Matt

The Arcade Fire is a carbon copy of Broken Social Scene for starters. Also, OLP, Moist, MGB, and the first LL album, all sound similar to one another. The style comes mainly from the Odds who opened the door for that sound. Matthew Good does have the marketing muscle behind him is the difference between him and other lesser knowns, it's simply that he can't sell. But not all indie bands that make it big are good either, and there are plenty of problems with the idea of indie bands getting big. Eastern Canadian indie bands maybe, but look at the west coast, we have some pretty cool ones, like The Feminists who don't get a whole bunch of attention outside of Vancouver. There's so many, but how many West Coast indie bands there are making it big right now? Not too many if there are any at all, yet the East has Metric, BSS, The Arcade Fire, DFA 1979, etc. A lot of it relies on where people seem to be situated these days too, perhaps this could be another problem for someone from Vancouver on a big label or not.

I never said industry success equals quality, that's what you two keep assuming. I think when the topic is about getting Matthew Good more popular, calling into question how marketable he still is is very relevant. Going on and on about quality is not. It has nothing to do with what people think about his current songs who already like him, it's the people who do not care for his new stuff that counts at this point. Also the Matthew Good Band pretty much rode the coattails of several other band's success, first the Odds had started the type of Alternative they played. Then there was Our Lady Peace, oh and Moist, heck even Everclear could be thrown in there. Perhaps, Matthew Good (with or without the band) is nothing more than the Puddle of Mudd, or Lifehouse, etc. of his time.

I think past his prime is appropriate, record sales drive the industry, when has there even been an industry based on something that cannot sell? A musician is an investment, very few record companies are looking at making music over making money. It's not about what people like or dislike, it's about what the majority of people like. If it was about how much good music someone can make then bands would not be dropped for selling so few albums. Art may be subjective, but when rationalizing arguments we need to find objective reasons, my reasoning is objective, thus making it an actual arguement. It is nigh impossible to argue subjectives, first year English should teach you that.

If anything it takes a real talent to write vague lyrics and still be able to associate them to something else. It's not about how obvious you are, anyone can be obvious, it's far tougher to write something that the listener has to decipher. I saw Universal push Matthew Good's solo stuff and The Band's AOB, I saw ads and whatnot, no more or less than anyone else. He was political before, however, he wasn't so in anyone's face so much about it unless that's what the listener wanted. Alert Status Red was a bunch of catch phrases thrown together, that's not all that tough to do. He may as well been writing a Nickleback, Lohan, etc. song.

No one's mentioned Johnny Cash's At Folsom Prison? It's such a great live album...

There's some new songs on HollyMcNarland.net, they sound pretty good, I can't wait for this album to come out.

First off "...Alert Status Red, but the sun comes up instead..." is no more better than any of the current mainstream bands' lyrics, Foogle-11. Also, Matthew Good has the same marketing maching behind him, they did try, but there's only so much you can do with a broken record. Matthew Good has always been outspoken, nothings different, however, he just can't sell. He can't sell though. Why, because he's no longer interesting. He's becoming a broken record, and his music has started to lag in recent years, especially since the band left.

You pretty much did with this: "I think that if Matt Good was capable of chart toppers in the U.S., he'd write them, but he's not." What do you mean by that, if you don't mean that there isn't a specific formula to a guaranteed hit? To offer up the suggestion that it indicates Matthew Good is past his prime is ignorant and completely ignores that there is literally tons of great music that follows the same formula as a generic pop song of verse-chorus-verse but never receives recognition. Let's take a look at 'Jumbo Jet Headache' by Limblifter for a second as an example. It follows a pretty clear formula followed by a good deal of hits. It's a pretty good tune, but how high did it chart in the US? In Canada? Does this mean that LL are past their prime? BTW to answer your question as to why I brought them up, it's because you're a fan of them, and they aren't popular in the mainstream anymore like MG is. There's a difference between not wanting your music to sell well and not caring if it sells well or not. Take for example the album 'Yankee Hotel Foxtrot' by Wilco. They were dropped by a major label for refusing to make it more accessible, and were picked up by a small indie label. The record went on to be at or near the top of most critic's Best Of lists for 2002 and has sold quite well. I never said that MG is trying to write music that won't sell. I'm saying that just because some music isn't immediately accessible doesn't mean it can't be a hit. I vehemently disagree with your opinion. Anything more to say to you. Yes, Limblifter is past their prime, they have not topped their first CD to date as best I know in sales. That doesn't mean I think it's their best, but my opinion does not matter because it is subjective, the only objective test of if someone is past their prime is through the numbers. Being past ones prime only means they are no longer marketable, Matthew Good is well past that point. However, if he could be marketable in somewhere like the U.S., he would not object, and I doubt being on his own terms would matter either. I never said that there was a box, nor did I imply all I have said is that Matthew Good would if he could. I never said there was a formula, you did. no yu begin wher i end, you can put words in my mouth all you like, but they are your words, not mine. If you like Good's new stuff, that's fine, but an entire marketing maching helped push him and failed to do much, doesn't that say something? Weapon got played a ton on Much and other stations, it's not like he's not getting radioplay, however, he simply does not write a majority of songs that relate to enough people to make him sell more records.

