Headliners 2015

[bamber]

they'd be the best headliner since 2003....

Not So....

[hurdy]

YouTube may self confirm today. Just have to watch 5 seconds of an ad at the start of each track before the crowd can skip to the actual music.

Wasn't it a year ago today that Arcade Fire self confirmed?

[russycarps]

Take that!

Grim times ahead if this is the kind of trash the eavis's are desperate to attract.

I dont think michael eavis is involved in this somehow.

Tragic times.

[A Guy Called Matt]

One swallow does not a summer make.

[eFestivals]

Mick Jagger said after the festival that the Stones were only asked to play once. In 2013.

But Eavis said he asked them every year.

that'll be the difference between what Jagger knows and what his management know.

There's little incentive for management to pass these things on, because they rarely get a cut of catalogue sales - which is where any financial benefit from playing Glasto would come from.

[Festival Liam]

Take that!

Grim times ahead if this is the kind of trash the eavis's are desperate to attract.

I dont think michael eavis is involved in this somehow.

Tragic times.

Or maybe Michael isn't up his own arse and likes to keep the festival providing some variety.

[DomDom1984]

Imagine wanting to attract a massive stadium sized pop act who have a huge variety of fans. Shocking stuff.

[eFestivals]

to be fair, Glasto has almost always gone for pop acts as headliners.

What has changed is what is now 'acceptable pop'. In the past boy bands were beyond the pale.

Welcome to the world of Thatcher's children and Simon Cowell.

[DomDom1984]

Take That seemed to be a fairly respectable pop act for some time there though. My only criticism would be as a three piece now, it all seems like a joke tribute, and now that I've heard it, the new album is a bit gash. They still sell tickets though, and I reckon they'd do pretty well. Not going to judge them live on some shite TV show performances.

[eFestivals]

Take That seemed to be a fairly respectable pop act for some time there though.

Yep. Tho their music hasn't changed for the better, what has changed are the attitudes towards them.

The missus and me were speaking last night about an 80s 'pop star' she's got to know recently, and where she's just found out how little he knows about music - chart pop is all he knows.

People like that have now taken over the world.

[russycarps]

to be fair, Glasto has almost always gone for pop acts as headliners.

What has changed is what is now 'acceptable pop'. In the past boy bands were beyond the pale.

Welcome to the world of Thatcher's children and Simon Cowell.

Yeh that's it exactly. Acceptable pop. I never ever thought I'd see the day take that became credible though. They were the worst of the worst! I cant think of a band that was more reviled than them in the 90s. They were the absolute pits. Anti-music. If you are of a certain age this is the most shocking of all possible bookings.

And now glastonbury goers are accepting of them! happy to see them play!

Though I suppose as you've pointed out in the past, the thought of prince playing in the 80s (and 90s) is similarly laughable, but I'd be happy to see him play so maybe I'm a hypocrite.

But he's got infinitely more going for him that take bloody that.

[DomDom1984]

I'd say that their music certainly changed for the better. Progress wasn't exactly a great album, but had it's moments. Beautiful World was pretty good and The Circus was absolutely outstanding stuff.

Their older stuff... so much of it is just so cringeworthy. There's of course some good stuff there. I still love Never Forget now.

[CaledonianGonzo]

It would have been a divisive booking 20 years ago and it'd be a divisive booking now - but that's no reason why it shouldn't happen. I'd take 'em over Kasabian.

[A Guy Called Matt]

Maybe someone should start a Take That thread to run along side the Taylor Swift one?

NFR NFC NFTS NFTT

[DomDom1984]

Glastonbury can't seem to get away from booking simple rock/indie acts as headliners without it being divisive though. Any deviation from that and shitloads of folk throw their arms in the air. Glastonbury is a diverse festival, and that should be shown in the headliners as well.

[russycarps]

it's really easy to be diverse and not book take that

maybe give more females a headlining slot would be a start

[A Guy Called Matt]

it's really easy to be diverse and not book take that

maybe give more females a headlining slot would be a start

Florence to headline then.

[CaledonianGonzo]

I'd still prefer Take That.

[russycarps]

Florence to headline then.

Rather that than take that. Take that! Good god.

From gimme shelter to a million love songs in 2 short years. What a farce.

[A Guy Called Matt]

Rather that than take that. Take that! Good god.

From gimme shelter to a million love songs in 2 short years. What a farce.

I am with you on that.

Seen TT and they were awful.

Would like to see Florence one day and she is the sort of act I would not buy tickets to see but would see at a festival. That's one reason I love festivals.

[ltfckimbo]

Take That seemed to be a fairly respectable pop act for some time there though. My only criticism would be as a three piece now, it all seems like a joke tribute, and now that I've heard it, the new album is a bit gash. They still sell tickets though, and I reckon they'd do pretty well. Not going to judge them live on some shite TV show performances.

Cowell and Clifford did an amazing job relaunching them after Barlow signed up to Cowell's label. Its amazing how many people think that Cowell's biggest crimes against music surround his tv shows, all he's done there is worked out a way to make money from a process that was going on anyway.

The real damage is done through his massive influence in the rest of the media, to make shit like Take That appear credible. When people paint him as a pantomime villain, they are just reinforcing the deliberate and very successful persona created by vermin like Max Clifford. He needs to be shown for massively stunting the creative output of this country, but seeing hiw people swallow his rebrand of Barlow/Take That its not going to happen any time soon.

[FuzzyDunlop]

Rather that than take that. Take that! Good god.

From gimme shelter to a million love songs in 2 short years. What a farce.

Then again, it was Gimme shelter to Mumford and sons in 24 hours

[russycarps]

I am with you on that.

Seen TT and they were awful.

Would like to see Florence one day and she is the sort of act I would not buy tickets to see but would see at a festival. That's one reason I love festivals.

Ah now you've lost me, she's bloody awful!

but if pop pap must be given a chance, rather her, or ed sheeran or some shit like that than take that, who have zero redeeming qualities.

Take that at glastonbury! Just seeing that written down makes me want to puke.

[neil999]

ironic teenagers from the 90's have alot to answer for...

[russycarps]

Cowell and Clifford did an amazing job relaunching them after Barlow signed up to Cowell's label. Its amazing how many people think that Cowell's biggest crimes against music surround his tv shows, all he's done there is worked out a way to make money from a process that was going on anyway.

The real damage is done through his massive influence in the rest of the media, to make shit like Take That appear credible. When people paint him as a pantomime villain, they are just reinforcing the deliberate and very successful persona created by vermin like Max Clifford. He needs to be shown for massively stunting the creative output of this country, but seeing hiw people swallow his rebrand of Barlow/Take That its not going to happen any time soon.

Spot on. The brainwashing is depressing to witness. Surely the glastonbury bookers havent fallen for it too though?? I think michael is immune, but emily I'm not so sure.....

I accept utter trash like take that will always exist and it is very easy to ignore, but when they start polluting glastonbury then it becomes a problem.

Edited December 19, 2014 by russycarps