Friday
Sep142018
Motley Crue To Record New Music
Friday, September 14, 2018 at 07:19AM Today's post is from HIM. Let me just say, I'm not one who is stuck on the "no more tours" contract. The band is making new music and not touring but really, who cares? The contract to not tour was with... each other. I'm not really sure how legally binding a PR stunt is, but whatever. Everyone online was freaking out about "the contract" and I say, just enjoy the new music! - Allyson
Crue! Whew! Phew! You?
Yup. The cat is out of the bag, thanks to Crue’s resident Blotz, Neil:
Exciting news! I’ll be going back in recording studio in a few weeks with the boys to record 4 brand new Motley Crue tracks! Rock On!!
— Vince Neil (@thevinceneil) September 13, 2018
So how do you feel about this? Me? Um. Well. Sure. Yeah. Okay. Right. Cool. Whatever.
I mean, nothing since Decade of Decadence mattered much to me, save the ‘oh so controversial’ eponymous 1994 release. Some okay songs. Some fairly good songs. Some other songs.
And I don’t begrudge them a new song or two (or four). They said they wouldn’t tour. What tour means is going to be up for some discussion, I assume, in subsequent years. But they never said they wouldn’t write new songs (under threat of legal penalties given all those documents they signed, legally-speaking).
So let me bring my recent comments (on other posts) to the fore: why? What purpose does this serve? If it is for the movie, then it doesn’t make a lot of sense, since that is about your glory days. If it is, as the article above suggests, a way to cash in (maybe) on a (how many have there been?) new greatest hits album, what is really the point? Who doesn’t own your greatest hits? How many were there, really? And how many times can you repackage them before fans—true fans—start to question your motives?
I love that Motley Blotzer is “excited.” That likely means he is going to dab gravy on his pork pies, rather than slather it on. But it really doesn’t add to the band’s incredible catalog. If anything, this will subtract from it.
I am sooooooooo willing to be wrong on this. Same goes for the movie. But I just don’t see how this turns out being a good thing, for a good band, that wants to maintain its status with those of us who truly appreciate what they did for metal.
Neil says “Rock On!” I say, “Come on.”
For those of you who don’t understand, yes “the boys” means Motley and we signed a contract not to tour anymore. We never broke up or said we would never make music again. Hope this clears it up.
— Vince Neil (@thevinceneil) September 13, 2018
The Greatest Hits - Motley Crue
Reader Comments (10)
If it takes 10 years to get Crüe to focus on making new music of that caliber or better, I’m all for it. If it winds up being sh*t like everything they put out since, it’s another missed opportunity. I put the pressure firmly on Nikki Sixx since he’s the chief songwriter and architect of the monster that is Mötley Crüe.
I just wish it was more than 4 songs. Go for a full blown album to rival or surpass “Infestation” by RATT or “The Missing Peace” by L.A. Guns, the last two great albums of the genre.
Sixx said he felt like they ended with a wimper and would have liked to have gone out on more of a high note. Well, here’s his chance to remove the tarnish from the Mötley Crüe name and do something truly great, or even just good.
If he can deliver he will have fixed a misstep he never had to make had he just gotten off his bandanad a*s in the first place.
This all makes sense. They have a movie coming out. I can see them not touring but “premiering” the movie in small halls (1-3k) followed by a kick ass live show. Tickets astronomical. Money is made. Whoop de doo... get over yourselves.
Bands are all about gimmicks and selling the idea of what they are doing. They entice us to listen, to pay, to keep doing both. But there is also a degree of trust that fans expect (perhaps don't deserve) from the bands they support. You quitting? Okay. Fine. But that matters. When you say there will be nothing more of X or Y (tours, albums, whatever), that naturally makes fans--again, true fans (to borrow from a fellow poster's list of required things)--eager to see you going out on a high (or high-ish) note. That strikes me as a gimmick that is not designed to lure you in, but to rake it in. And that is when I start questioning things.
Sure, the "farewell" tour is a well-worn joke at this point. The Scorpions changed their mind. I can understand that. Ozzy probably forgot "No More Tours" until Sharon reminded him. Makes sense too. KISS realized that they could just swap in more reliable dudes in face paint and keep the good times semi-rolling. I understand. You always have to ask though: why are you retiring? In any case, that is a very, very good question. What are you selling and why are you stopping?
And, yes, I also understand that the Crue contract was a gimmick of the highest order and also one that was designed to put butts in seats. The Crue (as Ozzy is also, non-contractually, doing) left enough wiggle room to drive a semi through said contract. Like I said, what is a "tour"? But the overriding point I was making (again, as I make it a lot): why? What do you gain as a band and what do you lose? If it is awesome, all is forgiven (even by me). If it isn't, what then? What about that trust issue that drove fans to celebrate your history when it was "The End"? I won't call it a lie. I will question it though.
Thing is, I am human. So I buy into a lot of what you all are saying. If I need a dose of nostalgia (or a fun night out with friends), I will go to see Ozzy, or the Crue, or the Scorps, maybe even KISS. But I likely will never buy another thing they release (unless it is a remaster or remix, or a version with rarities). To me, I want nostalgia, plain and simple, or value-added nostalgia (the recent Megadeth re-release comes to mind, as might the newest GnR versions of _AFD_, copies of both I bought). None of these bands will ever capture the lightning that drew us to them. Again. Ever. So we celebrate what they were, or attend a show knowing that we are squinting so as to see them as they were. We do that for ourselves as much for them.
But it is the height of delusion to think that who they are is who they were. Funny thing, same applies to us. So, yes, I manage expectations and temper them with a dose of snark. No hate in that. None whatsoever.
The Crue is dead! Long live the Crue!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoGnBHQzIPU
Yeah, I never got into Linkin Park. The music just didn't grab me. But I know a lot of people love(d) them. And a shame what happened to CB. A loss for his family, friends, band, and fans.
I still remember going to Ozzfest in 2001. I leaned over to my friend at one point and said, "I feel really old right now." Aside from Sabbath and BLS (well, and Manson . . . who I never really liked, but was blown away by his stage presence and show) I felt like I had gone to the wrong concert. I think that was a fairly specific point in time where a lot of the metal being made didn't feel like it was being made for me. And that is perfectly fine. If it isn't for you (or me), you can find something else.
And Jeff . . . you are likely very right. The lure of lucre will be enough to find way to breach those contracts. I mean, not breach their contracts. Selected dates. Specific venues. Maybe even some of them within a day or two of each other. But not a tour. Never. Personally? I just want them to release something from the vault. Like I said previously, value-added nostalgia is something I can get behind.
That said, one can hope, at least for mint or “cleaned up” previously unreleased concert recordings and video. And, if by some fluke, should there be any previously unreleased demos, outtakes or what-have-you of never before made public songs, by all means, let’s hear ‘em!
AND, like I said, an E.P.’s worth of four new songs is great, even if they’re tacked onto the new movie’s soundtrack but why not seal your legacy, Sixx, with a legit 9 or 10 songs worthy of a new album. That would literally be going out on a high note.