Foo Fighters - Are We Sick of Them?

Well, I guess there are fans of the first album and Foo Fighters fans, then...

I wouldn't say "edgy" either - I like the type of recording the first album has, that's what I would call raw, or basic, but the songs themselves do have a soft side (I actually like it better when Dave sings quietly than when he screams his guts out). There was a pop side, definitely. But its strange, I don't know how to define it. It's as if in the early days, there was still something quite fresh about Grohl as a songwriter. Fresh, pop and as you said, somewhat naive.He was probably still disovering back then. For you they are drafts, and to me it's what he did best. And then (and you won't agree, I know), it's as if Dave had become this machine, this pro at churning out two types of songs (that, to me were not as good and fresh as before), in a formulaic way, predictable, and hardly ever out of his comfort zone sonically. As you said, from the second album onwards, they became the Foo Fighters we all know and, well...that's pretty much when I left. He never really reinvented himself as a songwriter IMO.
I remember Grohl himself having reservations about his songs on "One By One" in hindsight in some interview and it's (obviously) not an album I enjoyed much when I got to hear it. You were wrong earlier : i would actually listen if they did something not as safe sounding and came up with something radical (maybe not Britney covers though) if i heard or read about it. Somehow I don't think it will ever happen - at least not under the Foo Fighters moniker.

This song is very much like the pop songs on the first album but already hinting at the second, I think...



(Did I manage to be civil enough?).

 

The results speak for themselves. He reduced the material from the interviews to a few catch phrases, and incorporated them into Foo paint-by-numbers songs. It was nothing if not formulaic.

They turned into Nickelback sometime around the third album.

 

That would blow the minds of the Kurt fanbois that think they hate the Foo Fighters.

 

Each song was very different to the previous one. The style of each song was different, with guest musicians. But of course they are all Foo Fighters songs. I dont think anyone should be apologising for, or excusing that but similarly it is unfair to claim they are all the same paint-by-numbers. Lets take a step back here; Grohl has his methods for writing a song, but then so does every other songwriter. I am not sure if people would be levelling the same criticism towards every other successful songwriting artist of the last 40-50 years.

If he recorded a song with banjos it would still be the same "paint-by-numbers" process.

Who knows, maybe he has a sitar album in the works, to get you lot off his back. And I'm sure Cobain would love it. Maybe one track he could just pluck strings at random, call it 'free form' and please even more people.

 

Cobain was nowhere near as prolific, especially towards the end of his life.

 

Exactly! That's an excellent word to describe the collected output of Bon Jovi, as relentlessly bland and mediocre a rock band as you'll find...

 

If you wanna claim the Stones of the last 20 - or even 30 - years produced a string of "same old same old" albums, that's fine - but that doesn't hold for the entirety of their career.

I like the Foos a lot, but I can't deny there's a pretty clear formula behind the songs. I like the formula so I don't mind, but there's not been a lot of change in the band's output across their whole career...

 

OK, Ken Oatman, if that is your REAL name, be kind to Jimmy.

 

Whose good will?

 

Nirvana fans who miss 'their' band.

 

This is a depressing thread...

 

"Goodwill" could've gotten decent sales for one Foos album. That's it - if Dave put out a blah album that people bought out of loyalty to/affection for Nirvana, the "goodwill" would've evaporated quickly if people didn't like the music.

It's been nearly 25 years since Nirvana ceased to exist. Foos have been consistently successful their entire career - and have probably become more popular as time has passed.

No one buys Foo albums or pays $100 to see Foos play because they miss Nirvana.

If Foos sustained themselves on "goodwill" for Nirvana, Foos might be able to play 500-capacity clubs.

Instead, they sell out huge arenas and stadiums.

If you don't like Foos, that's fine, but claims that they're successful because people miss Nirvana don't fly...

 

Yeah whatever you say

 

You're right: Bon Jovi aren't banal and mediocre. They're really innovative and clever. Your argument won me over!!!

 

I would never say that. There was certainly a post-Nirvana curiosity when the first album came out and that contributed to it selling but FF became MUCH bigger, popular a few years down the line (second and third album onwards) especially in the US. Many people, especially younger people, don't even know Dave was in Nirvana once. So yeah, it's not a valid point at all. And it's not the same type of music either.

 

Well, the music isn't radically different - it's still guitar-based rock - but I agree the Foos are more "meat and potatoes" than Nirvana - less angsty and all that.

Comments such as "people buy Foos tickets/albums because they liked Nirvana" make little sense. Nirvana gave Dave a foot in the door but he earned his success.

I mean, Josh Brolin had an initial advantage as an actor because his dad was already famous/successful, but people don't continue to give him lead roles in big movies 35 years later because they liked James!

 

I don't think the Foo Fighters are only successful because Dave was in Nirvana.

On the other hand I seriously doubt there are many people that don't know he was in Nirvana.

 

At this point, I think the percentage of Foos' success attributable to Nirvana is zero. As stated, that connection got people curious about the band... in 1995. All the sales/success since then is because people like the band.

Interesting question. Foos might be seen as a "dad rock" band but they still get a pretty good crowd of teens-20s-30s at their shows, so they attract people with little to no knowledge of Nirvana when that band existed.

I honestly don't know how well-known Nirvana remains among people who weren't there in real time.

Maybe "Dave Grohl was in a band before Foo Fighters?" is the 21st century version of "Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?"

 

Young people know Nirvana. Kurt is an iconic figure at this point. Go search his name on tumblr. Endless pictures of him/them on there.

or read the comments on youtube videos like this one.





190,687,191 views on that btw

 

Yeah, but 190,687,190 of those were from Bowie fans who wound up at the video by accident!

 

Love or hate the Foo Fighters (I go back and forth) Dave Grohl's publicist is much, MUCH too good at his/her job.

 

Now, that would be true. 20 years ago when there was significantly less internet access I think there would have been lots of people who didnt know that until after they liked or bought the album (whichever one caught their attention). That was certainly the case with me, I heard a record and bought the album off that listen. It was also the case when I bought my first Garbage album and I didn't know Butch Vig was in the band.

 

Yeah yeah yeah we get it.

 

I was a Nirvana fan back in the day and when they ended and D Grohl reappeared with this awesome, tight album called FF which it transpired, he had written and recorded all himself, I was blown away.
The reason I liked that album, and the subsequent ones, is that the songs are often really, really good.

There are some classics mixed into their albums; you can't expect every album to be full of pure gold,
but what a job DG did of keeping elements of the Nirvana rock sound popular whilst merging it into
a popular, catchy vibe to appeal to a broader audience.

So let's move this thread into appreciation that he gave us a lot of really good music after the loss
of Kurt.
Let's call out the killer tracks, starting with 'This is a Call'

 

I remember I did like the first album. And the half of the second album. There, I contributed something positive.