B-Roads

John_d · Post by **John_d** » 17 Nov 2016, 12:30

I have just asked the same question on the Gorillaz Phase 4 thread - what do we think Eleven got wrong in promoting The Magic Whip? I felt the band themselves didn't do very well on either of their big TV appearances in the UK - TFI Friday and Graham Norton. Lonesome Street was a poor choice for a single. But these are all things you could pin on Blur themselves, not Eleven. And somebody must have been doing something right to get a big crowd into Madison Square Gardens. (I am no fan of Eleven mind you - they seem bizarrely disconnected from the fan base.)

aldamasta · Post by **aldamasta** » 17 Nov 2016, 21:40

I think packing MSG had more to do with blur not having played any proper (other than the Brooklyn show in May) gigs in the US since 2003. The American blur fans just really came out in full force for the gig, not sure it had anything to do with Eleven IMO.

stephen · Post by **stephen** » 21 Nov 2016, 12:11

John_d wrote:I have just asked the same question on the Gorillaz Phase 4 thread - what do we think Eleven got wrong in promoting The Magic Whip? I felt the band themselves didn't do very well on either of their big TV appearances in the UK - TFI Friday and Graham Norton. Lonesome Street was a poor choice for a single. But these are all things you could pin on Blur themselves, not Eleven. And somebody must have been doing something right to get a big crowd into Madison Square Gardens. (I am no fan of Eleven mind you - they seem bizarrely disconnected from the fan base.)

I get the impression that the band never wanted to go heavy on promoting the album. They were happy they made a new album and they were happy with the songs and if people went out and bought it then great and of course they never appear to be too keen on the idea of spending too much time on music videos.

Would be interesting to hear your thoughts on what you expected from Eleven.

101reykjavik · Post by **101reykjavik** » 21 Nov 2016, 13:03

I agree. The whole tenor of the album's creation, and thereafter, promotion was ad hoc and spontaneous. Plus, at this stage in their career Blur are never going to want the mass promo junket / tour / merry-go-round that bands are prepared to do (or obliged to do) when they are half that age. It was low key on purpose in my opinion. I think we have to accept that - this isn't the '90s any more.

Mallard No. 22 · Post by **Mallard No. 22** » 23 Nov 2016, 07:43

Yes, I agree with the points made by aldamasta, stephen and 101reykjavik.

Blur were happy to make a new album, to connect with their dedicated fans.

Pavlich · Post by **Pavlich** » 23 Nov 2016, 10:00

I think that is a little idealistic and making excuses for the band. They are still on a major label and it wasn't as though the record was put out the same day as it was announced, for free. I'm sure Parlaphone wanted to squeeze what it could from what ended up being a number one album.

I was in the UK as the album was released, and I remember seeing posters for it in Edinburgh (in what was a mild, but memorable evening there). There were the slew of singles with videos, the Hyde Park show, and plenty of festival appearances. Damon has always been a bloke who loves attention and I have no doubt he wanted it back on him and Blur and into his bank account.

Maybe I'm a cynic but you know, it was out there.

I still think the announcement was so 90s that it was almost creative and inventive. The rest wasn't very teasey or anything, but it was by no means butchered or anything.

Mallard No. 22 · Post by **Mallard No. 22** » 30 Nov 2016, 07:58

I suppose you shouldn't put all your eggs in one basket. Therefore the Blur members now have careers parallel to Blur.

Life is a series of ongoing projects which they are involved in. They keep Blur current and return to it periodically. Blur and its members have not yet become a parody, trading on past glories.

TracyJosh · Post by **TracyJosh** » 13 Dec 2016, 15:12

If Damon was being so protective of Graham to the point he was telling journalists not to report his behavior at gigs on that tour, then why on earth did they even allow cameras to film? Surely the footage isn't THAT damning. Anyway, once again I'm a bit disappointed that those who have seen it can't understand and show a bit more empathy towards those of us who are obviously incredibly curious to see it. And the level of paranoia over it leaking is nuts, there are about 800 people in the world who care about it's existence, I'm sure everyone who wants to see it could be trusted not to share it on Youtube, and even if it did make it to Youtube, it would just get shut down straight away. In any such case, any mass leaking of it would only have a reach of a couple thousand people. I'm a blur fanatic and only found out about it's existence a matter of months ago. Might call my next album B-Roads just to freak out EMI :p

Mallard No. 22 · Post by **Mallard No. 22** » 14 Dec 2016, 08:36

TracyJosh wrote:If Damon was being so protective of Graham to the point he was telling journalists not to report his behavior at gigs on that tour, then why on earth did they even allow cameras to film?

The filming may have been arranged some time in advance. In the meantime Graham's situation may have deteriorated.

saltandgin · Post by **saltandgin** » 18 Dec 2016, 22:41

I think it's healthy not to release everything, just because some fans demand it. In the last few years, the entitlement culture has really stepped up a gear. We live in a society where you can get almost anything you want (music and video wise) for free, in literally minuets (if not seconds). I know my patience and attention span has been damaged by instant gratification. Just the other day, I was pounding my desk in frustration because my free HD movie was streaming quite quickly enough

Besides, I like the idea of music and videos out there that we haven't owned yet, because the idea that we have seen and heard everything blur have ever created, feels a little depressing.

anothermario · Post by **anothermario** » 19 Dec 2016, 01:06

saltandgin wrote: Besides, I like the idea of music and videos out there that we haven't owned yet, because the idea that we have seen and heard everything blur have ever created, feels a little depressing.

agreed

Mallard No. 22 · Post by **Mallard No. 22** » 20 Dec 2016, 04:55

Yes, good points saltandgin. We have come a long way from scouring second-hand record stalls.

TracyJosh · Post by **TracyJosh** » 20 Dec 2016, 15:35

How have a number of people on here seen it though? I think it's very unfair that there is a hierarchy that can be trusted to see it, but the rest of us(which doesn't equate to a particularly large chunk of the human race what so ever) have to settle with the scraps and read a description in a book. You can't just brush it off and say that everyone who wants to see it that hasn't would be disappointed, every individual would value different aspects of the footage.

TracyJosh · Post by **TracyJosh** » 23 Dec 2016, 21:45

Ps sorry for sounding gripey.. Didn't intend for my comment to come across so brash. Just a frustrated Blur obsessive

.

Sledge Hammer · Post by **Sledge Hammer** » 24 Dec 2016, 13:06

Correct though, why should some on here be allowed to watch it and indeed did watch it (why did they not refuse?), but then fiercely condemn us who would like to see it...

B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads

Re: B-Roads