---

For fellow Kurt fans...

---

Montage of Heck and the Impossible Kurt Cobain <---click link
By Lindsay Zoladz
April 24, 2015 10:54 a.m.

About a half hour into Brett Morgen’s new documentary Montage of Heck, the camera lingers on a note written in the slanted, scratchy handwriting of a teenage Kurt Cobain. It’s intended for his first girlfriend, Tracy Marander, with whom he lived for a little while in Olympia, Washington, while he was first putting together a band he briefly thought of calling Man Bug or Fecal Matter before finally settling on Nirvana. “Don’t read my diary when I’m gone,” the note says. Then, just below it, in the same script: “When you wake up, please read my diary. Look through my things, and figure me out.” What are we to make of this contradiction? What is its tone? Sarcastic? Playful? Needy? Marander hints that it might be all of the above, but the only person who can really tell us for sure has been gone now for 21 years.

This note takes on an eerie double meaning as soon as Morgen films it, though; in that moment, you almost get this sense that Cobain is communing directly with the filmmaker — or even you, the viewer, who has purchased a ticket to the film and may or may not have also shelled out $25 a decade ago to buy Cobain’s published journals. In the works since 2007 (when Courtney Love gave the director access to a private storage unit of Cobain’s belongings, including 108 never-before-heard self-recorded cassette tapes), the impressionistic, collagelike Montage of Heck is the result of Morgen’s trip through Cobain’s archives — seven years of looking through his things and trying his best to figure him out.

In the two decades since his suicide, a small cottage industry has developed that mythologizes Cobain’s despair and plumbs every last corner of his archives for insight into his life and death. Beyond the journals — and the perennially reprinted T-shirts and dorm-room posters — there have been countless Nirvana-related books (the most respected and authoritative of which is Charles Cross’s 2002 tome Heavier Than Heaven), and a few films that purposely played fast and loose with the truth (the provocatively pulpy Kurt & Courtney, Gus Van Sant’s fictionalized fever-dream Last Days). Montage of Heck is the first documentary claiming to tell some approximation of the actual story, and the first one to bear that dubious adjective “authorized.” In a scene that Morgen includes with what I’m sure is at least a pinch of irony, we’re reminded of what Cobain and his widow Courtney Love thought of the writers who previously sought to tell some version of the story without permission: “You have absolutely no @#$%& idea what you’re doing,” Cobain wrote in 1993 to Britt Collins, who was attempting to write an ill-fated book called Nirvana: Flower Sniffin’, Kitty Pettin’, Baby Kissin’ Corporate Rock Whores. “I will make your life a living hell on earth because we will sue the shit out of you.”

With the cooperation of Love and daughter Frances Bean Cobain (who recently admitted that she’s not a Nirvana fan, with a sort of free-spirited candor that probably would have made her dad proud), Morgen has certainly uncovered a treasure trove of Cobain ephemera. And what’s most striking about Montage of Heck is just how much of his short life Cobain actually wrote down — and recorded and drew and, most important, preserved. Cobain saved everything, apparently, and some of the scrawled-down fragments that Morgen uncovers and artfully animates into the film feel almost too good to be true. Consider that this list actually exists:

Smells Like Teen Spirit

needed:

1. School Gym

2. Cast of a Hundred Students, 1 custodian

3. Cheerleader outfits with Anarchy A on chest

4. Access to abandoned mall

5. lots of fake jewelry

6. mercedes benz

The Cobain of Montage of Heck comes off as someone with a relentless drive for self-expression, but also for even everyday forms of self-documentation. Those 108 storage-unit tapes, as it turns out, are not dozens of hours of unreleased Nirvana demos, but instead noisy sonic collages that feature fragments of found sound interspersed with recorded phone calls and occasional bits of Cobain telling — as if to a phantom therapist — stories of formative childhood memories. Who were these tapes intended for, exactly? (Is this how artfully lonely teenagers spent their evenings before Tumblr?) They’re so intimate that it feels a little uncomfortable to be listening to them, but in a strange way, it also feels like Cobain wanted someone to stumble upon them, too. They ooze with this youthful desire to be heard, which Cobain never had the privilege of outgrowing. Again, an unresolvable tension emerges between Don’t read my diary and Look through my things, figure me out. As devotees of the eternally 27-year-old Cobain know all too well, this contradiction is at the center of almost everything he did — and everything he left behind.

