Buy our new album “A Brief Crack Of Light” on CD or limited edition vinyl at Amazon.co.uk, or direct from Global Music

Therapy? should be bigger than Foo Fighters

#

Started by slush puppy

My copy of Scopophobia finally arrived last week, and so i’ve been thinking about Therapy? alot this week!

I think that Therapy? should be bigger than the Foo Fighters. I was a huge Therapy? and Nirvana fan back in 1992. Troublegum was awesome, and then the first Foo Fighters album was amazing too. Even though both bands haven’t produced better albums than those, the Foo Fighters are now writing macho-cock-rock arena-rock, where-as Therapy? are still sticking to their roots, which may be to their detrament.

I feel quite let down by the governors of grunge ie Dave Grohl and Courtney Love. It seems that Andy Cairns goo nature and loyalty to the music has held Therapy? back from being mainstream chart toppers. Now I know that most chart toppers are bland, manufactured shit. But it would be great to see Therapy? playing Top Of The Pops again and bombarding the charts with great rock tunes.

Any thoughts?

Posted on Thu, 29 January 2004 at 23:47

You’re viewing replies 1–30 of 44 by 24 people

·

Page: First | Previous | | Last

#1

Andy D wrote:

None what so ever.
I think THERAPY? should stay our group and not a group for the masses. As long as they keep producing good music and feed themselves I couldn’t be happier. I remember when Diane was a hit and people who didn’t knew THERAPY? before came to tell me that they discovered a new band and that I knew less of their music than they did to drop them 3 months later.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 01:54

#2

Karl wrote:

Totally agree, I like T? having the fanbase size as it is, and because of this, the band are so down to earth and approachable, and the gigs kick ass in such small venues rather than being hit in the pocket to watch your band on a big screen at an arena.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 07:47

#3

JSar666 wrote:

I wish T? were bigger than the Foo Fighters. Just because they deserve to be. The Foo Fighters have had some decent songs, but personally I think most of their stuff is FUCKING CRAP. I cannot emphasize this enough. Stuff like that awful song about “I’ll Be Coming Home Next Year”… arrrrgghggh :mad: Dave Grohl should stick to drums.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 08:37

#4

motherh666 wrote:

literally “stick” to drums?

I agree with my esteemed collegues. T? is the right size for the likes of us who are really happy to see them once or twice a year, buy a new album every second year and having 10 T?-shirts in the cupboard. We don’t need them to be on MTV all day and on the cover of smash hits.

Keepin’ it real with the T? Boys. Shizzle Fo Rizzle or something.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 09:00

#5

allroy (Rainer) wrote:

[quote=slush puppy]the Foo Fighters are now writing macho-cock-rock arena-rock
quote]

I think this sums up the whole point pretty well. To be bigger than the Foos (though I like them) would mean to write macho-cock-rock arena-rock and that’s not what I want to hear from T?. They were on the brink of it with Infernal Love and I’m glad that they’re back to their roots.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 09:17

#6

tokaarme wrote:

I agree.. Except that I fancy FF too.. I think that Dave is real multi-talented genius and some of the FF songs are in my all-time top 10 -list.

T? doesn’t need MTV or any other ‘sexy’ -media to be greatest band ever. They just need they’re music; if you know what I mean..

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 09:49

#7

3ddo-on-the-balcony (eddo) wrote:

@ Karl and mother666: my thoughts exactly!

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 13:55

#8

Michael wrote:

Absolutely nothing wrong with the Foo Fighters! They seem to be really down to earth guys, at least I have seen no signs of rockstar bullshit from Grohl & co. yet. Dave Grohl is a rock hero! I get the impression that some of you dislike/hate artists or bands just because they have commercial success. You can’t blame bands for having success, you can blame them for being total assholes who are in it for the money, that’s a different story. Neither the Foo Fighters nor Therapy? belong to this latter category, they both rock.
There, I rest my case.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 14:21

#9

JSar666 wrote:

I just think the Foo Fighters suck

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 14:27

#10

motherh666 wrote:

I think the Foo’s and their buddies are cleverer than people think. look at it this way: They have the whole of america and europe. The Foo’s with Queens o.t.s.a and (ahem) Tenacious D have all angles covered.

Foo’s for the light rockers and girls.
QOTSA for the slightly more hardcore
Tenacious D for the comedy.

They produce each others music, make each others videos.

That “Band of rockers” own the music industry right now. more than the likes of Britney or Timberlake or that pish.

Like them or loath them they have built an empire and that is worth respecting.

And they built that city on ROCK AND ROLL! :D

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 15:05

#11

CarlOfHellacious! (carl) wrote:

i reckon all foo fighters songs sound samey, cant say that with therapy?!

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 15:10

#12

Bad Karma wrote:

I always thought T? could have been as big as the Manic Street Preachers.

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 16:09

#13

prisonbreaker wrote:

it’s stupid to compare the popularity of T? with that from other bands,T? is T? and the foos are the foos
besides popularity does not means quality, as long as T? keeps writing good songs their’s no reason to be jealous at bigger (and mostly less talented) bands

Posted on Fri, 30 January 2004 at 17:46

#14

Andy D wrote:

JSar666 wrote:

I wish T? were bigger than the Foo Fighters. Just because they deserve to be. The Foo Fighters have had some decent songs, but personally I think most of their stuff is FUCKING CRAP.

So The Foo Fighters should become smaller in stead of THERAPY? getting bigger

Posted on Sun, 1 February 2004 at 03:32

#15

innerdrive wrote:

Why compare with other bands. They do what they think is right. we know Therapy and that’s why we’re the happy people

Posted on Sun, 1 February 2004 at 15:17

#16

philzilla wrote:

Fiestaboy wrote:

I think THERAPY? should stay our group and not a group for the masses.

gee, i’m sure the band wishes all their fans were as selfish as you.

Posted on Sun, 1 February 2004 at 22:16

#17

Dermot wrote:

Yeah. As long as T? can release the kind of records they wanna make, who cares how many people like them?

And what the fuck have T? got to do with the Foo Fighters for that matter?

Posted on Sun, 1 February 2004 at 22:31

#18

slush puppy wrote:

all i was trying to say is i miss seeing Therapy? on Top Of The Pops.

Forget comparing Therapy? to other bands. There’s no point.

I can still clearly remember seeing Therapy? play ‘Screamager’ on Top Of The Pops. It was very cool. It was one of the first tracks to turn me from pop to rock.

Also can remember them playing ‘Loose’ on Top Of The Pops.

And I am sure they featured on the pages of Smash Hits, as did Nirvana. Guess it was just part of the game.

Also would be great to see Therapy? playing bigger venues. I always think of Therapy? playing Brixton Academy! Awesome!

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 00:01

#19

Krisken wrote:

So I’m sitting here listening to my computers music on random (all 300+ albums of it) and what song comes on while reading this very thread but Tramline.

Kinda says it all, eh?

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 00:09

#20

JSar666 wrote:

Fiestaboy wrote:

So The Foo Fighters should become smaller in stead of THERAPY? getting bigger

Yeah, that way around works for me too :) It’s not so much that I want T? to be the most popular band on the planet, it’s just frustrating when bands I think are much worse are more popular. That’s all.

