This is the Thread Where You Bash REM's Monster

when you respond to me with "oh come on" then i start to like... wonder why i'm even trying to explain this to you

Hmm, he was pretty confident even by the Green tour but it also seemed to be him embracing his celebrity significantly more than ever before. Maybe that was hitched to him coming out or his wealth or maybe even just being in his 30s.

Not being a Roxy-phile (although I did also recently listen to the Roxy albums in the order presented on your blog), what's the connection you were making Al?

― Joe Gargan (dandydonweiner), Monday, November 4, 2019

I hope I addressed these points here.

Yeah, and better than I ever could. Your blog is a joy, btw. It's hard to keep up with all your lists, but often I make playlists from them. You know, if that kind of shit matters.

That said, I really don't see much of the playfulness or sexiness that others often reference in Monster. I think that overall, I'm just not taken with the arrangements much at all.

The “loud rockers” on Document, Green, and Monster all feel very different to me; can’t really articulate why.

the mixes, the hooks, the melodies are typically more straight forward and anthemic.

(on Document and Green)

I would even go so far as to say that, until the band started to repeat themselves on NAIHF, it’s hard for me to imagine any song from an R.E.M. album fitting on a different R.E.M. album. Maaaaybe there’s a little bleedover btw. Pageant and Document.

BTW they recorded most of NAIHF on the Monster tour. I'd forgotten that.

I wonder if a (not-so-)secret reason they stuck all those weaksauce demos on this reissue was to make a point — “Look how hard we worked to avoid repeating ourselves... We threw out all this stuff!”

Yeah it opened them up creatively for sure - it was clear from the Document -> Green -> OOT -> Automatic trajectory that they were self-defining as "folk rock" pretty much, but Monster said you know what? not doing that shit any more, here's something else.

http://exclaim.ca/music/article/torontos_sonic_boom_used_400_copies_of_r_e_m_monster_to_create_one_hell_of_a_window_display

giving some thought to the notion that the new mix is a troll - this is what you wanted, right? there ya go.

What a joy of a review, Brad. Beautiful writing, colorful and passionate.

^^^^^

^^^^

^^^

thanks y'all <3

i become someone
on command

'Monster' is so fucking sexy. It's the sexiest REM album ever, and I have great trouble understanding people who categorically deny this!

The new mix - listened to it tonight - is shit though. Properly shit. Like Brad wrote, it removes or pushes back everything that makes Monster Monster. It smooths over all the rough and ugly and daring edges that made Monster what Monster is. I can't understand Litt doing this again and this being the result; even if it was in his free-ish time, come the fuck on...

It's a mystery to me how thousands of Monster cd's ended up in the $1 bins in the US. Perhaps here in Europe ppl were too ashamed to return their cd, idk? I'm not saying Monster wasn't rejected by some, but nowhere near on the scale like it was in the US. Regardless, this album still steams and rocks. One of those rare albums that will only gain praise and climb higher as time passes.

I watched this interview y'day; Michael & Mike say that the producers of Friends (the sitcom) wanted to use "Shiny Happy People" as the theme song, and the band said no, so NBC hired another band to do an "R.E.M.-style" song. (This has nothing to do with Monster, other than the time period, but I thought it was funny.)

Pretty good interview and track by track commentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJje9gA9jsI

wait where is brad's review??

https://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/rem-monster-25th-anniversary-edition/

thank you!

yes, terrific.

It's a mystery to me how thousands of Monster cd's ended up in the $1 bins in the US...

The packaging and inserts and stuff in this box are really nicely done.

Wow — in these liner notes, Stipe is really effusive about Michael Hutchence, and what a great friend and influence he was.

Why do the credits for the Scott Litt Remix™ say “Mixed by Clif Norrell”?

The two of them work together, Litt producer and Norrell engineer - so I'd presume the aesthetic decisions were made by Litt and Norrell created the corresponding mixes.

That’s funny, he’s like — “Clif, turn that knob a little... a little more.... wait, too much”

My guess is Litt would handle the "why" and Norrell the "how" - there are lots of nuances in mixing beyond turning things up and down and panning them left or right, not that I am any kind of expert.
I still think the new mixes are a troll and am disappointed I wasn't lauded for my penetrating insight.

The new mix of "Bang and Blame" somehow brings into focus how much that song is a revisit of "Orange Crush" (but I like "Orange Crush" a lot better)

xp I like yr troll theory, but it sounds like Litt really wasn’t happy with the OG mix

The fact that the band is doing press for this, or that Stipe neatened his retirement beard and apparently took out the septum piercing, are further indicators that a reunion could be in the works.

But it’s only Michael & Mike doing all the things!

It is interesting how heavily this one’s been promoted, though. I’m surprised myself at how much I’ve enjoyed getting back into it

Did they promote all those other reissues? Did Stipe participate? I can't remember.

I don’t know, but Peter & Bill didn’t even show up for the liner-notes booklet interview.

I’m surprised myself at how much I’ve enjoyed getting back into it

Yep, same here!

The album has imo always been exceptionally good and the odd production is both the point of the exercise and one advantage it has over a lot of other ‘90s stabs at making some kind of future rock (vs modern rock).

I’ve really grown to like the remix... with the alternate takes, etc., it makes for a looser, scrappier album; maybe more “musical,” in some ways (insofar as it brings out some of the individual parts). As a complement (not a replacement!), I think it’s a success.

The live "What's the Frequency" on this is really fun; I think Mills's goofy harmonies on it probably don't belong on the record but they sound great live, just remind me of REM's history as a band blowing away college parties with dynamite ramshackle classic rock covers

re:the promotion, I remember a bunch of interviews & things for the Automatic reissue a couple years ago similarly just with Mills & Stipe, but it definitely seems like theyre doing more promo for this for whatever reason.

I really like the "doddering old married couple" dynamic that the two of them seem to have developed. Theres a really funny unboxing video with the two of them going through the monster set and showing almost none of it to the camera, just leafing through the pages and muttering "oh that looks cool, oh look at that, how neat" to each other.

Yeah, I find myself liking these guys all over again.

Btw- it hit me today that pieces of the vocal melody of "You" are sort of tweaked/recycled from "Fretless" (another great song)

I’ve mentioned this release to a few friends (R.E.M. fans) irl... they haven’t heard/bought it yet, but both mentioned that it’s covered in a recent episode of that Scott Aukerman/Adam Scott podcast. Sounds like those guys like the remix, fwiw.

Haha, that unboxing video is rather amusing.

Elsewhere on the Artist 100, R.E.M. debuts at No. 91, thanks to a 25th anniversary deluxe reissue of the band's classic album Monster. The set, which generated the Alternative Songs No. 1s "What's the Frequency, Kenneth?" and "Bang and Blame," originally spent two weeks at No. 1 on the Billboard 200 beginning upon its debut on Oct. 15, 1994, and re-enters the latest ranking at No. 115 with 7,000 units earned, up 1,237%. The set also starts at No. 2 on the Vinyl Albums chart.

Monster became R.E.M.'s second of two Billboard 200 No. 1s, following 1991's Out of Time. The group disbanded in 2011.