I'm sure many people on this forum care about the issue behind live 8, i just felt that the cause chould be aknowledged on the forums and give people a chance to air their opinions, also i think everyone should sing the petition on www.live8live.com (http://www.live8live.com) to have something to show the g8 leaders to show just how much you care.
I think it's a great incentive and I support what they're trying to do. I really hope this will make a change.
They were showing a documentary about how African refugees had to walk 50(!) days to the border to get some scoops of rice off of which they had to live for the next month.
It just can't go on this way...
What annoys me is the focus on the music.
On the BBC this morning Ferne Cotton was going around saying "Whats been the best bit so far?" And people would invariably say U2, or Paul McCartney.
Some guy shouted at Ferne when she was interviewing someone, saying its not about the music, but about making poverty history.
Its the same for those arm bands, which have become a fashion accessory.
At the end of the day the G8 will invariably decide to ease Africa's debts and give more aid (although its unlikely they'll introduce fairer trade) so ultimately Bob Geldof is doing a marvelous thing, I just hate how some people are responding to it.
I'm 21 years old, and just two weeks ago I found out I was calling it "Live Aid" not Live 8...
"Wait a minute. Bart's teacher is named 'Krabappel'? Oh, I've been calling her 'Crandall.' Why didn't someone tell me? Ohhh, I've been making an idiot out of myself!"
Back in '84 it WAS called Live Aid, Scummy.
They had some good bands, but the information about the concerts were embarassingly bad. I mean, there was NO information at all for WHEN WHICH band would play WHERE!
I saw "Green Day", who I almost meet in California one time by the way, and they where playing a pretty bad gig. It just didn't feel like a proper "Green Day" concert for some reason.
I would have loved to know when bands like Coldplay or Audioslave played, but there was - as said before - no information AT ALL. So you had to watch TV all day to find out and I don't have time for that!
Quote from: [ ... ] on Sun 03/07/2005 00:24:45
They had some good bands, but the information about the concerts were embarassingly bad. I mean, there was NO information at all for WHEN WHICH band would play WHERE!
I saw "Green Day", who I almost meet in California one time by the way, and they where playing a pretty bad gig. It just didn't feel like a proper "Green Day" concert for some reason.
I would have loved to know when bands like Coldplay or Audioslave played, but there was - as said before -Ã, no information AT ALL. So you had to watch TV all day to find out and I don't have time for that!
http://www.live8live.com/theconcerts/index.shtml
It doesn't tell you what time, but it tells you where.
I watched Live8 yeserday/night and I must say that this is possibly the best concert in the history of music. I shall go on with the highlights:
U2 did a great job opening the concert, although I wish they played "With or without you", but I guess that would really fit in the concert...
Def Lepard showed once again that they can rock hard, when they want to
A pleasant surprise for me was Coldplay, who played quite well. "The Bittersweet symphony" was one of the highlights of the concerts for me.
You dont see this every day, but Madonna was another one of the highlights. I didnt like the choice of songs, though. She has much better ones than "Ray of Light" and "Music" imo.
Deep Purple rocked the stage in Toronto, and although I only saw them through aol.com I am sure they were, indeed, great.
Bon Jovi did quite well too, and I liked their pick of songs - just the fast paced rockers, which suits the party most.
I must say that Robbie Williams was one of the best, if not the best performer in London. And the crowd was magnifficent too. Never have I heard an audiance sing so well and fit in the recording so well as in the chorus of "Feel" or the verses in "Angels". And he was clearly enjoying himself. Thumbs up!
The 80s bands did very well too, and I am refering to A-ha and especially Duran Duran. The voices of their vocalists were in top shape. Unfortunately I couldn't see Pet Shop Boys in Moscow so I cant really comment on them.
Many words can be said about the reunation of pink floyd, but I could summarize with with one: stunning. The synchronisation was so great that no-one would have thought that they hadn't played together for 20 years by listening to them. "Wish you were here" was the highlight for me.
Another surprise for me were The Who, who rocked, especially on the first song, "who are you?". An outstanding performance by the whole band, the vocalist was in a particularly great form.
The divas deserve a few words too - Mariah Carey, Sheryl Crow and Celine Dion swept the audiances with their voices once again.
Elton John did well too, although imo his voice was not in a particularly good condition. Or maybe his mic was low.
