasn't helping him.  That was just guilt.

I think it was Roger O'Donnell who later admitted that Lol wrote Homesick even though Robert denied Lol had contributed anything at all, and that when he was trying his best not to drink, the others were trying their hardest to get him drunk. 

It's also telling that Robert Smith remarked about how Lol was always wanting to be liked by everyone.  When you look at footage from interviews, specially the early ones, Lol comes across as confident, eloquent and intelligent while Smith and Gallup sit and squirm in front of the camera like schoolboys.   It makes you wonder if Robert's ego didn't quite like that. 

I do think, reading between the lines, that Lol got sidelined after The Top album.  And for someone who had co-founded the group and had some input, this must have been hard for him, exacerbated by the drink problem.

All I can say about the bullying is that there never is an excuse for that.  And bullying within a community or gathering, always starts at the top of the pile and works its way down.  And it seems to me that everyone who was ever in that band followed Robert's lead or else.  Those who didn't, left or got pushed.

It's to Lol's credit that he hasn't once slung the shit around in Cured. And I'll bet, as he says in his book, that he knows where all the bodies are buried.

I think the way he was treated was truly vile.   
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: MeltingMan on December 07, 2016, 09:46:30
Lol was a useless keyboard player.

From 'Cured' on page 214:

Quote
Steve turned to me after a fruitless day of knob twiddling and
said something that has always stuck with me.
'Lol, you know what that needs?'

'No?'

'RFM, mate.'
I asked him what RFM meant and he replied, 'Read the fuckin' manual!'

I like that sense of humor. :lol:
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on December 08, 2016, 14:16:44
I read recently that Robert Smith said that, had he been Lol's lawyer when Tolhurst tried to sue him, he'd have won the case...

Where did you read that?
It is known that Lol was the "scapegoat" and aim of much nonsense by the band... but, how could this lead to him winning that case? As far as I know it was a case about "ownership of the band" plus "royalties/cuts from the profits". Lol himself soon realised it was wrong to sue, as he'd signed all the contracts himself. No judge/lawyer could argue much about that fact. Even if the band "bullied" him, doesn't change his increasing lack of input (or the aforementioned limitations on the instruments).

I think Robert was more than happy to accept Lol's friendship again when the olive branch was offered because he knew what a t**t he'd been to him in the past when he should really have helped him more. 

Mind your language! We had several forum members banned for using such words...

I do agree that Robert is probably happy to have renewed the friendship with Lol. In my opinion mainly because Lol had the greatness to apologise for what he did (e.g. the above mentioned legal action)!

I think it was Roger O'Donnell who later admitted that Lol wrote Homesick

Yes. Read about it in that topic for example (post #5):
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.0

it seems to me that everyone who was ever in that band followed Robert's lead or else.  Those who didn't, left or got pushed.

Robert often said he needed a "working band" (i.e. people who e.g. go crazy during a tour aren't really helpful). We all know it was mostly him who had a "vision" (creatively speaking) for the band and followed it.

Btw, apparently it was the others (band members) who threatened to leave the band in late '88 if Lol would go on tour with them! Thus Robert had to do something...

Lol, nowadays, sees himself as the cause:
"So as the years passed communications and friendship returned. Eventually all the nonsense and sadness and pain I had caused myself and the others dissolved ."
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.0

I think the way he was treated was truly vile.

I think both sides have made their mistakes. Lol was willing to forgive. Robert too.
All's good as far as I can tell.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: MeltingMan on December 09, 2016, 17:32:25
My opinion is that Lol embodied the experimental side of The Cure's music-
at least for a while. The development and improvement of the early synthesizers
were quite rapid, but it's not true that those instruments always have an impact
on your creativity. Apart from that, it's a noted feature of bullying to delegate tasks
to someone else who hasn't been actually trained for, though he had a number of keyboard
lessons. However, he was and still is interested in electronic instruments as he pointed out
in his book. When he left The Cure the feeling of relief didn't last for long (Roger's temporary
departure), so he wasn't alone responsible for tensions inside the group.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on December 09, 2016, 19:07:43
Apart from that, it's a noted feature of bullying to delegate tasks to someone else who hasn't been actually trained for...