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 08:08

#21

allroy (Rainer) wrote:

I hope you don’t get too depressed every time you hear Westlife or atomic Kitten on the radio. :)

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 08:59

#22

JSar666 wrote:

Actually I do :) Which is why I don’t listen to the radio anymore ;)

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 10:02

#23

Isness wrote:

It’s not so much the sales as it is recognition. The Foos are seen as one of the greatest rock bands around at the moment, and, personally, I fucking detest them. I’ve had the unfortunate experience of seeing them live, and their live ‘jam’ was hilarious. From everything I’ve seen of Grohl, he isn’t a multi-talented ‘genius’. He’s really not all that great a guitarist. Their songs regularly draw on HUGE clichés, and have that horrible nature of sounding very, very samey. I’m all for poppy rock when its done well, but that’s why I like stuff like High Anxiety. The Foos are horrible. One of my all time least favourite bands.
So in this circumstance, I wish Therapy? had more recognition as a great band, rather than the Foos, or, in fact, any other rock band who are seen as genius, when they’re… well, not.

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 12:10

#24

JSar666 wrote:

I’m with Isness on this one.

Btw, have you heard that Atomic Kitten are taking a “break” :cool: Apparently they’re going to take time off cos one of those slappers wants to look after her kid for a while. Who knows.. maybe they’ll split up ! Here’s the
article for proof:

————————————————————————

KITTEN SAY “BREAK NOT BREAK UP”
Atomic Kitten are denying claims in Friday’s Sun that the group is
splitting - insisting, instead, that the trio have agreed to take a break to
give band member Natasha Hamilton more time to spend with her son.

Hamilton told reporters: “I’ve not really had a moment to be with [her son]
Josh consistently and properly since he was born, having released two albums
and six singles since 2002 and promoted them around the world. I knew that
the time would come when I’d need to take time out and luckily the band’s in
great shape following a brilliant autumn, and I have wonderful mates in Jen
and Liz, at my management company and at Innocent Records who support me
completely.”

Despite plans for a greatest hits album in late March and confirmation that
other Kitten members Jenny and Liz are considering pursuing solo careers,
the band’s publicist insists it’s a ‘break’ rather than ‘break-up’: “After
nearly five years at the top, Atomic Kitten have decided to take a break.
The girls’ work ethic has kept them constantly busy, travelling the world
several times over whilst vigorously promoting each release. This has meant
they have had few breaks throughout that period and as a result Natasha has
decided to take a well-earned break after completion of the tour’s final
date in Hull on Mar 11 to spend quality time with son Josh.”

————————————————————————

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 12:30

#25

philzilla wrote:

JSar666 wrote:

Apparently they’re going to take time off cos one of those slappers wants to look after her kid for a while.

dude, what the fuck? you’re slagging a girl off for wanting to look after her child? you might not like her records, but give her a break.

some of you people are just unbelievable. i’m sure your own mothers are very proud of you.

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 12:54

#26

motherh666 wrote:

nah fuck that. By all means if she wants to look after her footballer spawned rat of a child she’s glad to. I personally think the likes of Atomic Kitten should not procreate. She should have been neutered long before she had the chance to shag half the premiership.

Damnit.

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 13:00

#27

JSar666 wrote:

philzilla wrote:

dude, what the fuck? you’re slagging a girl off for wanting to look after her child?

No I’m not slagging her off for looking after her child. I think it’s good. Very good. In fact, I think she should stop “singing” and look after her kid full-time :)

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 13:33

#28

Michael wrote:

Some bands or artists used to piss me off, now I think it’s just a waste of energy. Think of it this way: ‘bands’ like Atomic Kitten don’t make great music, but with the mute option their videos become a whole lot more interesting ;-) But seriously, if you don’t like a video or song, just don’t watch or listen to it. Problem solved.

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 14:27

#29

JSar666 wrote:

Yeah, this is why I don’t listen to the radio or watch MTV anymore… they just flood them both with shit. Or maybe that’s just me getting old. I’m not sitting up until Midnight to watch Super Rock (if that’s even still going).

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 14:30

#30

Gav wrote:

Just seen a vid for Dave Grohl’s Probot with Lemmy, not bad really - but damn those warts are huge!

Posted on Mon, 2 February 2004 at 23:56

You’re viewing replies 1–30 of 44 by 24 people

·

Page: First | Previous | | Last

and become a member of the message boards. Sign in if you’re already a member.