by Screen 13 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 4:55 am
[quote][i]Originally posted by Frank_Chickens[/i]
<br>[quote][i]Originally posted by Screen 13[/i]
The worst was yet to come - their ultra crap cover version of The Beatles' "Revolution." There have been some great Beatles covers, but that one should be seen as an example of how NOT to do one. Here's to Future Days was certainly one of the death knells of "New Pop" in my opinion.
(On a side note, I just got the Fruer album, and yeah, they knew when to stop Doot Dooting. One good song and a bunch of mediocre posing.)
[/quote]
Rumour has it that both the single and album were rushed out in order to help pay for Alannah Currie's heroin debt.
[/quote]
Never heard that one, being only rumour.
Fact-wise, however, their 1985 was professionally trouble-ridden enough. A Late 1985 UK Tour was stopped, with a report in the October 19, 1985 Melody Maker stating about their promoter going into liquidation plus reporting about tickets not selling as well as expected (Promoter Paul Loasby claiming that only 55% were sold with reports from sellers backing that claim up very well after two shows were cancelled). Throw in the complaints about ill-advised places to play, inadequate advertising, and the band's claim that the promoter was in trouble already, and it was all a strong mess. This was following another round of cancellations in March 1985 after Tom Bailey needed to rest (the report said "due to Tom Bailey's collapse in March.").
My guess about the release of Future Days was that is had to be delivered, and possibly due more to contractual things than anything else - Sometimes first singles from albums in The UK were well in advance, but the gap (no pun intended) from "Lay Your Hands on Me" to Future Days was stretching things quite a bit to the point where I'm sure record company executives were putting some pressure. The hold backs included Bailey's illness; a change in producer from Alex Sadkin, who produced the highlight "Lay Your Hands on Me," to Nile Rogers after ditching a lot of what was recorded before; and a change in approach (Although I don't hear that much. It's possible that the Producer change was more calculated than that in my view). It's release in The UK may have been Top 5, but it took a strong downslide after about a month following the initial Top 20 showings, a major drop from Into the Gap's long run (Damn, I'm sounding like a CEO!). In short, they "Dropped the ball" on that album due to a long wait between releases, a very disappointing sound (even as a non-fan, I would say that it's not up to Into the Gap), a crap album cover (Always something that kills the momentum), cancelled UK tours, and a naturally dwindling fan base that was moving onto other bands and singers, with health reasons also extending the wait between releases as well as stopping a career-continuing tour of their home country.
In my opinion, the release of "Revolution" in the UK was seriously a last-ditch attempt to save the sinking ship which already saw "King for a Day" reach #22 in The UK after the middling performance of "Don't Mess With Doctor Dream," reaching only a Top 20 after a long wait from the strong Top 10 showing of "Lay Your Hands..." in The UK. As it was the song they played at Live Aid, it was a in practice a logical choice being both a song performed at a high profile event as well as a Beatles cover (I've heard worse that made stronger showings), but being such a poor cover, it did not do much.
At least there was some major success in The States to soften up the fall. "King for a Day" and "Lay Your Hands On Me" were both major hits.
Yeah, I know, thinking too much about a couple of crap releases, but when it's released in a time when a lot of New Wave releases were under performing for many different reasons beyond the natural drop of fans, a topic that can feature one of those albums, and some time on my hands (plus a lot of collected research...), I like to share some thoughts.
There's always time to do more research...