Who delegated what to whom?  :?
And btw if that's the case, he shouldn't have played the drums as well!  ;)

Lol (from his book) on the subject:
"Although I have always felt like a creative musician, I am not a virtuoso drummer or keyboardist."
(page 204)

In the next quote he talks about keyboard/synthesizers (as he was interested in them):
"Robert and I discussed my involvment in that side of music, and now that we were a two-piece, we thought we should maybe get a different drummer..." (page 205)
Does not sound like anyone delegated it to him.  :?

... so he wasn't alone responsible for tensions inside the group.

I never thought he was. In any group, especially if they're on the road and together for almost 24 hours a day, there will be tensions.
As Roger pointed out, not having Lol in the band as an "escape valve", the tensions grew worse.

Quote
Nobody did take up the role of official scape goat and that probably led to the tensions within the band becoming so unbearable during the Prayer Tour.
http://www.rogerodonnell.com/disintegration/

Also helpful for more about Lol's book:
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=8337.0
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Snow on December 12, 2016, 03:53:31
My opinion is that Lol embodied the experimental side of The Cure's music-
at least for a while. The development and improvement of the early synthesizers
were quite rapid, but it's not true that those instruments always have an impact
on your creativity. Apart from that, it's a noted feature of bullying to delegate tasks
to someone else who hasn't been actually trained for, though he had a number of keyboard
lessons. However, he was and still is interested in electronic instruments as he pointed out
in his book. When he left The Cure the feeling of relief didn't last for long (Roger's temporary
departure), so he wasn't alone responsible for tensions inside the group.

You can't abuse drugs and drink without something unhealthy developing in your head...and that pertains to the whole band at that time.    Some people cope better than others and some go under.  I think Tolhurst might have been fundamentally unhappy for a long time and his way of coping was to blot it out with booze.   Many victims of bullying act the clown as a psychological means to cope with the cruelty.  But eventually, you can't sustain it and something has to give.

Roger O'Donnell kind of summed it up.

 We had a pretty massive collection of keyboards including the state of the art Emulator 3 which Lol had just bought. I think it was Teddy and Simon who thought it would be hugely amusing to change the voltage on the back of the E3 , they thought it would blow a fuse when Lol turned it on and we would have a good laugh. Unfortunately it blew the entire power supply and it had to go away for a very expensive repair.

I think it’s pretty much common knowledge how Lol was treated in those days, very very badly. I'm not innocent either but then again he didn’t really do himself any favours, he was drunk most of the time and when he was trying to stay sober we would do all we could to get him drunk again. He barely played anything on the record and I think some of the things he did play I had to play again while he wasn’t there. It was pretty sad looking back the way he was victimised but it was sort of funny at the time, or was it ? He would usually be so drunk after dinner that he would go straight to bed only to get up at about 2am and come wandering into the studio and say everything sounded like shit. He would then decide he was hungry and would go and cook himself something which we would all do our best to ruin, he would still eat it though… Happily Lol is now healthy and happy and not drinking and hopefully he forgives us for what went on then…
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on December 12, 2016, 09:07:35
Roger O'Donnell kind of summed it up.

Yeah, kind of. But there's always more than one side to a story.
Did you read Lol's book at all?

In one of the topics linked above, you'll find a quote by Lol about "Disintegration" (from Jeff Apter's book on the Cure):
"I remember Dave Allen saying to me on Disintegration that I'd played more on that album than the last couple, but I don't remember it."

P.S.: It would still be good if you could give a source for the Robert quote you mentioned (the one aboout the lawyer).
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: MeltingMan on December 13, 2016, 13:08:25
I think Tolhurst might have been fundamentally unhappy for a long time and his way of coping was to blot it out with booze.

