99 Revolutions Tour - Tour Identity Crisis and NY Times Dead-On Review

[Abbey.]

This review of the Barclays Center show was posted in the tour thread for that show, but I think it is dead-on and completely accurate in describing whats going on with the 99-Revolutions Tour.

Im impressed that the NY Times reviewer, Nate Chinen, is familiar enough with Green Day and their tour, to know that this 99-Revolutions tour is having an identity crisis. He writes "...there was a larger hollowness to the show, with its jukebox set list and routinized interaction. Every band has a right to shrug off its past pretensions, but at the moment Green Day is trying, and failing, to have it both ways."

NY Times piece:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/09/arts/music/green-day-at-barclays-center.html?smid=tw-nytimesarts&seid=auto&_r=0

I get that the audience wants a show of Green Day greatest hits. I was only at the Fairfax, Virginia show. They played X-Kid to a generally unethusiastic audience, then followed that up with Minority, in which the audience EXPLODED when hearing the first few bars. I couldnt help but be a tad bit disappointed, yet understanding, that it was going to be all about the "greatest hits."

So, thought Id start a thread to talk about the tour, in general, and what us GDCers are thinking about it.

[Clayish]

The setlist is definitely a bit lame at this point for sure. I was really expecting a brand new setlist, but it looks like we'll continue to see this setlist, playing the big hits with about 4 new songs and 3 or 4 surprises. Kind of lame.

[BullwinkleCheech]

he is right in some sort of way. the interaction is getting a bit routinized..

[Guest]

So the mainstream press has finally started agreeing with that the fans have been saying for years? About time.

[GreenRanger]

I get the point of the article and can understand where he's coming from, but I kind of wish he would have included thoughts on what could have made it better....unless he did and I just didn't catch on to it. But it makes sense that this tour would have something of an identity crisis, since the trilogy had a lot of songs about partying and being kind of wild, and now they're probably kind of awkward since they would have set the tone for the tour...which now has to be different due to the circumstances.

[PanicAttack!]

Tour identity crisis? What an accurate way to describe what I had difficulty describing. They're caught between the public flop of the trilogy and their own ambitions with it, and between fans demand to hear new and rare stuff, and others demand to hear their greatest hits.

[Blond-O-Sonic Shimmer Trap]

It's fine for their new fans who have never seen them before, but I don't really want to spend that amount of money to go and see them just play predominantly the same songs I've seen 3 times with 3 or 4 new songs in, especially when one of them is Stop When The Red Lights Flash. Some of the new stuff is up there with their best but I wouldn't go just to hear X-Kid and Brutal Love even though they are my favourite trilogy songs. And even with the back catalogue they've got, they could start playing a song they've never played live like Panic Song and still make it a staple, but they still play it too safe.

There was such promise this time a year ago when they had played a bunch of club shows and felt like they could drop stale oldies and the worst 21st Century Breakdown material, but now I am kinda worried they will never reach for that final pantheon of rock legend and just play whatever the hell they feel like for 2 and a half hours, like Springsteen or Pearl Jam.

[WhiteTim]

Like I said earlier how many big time band plays shows at big arenas and just plays album tracks and ignoring the songs they are known for? I'll wait for the answer...

Do I wish for songs like Panic Song Babs Uvula Who 16 Dirty Rotten Bastard Misery or the other 200 songs they have were played of course but I'd say at least half if not more than half of the people who goes to shows are casual fans who couldn't name those tracks

And of course this tour could just be Billie adjusting to sober life and just wanna focus on the tracks he knows

[Abbey.]

For anyone interested, the NY Times reviewer is on twitter @natechinen if they would like to share their 140 character or less thoughts with him about his review. See his response to me below, as he says he was wondering how Green Day Nation would respond:

Nate Chinen ‏@natechinen

@xoFyebbA glad to hear from you, Abbey. Was wondering how it'd go down w/ Green Day Nation.

