Author Topic: The Darkness (Read 13631 times)

horsehead · « **on:** April 03, 2007, 01:40:31 PM »

did they take rock music forward, or make it a laughing stock...discuss

TwilightOdyssey · « **Reply #1 on:** April 03, 2007, 01:42:58 PM »

The who?! PDT_008

Oh, you mean that band that made all that flash-in-the-pan money by capitalizing on a dozen sounds, none of them original?

Personally, I love Permission To Land as a semi-guiltly pleasure. The follow up was terrible.

They didn't push rock music forward or back in my opinion. They just cashed in on a sound. It was nice hearing solos on the radio, again, however.

blue · « **Reply #2 on:** April 03, 2007, 01:49:41 PM »

they brought back good, fun, glamorous rock and were damn good at it! i wouldn't say they moved anything forward, they were hardly ground breaking. they were made a laughing stock by the small minded back-lash mentality press in this depressing little country who (for now) prefer the dull mediocrity of the kaiser chiefs etc. ( note to Alanis Morissette, kaiser's new song "everything is average nowadays". now THAT'S irony!)

they were a fantastic live band, excellent musicians, and the problem was that people took it all much too seriously. should've just enjoyed them for what they were.

noodleplugerine · « **Reply #3 on:** April 03, 2007, 02:18:24 PM »

I think they made people want more than power chords for the first time in 10 years.

Crazy_Joe · « **Reply #4 on:** April 03, 2007, 03:48:39 PM »

I can't stand them to be honest, the only thing i liked was some of the guitar solos i think.
Justin Hawkens or whatever his name is is an absolute tit.

TwilightOdyssey · « **Reply #5 on:** April 03, 2007, 03:49:38 PM »

Quote from: noodleplugerine

I think they made people want more than power chords for the first time in 10 years.

Really? Who would you define as 'people'? The radio-fed sheep that will eat whatever cr@p the Powers That Be tell them is 'good'? Or the Generation Z fall-out children of the post-grunge so-called nu-metal 'thrash' variety that haven't been exposed to good (or any) soloing through mainstream outlets?

Because I've ALWAYS wanted to hear more than power chords, and I think any guitar player reaching beynd the remedial would want the same.

ps - I'm not flaming you, noodle. Just tryin to dig a little deeper with this one, because we're talking about a band that, while they had mainstream success and some credibility, were ultimately just another passng fad.

pps - And, yes, I take this stuff very seriously. It's my life and my vocation!

TwilightOdyssey · « **Reply #6 on:** April 03, 2007, 03:50:00 PM »

Quote from: Crazy_Joe

I can't stand them to be honest, the only thing i liked was some of the guitar solos i think.
Justin Hawkens or whatever his name is is an absolute tit.

That's more like it. :)

noodleplugerine · « **Reply #7 on:** April 03, 2007, 04:04:59 PM »

I hated the entire style of the band, and their image, but they weren't typical.

When I say people, I mean people who aren't old enough or didn't care enough to remember the days when it was more than power chords.

And even those who can remember have been so used to bands getting more average by the day that they've forgotten what good guitar playing is. Darkness kinda woke up I guess.

That being said, the simplicity of Indie and emo music is still there, and that music is as popular as ever.

dave_mc · « **Reply #8 on:** April 03, 2007, 04:14:09 PM »

Quote from: TwilightOdyssey

The who?! PDT_008

Oh, you mean that band that made all that flash-in-the-pan money by capitalizing on a dozen sounds, none of them original?

Personally, I love Permission To Land as a semi-guiltly pleasure. The follow up was terrible.

They didn't push rock music forward or back in my opinion. They just cashed in on a sound. It was nice hearing solos on the radio, again, however.

+1, I definitely liked them. and solos/80's style rock music on the radio was awesome. I didn't actually hear the second album, but of the singles, is it just me (think that's the title) was excellent, though the other two singles were terrible.

Ratrod · « **Reply #9 on:** April 03, 2007, 04:14:54 PM »

At least they got some rock n' roll back on the airwaves. And there was some humor in there.

dave_mc · « **Reply #10 on:** April 03, 2007, 04:16:50 PM »

yeah, there seems to be very little "rock" in emo/alternative. there's no blues in there, no real "rocking". for want of a better expression.

matteo · « **Reply #11 on:** April 03, 2007, 05:45:25 PM »

i thought they came up with some cool riffs!!! stuck in a rut and black shuck had a vintage ac/dc vibe. and there was some good songs that made me chuckle and actually want to sing along when i heard them. so they werent groundbreaking but more rock than allot of more recent groups. nice to hear some solos and even some tapping! not bad players!

so there not going to be everybodys cup of tea but is there a band that evryone likes? i doubt it :D

Kilby · « **Reply #12 on:** April 03, 2007, 06:04:20 PM »

I liked them, it was nice to hear something actually being played

Showmanship, a decent stage show and toungues planted firmly in cheek.

Things are depressing enough in the world without the most of the performers who produce the following

Emo, dirge (they should get out more)
Nu metal, constant chug, sludge & rapping (enough said)
So called RnB / Urban desire to be a pimp, crack dealer or thug
Goth, poetic pretentions
European metal, who watched too many horror movies instead of going out and enjoying themselves
Cookie monster vocals
Lily Allen (the fact that she exists is enough to annoy me)

Apart from Lily Allen, there are some good bands & artists (whom I really enjoy) in each of the above catagories, but the majority of it is shite "Me Too" bands & artists who have simply jumped on the nearest bandwagon.

For those Francis Dunnery (remember him if not find some It Bites bootlegs) sums up some of what the public are fed by the music biz here http://www.francisdunnery.com/preview/media/articles.php#goldencastle

Music was never perfect up but until the mid 90s there was always something that was both entertaining and a little musical credibility.

No the Darkness didn't change things but they made me (and a lot of other people) smile and thats a good thing in these dark days.

Rob...

99_not_out · « **Reply #13 on:** April 03, 2007, 06:19:57 PM »

Yep, had some good riffs and (although they weren't the only band doing it at the time) got a classic rock sound back on the airwaves and the dance floor. The Radio seemed to love them and therefore classic rock, which was good ... although someone did say to me once "You like AC/DC? are they that band like the darkness?"

wragh!

Philly Q · « **Reply #14 on:** April 03, 2007, 06:25:22 PM »

I love the first album. Black Shuck and Love On The Rocks With No Ice are fantastic rock songs.

I think it's true that they were a sort of parody rock band, but I couldn't care less. It was tongue-in-cheek rather than a total pisstake. And I think they were "serious" about the music. It was great to see an old-fashioned British glam/hard rock actually selling some records and being recognised by the general public (OK, it was a flash-in-the-pan, but I'd rather see The Darkness on Top Of The Pops and in The Sun than some whining bore like James Blunt).

They said they were going to do an album a year like bands did in the 70s. When that didn't happen, I knew they'd blown it even before the second album came out. And then they gave in to all the clichés they initially made fun of - "difficult" second album (which was rubbish), "name" producer who messed up the sound, musical differences, line-up changes, substance abuse. Plus some eating disorders and hair loss, just for a change (at least the latter inspired the only good song on the album).

The less said about Justin's Eurovision challenge the better. :?

It was fun while it lasted.