Stranger than Fiction, Larger Than Life: the Finn Brothers song-by-song discussion thread

Every hit single probably has its own little saga, unless it's by some mega-star. Every non-hit probably has its own theories as to why it wasn't huge.

 

Instead of theories, perhaps only wild conjecture.

 

Another example of Capitol's disarray in the USA is the fact that several of us have said that different songs were being played on different markets. Some people heard "Never Be the Same" played a lot (in LA and Boulder/Denver.) But "Sister Madly" was definitely the rock hit in my neck of the woods. "Better Be Home Soon" was big on MTV and in some markets; I didn't have MTV and I remember it playing for only about two weeks.

Seems like they had different salesmen working on different songs, or something, or perhaps no salesmen at all and the radio stations were choosing themselves.

 

A fine song and an excellent way to finish the album. It doesn't particularly sound like a global hit to me and I'm not too surprised that it failed to match the success of Don't Dream it's Over. I know that Neil has said that that was down to it sounding too country, which may have an element of truth, but it may be just as much about it simply not being quite as commercial.

The end it/depend on it rhyme always struck me as a little awkward yet endearing at the same time.

4/5.

 

Here's a rather, um, different performance by Neil:

 

Better Be Home Soon...…..beautiful song, nice harmonies by Tim, great way to end the album.
5/5

 

Very interesting comment about the proximity of "Better Be Home Soon" in relation to "Into Temptation". In 1987/88 I was in the very short-lived U.S. fan club and with their second (and final) newsletter, they enclosed two Capitol press releases for "Temple of Low Men", one seemingly for record stores and one for media. The one which seems to be for record stores shows a different cover and a very different track sequence: it lists "Into Temptation" as the first track on side A, followed by "Better Be Home Soon" as the second track. It then goes: Love This Life - Mansion In The Slums - Sister Madly - Kill Eye on side A and Never Be The Same - I Feel Possessed - When You Come - Lowlands on side B.

The track listing in the other press release is also different, it is: I Feel Possessed - Sister Madly - Kill Eye - Into Temptation - When You Come - Never Be The Same - Better Be Home Soon - Mansion In The Slums - Lowlands - Love This Life.

I think it's interesting that even at what must have been a late stage, the album's sequencing was changed twice which might suggest that Capitol and/or the band were concerned about how the album should be presented.

 

This reminds me of Men At Work's situation with their first album "Business As Usual" which was released in 1981 in their native Australia and was very successful there. It was also very successful in New Zealand, Canada and parts of Europe, but initially their US record company rejected the album because "they couldn't hear a single". Men At Work's manager didn't accept this and would go to the US record company's office every day for weeks to try and convince them to release the album in the States. Eventually, they did so in 1982, and the first two singles, "Who Can It Be Now?" and "Down Under" both went to no 1 in the States, the latter song also went to no 1 in the UK and many other countries. The album itself spent 15 weeks at #1 on the Billboard chart, which was then a record for a debut album. Pretty good for an album where they couldn't hear a single!

Closer to home in this forum, in May 1991 when Capitol were preparing to release "Woodface", it says in Chris Bourke's book they weren't sure whether the first single should be "It's Only Natural" or "Chocolate Cake" but eventually went with "Chocolate Cake". The second single chosen was "Fall At Your Feet" (September 1991) and at least in Europe, they then chose "It's Only Natural" as the third single (January 1992, though the UK release was later). "Weather With You" was only the fourth single off the album (third in the UK I believe) and that song was top-10 in the UK and charted well all over Europe. With the benefit of hindsight it's surprising nobody seems to have even considered that as the first single in 1991!

 

Also “Sad Songs (Say so Much)” from Elton John’s Breaking Hearts.

 

Not much to add after a lot of great contributions by others earlier today. A very -very- good song, but not one I would include in my dream set list. It was a very modest hit in The Netherlands (no. 35, 3 weeks on the charts). While quite a few CH songs are still occasionaly played on the radio, I don't think I 've heard Better Be Home Soon on the radio in the last 20 years. When I first played "Temple of Low Men" in 1998 I did not recognise "BBHS".

