2012 vs 2002

[Martino231]

But you also have bands you look back on and think "what the fuck were they doing booking them there?" . Some people on here remind me of that lunatic britney spears fan.

[eFestivals]

The problem with looking back on past line-ups is that the view of them is skewed by the greater fame that often comes to acts in following years.

[thejimbola]

Guns n Roses at Leeds above Prodigy added another level of awesomeness to it as well. 2002 was easily the best lineup ever, although the 3 years before that weren't bad either. Tickets were under 100 quid as well!

Download starting in 2003 has really had a dramatic effect on the Reading/Leeds lineups.

[thejimbola]

The problem with looking back on past line-ups is that the view of them is skewed by the greater fame that often comes to acts in following years.

[dirtymookie]

That's irrelevant though. That's not what stands out. No one here is looking at the 2002 line up and laughing that Vex Red got booked to play the main stage of Reading festival. Instead people focus on the fact that we got Foo Fighters, Muse, Ash, The Hives and Sum 41 on the same stage on the same day. But what were Muse, Sum 41 and The Hives back in 2002? Three very promising bands but none of them had the followings that they have today.

There are a number of bands on the 2002 line up that never made it. Does that make it a bad line up? Of course not.

Edited March 19, 2012 by dirtymookie

[eFestivals]

Or by some of those acts dropping off a cliff? Thats a one-sided way of looking at it. Is it not fair to look back and laugh at Razorlight, The Darkness or Travis getting booked as a headliner?

in the main, people ignore the bands which 'fail' and only tend to see the ones that go onto better things.

The only reason those particular bands jump out at you for you to name them is because, for no particular reason, they've become 'uncool'. Like it or not they were decent enough headliners at the time they were headliners (the fact that they were not 'mega' bands of the status of [say] Foos is not really relevant).

Edited March 19, 2012 by eFestivals

[Martino231]

How is it irrelevant? Maybe to you but not everyone looks at it the way you are. Muse subbed off two albums and so is Florence. That's comparable. I still could not give a toss about Muse exactly the same as Florence. Just because you seem incapable of gauging bands against there value at the time they were booked doesn't mean other people can't. It's a bit of fun so stop being so precious. You made a comment before that if people don't like the line up then don't go. Same thing, if you don't like the thread, don't look at it?

[rexclark]

The Cure vs. The Strokes

Paramore vs. Pulp

Bombay Bicycle Club vs. Jane's Addiction

You Me At Six vs. Weezer

Crystal Castles vs. The White Stripes

Angels And Airwaves vs. The Dandy Warhols

Coheed And Cambria vs. Mercury Rev

Cancer Bats vs. The Soundtrack Of Our Lives

Deaf Havana vs. The Moldy Peaches

Kasabian vs. Foo Fighters

Florence And The Machine vs. Muse

The Vaccines vs. Ash

Enter Shikari vs. Sum 41

The Shins vs. The Hives

OFWGKTA vs. A

Mystery Jets vs. Less Than Jake

Blood Red Shoes vs. Vex Red

Foo Fighters vs. The Prodigy

The Black Keys vs. The Offspring

Kaiser Chiefs vs. Slipknot

Bullet For My Valentine vs. Incubus

All Time Low vs. NOFX

The Gaslight Anthem vs. Puddle Of Mudd

Eagles Of Death Metal vs. Hundred Reasons

Band Of Skulls vs. Amen

Pulled Apart By Horses vs. Raging Speedhorn

5- 20 to 2002, not surprising considering that 2002 was my favourite festival line up ever. One of the best weekends of my life.

The problem with looking back on past line-ups is that the view of them is skewed by the greater fame that often comes to acts in following years.

[2rare2die]

in the main, people ignore the bands which 'fail' and only tend to see the ones that go onto better things.

The only reason those particular bands jump out at you for you to name them is because, for no particular reason, they've become 'uncool'. Like it or not they were decent enough headliners at the time they were headliners (the fact that they were not 'mega' bands of the status of [say] Foos is not really relevant).

[Benj]

to be fair i think 2002 was one of the best lineups readings had

[eFestivals]

The Darkness were never a decent headliner, they didn't even have enough material to fill their time slot at the time they headlined.

hadn't they released two albums when they headlined?

Anyway, however much they had they were extremely popular at the time, so popular that the nme photographer was almost on his knees begging to be allowed to go and photo them (the Darkness didn't like nme, cos nme had slagged them off so much. So the nme photographer was banned ).

Like it or not, they were a more than decent headliner at the time, even if they didn't suit all tastes. It was only after they'd headlined they (again) became a hated band by the sorts of people who think themselves too cool to enjoy an act who are very good at what they do - they didn't end up as a headliner by accident, but by being very good at what they so (far better than many of the so-called 'cool' bands who get to headline).

Before anyone starts, no I'm not a fan of The Darkness ... but that doesn't stop me being able to recognise an act at the top of their game.

[Benj]

hadn't they released two albums when they headlined?

Anyway, however much they had they were extremely popular at the time, so popular that the nme photographer was almost on his knees begging to be allowed to go and photo them (the Darkness didn't like nme, cos nme had slagged them off so much. So the nme photographer was banned ).

Like it or not, they were a more than decent headliner at the time, even if they didn't suit all tastes. It was only after they'd headlined they (again) became a hated band by the sorts of people who think themselves too cool to enjoy an act who are very good at what they do - they didn't end up as a headliner by accident, but by being very good at what they so (far better than many of the so-called 'cool' bands who get to headline).

Before anyone starts, no I'm not a fan of The Darkness ... but that doesn't stop me being able to recognise an act at the top of their game.

[thetime]

Travis always get alot if stick headlining over greenday, but travis headlined every major uk festival at that time.

[2rare2die]

hadn't they released two albums when they headlined?

Anyway, however much they had they were extremely popular at the time, so popular that the nme photographer was almost on his knees begging to be allowed to go and photo them (the Darkness didn't like nme, cos nme had slagged them off so much. So the nme photographer was banned ).

Like it or not, they were a more than decent headliner at the time, even if they didn't suit all tastes. It was only after they'd headlined they (again) became a hated band by the sorts of people who think themselves too cool to enjoy an act who are very good at what they do - they didn't end up as a headliner by accident, but by being very good at what they so (far better than many of the so-called 'cool' bands who get to headline).

Before anyone starts, no I'm not a fan of The Darkness ... but that doesn't stop me being able to recognise an act at the top of their game.

[eFestivals]

Nope, they didn't release their second album until a year after they headlined, and while i don't doubt they were entertaining enough for the people that liked them (was never bothered either way really) surely to be a decent headliner requires you to actually have enough music for the slot? As they didn't, they just ended up twatting about for large portions of it, which to me, popular or not, makes them a poor choice

I don't remember them 'twatting about for large portions of it'. But even if they did they must have been entertaining enough for me to not remember it. And entertainment is what any band is about.

But anyway, the main point I was making still applies - the looking at an old line-up brings about a revision of how it was viewed at the time. The Darkness certainly weren't the most disliked & criticised headliner there's been in the last ten years - it's pretty clear that (in immediate hindsight) that 'honour' belongs to RHCP, which gets to show that huge names are not necessarily the best thing to have.

[kaosmark2]

I don't remember them 'twatting about for large portions of it'. But even if they did they must have been entertaining enough for me to not remember it. And entertainment is what any band is about.

But anyway, the main point I was making still applies - the looking at an old line-up brings about a revision of how it was viewed at the time. The Darkness certainly weren't the most disliked & criticised headliner there's been in the last ten years - it's pretty clear that (in immediate hindsight) that 'honour' belongs to RHCP, which gets to show that huge names are not necessarily the best thing to have.

[eFestivals]

Whether The Darkness did is a bit more questionable.

Yeah, they did within the context of that time, no doubt about it.

If the likes of Reading isn't going to go with a The Darkness sort of act at times they might as well sack their bookers and put the same half-dozen bands on constant repeat.

While some of the acts they have as headliners might be a little off the mark for some at times it's far less boring than the alternative scenario would be. There's no future for any festival which doesn't try even if they might get it a little wrong thru their trying sometimes.

