More evidence that Muse will headline

[jump]

The point wasn't that bands that played recently weren't allowed. It's just a list of bands who could headline given the chance, be it bands seen as headliners, coule be seen as headline or could reunite at any point.

and judging by the ones you've deleted.... was it just random or?

[Vieuphoria]

also I fail to see how Fleetwood Mac are less of a stupid idea than say The Cure or Blur?

[jump]

also I fail to see how Fleetwood Mac are less of a stupid idea than say The Cure or Blur?

Edited March 4, 2011 by jump

[Vieuphoria]

...yes, you were randomly mentioning bands.

[Vieuphoria]

Cure are booked at another festival & Blur are unavailable as they won't play shows until they want.

[jump]

Yes I was. All bands who could headline. Random ones off the top of my head. Whats your point?

[jump]

You've missed the point. Ignore all other festivals right now. I'm talking R/L. What stops R/L booking a band like The Cure before a festival like Bestival. Why not keep it diverse and more interesting? Instead of the same few bands on rotation with a few newer acts thrown in. That's the point.... not that other festivals had them.

Edited March 4, 2011 by jump

[Vieuphoria]

Gah the point is R/L are really boring when it comes to headliners. I understand playing it safe with boring acts like Muse or Foo Fighters etc as it keeps the commercial edge to the festival.... But on one of the days at least there needs to be something different or slightly credible. This is all that was mean't by it. How do festivals in europe manage to put on brilliant lineups each year, but Reading seem to just book whatever and be done with it. Just some imagination is all I ask. Don't want to becoem Download.

I'm not getting into the The Cure arguement again. Such a stupid discussion. They're no more washed up than GnR, or Blink-182 (who apparently didn't bother to learn how to play?)

Edited March 4, 2011 by Vieuphoria

[jump]

Gah the point is R/L are really boring when it comes to headliners. I understand playing it safe with boring acts like Muse or Foo Fighters etc as it keeps the commercial edge to the festival.... But on one of the days at least there needs to be something different or slightly credible. This is all that was mean't by it. How do festivals in europe manage to put on brilliant lineups each year, but Reading seem to just book whatever and be done with it. Just some imagination is all I ask. Don't want to becoem Download.

I'm not getting into the The Cure arguement again. Such a stupid discussion. They're no more washed up than GnR, or Blink-182 (who apparently didn't bother to learn how to play?)

Edited March 4, 2011 by jump

[mrtourette]

There's too much competition in this country to be truly experimental with headliners. In the US and Europe there aren't the number of major festivals in such small area; it's not as if someone can say "I don't like the Roskilde/Coachella line-up, I'm going to Benicassim/Lollapalooza" with anywhere near as much ease as you can swith between R&L and V or Download and Sonisphere in this country. Major US and European festivals aren't scrapping for ticket sales with other festivals in such a small pool as UK festivals so can afford to put on diverse line-ups because their catchment area is so big and varied that they'll always sell tickets.

[Dan R]

I get the point Vieuphoria's trying to make

It's more a list of bands that FR could consider and approach for headliner's when they are planning a line-up, not necessarily bands that could be available for this year's festival. Considering how many bands are on that list (and I agree with virtually all of them, personal taste aside)it does show that if it is the Strokes and Muse then are are very predictable choices as they're two of the bands predicted every single year.

[jump]

I get the point Vieuphoria's trying to make

It's more a list of bands that FR could consider and approach for headliner's when they are planning a line-up, not necessarily bands that could be available for this year's festival. Considering how many bands are on that list (and I agree with virtually all of them, personal taste aside)it does show that if it is the Strokes and Muse then are are very predictable choices as they're two of the bands predicted every single year.

[Vieuphoria]

I get the point Vieuphoria's trying to make

It's more a list of bands that FR could consider and approach for headliner's when they are planning a line-up, not necessarily bands that could be available for this year's festival. Considering how many bands are on that list (and I agree with virtually all of them, personal taste aside)it does show that if it is the Strokes and Muse then are are very predictable choices as they're two of the bands predicted every single year.

[mrtourette]

A lot of those bands listed are unrelaistic options due to the market aimed at and restrictions the festival puts on itself. Of course the restrictions could be removed and the market would eventually change if more chances were taken, but it's an endless circle that the festival is trapped in.

[jump]

This guy get's it. Thank you sir.