Morgen — who’s best known for the similarly poetic, memoirish Robert Evans doc The Kid Stays in the Picture — tells Cobain’s story in the closest possible approximation to his subject’s aesthetic. He animates Cobain’s dark doodles with twitches and blood spurts, and through vintage anatomy-class B-roll, draws a (literally) visceral connection between the singer’s chronic stomach pain and the fury of his most guttural screams. (“I would give up anything to have good health,” Cobain says at one point, but in the next breath, he takes it back, admitting that his stomach pain “helps [him] create.”) It works most of the time, but there are certainly times when Morgen’s heavy stylization becomes overwrought. There were a few too-earnest moments on the soundtrack — a plinking lullaby rendition of “All Apologies” accompanying Cobain’s early home movies; an operatic choir arrangement of “Smells Like Teen Spirit” that overdramatizes the band’s sudden rise to fame — during which I could easily imagine Cobain rolling his eyes.

“THE MOST INTIMATE ROCK DOC EVER,” proclaims the Rolling Stone pull-quote on Montage of Heck’s DVD screener, but it’s that very feeling of familiarity between film and subject that left me feeling a little uneasy. Something about Montage of Heck’s conjured, artfully crafted intimacy tricks us into thinking we know Cobain better than we actually do — which tricks us into thinking we can finally make some kind of neat, cause-and-effect sense of his death.

While watching the film, I kept thinking about The Silent Woman, Janet Malcolm’s great book about Sylvia Plath and the problems with biographies that purport to speak for the mythologized dead. In an early chapter, she reminds us that the term authorized, while it seems to bear some sort of mark of absolute truth, really just means that the biographer was working with a certain degree of cooperation with the deceased’s family — helping put their particular, sanctioned version of him out into the world. It’s worth remembering that there are other versions out there, too. Rather egregiously, Morgen’s film contains no interview footage of Dave Grohl (and almost too much Krist Novoselic), and though he’s said recently that this was his stylistic choice, it’s hard to believe that this has nothing to do with Courtney Love. (If you want Grohl’s side of the story, look no further than the Seattle episode of his series Sonic Highways, which — touché — egregiously excludes any mention of Courtney Love.) Montage of Heck can’t possibly shoot from all the angles; it can’t possibly represent every version of its endlessly prismatic subject. The truest version of Kurt Cobain is somewhere in the spaces between the millions of words that have been written about him, at once embarrassed and deeply delighted that we’re still rifling through his diaries, trying to figure him out.

Thanks for this swiss. I'll be checking it out for sure although I'm still pissed at Brett Morgen for excluding Ian Stewart in Crossfire Hurricane and I'm not particularly excited about any editing influence Courtney Love might have had on the film.

peace

I would hope its good. I thought Crossfire Hurricane was excellent. Right up there with the best music documentaries nowadays. I've thought this Cobain one could suck, but I'll admit with Brett's input I'm a bit more interested. Honestly, my fear about it is Courtney. Whether you like her or not, her presence is something you have to talk about, and with her being so close to the production I don't want something thats held back. I want the real story and not something she glamorizes. I'll be shocked if they say anything bad about her.

I think it is on the 4th that it premieres on HBO. Looks really good.

Interesting account of a directors screening and Q&A of the film here in Seattle this week..


[www.thestranger.com]

"Then a woman shouted her displeasure that the documentary was all “from Courtney [Love]’s point of view.” As Morgen began to defend himself, the woman said she knew both Kurt and Courtney, and reiterated her point.

It was definitely not the glowing reception HBO execs were probably hoping for in Seattle. But Morgen handled it all quite well and seemed open to the feedback. Although McMurray tried to bring the discussion back into polite territory, Morgen stopped him. “I think we had a thing about we weren’t supposed to take questions, like, to protect me,” Morgen said, “but @#$%& that. Anyone who wants to ask a question, just ask a question. I’m pretty confident in the point of view of this film.”

Quote
MisterDDDD
Interesting account of a directors screening and Q&A of the film here in Seattle this week..


[www.thestranger.com]

"Then a woman shouted her displeasure that the documentary was all “from Courtney [Love]’s point of view.” As Morgen began to defend himself, the woman said she knew both Kurt and Courtney, and reiterated her point.