[kaosmark2]

Yeah, they did within the context of that time, no doubt about it.

If the likes of Reading isn't going to go with a The Darkness sort of act at times they might as well sack their bookers and put the same half-dozen bands on constant repeat.

While some of the acts they have as headliners might be a little off the mark for some at times it's far less boring than the alternative scenario would be. There's no future for any festival which doesn't try even if they might get it a little wrong thru their trying sometimes.

[dirtymookie]

I was honestly surprised to find out they were a serious band. Thought they were just a shit joke when they first brought out that first single.

[mrtourette]

Was there as much guff in 2002 about the Foos headlining on the 10th anniversary of Nevermind as there has been this year about them headlining on the 20th? I don't remember anything like that but then again 10 years ago was a long time.

[mrtourette]

The Cure vs. The Strokes

Paramore vs. Pulp

Bombay Bicycle Club vs. Jane's Addiction

You Me At Six vs. Weezer

Crystal Castles vs. The White Stripes

Angels And Airwaves vs. The Dandy Warhols

Coheed And Cambria vs. Mercury Rev

Cancer Bats vs. The Soundtrack Of Our Lives

Deaf Havana vs. The Moldy Peaches

Kasabian vs. Foo Fighters

Florence And The Machine vs. Muse

The Vaccines vs. Ash

Enter Shikari vs. Sum 41

The Shins vs. The Hives

OFWGKTA vs. A

Mystery Jets vs. Less Than Jake

Blood Red Shoes vs. Vex Red

Foo Fighters vs. The Prodigy

The Black Keys vs. The Offspring

Kaiser Chiefs vs. Slipknot

Bullet For My Valentine vs. Incubus

All Time Low vs. NOFX

The Gaslight Anthem vs. Puddle Of Mudd

Eagles Of Death Metal vs. Hundred Reasons

Band Of Skulls vs. Amen

Pulled Apart By Horses vs. Raging Speedhorn

As with most comparisons the Friday puts this year heaviliy behind but the Sunday puts in a valiant effort to catch up, ulimately ending in defeat.

[therefused]

The Cure vs. The Strokes

Paramore vs. Pulp

Bombay Bicycle Club vs. Jane's Addiction

You Me At Six vs. Weezer

Crystal Castles vs. The White Stripes

Angels And Airwaves vs. The Dandy Warhols

Coheed And Cambria vs. Mercury Rev

Cancer Bats vs. The Soundtrack Of Our Lives

Deaf Havana vs. The Moldy Peaches

5-4

Kasabian vs. Foo Fighters

Florence And The Machine vs. Muse

The Vaccines vs. Ash

Enter Shikari vs. Sum 41

The Shins vs. The Hives

OFWGKTA vs. A

Mystery Jets vs. Less Than Jake

Blood Red Shoes vs. Vex Red

3-5

Foo Fighters vs. The Prodigy

The Black Keys vs. The Offspring

Kaiser Chiefs vs. Slipknot

Bullet For My Valentine vs. Incubus

All Time Low vs. NOFX

The Gaslight Anthem vs. Puddle Of Mudd

Eagles Of Death Metal vs. Hundred Reasons

Band Of Skulls vs. Amen

Pulled Apart By Horses vs. Raging Speedhorn

4-5

12-14

From what i can tell here though, ive picked the bigger acts from 2012, and the acts lower down for 2012. Mainly because ive heard of all the acts filling out the mainstage, not on merit. Ive no idea wether the moldy peaches are better than deaf havana, but i dont mind deaf havana, so yeah.

[Martino231]

I was honestly surprised to find out they were a serious band. Thought they were just a shit joke when they first brought out that first single.

[RichieParf]

I don't remember them 'twatting about for large portions of it'.

[jump]

There was a perception re. The Darkness before that they might not have the material to fill the set though, while the perception before RHCP was that they'd be a great headliner.

I didn't see the Darkness, so can't judge that set, but RHCP fucked it up, rather than didn't deserve that opportunity. Whether The Darkness did is a bit more questionable.