The difference between Arcade Fire is this. Arace Fire were booked as subheadliners in 2007 and did arena tours then. They came back 3/4 years later with an album that was critically acclaimed, got to number one, won a shit tonne of awards, and did a sell out arena tour. My Chemical Romance however played 3rd top in 2006. They did some arenas etc at their peak. They were huge. They come back 4/5 years later. Don't reach the top 10 in the chart, don't sell out any tours, and are a considerably smaller band than they were in 2006 when they played 3rd? That is the point there. Nothing to do with personal taste... I'm not really an Arcade Fire fan, I find them kinnda dull. But headliners they are, and they proved it (not crowd wise but still).

[Vieuphoria]

This is still subjective, MCR are headliners as they've headlined Download and (I hear) they are good live and Arcde Fire had no major fests under the belt yet. MCR wil get a similar size crowd as Arcade Fire this year.

Foos headline twice, I'm not disagreing with you on this (only your stupid list) but what makes you think they haven't got a trick this year? They got Libs last year as non headliners and pulled a few tricks before like Faith No More.

I take it back then with that well thought out counter arguement, Queens Of The Stone Age, Darkness, Pulp to headline this year please

It's less than you'd think, by your same logic (and hate postion arguements as they mean shit) as MCR the Cure last album got to 33 in the charts and sold very poorly.

[jump]

Download headlers in 2006 doesn't equate to Reading Headliners 2011 surely? In terms of the their decline in the last 5 years, they aren't really headliners. Yes, sure take a risk and try and make new bands into headliners a la Arcade Fire. But do it with ones who are deserving surely. But that logic Lostprophets and The Offspring are viable headliners no?

Edited March 4, 2011 by jump

[kev1664]

This guy get's it. Thank you sir.

The difference between Arcade Fire is this. Arace Fire were booked as subheadliners in 2007 and did arena tours then. They came back 3/4 years later with an album that was critically acclaimed, got to number one, won a shit tonne of awards, and did a sell out arena tour. My Chemical Romance however played 3rd top in 2006. They did some arenas etc at their peak. They were huge. They come back 4/5 years later. Don't reach the top 10 in the chart, don't sell out any tours, and are a considerably smaller band than they were in 2006 when they played 3rd? That is the point there. Nothing to do with personal taste... I'm not really an Arcade Fire fan, I find them kinnda dull. But headliners they are, and they proved it (not crowd wise but still).

Competition I agree. But Think of all the bands that could be booked instead. Foo Fighters played 3 times in a decade yes.... why? Popular they may be but change it up a bit. A company as big as this surely have the money and resources to pull out some difference and special every year. I realise some of the bands aren't still together (Stone Roses etc) but the point is you know R/L wouldn't book them if they did.

Common sense here by means "your logic" yes?

The Cure were booked say, they would get a crowd and a lot of buzz. They are more popualr than you think.

[Vieuphoria]

They may aswell have been according to a lot of the shit in your list. The same decline can be applied to Arcade Fire, their best selling album is still their 1st and their buzz didn't until R&L so the same can be applied to MCR but this doesn't change MCR & Arcade Fire will (probably) get the same size crowd but in terms of preformance (again probably) they are headliners.

Partly because they don't tour enough, playing less often means they can sell out arenas. I see no difference between them and Manics, Prodigy, Sterophonics etc. just not healiners anymore even though they get big crowds & play big venues. They don't have enough general intrest to pull people at a fest to be headliner anymore.

Edited March 4, 2011 by Vieuphoria

[beau1]

This is still subjective, MCR are headliners as they've headlined Download and (I hear) they are good live and Arcde Fire had no major fests under the belt yet. MCR wil get a similar size crowd as Arcade Fire this year.

Foos headline twice, I'm not disagreing with you on this (only your stupid list) but what makes you think they haven't got a trick this year? They got Libs last year as non headliners and pulled a few tricks before like Faith No More.

I take it back then with that well thought out counter arguement, Queens Of The Stone Age, Darkness, Pulp to headline this year please

It's less than you'd think, by your same logic (and hate postion arguements as they mean shit) as MCR the Cure last album got to 33 in the charts and sold very poorly.

[Joe-]

And public enemy!

[mrtourette]

The Cure are a great band but aren't a legitimate R&L headliner because they don't appeal to the R&L target audience enough to warrant headlining. It would be a risk but I guess not the risk they want to take, unlike MCR, which is also a risk but I guess one they're willing to back as the organisers probably see them as more relevant to R&L than the Cure. It must be a constant battle between popularity and quality, the Cure sit too much towards quality.

[LondonTom]

Sweet day ticket it is then