As far as "BBHS"’s inclusion in live sets it is obvious is has been a staple throughout their whole career from late 1986 onwards.

4.0 / 5

 

I heard them play this song live several times in 1987 and remember feeling disappointed in how flat the record sounded when it finally came out the next year. It was missing that intangible spark that Don't Dream had. It sounded to me that they were sure this was the lead single when they recorded it and they were a bit careful and tried to make it too perfect, when their strength was always playing live with some rough edges, which was where the magic happened. 5/5 for the song. 4/5 for the recording.

 

I’m late, but I love “In The Lowlands”. 4.5/5.

BBHS is a Neil classic. When I saw them perform it live on the MTV awards I was sure it was going to be a big hit, and that CH would become an even more popular band here in the USA. Sometimes you’re right, sometimes you’re wrong...

5/5.

 

Very much a continuing feature of Neil's records, and maybe Tim's too.

 

From the (Australian) fan club's June 1988 newsletter, here are the band members' comments about "Better Be Home Soon":

Nick - "I always saw that as being a straight country type song. It could be a real country gem. It has a real R&B flavour to it."

Paul - "Neil wanted to release it at Xmas but it's the latest single. It's one of those classic sounding tracks. Mitchell only made two changes and the songs got some great vocals on it. Excellent."

Neil - "It's written from a woman's viewpoint. She's saying you haven't got much time buddy, you'd better show up soon or else you're in trouble."

 

Tom Petty's Full Moon Fever was like that too, apparently. The record company was hesitant to release it. Loaded with big hits.

 

Interesting. I bet it would have been a bigger hit if sung by the right female artist. Something cooler about a woman saying "you better be home soon" than a man.

 

Agreed. The whole subject of the song is just uncomfortable to me. It’s certainly not “Run for Your Life” territory, but it’s not an emotion I want to hear on repeat, regardless of the musical perfection behind it.

 

Now I get it, yesterday I couldn't figure out what the problem was because I've known for so long that it was from the woman's point of view that I can't remember not knowing that.

Yeah, the song could be taken as almost comically mysogynistic if it's a guy singing about a Girls Night Out or something.

Anyway, here's Kasey Chambers' version from She Will Have Her Way.

 

Our votes for "Better Be Home Soon":

1-0
2-0
3-0
4-2
5-12
Average: 4.7535

 

Today we can discuss Temple of Low Men as an album.

 

Yeah, that's cool. Kind of a modern Tammy Wynette vibe. There's nothing controlling about it when sung by a woman. Double standard maybe but that's the world we live in.

 

I think that I wouldn't take it as so controlling if it was from a guy, I'd be more likely to take it as someone who was just sensitive; a man really, truly finding out about an affair his wife was having and facing the truth about her, after a long time of "lies and deception." Actually writing about it this way makes me recognize the country-ness of the lyric even more.

But I get the other take now.

 

I never interpreted 'Better be home soon' as a literal 'better be home soon', but as a metaphor.

 

As I've said before, I consider Temple of Low Men to be a significantly better album than Crowded House in virtually every way. I find the lyrics better, the production and sound FAR better, the arrangements more creative and multi-layered, and the melodies at least as good if not even more sophisticated and compelling. The overt "eighties" production choices that occasionally rear their nasty heads on the debut are mostly absent on TOLM, as are the awkward stabs at R&B/funk. If I'm ranking all Crowded House albums, TOLM is probably tied for third place with TOE, or maybe just squeaks ahead of that one.

Ranking the album's tracks in order of my most to least favorite....with the caveat that I like every song and gave a 3.8 to the bottom ranked pair:

Into Temptation
When You Come
I Feel Possessed
Love This Life
Never Be The Same
Better Be Home Soon
In The Lowlands
Mansion In The Slums
Sister Madly
Kill Eye

Overall, I give this album a 4.8/5.

