Gotta love your style J.D.! So true. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by J.D. DIAMOND from Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:06:31 PM)
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Yes,Brian is a mother fucking "DORK" on crack. Its not just you and I that notice this guido,its 50 other people that read this shit but don't post a comment about it,so basically the entire forum knows his contradictions. Its ok for Maiden to put out a watered down progressive album but its not ok for Priest to do Nostradamus?
Its ok for Bruce to wear Beastie Boy looking cloths on stage for Maiden but its not ok for Rob to wear a studded black leather coat that looks fucking awsome? Pssssft,please this guy is a fucking JOKE.
guidogodoy wrote:
HAAAA! So YOU noticed that little "contradiction" too, eh? Yet another brilliant comment.
Bwian = douche.
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Oh I see...Brian says "its about the music anyway,thats the most important thing"....yet you've mentioned hundreads of times about how Rob needs to quit wearing the long-capes? Psssft,please can somebody say "contradiction"?? Bruce looks like a fucking "DORK".
Brian_Evans wrote:
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
[spapad] Saturday, February 19, 2011 4:12:48 PM
I don't think think the atmosphere of the band/managers was the same back then. So, that made things difficult and would have shown in any work around that time. It only takes one person who's heart is not in it to sink a project. That is water under the bridge now, but guessing on it is also probably folly. What if, never works. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:59:24 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Come on, Priest were on a career high after Painkiller, their best and most consistant album since Stained Class. It it was thrown away for whatever reasons. The Resurrection album didn't come out until 2000 so thats 9 years wasted that Priest could have been producing material, instead Rob was keeping it real with his homeboys in Fight and Priest were playing at being a Priest covers band. I was only using AC/DC as an example because they went on a hiatus during the time grunge was in, they kept a lower profile which served them well when they did come out with something. Priest could easily have stayed together and Rob could have done his own thing as well. Like what's happening now. I call that period a waste because we could have had 2 or 3 quality Priest albums over that 9 or 10 year period. Ressurection and Crucible are good but they are nowhere near Priest at their peak.
spapad wrote:
It was not a waste. Halford created many good songs. What would have happened if he stayed then............. would not have been what we wanted. He had to return of his own volition, or Priest would have suffered from disintrest. That would have been the nail in the coffin more than Rob leaving.
[jimmyjames] Saturday, February 19, 2011 4:03:34 PM
Yep, AC/DC put on a brilliant show in NZ. They were great. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Saturday, February 19, 2011 2:19:14 AM)
Becks wrote:
I thoroughly enjoyed AC/DC when I saw them in NZ last year, I had a great time. Apart from getting squashed against the railing of our area, that wasn't fun lol.
guidogodoy wrote:
Damn straight. One of the absolute WORST concerts I have seen. "Thunderstruck," my ass. Sounded like Brian was gargling marbles the whole show and seeing a bald man in short pants was really odd...even for the 90s.
Head banger wrote:
and boring as listening to country music
jimmyjames wrote:
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have.
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[jimmyjames] Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:59:24 PM
Come on, Priest were on a career high after Painkiller, their best and most consistant album since Stained Class. It it was thrown away for whatever reasons. The Resurrection album didn't come out until 2000 so thats 9 years wasted that Priest could have been producing material, instead Rob was keeping it real with his homeboys in Fight and Priest were playing at being a Priest covers band. I was only using AC/DC as an example because they went on a hiatus during the time grunge was in, they kept a lower profile which served them well when they did come out with something. Priest could easily have stayed together and Rob could have done his own thing as well. Like what's happening now. I call that period a waste because we could have had 2 or 3 quality Priest albums over that 9 or 10 year period. Ressurection and Crucible are good but they are nowhere near Priest at their peak.
It was not a waste. Halford created many good songs. What would have happened if he stayed then............. would not have been what we wanted. He had to return of his own volition, or Priest would have suffered from disintrest. That would have been the nail in the coffin more than Rob leaving.
[J.D. DIAMOND] Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:32:32 PM
Bruce was even "more athletic" (you know...all over the place) on stage 25 years ago and here is a picture of what he was wearing while he was "all over the place" and don't even try and feed us a bullshit story of how Bruce is too old to wear leather and still move around on stage,so I'll cut that one out of your defense right now. Bruce spoanks of poor aesthetics nowadays and looks like a fucking wanker! Saxon is up 10 to 2 over Maiden in your showdown thread haha!
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
Edited at: Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:33:53 PM
[J.D. DIAMOND] Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:06:31 PM
Yes,Brian is a mother fucking "DORK" on crack. Its not just you and I that notice this guido,its 50 other people that read this shit but don't post a comment about it,so basically the entire forum knows his contradictions. Its ok for Maiden to put out a watered down progressive album but its not ok for Priest to do Nostradamus?
Its ok for Bruce to wear Beastie Boy looking cloths on stage for Maiden but its not ok for Rob to wear a studded black leather coat that looks fucking awsome? Pssssft,please this guy is a fucking JOKE. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:02:14 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
HAAAA! So YOU noticed that little "contradiction" too, eh? Yet another brilliant comment.
Bwian = douche.
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Oh I see...Brian says "its about the music anyway,thats the most important thing"....yet you've mentioned hundreads of times about how Rob needs to quit wearing the long-capes? Psssft,please can somebody say "contradiction"?? Bruce looks like a fucking "DORK".
Brian_Evans wrote:
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
[guidogodoy] Saturday, February 19, 2011 3:02:14 PM
HAAAA! So YOU noticed that little "contradiction" too, eh? Yet another brilliant comment.
Oh I see...Brian says "its about the music anyway,thats the most important thing"....yet you've mentioned hundreads of times about how Rob needs to quit wearing the long-capes? Psssft,please can somebody say "contradiction"?? Bruce looks like a fucking "DORK".
Brian_Evans wrote:
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
[J.D. DIAMOND] Saturday, February 19, 2011 2:58:10 PM
Oh I see...Brian says "its about the music anyway,thats the most important thing"....yet you've mentioned hundreads of times about how Rob needs to quit wearing the long-capes? Psssft,please can somebody say "contradiction"?? Bruce looks like a fucking "DORK". [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Brian_Evans from Saturday, February 19, 2011 9:50:20 AM)
Brian_Evans wrote:
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
[Head banger] Saturday, February 19, 2011 1:17:24 PM
and I am sure anus is great and all but I went to see a 4 member band, and he spent more solo time than the band spent playing songs. a whole arena full of people sitting down.
PS, noticed my typo above in the name, and liked it that way [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, February 18, 2011 11:25:33 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
Damn straight. One of the absolute WORST concerts I have seen. "Thunderstruck," my ass. Sounded like Brian was gargling marbles the whole show and seeing a bald man in short pants was really odd...even for the 90s.
Head banger wrote:
and boring as listening to country music
jimmyjames wrote:
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have.
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[Brian_Evans] Saturday, February 19, 2011 9:50:20 AM
Bruce is very athletic (all over the place)on stage so I'm sure he wears things that are comfortable and allows him to do that. It's about music anyway, thats the most important thing and they deliver.
[J.D. DIAMOND] Saturday, February 19, 2011 2:57:43 AM
The "cape" looks very metal compared to this shit rap orienated look Bruce has going on with the Beastie Boy's beenie hat and baggy jungle cloths with sneakers? Bullshit,Bruce spanks of poor aesthetics big time,imagine if Halford wore his Fight cloths in Priest? It would spank of shit metal aesthetics,so stop whining about his cape,you should be whining at Bruce...you know,that lead vocalist for the Beastie Boys. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Brian_Evans from Friday, February 18, 2011 10:57:15 PM)
Brian_Evans wrote:
Cool show! Halford needs to drop the cape though.
jimmyjames wrote:
Yep, we all agree that it was waste. Here's some footage of the Priest show I was at in Canada, this guy actually recorded and edited it pretty well, there's snippets of quite a few songs. There's actually a second part to this as well.
Brian_Evans wrote:
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion.
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Becks] Saturday, February 19, 2011 2:19:14 AM
I thoroughly enjoyed AC/DC when I saw them in NZ last year, I had a great time. Apart from getting squashed against the railing of our area, that wasn't fun lol. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, February 18, 2011 11:25:33 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
Damn straight. One of the absolute WORST concerts I have seen. "Thunderstruck," my ass. Sounded like Brian was gargling marbles the whole show and seeing a bald man in short pants was really odd...even for the 90s.
