+1 on that.
Heck, there are quite a few tribute bands out there doing the same thing. Why can't one of the owners of the music do it as well, and pleasing thousands of fans in the process?
And as for Tony being resentful of the others' solo success - it would make that his best stuff was being used for Genesis, whereas most of Hackett's material wasn't. If anything, Tony might have some resentment because Hackett is so revered by the fanbase.
Here's my take on the anthology per the movie.
I got the feeling that in the early days, Tony wrote most of the songs and Peter wrote the lyrics. When Peter started to write songs, Tony didn't like it much. Then Peter left and Tony wrote the songs again. Then Steve wanted to contribute more and was (likely) shut down, so he compiled his songs for a solo career and left when he had enough to go it alone. Then Phil began writing songs, and tony let him because they were such a huge commercial success (moey talks, ya' know). Then Phil went solo, but still kept writing for Genesis and compiling hits, so that was OK. Then Mike started his solo career and had some hits, primarily because he continued to work with others who had talent.
tony kept trying to go it alone in his solo stuff, and it never really took off.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A gentleman is defined as someone who knows how to play the accordion, and doesn't.
I wish Hackett would bring Genesis Revisited here to Texas.
+1MOriginally Posted by Flightwave
specifically - come to Austin, Texas
On the contrary, I'm tired of reading complaints that Hackett is just reliving past glories.
A quick glance at the quality of his discography since 1993 (the year in which Guitar Noir was released, and just after his erstwhile colleagues' We Can't Dance was a big hit in the album charts) suggests pretty convincingly that Hackett - along with Gabriel - left the rest of the band behind creatively a long time ago.
I can't think of any other Genesis member past or present who matches Hackett's prolific production of new material over the last 20 years - and he's certainly the only one who has produced anything like top-notch quality on a reasonably regular basis.
However, I too look forward to his return to his own music - just so he can shut up the boo boys who seem to have difficulty in adding up the number of solo albums Hackett has made or projects he has contributed to just in the last decade alone. :-)
Also, as has been pointed out already, Hackett's already announced several times that he's already working on his own new material. Anyone familiar with his solo career won't be remotely surprised by this.
My comment about Hackett revisiting Genesis was about album releases, not live performances. I guess I should have made that clear. I've stated elsewhere that I have no issue with Hackett performing the stuff live.
I saw the show in London on Saturday at the Hammersmith Apollo. An excellent crowd and not all 50+. There is obviously an appetite for this, and I'd rather that Steve Hackett was playing that a tribute band. He dusted off some really old stuff like The Knife, The Return of the Giant Hogweed & The Return of the Giant Hogweed.
Having watched the recent documentary & also read Mike Rutherford's book, I get the impression that he just wasn't really wanted in the band. Or rather, they wanted him as a guitarist but not to interfere with the writing.
Sort of on topic…
i do not agree at all with Phil's remark that the same band that wrote all of the 70s Genesis material is the same band that wrote Invisible Touch. Seriously? Is he fucking kidding? The remaining members (2 had left) were in a totally different mindset by then - hence - not really the same band. Invisible Touch is what it is and I find it amusing he tries to defend it with this bullshit remark. Not one of my favorites though I know many here enjoy and even love it. I respect that.
But for me - totally with Steve's throat slitting gesture.
I always felt that the latter day Genesis song writing sounded amaturistic, despite the big sales. In that era, they'd just jam and record bits that came up with no pre planning or thinking. It shows. Even a lot of the lyrics were improvised and then used because the band thought the nonsense lyrics sounded good. The lyrics were really stupid. She seems to have an invisible touch?? Wake and find you're covered in cellophane??
Many of the songs of that era to me just sound largely "made up" on the spot as opposed to "composed" if you know what I mean.
Yeah, I somewhat agree. I have nothing against a well-written pop song, but a lot of the latter-day Genesis stuff to my ears sounds like it's made up mostly of really dull and repetitive keyboard riffs, as if barely any thought went into the compositions. I'm not a hardcore fan, so maybe I'm missing something, but I don't even hear anything from Mike most of the time. It's mostly all Tony's boring riffs and Phil's drums and vocals. At least the stuff from Phil is (mostly) good.
Tony does have a very english, subtle sense of humor. Although I wouldn't blame him a bit if he feels irritation that 'I Cant Dance' and 'Sussudio' garner more success than 'From The Undertow'. Banks and Hackett would make a great team, if only....
As to the songwriting, I do think Genesis wrote some really good songs in the 80s, but no, not as strong as the 70s material, but 'Me & Sarah Jane' especially, and 'You Might Recall', 'Keep It Dark', and 'Its Gonna Get Better' I think are solid artsy pop tunes. 'One For The Vine' they are not, though.
Banks and Hackett WOULD make a great team...or Hackett and Gabriel
There are 2 tracks on We Can't Dance that I love. Since I Lost You and Fading Lights. Living Forever is pretty good too. However, to me, this album was a dire effort otherwise.
Mad props to Anthony Philips.
I just listened to "One For the Vine" and decided I could never be upset at Tony Banks.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks