not logged in
| re: Meat Loaf talks Jim Steinman reunion - Rolling Stone | |
Posted by:  |
rockfenris2005 06:49 pm UTC 07/29/16 |
| In reply to: | re: Meat Loaf talks Jim Steinman reunion - Rolling Stone - Infinite_Victims 02:36 pm UTC 07/29/16 |
In my mind, as soon as they announced that they were going to make Bat 3, it was like drops of blood dropping into a tank full of sharks. People just went ballistic. I mean, think about it. When they made Bat 2, you didn't have a sequel album. You didn't have "Anything for love" Number 1 in how many places. The moment you announce Bat 3 to these people, they start going crazy. No wonder Meat couldn't get out of the deal. The record company were told they were actually going to get Bat 3 and by God, were they going to deliver come hell or high water, even if Diane Warren had to write half the bloody LP. That's how I see the situation. "Folks, we're doing Bat 3." *Theme music to Jaws* *The sounds of Columbia screaming when Eddie gets chopped up into bits in "Rocky Horror"*. "One from the vaults..." And literally in quite a few cases with this album. If Meat and Jim had gotten together the way they had now, and only decided to call it Bat 3 at the eleventh hour, then they would have had it. Nobody would have gone berserk, not until the content was down and everything had been recorded. Makes me think of the quote on this website on the "Whistle 96" page about how commerce can be detrimental to the arts or words similar to that. > > > > Ha - I actually made the 2 out of 3 ain't bad joke when > > Bat III came out. I remember all the politics, but Meat > > said something about the record label forcing certain > > things and Desmond doing things on his own and it wasn't > > supposed to be this way... > > > > Do you remember anything about that? Have never been able > > to get details. > > > > > > > > From memory I think Jim had negotiated one of the best > contracts ever to do this album. For some reason - > possibly due to his management or attorneys - he dropped > out. I seem to recall some confusion on whether a deal was > struck or not - something to do with a fax. > > Meat had signed to deliver the record company a "Bat Out > of Hell 3" and I believe he was under much pressure to > fulfill that exact title which caused arguments and legal > hand-wringing. > > They cobbled together what Jim songs that were left that > they could use legally. Desmond was brought on board and I > don't think Meat ever really liked that. Although I'm > pretty sure he said the "usual stuff" during press > statements. But he couldn't very well trash the album or > Desmond at that time or probably risk being sued. > > Had the album been a hit I'm sure he'd have felt some > better about it. Although I'm pretty sure Desmond went way > over-budget and it was not discovered until too late and > I'm pretty sure Meat was at least partially blamed by the > record company for the budget. > > The fact that Meat cleaned house on management soon after > pretty much tells a lot. I don't think Meat felt like > anything more than most of us do on our jobs some days. > Caught between the record company, Desmond, managers and > having to meet commitments. > > I usually take what Meat says with a box of salt, > especially when he gets angry and his real nature comes > out. But in the case of this album I think he was catching > hell from all sides and that is a big reason why he > dislikes it so much now. > > I think it all boils down to having to meet commitments > to numerous people and the pressure that brings which > hurts creativity. Was it a good album as compared to say > "Midnight at the Lost and Found"? Certainly so. But it > just was not a "Bat 3" more of "Welcome to the > Neighborhood 2" with more stress. > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Meat Loaf talks Jim Steinman reunion - Rolling Stone - Infinite_Victims 02:36 pm UTC 07/29/16 |
| Next: | re: Meat Loaf talks Jim Steinman reunion - Rolling Stone - renegadeangel 09:07 pm UTC 07/30/16 |
| Thread: |
|