Jump to content
 

2016 Summer Tour General Discussion


Hit me up Jans ex

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, daveyjones said:

i'm not arguing that point at all. you said, and i quote, "Let's face it, blink isn't a high brow art house band that needs to be playing in theaters." and my point is, that's a gross oversimplification of the kind of bands that play the theater circuit. i've seen tori amos in a theater. i've seen R.E.M. (one of the most famous and noted american rock bands of all time) in a theater. i've seen ke$ha in a theater. i've seen taylor swift in a theater. the list is endless, and these are not "high brow art house" bands.

but, just for the genre, green day is sticking to mostly theaters and smaller halls lately. because they actually give a shit..

:GD_tour_dates.jpg

I didn't realized they'd be in Detroit on the 24th. I checked the venue's facebook and the date has been postponed due to illness. I still may have a shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Knapton - should have met up! I went to the same show. 

So, a little review. I got there with a group of friends super early - like, 5 hours before the show started early. Which meant I pretty much went directly to the nearest bar, but was incredibly surprised with how many people were lining up early for the show. Tons of people there, and quite a few younger people. Not too many older people to start - and that was really cool to me. I'm sure AAR and ADTR were more the appeal, but cool to see. When blink played, it was really rad to just look around at a completely full stadium (granted the events center they had to relocate to because of being unable to sell out Vancouver's arena the past two tours limited them to a 7000 capacity 'stadium'. Felt a bit more of an intimate show though). 

AAR were fine. ADTR were alright too. I wasn't a fan of either of them, and there was a point I went into the middle of the pit to jump around and I honestly felt fucking creeped out because of how many younger kids there were. I think I might have pushed like, a 12 year old. Not really, but it creeped me out enough that I left immediately to go to the outside of the floor crowd. Ended up hanging out in the stands until blink came on.

I am pretty much fully agree with Knapton's review. While Mark played incredibly enthusiastically, and I honestly think Travis carried the entire show (there is a clear focus on him being a staple to the act now). Matt (while his singing was great) was pretty boring comparatively to the other blink shows with Tom. It really did not feel like a blink-182 show so much as a tour for Mark and Travis. And don't get me wrong - I'm really happy Mark and Travis are able to tour under the blink name and rightfully tour the band they are the face of (and have been for so long) - but it really did not feel the same to me. I fucking cringed so hard when Matt was singing Dysentary Gary - not even the nostalgia of seeing the giant flaming FUCK could get me stoked to hear Matt singing the blink songs no differently than what I would have expected. He fucked up Not Now royally hard (came in way too early during the first verse and after the bridge). The no-banter thing really bothered me as well. The only real time we heard Mark talk was moreorless Mark pointing out that Matt Skiba was in the band. "GIVE IT UP FOR MATT. HEY CHECK OUT MATTS GUITAR WORK!" And again, I fucking love that Skiba breathed new life into this band, but seeing them on tour is no where near comparable to the 2009 and 2011 tours. They felt like a shell of their former self. 

Merchandise was awful, didn't get anything. I actually won a California vinyl though from the street team because I got 14/15 questions right or something like that in their little interview contest. So that was neat. 

All in all, I didn't feel like the show was that big of a deal. I did enjoy Matt's singing, and again Mark and Travis played like they were having tons of fun - but it just never felt the same. I will say that the "hits" were actually done really well - and it was fucking rad to be singing along to the hits with a packed crowd. Matt definitely had those songs down pat and I felt the band played them well. I enjoyed hearing the hits surprisingly, but it was the rest of the setlist outside of the bigger hits that bummed me out (except for California songs - they sounded great as well!). But for me - the fun of the blink shows post-first break up was both the banter and the way they were able to fuck around with older songs  in both a nostalgic way but having a bit of a refreshing twist on them (different guitars, bridges, etc). Ah well. 