[TimmyChunks]

Like I said earlier how many big time band plays shows at big arenas and just plays album tracks and ignoring the songs they are known for? I'll wait for the answer...

Do I wish for songs like Panic Song Babs Uvula Who 16 Dirty Rotten Bastard Misery or the other 200 songs they have were played of course but I'd say at least half if not more than half of the people who goes to shows are casual fans who couldn't name those tracks

And of course this tour could just be Billie adjusting to sober life and just wanna focus on the tracks he knows

Someone else mentioned it already, but the list is limited to Pearl Jam, Springsteen, and Phish. Everyone else plays fixed setlists. Would it be great if Green Day took a cue from the three bands I mentioned and changed up the setlist considerably from night to night? Of course. However, I don't think we should expect them to do so. It's never been their cup of tea and probably never will be. I'll just take what they give me and try to enjoy it.

Also, it's important to note that you end up with a lot of variability at PJ, Springsteen, and Phish concerts due to the changing setlists- sometimes they're mindblowingly good, and other times the setlists flat out don't work and it's a lackluster show. I've been to PJ and Phish shows that were just ok because the setlist wasn't all that exciting. I think the consistency of the Green Day setlist can sometimes be a blessing, even if it never is particularly surprising or exciting.

[Guest]

I'm okay with them playing big hits but considering they've removed one of their biggest, Good Riddance [or so I was told], I think that's a dick move. I'd love to hear more of the Trilogy but I understand keeping more of the big hits. I see it as more of a "we're back!" tour than the promotional tour.

[WhiteTim]

Someone else mentioned it already, but the list is limited to Pearl Jam, Springsteen, and Phish. Everyone else plays fixed setlists. Would it be great if Green Day took a cue from the three bands I mentioned and changed up the setlist considerably from night to night? Of course. However, I don't think we should expect them to do so. It's never been their cup of tea and probably never will be. I'll just take what they give me and try to enjoy it.

Also, it's important to note that you end up with a lot of variability at PJ, Springsteen, and Phish concerts due to the changing setlists- sometimes they're mindblowingly good, and other times the setlists flat out don't work and it's a lackluster show. I've been to PJ and Phish shows that were just ok because the setlist wasn't all that exciting. I think the consistency of the Green Day setlist can sometimes be a blessing, even if it never is particularly surprising or exciting.

Springsteen doesnt really change his set list i saw him 2 years ago at 2 shows pretty much was the same show cept for 3-4 tracks

Pearl Jam have a point bit on the other hand they also have been the opposite of what Green Day and the other major bands has done

Phish are NOWHERE near the level as Green Day Pearl Jam or Springsteen (who is beyond GD and PJ's status)

I wish GD would do like they do with the secret shows/small clubs with the arena shows but they choose not to

[DeadbeatCastaway]

While I'm not sure what's attributing to them not playing the newer stuff on this tour, I can possibly see a few reasonings behind it. Perhaps, WhiteTim is right and this is Billie adjusting to sober life on tour, and that's stressful enough without having to worry about audience reaction of newer stuff--plus a lot of the newer stuff may have bigger emotional triggers to Billie. In Cuatro audience reaction was really weird to the newer songs, albiet, people hadn't heard the trilogy yet, but the article made a huge point, during the shows the guys can play a few new songs, and there's a little bit of positive reaction for us fans that follow the band a bit more closely, but if they play older stuff? The audience explodes when older stuff is played, so maybe audience reaction, as well as the weird reaction of all the albums coming out with little to no advertising, and kind of flopping while Billie was in rehab just made the band second guess the trilogy? As shown in Cuatro the guys as SO much enthusiasm for the trilogy and worked really hard to make this thing amazing, but for now I think for now they're playing it safe, I hope it's not too ambitions to say that later in the tour (or if/when there's a second leg) they'll be more comfortable bringing out newer stuff, because right now the band is not giving the trilogy the justice it deserves.