Yes, perfectly. The consumption of alcohol allowed him in a way to keep up with
The Cure's schedule of the early years and...with a different lifestyle. Nevertheless,
he deserves a minimum of appreciation for his work on stage and in studio. It had to
be led into a dead end, artistically. He accepted his new contract from 1986 and his role
as 'employee'. Somehow he missed an opportunity to leave the vicious circle of alcoholism
and bullying one or two years earlier, probably due to the loss of self-respect.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Snow on January 17, 2017, 21:56:49
I read recently that Robert Smith said that, had he been Lol's lawyer when Tolhurst tried to sue him, he'd have won the case...

Where did you read that?
It is known that Lol was the "scapegoat" and aim of much nonsense by the band... but, how could this lead to him winning that case? As far as I know it was a case about "ownership of the band" plus "royalties/cuts from the profits". Lol himself soon realised it was wrong to sue, as he'd signed all the contracts himself. No judge/lawyer could argue much about that fact. Even if the band "bullied" him, doesn't change his increasing lack of input (or the aforementioned limitations on the instruments).

I think Robert was more than happy to accept Lol's friendship again when the olive branch was offered because he knew what a t**t he'd been to him in the past when he should really have helped him more. 

Mind your language! We had several forum members banned for using such words...

I do agree that Robert is probably happy to have renewed the friendship with Lol. In my opinion mainly because Lol had the greatness to apologise for what he did (e.g. the above mentioned legal action)!

I think it was Roger O'Donnell who later admitted that Lol wrote Homesick

Yes. Read about it in that topic for example (post #5):
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.0

it seems to me that everyone who was ever in that band followed Robert's lead or else.  Those who didn't, left or got pushed.

Robert often said he needed a "working band" (i.e. people who e.g. go crazy during a tour aren't really helpful). We all know it was mostly him who had a "vision" (creatively speaking) for the band and followed it.

Btw, apparently it was the others (band members) who threatened to leave the band in late '88 if Lol would go on tour with them! Thus Robert had to do something...

Lol, nowadays, sees himself as the cause:
"So as the years passed communications and friendship returned. Eventually all the nonsense and sadness and pain I had caused myself and the others dissolved ."
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.0

I think the way he was treated was truly vile.

I think both sides have made their mistakes. Lol was willing to forgive. Robert too.
All's good as far as I can tell.

Mojo Magazine.  2014.  Interview with Robert Smith.

 “Nothing came out in the court case,” he says. “I could have won if I’d been Lol’s lawyer. Just the f****** mental cruelty that went on towards him. He was so out of it for so much of time that he couldn’t remember.”

https://thecuretc.wordpress.com/tag/mojo-magazine/
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on January 18, 2017, 10:55:49
Mojo Magazine.  2014.  Interview with Robert Smith.

Thanks. Wow, took you only a bit more than a month.  :smth023

Anything else you got to say? Did you read Lol's book in the meantime?
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: piggymirror on November 19, 2017, 04:03:15
I think it was Roger O'Donnell who later admitted that Lol wrote Homesick even though Robert denied Lol had contributed anything at all, and that when he was trying his best not to drink, the others were trying their hardest to get him drunk.

Lol is credited as co-writer on each song and b-side of Disintegration, so he must be getting some royalties for that.
Even if his contribution was small, he must have made some money out of Disintegration, as that record sold a bit.

That said, none of us can tell the way royalty money is distributed within the band.
We only know Robert gets more money, for obvious reasons, but that's all.

Anyone having read the book will know that by 1989 Lol was suffering from delirium tremens.
God knows the amounts of booze he must have taken to lead him there.

Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on November 19, 2017, 15:31:31
Even if his contribution was small, he must have made some money out of Disintegration, as that record sold a bit.

Yes, we can only guess it was Robert's (or the band's) "generosity" to list him as a co-writer and instrumentalist for this album.