All right, I never once said there was a box musicians pull stuff out of to write a hit. But why does a musician write music? It's not so it DOESN'T SELL. To act like Matt Good doesn't want his music to sell well is ridiculous, however, he is well past his prime and simply doesn't have anything really more to say.

My point was that bands could have deep meanings to their lyrics and still be popular, and how did LL get into this? Their lyrics are not all that deep...

Well past his prime??? He's doing his best stuff right now, along with Avalanche. Doesn't need a band, only for backup. Anyways, it took me about 10 years but i finally made my sister a fan of Matt Good. I stick lots of songs & videos of MG on my MySpace, thats about all i can do right now. His solo stuff is incredibly bland if anything else actually.

Matthew Good is no different than your average top 40 rock bands, his music is pretty poppy as is. Beyond that, do you really believe that all "manufactured" songs sell? Of course not, everything's hit, miss, or moderate success in the music industry. Moderate success seems to becoming more miss these days though. But, to say Matthew Good is somehow better than other musicians because of his lyrics is just ridiculous. Take Johnny Cash for example, he wrote tons of social inspired lyrics in with stuff that wasn't so much, and he's far better than Matthew Good is. Billy Talent, Sum 41, etc. write political lyrics and they're popular. K-OS writes "thinking man" lyrics, and he's popular. It's not impossible to be popular and write insightful lyrics. It's simply Matthew Good has not been all that capable lately of connecting with a lot more people.

WLRRR is pop but it's anything but popular. Interest in Matt's music has declined with each album after BM. He's not stupid. he knows what the formula is. Hire a dave, write alternative rock songs about the future, wear a mask in a video with random phrases floating around and you'll sell more albums. If him and Dave Genn still got along, he probably would have still declined in popularity, if you really think about it how many bands that were popular in '99 are still popular now? Our Lady Peace, Barenaked Ladies, and was Nickleback popular then? I thought it was a couple years later... But beyond that not too bands last too long. However, that doesn't really detract from the idea if he could he would. His singles are still poppy enough, but perhaps that's the problem. How many people probably bought Beautiful Midnight because of the singles, but didn't really like the rest of the album? I know of a few people. It happens, people don't generally keep buying though because they like the single after a while either though.

I think that if Matt Good was capable of chart toppers in the U.S., he'd write them, but he's not. Beyond that, I think he's well past his prime and without the band he's not what he was because the band was the band.

I think she just asked Chris Murphey for career advice...

Matt Damon could work as Kirk, sort have like how well he does as Bourne, but it's definitely going to be interesting to see if he can pull it off. He will basically have to get all of Shatner's mannerisms and speech paterns down pat, which could prove tricky if not impossible to overcome.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0796366/

Matthew Good doesn't really shine on his own, he's really kind have meh.

Anyone else watch the final game on Shaw? It was a pretty good one. The Vancouver Whitecaps beat Cardiff City F.C. in Penalty Kicks to win the first Nation's Cup. Apparently after next year it will become an annual event as well.

We studied this quite extensively in my history class in grade 12 a few years back. Basically, the internment camps in World War II were just the straw that broke the camel's back for the Jews. They have been kicked out of pretty much every country in Europe at one time or another, Nazi Germany just took it to a new extreme. Part of the problem was that quite frequently Jews would accumulate in "Jewish Ghettos" which were usually near synogues, so of course, they never quite fit into the rest of the culture in the country they resided in, which made them outsiders. So, after World War II, the holocaust survivors realized they were truly alone, and worse was that they realized being passive just didn't work for them, their entire religion, culture, you name it, was almost wiped out. So, of course when Jewish people were offered a land of their own they took it. And withing a few days of Israel coming into existance, all their neighbours invaded them. The only reason Israel survived the invasion was because it was poorly co-ordinated. When each country invaded it was at different times, so it gave Israel a chance to re-deploy its troops elsewhere to fend off the next invasion after it finished fighting off the last one. Most of the land they have since taken has actually been more or less for strategical or sensimental purposes. The Golan Heights, part of Egypt (since been returned), were all, so they could keep an eye on their neighbours. Jersulam was of course taken because it's the Jewish holy city, the problem is for muslims, it's also a holy city. The trick is learning to share the city, which neither side seems to want to do... For the most part they were on their own for the longest time too, the only reason the Americans got involved was because the Soviets started buddying up in the middle east, so of course the Americans needed to do the same as well.

What about Owen Wilson? He pretty much plays the same character in every movie these days and it's getting old fast too.

Jeff Pearce wrote most of Moist's tunes, so I don't think you should really give him to much credit for Moist's music.

The problem is there are some shallow lyrics that over shadow the well put together ones unfortunately. But, generally the songs with shallow lyrics have good tunes, which kind have balances it out I suppose.

I enjoyed this one, it was fun, the ending wasn't really an ending, but it's a lot like "Empire Strikes Back", it's setting up the next movie.

Please, just because I don't agree with your taste in music doesn't mean I don't have taste, it just means you need to start talking more about what you like and less about what you don't.