Head banger wrote:
and boring as listening to country music
jimmyjames wrote:
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have.
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[guidogodoy] Friday, February 18, 2011 11:25:33 PM
Damn straight. One of the absolute WORST concerts I have seen. "Thunderstruck," my ass. Sounded like Brian was gargling marbles the whole show and seeing a bald man in short pants was really odd...even for the 90s. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Head banger from Friday, February 18, 2011 11:20:11 PM)
Head banger wrote:
and boring as listening to country music
jimmyjames wrote:
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have.
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[Head banger] Friday, February 18, 2011 11:20:11 PM
and boring as listening to country music [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:32:55 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have.
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[Brian_Evans] Friday, February 18, 2011 10:57:15 PM
Cool show! Halford needs to drop the cape though. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 9:26:52 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Yep, we all agree that it was waste. Here's some footage of the Priest show I was at in Canada, this guy actually recorded and edited it pretty well, there's snippets of quite a few songs. There's actually a second part to this as well.
Brian_Evans wrote:
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion.
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS] Friday, February 18, 2011 10:54:46 PM
Oh sure, throw salt in that wound - I'm still kicking myself that I missed the Resurrection tour!!! Halford (the band) is most definitely not a waste. Rip on Winter Songs and Made of Metal all you want, but I love all the Halford albums!!! And Spa is right, Rob had to come back on his own. He needed to get it out of his system and see what he could do on his own. I don't have a problem with that, I just wish he hadn't left for as long as he did.
But I think I know what you mean JJ, you mean all those years Priest could have been recording with Rob and we'd have more metal from Priest? Maybe, or maybe if Rob had stayed they would have truly ended things years ago. I'm just thankful he is back now and we have another Priest album to look forward to! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by guidogodoy from Friday, February 18, 2011 10:13:00 PM)
guidogodoy wrote:
I don't agree that it was a "waste" either. Not by a longshot. I loved Halford and "Live Resurrection" still continues to be one of my favs. I was actually a bit upset to know that HALFORD (the band) would never play again when Rob went back to Priest.
Resurrection was a damn good tour.
jimmyjames wrote:
Yep, we all agree that it was waste. Here's some footage of the Priest show I was at in Canada, this guy actually recorded and edited it pretty well, there's snippets of quite a few songs. There's actually a second part to this as well.
Brian_Evans wrote:
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion.
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[guidogodoy] Friday, February 18, 2011 10:13:00 PM
I don't agree that it was a "waste" either. Not by a longshot. I loved Halford and "Live Resurrection" still continues to be one of my favs. I was actually a bit upset to know that HALFORD (the band) would never play again when Rob went back to Priest.
Resurrection was a damn good tour. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 9:26:52 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Yep, we all agree that it was waste. Here's some footage of the Priest show I was at in Canada, this guy actually recorded and edited it pretty well, there's snippets of quite a few songs. There's actually a second part to this as well.
Brian_Evans wrote:
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion.
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[spapad] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:59:11 PM
It was not a waste. Halford created many good songs. What would have happened if he stayed then............. would not have been what we wanted. He had to return of his own volition, or Priest would have suffered from disintrest. That would have been the nail in the coffin more than Rob leaving.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:26:52 PM
Yep, we all agree that it was waste. Here's some footage of the Priest show I was at in Canada, this guy actually recorded and edited it pretty well, there's snippets of quite a few songs. There's actually a second part to this as well.
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion.
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Brian_Evans] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:17:41 PM
I think Halford totally blew it when he left the band. Wasted all those years apart and they have never quite recovered from it. Haven't been the same in my opinion. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:07:23 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Becks] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:07:31 PM
Haha I will try to stay self controlled, I get very very excited though. In hopefulness of a NZ show, for Craigs birthday next month I have ordered him a DOTF shirt to wear hopefully it arrives soon so I can post it on to him in time.
[spapad] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:06:28 PM
Oh...............News! The Setlist page has not moved for a whole hour!