Apparently later Lol had to sell his publishing rights (or something like that) to be able to pay the costs for the court case.  :roll:
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: piggymirror on November 21, 2017, 05:01:05
Yes, we can only guess it was Robert's (or the band's) "generosity" to list him as a co-writer and instrumentalist for this album.

I'm afraid we don't know wether he contributed anything or not.
Mind you, delirium tremens or not, it's not like Robert was in a much better state during The Top/Hyaena...

But Budgie also had delirium tremens, and we won't discuss his brilliance, will we?

Apparently later Lol had to sell his publishing rights (or something like that) to be able to pay the costs for the court case.  :roll:

Source?
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on November 21, 2017, 09:42:22
I'm afraid we don't know wether he contributed anything or not.

Oh yes, we do...
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.msg760667#msg760667

(And btw I'd said "we can only guess"...)

it's not like Robert was in a much better state during The Top/Hyaena...

He played many concerts with 2 bands and performed on 2 albums at the same time, personally I would consider this a "much better state"!

But Budgie also had delirium tremens

Source?

Source?

Several interviews with the band back in the 90's. But it would take a long time to find them...
In his book Lol says:
"I had ... only about 25 per cent of my income to live on. The judge had ordered that I allocate 75 per cent to pay off my trial costs and legal fees".

(Possibly it was that what they meant in these interviews, sorry for any confusion on my side.)
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: piggymirror on November 21, 2017, 21:21:43
I'm afraid we don't know wether he contributed anything or not.

Oh yes, we do...
http://curefans.com/index.php?topic=7896.msg760667#msg760667

(And btw I'd said "we can only guess"...)

Oh, yes. Sorry, I'd forgotten about it.

it's not like Robert was in a much better state during The Top/Hyaena...

He played many concerts with 2 bands and performed on 2 albums at the same time, personally I would consider this a "much better state"!

Lol also played live... while he could.

Robert played many concerts with both The Cure and the Banshees, yes.
However, it's no secret that the Banshees weren't very happy with his behaviour.
He didn't ruin a show like John McGeoch (who also had serious trouble with the bottle).
But there are many shows where he clearly is not in top form, both in The Cure and in the Banshees.
Ok, Concert, Nocturne and that TV show with the Banshees (the one with the fish guitar) seem to put a strong objection to that, but you listen to bootlegs from 1983 and 1984, and... well, he really wasn't in top form. Lyrics forgotten, guitar parts badly played... that was not uncommon between 1983 and 1984.
That didn't mean he didn't have his brilliant moments, of course he had them, he's Robert fvcking Smith!!

But Budgie also had delirium tremens

Source?

Himself in the Banshees official biography.
He didn't explicitly say he had it, but he described the symptoms.
Actually, Budgie's alcohol problem was the main reason that led to the break-up of the Banshees... and nearly The Creatures at the same time.
However, Sioux and Budgie managed to stay together for some ten more extra years.

That said, Budgie's problem seems to have been less grave than Lol's.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: Ulrich on November 22, 2017, 10:30:04
Lol also played live... while he could.

And...? Nobody doubted that.  :?

Himself in the Banshees official biography.

That said, Budgie's problem seems to have been less grave than Lol's.

Okay. Good to hear about the latter.

Btw, "delirium tremens" is a very specific part of the problem, not everyone who drinks too much suffers that:
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/delirium-tremens
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: MeltingMan on November 22, 2017, 17:43:50
but you listen to bootlegs from 1983 and 1984, and... well, he really wasn't in top form. Lyrics forgotten, guitar parts badly played... that was not uncommon between 1983 and 1984.

Hmm. When I read this I hope Lol is able to put together a supplement for every chapter of Cured;
for volume 2 of course. The sound in that period is my favorite one, however.
Title: Re: What do you think of Lol?
Post by: PearlThompsonsBloodflowers on December 15, 2017, 01:27:27
I love Lol he is so kind to me on instagram as well as to other fans  :smth049


I love his playing style too, and I think he was usefull untill he left.