Stevie Wonder also reminded of his incredible talent, closing the show in Philadelphia.
And, of course, sir Paul McCartney was outstanding, 'finishing off' the audiance with several classics from the beatles. He hasn't lost a bit of his skills since his beatles days. The finale was bombastic, unique, magnifficent.
And as for the disappointments, they weren't unexpected for me. Bands such as Green Day, Linkin park and die toten hosen cannot even be compared to any of the aforementioned rock and pop legends. However, the greatness of this concert was that if you didnt like any of the bands, you could switch to another city. Pity I couldnt see the shows in Moscow and South africa though.
Last but not least, it is great to see young and old pop and rock stars unite around a good cause. it was the best show I have ever seen, and I hope that I will have the opportunity to see one like this live sometime.
Edit: There were some people missing: Aerosmith would have rocked, and Brian May, Roger Taylor and Paul Rodgers as Queen would have been a great addition. And although George Michael turned up towards the end, it would have been nice to let him sing a few songs.
Quote from: TheDude on Sun 03/07/2005 03:33:30
http://www.live8live.com/theconcerts/index.shtml
It doesn't tell you what time, but it tells you where.
Allright, I did find this information, but it was the only information I was able to find and WHEN the bands played would have been the most important piece of information, or? I mean, let's say I wanted to see Coldplay (what I wanted to do ;) ), now I can find out if they play in Berlin or in Paris or in London and whatnot but not WHEN. I mean everyone that watches the concerts via good-old TV was forced to watch the whole program.
Anways, they had great guests, so whatever. And now - just for practice I am going to write the word WHEN one time not capitalized... when.
It might be a great line-up but . . . great cause my ass. No financial, labor, food, or any other sort of aid going to the needy ones. Lots of perks for celebrities (accomodations, gifts, etc.), and not one dollar going to the needy. It's a concert to raise awareness and suggest to the largest 8 governments that they be more charitable. There may be some token financial aid given, but - for the most part - the "Big 8" will be unaffected. Every school child knows at least a little bit about the starvation, corrupt government and constant wars and rebellions in that continent. If our governments gave a crap, they would've done something by now. Live 8 doesn't have good television coverage (particularly in the US), and in any case, it doesn't seem likely that people who haven't done anything by now are likely to pick up their telephones and call their representatives.
If they had had negligible entrance fees (say, $5.00 per person, 0.50 to watch via net feed or subscription TV) they'd make more of a contribution. For that matter, if they took the money for promoting the concert, showing it and outfitting the celebrities with what they 'need' and donated that, it'd make more difference than what we'll likely see. After all, the "leader of the free, peace-loving, democratic world" didn't bat an eye when tens of millions protested against the initiation of the Iraq war, why will they care about something their perceive as utterly irrelevant to them.
I just don't get it. Live Aid was crap (from what I've heard even from the nostalgic types) but at least they were contributing something tangible. There may as well just be a sticker on every U2 CD that says, "Buy the CD, but take a moment afterwards to think about starving people." Sorry for the load of cynicism, but this concert strikes me as 'for-a-good-cause', star worship horsesh__. Seems similar to celebrities visiting the tsunami-stricken Southeast in order to help, as though their mere presence would improve the people's lot in life. The deification of familiar names needs to stop (though, to be hypocritically frank, I'd have loved to have seen Floyd).
I'm pretty much with you on this one, Yak. I knew next to nothing about this whole deal until today when I saw a bit about it on the news, heard a bit about it on the radio as I changed to a different station (because the two live acts I listend to were the most AWFUL renditions of "Ordinary World" and "Seven Seconds" I've ever heard in my life) and the fact that it's on tv right now, and I've spend the night watching other channels to avoid it.
If this whole thing manages to make a few hundred/thousand people more aware of these issues, great. It's not doing anything really tangible though, and seems to be a lot more about wank than the original was.
I'm listening to Paul McCartney right now, and although I was never a Beatles fan (blech!), he really is boring the shit out of me. God, he sucks. I'm looking at it thinking, "THIS is supposed to be a huge concert? I've seen live acts in pubs that rock more than this".
The only thing that made me want to watch/listen was when I saw Stevie Wonder, but that was only for a couple of seconds on the news.