[spapad] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:04:44 PM
Stay self contained for an hour and a half! Then you can explode. lol [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:56:37 PM)
Becks wrote:
I'll keep that in mind
jimmyjames wrote:
Explode at the show, that would be memorable for all in attendance.
Becks wrote:
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards.
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:04:26 PM
I think you both will not be able to speak for a week at least from all the screaming and your necks will never be the same from all the headbanging!! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:56:37 PM)
Becks wrote:
I'll keep that in mind
jimmyjames wrote:
Explode at the show, that would be memorable for all in attendance.
Becks wrote:
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards.
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[spapad] Friday, February 18, 2011 9:03:44 PM
Nah, she doesn't want to go out as the Priest Jihadist! NO. lmao! Plus, she'd miss half the show! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:52:54 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Explode at the show, that would be memorable for all in attendance.
Becks wrote:
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards.
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
Explode at the show, that would be memorable for all in attendance.
Becks wrote:
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards.
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:52:54 PM
Explode at the show, that would be memorable for all in attendance. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:49:07 PM)
Becks wrote:
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards.
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Becks] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:49:07 PM
Oh you're right, I'll save the exploding for afterwards. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:46:07 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show.
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:46:07 PM
Fuck, don't do that, you'll miss the show. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:44:00 PM)
Becks wrote:
If they come here I will explode
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Dissident.Aggressor] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:46:05 PM
Maiden will always be in my heart. But Judas will always be who I am !
[Becks] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:44:00 PM
If they come here I will explode [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:15:05 PM)
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them!
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:32:55 PM
And they stick to their guns. Malcolm and Angus are tight and won't let anyone fuck around with what they have. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by spapad from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:31:17 PM)
spapad wrote:
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years.
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[spapad] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:31:17 PM
AC/DC has had good management. The band really does not do anything different than they have done for years, but like you said, they time it right and everyone wan't another dose of the same sound again. Since Back in Black, nothing has changed. The early AC/DC did change more than the post Bon years. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:22:16 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:22:16 PM
When you think back on that time AC/DC only really released one albumin the 90s. Razor's Edge came out in 90 before the grunge era broke. They released Ballbreaker in 95 and by that time they'd been away long enough that people wanted to see them, plus grunge was imploding by then. Five years later in 2000 they released Stiff Upper Lip, which was shit but no-one cared because they missed them. Priest might have been better served to take that road rather than giving up completely.
[HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:15:05 PM
We all wish that JJ, you aren't alone in that. I wish they had just taken a year or two off from each other and Rob could have done what he needed to do. I'm just hoping that the new album is killer and exactly what we all want to hear from them. I'm sure you'll feel a bit differently then. I truly hope they go to NZ so you and Becks can see them! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 8:07:23 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do.
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:07:23 PM
There's no denying that everything they've done together has been way better than anything they've done apart. Maybe management did sway them at times. I just wish they'd stuck to their guns in the 90s, if they had done that the way the likes of Maiden, AC/DC, Slayer and so forth did then maybe I wouldn't feel the way I do. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS from Friday, February 18, 2011 7:45:52 PM)
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together.
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS] Friday, February 18, 2011 7:45:52 PM
You are absolutely right about why Rob left, he saw traditional metal was no longer the in thing. He even said metal was dead, didn't he? I was so pissed at him that I didn't even follow him back then and stuck with Priest. I think the POE album and some of the other things are management and record companies telling Priest to go that way, not necessarily what they wanted to do if you know what I mean. As for the reissues and remasters, it's the only way to keep your stuff on the shelves of the CD stores these days because they only carry the current stuff. I remember when you could go into a record store and buy any album the band had, current or 10 years old but it just isn't that way anymore. Other bands do the same thing, trying to attract new fans. Is it the bands decision to put out those or is it the record company's? I don't know. And yeah, Rob wasn't making it big with Fight, Two or Halford and then he reunited with Priest. But money isn't everything and if you hate the people you are with, it just isn't worth it. When I saw Priest in 1990, I'm not even kidding about this - they HATED each other that night! It was beyond obvious to anyone that had ever seen them before. I have the bootleg video of that show too. They aren't very good at hiding their emotions on stage, lets put it that way. Of course it's about making money too, but they wouldn't be able to write or tour if they really didn't want to be together. So I'd say it's likely half and half, 50% for $ and 50% because of the magic they found together. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 7:21:31 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Becks] Friday, February 18, 2011 7:45:23 PM
Well you are very cynical. Not being a smart arse or anything, it's just what I think when I read posts like that.
