Red Hot Chili Peppers...

[rivalschools.price]

im with thomas insofar as it not being as bad as people make out.tho they were nowhere near as good as when i saw them in london docklands a few years previously when they were awesome.i agree it wasnt a festival setlist,but people were praising radiohead last year for not catering for the masses by playing a festival setlist.whats the difference?

i know radiohead didnt play overly long jams(there would be loads on here saying they play the best jams in the world if they did) but their setlist was hardly an ok computer and the bends medly.

people have a habit of rewriting history on these boards and in a few years time the perception will be that chilis set was one big jam from start to finish(and pumpkins only played to 12 people and RATM only agreed to play cos they were offered £10m and had mcdonalds in their rider,ha ha)

[fat_man_joe]

im with thomas insofar as it not being as bad as people make out.tho they were nowhere near as good as when i saw them in london docklands a few years previously when they were awesome.i agree it wasnt a festival setlist,but people were praising radiohead last year for not catering for the masses by playing a festival setlist.whats the difference?

i know radiohead didnt play overly long jams(there would be loads on here saying they play the best jams in the world if they did) but their setlist was hardly an ok computer and the bends medly.

people have a habit of rewriting history on these boards and in a few years time the perception will be that chilis set was one big jam from start to finish(and pumpkins only played to 12 people and RATM only agreed to play cos they were offered £10m and had mcdonalds in their rider,ha ha)

[kev1664]

im with thomas insofar as it not being as bad as people make out.tho they were nowhere near as good as when i saw them in london docklands a few years previously when they were awesome.i agree it wasnt a festival setlist,but people were praising radiohead last year for not catering for the masses by playing a festival setlist.whats the difference?

i know radiohead didnt play overly long jams(there would be loads on here saying they play the best jams in the world if they did) but their setlist was hardly an ok computer and the bends medly.

people have a habit of rewriting history on these boards and in a few years time the perception will be that chilis set was one big jam from start to finish(and pumpkins only played to 12 people and RATM only agreed to play cos they were offered £10m and had mcdonalds in their rider,ha ha)

[thomasowen]

I do understand what you mean in the above post.

But how come it wasn't just reading fans complaining, it was both reading and leeds fans who thought the same. 2 seperate nights where people thought they were absolutly garbage! It doesn't show much room for a defence!

Edited January 31, 2010 by thomasowen

[kev1664]

SOME people thought they were garbage. Remember there were a lot of people who probably enjoyed them. There were like 80,000 people watching them over the wekend afterall.

[charley]

Saw them headline in 94 and they were pretty dull then as well, if that helps..

[thomasowen]

The majority of the people who I have talked to at the festival since agreed that they were garbage that year.

I know I havent talked to anywhere near the amount of people who were at the festival. But id say at least 90% of all the people I did talk to were in agreeance that they were very poor.

I'm not doubting they are a good band. I'm just saying it was a poor performance.

[thomasowen]

double post.

Edited January 31, 2010 by thomasowen

[scottt]

im with thomas insofar as it not being as bad as people make out.tho they were nowhere near as good as when i saw them in london docklands a few years previously when they were awesome.i agree it wasnt a festival setlist,but people were praising radiohead last year for not catering for the masses by playing a festival setlist.whats the difference?

[rexclark]

They can f**k right off. They've been shite since the 90s.

[judyblue110]

For any straggling doubters that think they're even at least a tiny bit decent thesedays:

And to think Neil Young had to watch this.

Edited February 1, 2010 by judyblue110

[JonnyHarper]

f**ks sake people, way to jump on the bandwagon! Fact is the Chilis are a fantastic band who have made some of the most innovative music of the last 20 years - yet still appeal just as much to a pop fan as a hardcore rock music nut. It's so easy just to have a massive go cause of what some metalheads say on a forum but fact is they would be one of the best, most popular headliners reading could possibly book.

And as for the post above, you can hardly hear a thing in that video - and that show got rave reviews.

[jordanuk90]

I still thought they had split up tbh

[judyblue110]

f**ks sake people, way to jump on the bandwagon! Fact is the Chilis are a fantastic band who have made some of the most innovative music of the last 20 years - yet still appeal just as much to a pop fan as a hardcore rock music nut. It's so easy just to have a massive go cause of what some metalheads say on a forum but fact is they would be one of the best, most popular headliners reading could possibly book.

And as for the post above, you can hardly hear a thing in that video - and that show got rave reviews.

[rexclark]

f**ks sake people, way to jump on the bandwagon! Fact is the Chilis are a fantastic band who have made some of the most innovative music of the last 20 years - yet still appeal just as much to a pop fan as a hardcore rock music nut. It's so easy just to have a massive go cause of what some metalheads say on a forum but fact is they would be one of the best, most popular headliners reading could possibly book.

And as for the post above, you can hardly hear a thing in that video - and that show got rave reviews.

[thomasowen]

It's not a bandwagon, it's just alot of people don't like The Chillis. I'd imagine alot of people are like me and used to really like them but realise they've deteriorated through the years. There is no way anyone can argue that they're better now than say in the mid 90s.

[scottt]

This shows they've still got it when the want to

[thomasowen]

You raise a valid point with that video.

I dont see any kind of bandwagon-ing going on here.

I think they've gone from making some GREAT albums, to making decent albums with a few great songs on them. On CD, i think they are one of the strongest headlienrs any festival could book, i agree with that.

But when theres a strong possibility theyll manage to bore 80,000 people over 2 days (quite an achievment in its own right), it kind of takes away from everything they are on CD.

[tori1607]

I love the chili peppers and am gutted frusciante has left. I agree with others saying there newer albums arent as good as the others, they are relatively more poppy- but it dose not mean i like the chilis any less. Even if u are not liking there music at present you cannot deny they are a highly talented band with extremely talented musicians, John frusciante and flea are amazing as is chad smith. Kiedis lyrica are amazing and they are one of the most charismatic bands out there.....

I also recommend Kiedis's book "scar tissue", its a great read

[Budweiser]

f**ks sake people, way to jump on the bandwagon! Fact is the Chilis are a fantastic band who have made some of the most innovative music of the last 20 years - yet still appeal just as much to a pop fan as a hardcore rock music nut. It's so easy just to have a massive go cause of what some metalheads say on a forum but fact is they would be one of the best, most popular headliners reading could possibly book.

And as for the post above, you can hardly hear a thing in that video - and that show got rave reviews.

[ALLHALLOWS]

Can't be bothered reading though all the posts but I hope to God they don't play.

The worst live band I've ever seen.

Edited February 8, 2010 by ALLHALLOWS

[judyblue110]

The worst live band I've ever seen.