Noone could honestly think this is going to do anything to any government. What would be much more useful is if one of these guys got involved in politics and didn't go corrupt afterwards.
EDIT: Even worse than Paul's singing is this bit right now where they're all hugging while singing "nanana naa" and Mariah Carey is squeezing her boobs together and looking just altogether way too sexy for standing in amongst a bunch of little African children.
EDIT2: I just figured out what slightly annoys me about this (I can't say I'm really annoyed, I mean, every little bit helps so I don't dislike what they're doing outright). It's preaching to the converted. The whole thing stinks of tokenism and manufacturing emotions, and just isn't targetting the people that do need to change their thinking/behaviour.
QuoteI just figured out what slightly annoys me about this (I can't say I'm really annoyed, I mean, every little bit helps so I don't dislike what they're doing outright). It's preaching to the converted. The whole thing stinks of tokenism and manufacturing emotions, and just isn't targetting the people that do need to change their thinking/behaviour.
Nail on the head. I've got an asshole's point-of-view on this one but the entire event seems so very superficial and incredibly shallow that I'd suspect the Hilton sisters of arranging it. I don't want to be a downer to those enjoying the shows or music, but I don't think it's worthy of more praise (justification-wise) than a golf-clap.
Seems like Yak has hit the right spot:
Live 8 is a Fraud (http://schadenfreude.cogitox.com/archives/000286.html)
Frankly I really can't be bothered to form an educated opinion on the politics etc of this thing, but I have to say Pink Floyd really blew me away yesterday. I don't even like the band all that much, but they were really sounding sublime - Gilmour's singing especially. The Who were great as well, even if I'm not sure playing two very long songs back to back was really the best approach. McCartney's live 'schtick' is definitely getting a bit old at this point, though.
On another note, all the debate about the problems in Africa is bizaarely 300 years out of date. The Live 8 people are saying that it's unequal trade relationships, their critics say it's the countries' inability to export efficiently.
What? Is this 1700? You would have thought that these Mercantilist ideas would have died out when countries realised wealth was what your people could buy, rather than what they could sell. The likes of Canada and Australia have rarely ever experienced trade surpluses yet have amongst the highest living standards in theworld, whereas Saudi Arabia and co have large trade surpluses and large poor populations.
Even with all the chatter about globalisation, most people making their living from the people around them, and that's what has to be developed.
The purposes of these people may be noble, but clinging to ye olde notion of "Exports good, imports bad" is bemusing and archaic.
On another note, it's sad enough that it takes rock stars to get people to pay any attention to poverty, but it's even sadder when people choose to splurt lame hyperbole without even lip service to the stated cause [look up the thread and see if you can find one!].
And why didn't McCartney have the decency to get himself shot or killed in some fashion [like, I mean a second time or something] so people could remembe him as an illusion rather than the sad fact of what he really is [and always was].
Excellent points on the outdated world trade view. As the economy becomes more globalized, it's more a matter of how 'in touch' you are with it, rather than how many sheep skins or VCRs you manage to send out of your country.
I didn't want to poke people here in the ribs, but since you unsheathed that particular point, I did find it interesting how this forum, other forums, news broadcasts and the musicians themselves seem to vaguely mention the cause this event was organized in the name of. Also interesting how we keep hearing what our actions need to be in regard to Africa (TM). As we all know, Africa is broken into dozens of states that are fairly identical, despite large variations in climate and a massive land mass. The reason Egypt needs the same stuff as South Africa and Nigeria is because of the all-encompassing and merciless rule of the Evil Emperor Ming King of Africa!
If this works out well, then we'll have to have a Southern Hemisphere benefit where we can address the entire third world's problems at once!
I missed the entirety of Live 8 (save for a tinny rendition of Bittersweet Symphony) because I was at the Make Poverty History protest in Edinburgh.
I can understand the critics of the project saying that over-simplification of the problem won't help those in need, but I think it's important that these sort of issues be given air-time. If that means caricaturing the nature of the beast I'll except it because it at least prompts debate.
I've heard a number of Live 8's and Live Aid's detractors arguing that aid money tends to line the pockets of corrupt officials. I Live 8 wasn't happening the Western Media wouldn't be giving this issue the time of day! We'd all be on the edge of our seats waiting for something remotely interesting to happen ong Big Brother 53, or whatever it is now.