while the idea of some more albums-in-full performances is a nice thought, i'm not sure it would be a good idea.
i think those performances rarely even work in live setting and considering that i think trilogy worked pretty well.
but if they started doing it more... i don't know. for me it would lose all its taste and meaning i guess.
and i didn't even see the trilogy shows and i do regret it - but still, i don't really wish they'd do it again. i just think some things are better when they are one-off and that's it. toying with the idea is nice though but that's it.
just my opinion.
I suppose it's all a matter of taste; if, for one, adore the Trilogy DVD, so it's hard for me to look at it and say "Better not try again." Thinking about it, The Head / Kiss Me / Wish would make a bit of sense for a Porl-involved Cure to do, though it is virtually unthinkable without a keyboardist. I suppose it would be kind of gimmicky if it became their thing -- performing albums in sequence -- but that's about as good as gimmicks get.
And I don't think another Trilogy would cheapen the P/D/B trilogy, especially for those who don't feel that P/D/B is the 'real' trilogy anyway. I think adding another trio would only serve to add another element, not reduce the potency and meaning of the first element. If that makes sense....
well i uess i have to disagree - but no problem about that. :smth001
for me it would be useless to do it all over again
i just think the idea of playing albums in full always sounds better in advance than it really is in reality. often the idea can seem great at first (because yes, it would truly be something awesome, what a feast for fans!). but then again when one really starts thinking about it, what would be the real point? i mean, really
why repeat it all live in the same order as it appears in the album? what would be the motivation for it? just to make fans happy? i don't think that's the one... or to make the listeners feel like they were safely listening to the album through the venue PA with a few dudes miming it on stage hehehe?
ok that last one was maybe a joke... but i think since the live shows sort of do provide an opportunity NOT to keep everything in fixed order then it's a much more better idea to go along with than sticking to the album structures.
and that's why i think playing albums in full should be used only on special occasions, when the artists is really trying to point out something to the listener. trilogy had some notion behind it, it wanted to establish the certain spiritual connections between those three albums, despite the long stretches of time that separate them. i think robert smith was trying to say something with it. and it doesn't depend on the idea whether or not pornography/disintegration/bloodflowers is the "real" trilogy or not (which it even isn't for me, by the way). it was not just a selection of albums documenting the band's career so far etc. but it had a kind of "mental artistic arch" (what a clumsy expression i know - sorry i can't think of anything better now) behind it that goes much deeper than that.
so compare that with the idea of playing head/KM/wish back to back: what would that "trilogy" try to point out? even if it would surely sound pretty damn good and delicious idea, i don't see anything special behind it. what's the aim? there's no connection between those albums, similar to those of trilogy. it would be more or less superficial, done for more or less purely for reasons of entertainment only.
that's why i don't think that things like that should become something common - and by the way no-one really seems to do it so much at all which i think also might prove something. because if it was a superb idea in itself i guess people all around would do it more... but they really don't. so...
(i also think the main problem would be that they couldn't do all the songs on those three albums (head/KM/wish) anymore - and i'm not just talking about the lack of keyboards there.)
:smth001
Topic: your perfect setlist (Read 33412 times)
April 24, 2006, 09:10:12