I'm okay with them playing big hits but considering they've removed one of their biggest, Good Riddance [or so I was told], I think that's a dick move. I'd love to hear more of the Trilogy but I understand keeping more of the big hits. I see it as more of a "we're back!" tour than the promotional tour.

I'm hoping your right with this being a 'we're back!' tour with the Billie adjusting to being sober and the guys getting back out there. I'm keeping a hopeful mind about an actual promotional tour coming around a second leg, but right now I'm not even sure how likely that is to happen.

[Hermione]

Why did Green Day mostly stick to playing the hits and a set setlist on the 21st Century Breakdown Tour? Why did they mostly stick to playing the hits and a set setlist on the American Idiot Tour? Why did they mostly stick to playing the hits and a set setlist on the Pop Disaster Tour? Etc etc etc. Because that's what Green Day do! That's what they've always done, added only a few new songs and stuck to playing the classics and doing all the little traditions they've developed over the years with them to ensure a well put together show with a mix of old an new and plenty of songs to get the whole crowd going and singing along.

Seriously, they've never been a band who drastically changed their setlists between tours or shows. Why are people suddenly acting like this is a new thing and moaning on and on about it? Why was anyone expecting them to change the way they've approached playing shows for the last 20 years? Why is anyone surprised that they're carrying on doing something the same way they've always done it? I don't get it.

[Guest]

From the set lists I've seen, they've added very few new songs. I understand that they do stick to what they know on the setlist front but in the AI tour, they added way more new songs than they have this time around. & that was only one album worth of songs to choose from, now it's 3. I just woulda thought they'd incorporate more new songs.

[jojo2323]

I've been thinking of this small US tour as sort of a "test tour" where they are easing their way back and playing what the crowd knows and loves and not taking to much of a risk. They went 6 months without playing any shows I didn't think they would come back and play 20 new songs.

With that said, hopefully when they get to Europe they will go into trilogy mode and start cranking out new songs then come back and get the rest of the US.

[Guest]

They could play a 2 and a half hour show with just Trilogy material, yet they're barely playing 20 minutes worth of stuff. Some renditions of Shout go on longer than that, for fuck sake.

[TimmyChunks]

Springsteen doesnt really change his set list i saw him 2 years ago at 2 shows pretty much was the same show cept for 3-4 tracks

Pearl Jam have a point bit on the other hand they also have been the opposite of what Green Day and the other major bands has done

Phish are NOWHERE near the level as Green Day Pearl Jam or Springsteen (who is beyond GD and PJ's status)

I wish GD would do like they do with the secret shows/small clubs with the arena shows but they choose not to

Phish nowhere near the level of Green Day? In what way? By album sales, maybe, but as a live touring act, let me assure you...they have a more loyal fanbase and sell out venues larger and quicker than Green Day. And they're damn good live. Don't get me wrong- Green Day is my all time favorite band, and I'm more of a casual Phish fan. But from a touring perspective, Phish is definitely more successful in selling tickets. And don't point to BIAB- Phish has been playing festivals where they've been hosting 100,000 fans for three days at a time for years. Some of those festivals made BIAB look like a club show in size.

[Guest]

Yeah, Phish, they're huge. This totally isn't only the second time I've ever heard of them, the first time being a Cracked article...

[Red Lights Flash]

Very interesting article.

Here's my opinion on this. I actually like them playing the greatest hits, mixed with a few fan-favorites. When they play songs that nobody knows, you immediately feel that in the crowd. I remember seeing Before the Lobotomy live, and it was kind of awkward how only a few people sang the line 'whiskey shots and cheap cigarettes' when they stopped for that.

Obviously that's fine when it's just a few songs. It needs to be done, for the big fans like us. But here's the problem: every trilogy song is relatively unknown. It's sad because I think that they're good songs, but it's true. And it doesn't help that they aren't even playing the singles (Kill the DJ and Stray Heart).

Another problem is that the typical stage antics haven't changed in years (King for a Day, Highway to Hell before Brain Stew, ...). Last time I saw a show, I heard people say that they're disappointed that these things aren't as spontaneous as they thought, since they did the exact same things the previous time.