Me, like I said, I'm an optimist and prefer to think the best of people. If I get proven wrong eventually, so be it. But I do not feel (as in I have not seen anything to make me) that way. Not yet, don't know if I ever will. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 7:21:31 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different?
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Brian_Evans] Friday, February 18, 2011 7:39:57 PM
It's way too early in the game to be claming a win here. Don't get cocky. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by J.D. DIAMOND from Friday, February 18, 2011 3:28:48 AM)
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Why would you give a flyin' fuck where I've been? And no I didn't know Maiden won a grammy because I don't care about Maiden. Looks like Saxon is up 9 to 1 in your "metal showdown" thread,there is a "reason" for this.
(Quoting Message by Brian_Evans from Thursday, February 17, 2011 11:15:08 PM)
Brian_Evans wrote:
Well I see the old Saxon fanboy himself is back ...where you been man?
Maiden won a grammy while you were gone. Just in case you didn't know. lol
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Thats because your seeing that Iron Maiden is "overrated"..... PERIOD.
Vitaliy0801 wrote:
Hi everybody. I'm from Russia. As you all know Iron Maiden has started new Final Frontier Tour and started from Moscow. I saw it last week. The set list was super but the show..... Nothing special. Has nothing to do with what they promissed.
Edited at: Friday, February 18, 2011 3:29:25 AM
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 7:21:31 PM
I'm not convinced. Of course they are going to say that. No band is going to reform and say "yeah, we're basically sick of playing clubs so we're getting the old band back together so we can hit the arena circuit and cream some decent money out of it". It's no coincidence they broke up when bands like Pantera and Sepultura were getting big, the grunge era was in full swing and Halford saw that as the future, hence the reason he started Fight and started wearing backwards caps and checkered shirts. Amazingly when traditional metal made a comeback in the early 2000s Priest made a comeback. You can say they wouldn't do something so hollow but they've chased the buck so many times in the past ( Point Of Entry, Turbo, Johnny B Good cover, countless reissues, remasters, British Steel re reissue and tour, that shitty live album they released), why should this be any different? [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS from Friday, February 18, 2011 7:06:30 PM)
HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS wrote:
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other.
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[HOT ROCKIN' METAL GODDESS] Friday, February 18, 2011 7:06:30 PM
You are right Becks,they truly aren't that shallow. Rob wanted back in the band long before it actually happened, but he put conditions on it such as wanting new management (which I WISH would have happened!) But a TON of shit went down when he left. Hurtful things were said by both sides and there were A LOT of hard feelings. It wasn't until Rob wrote a letter to the band, pouring out his heart, that they began to build the bridge again. Rob had a lot of making up to do with Glenn and once that happened they talked about reuniting. It wasn't for the money - it was because as Rob said, the greatest things he ever did were with Priest and that is where his heart is. KK said something like, why aren't we putting our eggs in one basket? They went to see Halford perform live and saw that Rob still had it. They are like siblings and siblings fight. Fortunately for us, they got back together and aren't holding any grudges. As Rob said before they got back together, we have to do it for the right reasons and not for money because the fans will know. Well, there you have it - we would be able to tell that they were there only for the money when on stage and trust me, they are having way too much fun and getting along way too well for it to be solely about money! I can't say the same about other bands though, reunite for one tour and call it quits again cause they can't stand each other. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 6:25:04 PM)
Becks wrote:
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow.
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Becks] Friday, February 18, 2011 6:25:04 PM
Maybe they just realised that the were never as good apart as they were together, and the fact that before all the crap post Painkiller happened, they were best friends. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but that's how I see it. As for money, yeah that plays some role, it has to, they make music for a living for goodness sakes. I guess I'm just not so easily convinced of Priest being so hollow. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Friday, February 18, 2011 3:08:10 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years.
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
Looks like JD is back with a vengeance ! I was thinking they are like a scene out of Pulp Fiction myself.