 

For discussing Temple of Low Men, I like to consider it within the context of the four original CH albums.

To me, the albums 'Crowded House' and 'Woodface' are the single-oriented albums, and more 'up'. 'Temple of Low Men' and 'Together Alone' are the more album-orientated albums, and have a darker tinge.

Personally I prefer the album albums of ToLM and TA. However, when ToLM came out, I was aware of CH's status of a Finn brother finally having 'made it' after a decade of trying. I'd seen the newspaper articles where Tim had turned 30 and was discussing whether it was still possible to 'make it' at that age.

For whatever reason there aren't so many simple straightforward songs on ToLM. It delivers its considerable quality in a more subtle manner compared to the debut. Even including BBHS which I still think should have been a worldwide hit, there are no songs as poppy as a 'Now We're Getting Somewhere'. 'Don't Dream It's Over', 'She Called Up', 'Weather With You'.

Even then, BBHS hit in Canada and in Australia/NZ. Not coincidentally, I think, the areas where Split Enz were big. But, not in the US and not in Europe, which are very important markets.

I have no real idea why the debut album hit in America but ToLM didn't. It does seem that someone at Capital took their eye off the ball. DDIO had some help in terms of using 'methods' to promote it to radio, but the song certainly took and nowadays is considered a classic that Fleetwood Mac fans around the world will recognise. So, why not the many other excellent songs that CH has released?

If Neil's aim was to preserve the fame he'd achieved with the debut album, then really they needed a different album. Neil had the experience of gaining some success and then it slipping away again. So, I think he'd be well placed to understand what he needed to do to keep things going, but he wrote and produced a very different album. And, as later interviews have suggested, he may have done so at least subconsciously or even consciously. With the cancelled tour dates for the first album, Neil seemed to burn out on fame pretty quickly.

If the record company and Neil had been wishing to repeat the success of the first album, then I think that Neil needed to write different songs. The production team was ready. Did someone not listen to the album and say 'I can't hear any hits here' and send the band back for some new songs. The debut album had a re-recording of 'I Walk Away'. They could have re-recorded 'Message to my Girl'. And I'm sure that Neil could have written more hits. But, he didn't and Capital did ... something suboptimal with the promotion of the album.

I feel that I've personally benefitted from the seeming left turn that this album represents, as I prefer the more album-orientated music within to the more commercial debut. But, it was a bit disappointing that the New Zealander who had made it on the world stage had their fame fade a bit. E.g. if they had re-recorded 'Message to my Girl', then I as a person who owned the original possibly could have felt a bit short-changed. But, if it had been the hit in the US that it could have been - and of course given the unpredictability of the charts it could have missed spectacularly - I would have heartily approved. If that was what Neil wanted and what Capital was able to provide - which in both cases it seems 'not'. And of course, I believe that Neil had he wanted to could have written some obvious chart fodder.

Returning to the album, to me it's one of those albums that works well as a single complete album. The songs, apart from the closer BBHS, don't really stand out. But, they are all solid songs that reward familiarity. As I mentioned when we started on the album, this was my wake up call for Neil being a really serious artist. I had expected the singles and chart-fodder. This is a more subtle and adult album than I expected. Looking back over Neil's career, I think it's an important album in terms of Neil working out what sort of artist he wants to be. Certainly there has been plenty of music consistent with ToLM over the decades. E.g. much of 'Time on Earth' with songs such as 'Say That Again' doing the more subtle adult thing, perhaps even better than ToLM. And of course something like 'Private Universe', perhaps my favourite CH song, being an adult, sophisticated, song.

In hindsight, I'm pleased that there was ToLM. But, I wonder what would have happened if Neil had written a chok-full-a-hits album instead. As said above, the end result wouldn't necessarily have been better. I'm pleased that we have ToLM and the other less commercial music from Neil, and the hits (including those to come) as well.

Overall: 4.5/5