But at the end of the day, even though there's room for some criticism, they're still one of the best live bands out there. And when you're actually there, you don't care about the setlist. It's just too fucking awesome.

[Hermione]

From the set lists I've seen, they've added very few new songs. I understand that they do stick to what they know on the setlist front but in the AI tour, they added way more new songs than they have this time around. & that was only one album worth of songs to choose from, now it's 3. I just woulda thought they'd incorporate more new songs.

I agree that they added a lot of AI songs on the AI tour, but I'd say that was a exception to the rule. With all their albums before and since they've been conservative about the amount and variation of new songs played. Even if you look at Dookie it was mostly the same songs each time.

It would be nice to see more new songs, but I get the feeling they're more concerned about the atmosphere at the show and making sure everyone has a good time (not just fans who've seen them loads of times and want rare songs). Maybe slightly too concerned.....but still they've always been that way so it's still not a surprise.

[WhiteTim]

Phish nowhere near the level of Green Day? In what way? By album sales, maybe, but as a live touring act, let me assure you...they have a more loyal fanbase and sell out venues larger and quicker than Green Day. And they're damn good live. Don't get me wrong- Green Day is my all time favorite band, and I'm more of a casual Phish fan. But from a touring perspective, Phish is definitely more successful in selling tickets. And don't point to BIAB- Phish has been playing festivals where they've been hosting 100,000 fans for three days at a time for years. Some of those festivals made BIAB look like a club show in size.

I know exactly who Phish are but just cause a band has a strong touring movement doesn't make them a huge band...

[Guest]

Just a quickie, I've never heard of 'Phish'.

[stories and songs]

I have such mixed feelings about this. Because, to my mind - while yes, we all want to hear new songs, it is important that the band caters to everyone at the show, young and old, new fan or old fan. And they do a great job of that. Playing 6 or 7 songs from the trilogy is quite a lot - not in comparison to how many trilogy songs there are, of course, but that is about how many they played off of AI and 21CB during those tours. Same thing. This tour is no different from other tours in that respect. Personally, I absolutely love hearing older songs. You can just feel the entire stadium overflowing with energy, and it is fantastic. While I love the trilogy songs live, the fact remains that not as many people know the music. I would go crazy over more trilogy songs, but the rest of the audience may not. A huge part of the show is the energy you feel from the crowd. It affects both other audience members and the performers, so it is a big deal if a large portion of the audience isn't as familiar with what you're singing.

And you know - when I went to Philly, I had a great time. They were spot on and it was an amazing night. That said, I'm not going to lie and say I didn't think something was amiss. Something most definitely was. And I will probably never know what it was that made me feel that way. Maybe I'm still too worried and wrapped up in the past few months in Green Day world (because I DO think they got back out on the road very fast). Maybe I was just having an off night, I don't know. It was a WONDERFUL show and Billie sounded amazing and the whole band seemed happy. But usually when I leave Green Day shows, I feel more strongly connected than ever to them. The morning after I woke up from Philly, I felt... weird. Nothing was wrong with the show. But it wasn't completely right, either. I don't know what I wanted from them, and I do feel like it is probably just a "me" thing. But thought I'd share. They're the best live band I will probably ever see, don't get me wrong.

I think the interview nailed the "identity crisis" bit perfectly, except I don't think it is a tour identity crisis. It is bigger than that. I think it is a slight band identity crisis we're dealing with, which is perhaps leading to a fan identity crisis as well. The band made the trilogy to let loose and change their image from the political punk rockers they had been known as for a while. Now they've been forced to reevaluate their image again, because of everything that happened with Billie. They're trying to find their footing and figure out their next move while performing in front of thousands of people every other night. We're all on the ride together as we figure out what that next move will be.

[WhiteTim]

Just a quickie, I've never heard of 'Phish'.

Jam band their shows can go for 8 hours with only 3 songs played think along the line of Grateful Dead but with half the talent...