Oh, also DJ Spyder was actually pretty fun. I feel bad for any DJ who has to cater to a pop-punk general audience crowd at the first set of the night. For what he has to work with, he did an alright job. I mean - it wasn't anything to go to the front of the pit for but I appreciated it from a far in between beer-runs. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing I like from arena massive shows is that, if they are recorded, they just look stunning on the TV, hahaha. Other than that, I preffer smaller venues. I wasn't able to see Green Day in 2000 in Barcelona when they were touring Warning, on a small place, and I got to see them in 2004 in Badalona on the American Idiot tour on a huge place. I'm still regretting the whole thing, except for the fact that Jimmy Eat World were opening for them on the Futures tour. Hahaha.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bennett said:

i feel like it's just a status thing for mark. blink was always the joke band and they strived to be taken seriously. he can go hey look we sell out arenas! it's sad when you see a band as huge as green day playing a normal venue like webster hall in NYC on their upcoming tour, but blink will only do large arenas. 

Well, I don't agree. You have All Time Low filling arenas and they are still a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

another thing i wonder that we don't often discuss is if blink's increasingly short set length was influenced at all by tom's back issues. didn't he once say he has trouble standing and playing onstage for more than an hour or two? that, combined with mark's oft-repeated love of short sets and the "hits", we get 70 min blink shows. which, i agree, i think that's wrong. i believe i've defended the hits setlist and the 90 min runtime here before but if they're really only playing for a little over an hour that's BS lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw blink in a small club like three years ago. It's the big release of the new album so of course they would play an arena. Green day will go back to playing arenas after this wave of shows. It's common sense.

if you could sell out arena's then why wouldn't you ? Ideally they probably make their money on these big tours and then sprinkle in some club shows. Just last year they played at SOMA. Also getting tickets for a blink show in a club would make it almost impossible.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Mau5 ya i didnt get there till like right when ADTR was finishing. Im happy you said Matt screwed up in not now cause i even said to my friend after the bridge that i think he just fucked up big time, but all the lights and stuff were still in sync so i wasnt sure. Im pretty sure you could see Mark look at Travis and then Travis corrected it so it wasnt a big deal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, boxelder said:

another thing i wonder that we don't often discuss is if blink's increasingly short set length was influenced at all by tom's back issues. didn't he once say he has trouble standing and playing onstage for more than an hour or two? that, combined with mark's oft-repeated love of short sets and the "hits", we get 70 min blink shows. which, i agree, i think that's wrong. i believe i've defended the hits setlist and the 90 min runtime here before but if they're really only playing for a little over an hour that's BS lol.

For a couple of years after the reunion I believed they had to keep the set short because of Travis's injuries but nothing has changed even when he got better. Tom's problems with his back could have been another reason but, at the end of the day, it's just because they will always do things the way they're used to.  

70 minutes would be acceptable only if they still played fast like they did in 2003/2004 haha 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Octodad said:

if you could sell out arena's then why wouldn't you?

there are plenty of bands who are popular enough to book arenas but don't because they dislike the crowds and large setting. R.E.M. gave up arenas for the last decade and a half of their career, even though they still sold out larger-than-arena festival venues. and as i pointed out earlier, nirvana despite being the most popular band on the planet, never toured arenas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Olidamus said:

The Beatles could sell out baseball stadiums and just quit playing live altogether, they said the entire thing was a "freak show". Plus they said you don't grow musically when you tour, which is kind of true.

They also couldn't play live because they couldn't hear their instruments over the screaming of young girls and old PA systems so it made it difficult to play in time. It wasn't entirely their personal choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Chad Has Herpes said:

Kinda glad I didn't get tickets to the Van show. $140~ (after taxes/fees) for 70 mins of playtime is highway robbery. Also playing an hour outside of Vancouver would've been a bitch to get to the show and still drink. Sucks they played the same night Drake was in town. 

Wasnt drake the night before? Was so nice having it in abby. Nice 15 minute drive for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Olidamus said:

The Beatles could sell out baseball stadiums and just quit playing live altogether, they said the entire thing was a "freak show". Plus they said you don't grow musically when you tour, which is kind of true.

And now Paul only plays huge shows. Blink plays small shows when they want to do something for the fans (which is awesome) They also do this for a living so they do big arena tours for $$. I can't fault them for that. 

Also like I said the smaller then venue, the less of a chance you have to see them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, boxelder said:

mark just made a tweet about being on tour for so long. they really have though. counting the first leg and beginning with the kroq show in may, they will have played 71 shows and have been on the road, nearly nonstop, for five months

Mark is so out of shape.... he should stop crying and look up to bands like Flogging Molly, for example. They spend, literally, years on tour non stop, and kicking tons of arses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...