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Why don't Jimmy James and Budred get a hotel room together and dry hump each other's leg untill day break? For christ's sake guys stop this bickering war,neither of you are here to irritate the forum like Brian Evans so why don't the both of you get a freaking grip.
[METALMANJP] Friday, February 18, 2011 6:03:09 PM
Looks like JD is back with a vengeance ! I was thinking they are like a scene out of Pulp Fiction myself. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by J.D. DIAMOND from Friday, February 18, 2011 3:17:07 PM)
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Why don't Jimmy James and Budred get a hotel room together and dry hump each other's leg untill day break? For christ's sake guys stop this bickering war,neither of you are here to irritate the forum like Brian Evans so why don't the both of you get a freaking grip.
[Head banger] Friday, February 18, 2011 5:51:10 PM
Why don't Jimmy James and Budred get a hotel room together and dry hump each other's leg untill day break? For christ's sake guys stop this bickering war,neither of you are here to irritate the forum like Brian Evans so why don't the both of you get a freaking grip.
[J.D. DIAMOND] Friday, February 18, 2011 3:17:07 PM
Why don't Jimmy James and Budred get a hotel room together and dry hump each other's leg untill day break? For christ's sake guys stop this bickering war,neither of you are here to irritate the forum like Brian Evans so why don't the both of you get a freaking grip.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 3:12:53 PM
Hey budred, why don't you go cook a steak and take a photo of it.?
Wow, you're so smart. You know everything.
We should start a thread called "Ask Jimmy"
Oh yeah' and some people just hate Maiden cause they've sucked since the early nineties.
That and Bruce is an arrogant asshole!
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[jimmyjames] Friday, February 18, 2011 3:08:10 PM
I can't think of any other reason why a band who don't get along would suddenly decide to reform after 14 years. [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by Becks from Friday, February 18, 2011 1:44:56 AM)
Becks wrote:
Honestly, I have never felt that for a second.
jimmyjames wrote:
Everyone knows it's true deep down.
Brian_Evans wrote:
Better watch out man, you're not supposed to "rip" on Priest and then praise Maiden around here ..lol
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[Budred] Friday, February 18, 2011 8:40:31 AM
Wow, you're so smart. You know everything.
We should start a thread called "Ask Jimmy"
Oh yeah' and some people just hate Maiden cause they've sucked since the early nineties.
That and Bruce is an arrogant asshole! [Show/Hide Quoted Message](Quoting Message by jimmyjames from Wednesday, February 16, 2011 3:12:24 PM)
jimmyjames wrote:
Yes it was, the band had been broken up for 14 years. Obviously bad blood there as well. Priest were a joke with Ripper, The Fight and Halford bands were going nowhere. Suddenly classic metal starts to make a comeback in the early 2000s. Oh well, lets put our differences aside and try and make some money out of it. That's exactly what happened.
Head banger wrote:
AMOLAD kicked ass on Final frontier. and priest a cash grab? AOR wasnt a cash grab. glad maiden won, but Final Frontier sucks balls
jimmyjames wrote:
Final Frontier is actually really good. The best Maiden have done in a while. And a much more deserved grammy than Priests for Dissident Aggressor. There seems to be a lot of anti Maiden feeling on this thread sometimes. It looks like a case of sour grapes from Priest fans who can't admit that Maiden have just done it better than Priest throughout their career. Priests career since 1990 has pretty much been a joke and it's been a cash grab since 04.
[J.D. DIAMOND] Friday, February 18, 2011 3:28:48 AM
Why would you give a flyin' fuck where I've been? And no I didn't know Maiden won a grammy because I don't care about Maiden. Looks like Saxon is up 9 to 1 in your "metal showdown" thread,there is a "reason" for this.
Well I see the old Saxon fanboy himself is back ...where you been man?
Maiden won a grammy while you were gone. Just in case you didn't know. lol
J.D. DIAMOND wrote:
Thats because your seeing that Iron Maiden is "overrated"..... PERIOD.
Vitaliy0801 wrote:
Hi everybody. I'm from Russia. As you all know Iron Maiden has started new Final Frontier Tour and started from Moscow. I saw it last week. The set list was super but the show..... Nothing special. Has nothing to do with what they promissed.
hopefully it arrives soon so I can post it on to him in time.