It was definitely not the glowing reception HBO execs were probably hoping for in Seattle. But Morgen handled it all quite well and seemed open to the feedback. Although McMurray tried to bring the discussion back into polite territory, Morgen stopped him. “I think we had a thing about we weren’t supposed to take questions, like, to protect me,” Morgen said, “but fvck that. Anyone who wants to ask a question, just ask a question. I’m pretty confident in the point of view of this film.”

Whoa -- that's pretty amazing! Good for Morgen (and, perhaps also, shrewd).

I'm equal parts hopeful and uneasy about anything re: Kurt (meaning: books, articles, essays, film). I've generally had my head in the sand for the past 6 months, so did not know this was coming down the pike until yesterday.

I don't think "history" is treating Kurt Cobain or Nirvana well. The late '80s and early '90s was a short but fairly revolutionary time, marked by many things DIY--societally, culturally, artistically, politically (and in conjunction with what the early internet pioneers were doing) and therefore, being DIY, being subversive---right before this current era, when huge corporate control pretty much took over.

To me, that late '80s to early '90s time period seemed to be a last gasp--correction: not "last," but more, a period representing powerful and successful attempts to wrest free of corporate/big-money power and control, find and define alternatives, and make culturally honest and impactful art across all musical genres [except big corporate rock and C&W, but, yes, including incredibly intelligent hip hop].

Because of the nature of the era --i.e., disdainful of and subversive to dominant power structures-- which is reflected in Nirvana's work, and Kurt's attitude, mainstream depiction of Kurt must discredit and trivilaize him. To make what he was saying and doing childish, and ultimately not-credible. As a friend remarked, one of the worst things about suicide is that "history" gets to define everything about you and your life to that point as leading toward the inevitable conclusion of suicide--everything that came before that becomes "evidence" of a disturbed nature. You become, nearly indelibly, drawn as a sad figure in history.

So...it serves the corporate-drawn and other restrictive societal narratives reinforcing adherence to conventionality that Kurt Cobain was a nut job. That his subversive and deeply irreverent nature in which he (often with humor, an important personality element, unfortunately often left out of the cartoonish mopey characterizations of Kurt Cobain) called into question the validity of any sort of presumed status quo power structures, are retrospectively drawn all as symptoms of instability and mental illness (i.e., evidenced by his eventual suicide).

If for no other reason, and there are many other reasons, that is why it is stupid to die young if you can otherwise help it. You don't get to design or manage your own narrative.

Which leads you to others vying to do exactly that. And in this case you've got:

[1] Courtney Love who--as said above--has her own lens through which to see and to "present" Kurt

[2] his "record company" with their perspectives and opportunities to spin and monetize him however may be most profitable

[3] the remaining members of Nirvana (and I'm not sure of their trip--but get the sense they're becoming completely exhausted by the whole topic, like remaining members of the Doors--I once saw Ray Manzarek give a talk to a few dozen people in San Francisco, and this woman asked "What was Jim really like?" and he went ballistic, reminding her the Doors was not just Jim Morrison, and did she think he hadn't been asked that question a million times, and did she actually believe he was going to right then and there share some little insider nugget he'd never shared before--none of which I blame him, for being frustrated by, tho I was glad I wasn't that woman)

[4] various finger-wagging-see-kids-going-against-the-status-quo-will-lead-you-down-the-road-to-perdition folks

So...again, I'm always equally excited and leery of efforts to "document" Kurt.

And I'm not sure yet what I think of Brett Morgen.

From interviews with Morgen around the time Crossfire Hurricane was released, it was clear that he was receptive to Mick's vision for the film--and Mick's input into what it would, and would not, be.

Crossfire Hurricane made good use of archival footage (which I have no doubt this film does too), and I appreciated that about it, and believe Morgen executed that deftly and well. To me, it was more or less what might be expected as a 50th Anniversary public relations piece for the Rolling Stones.

So, I do look forward to seeing how Brett Morgen does with this film.

I don't have HBO, but hope it pops up elsewhere soon, to access it!

- swiss

I found it a little odd that they never mentioned Brett Morgen doing Crossfire Hurricane.

Looking forward to seeing this...There are some people in Seattle (where I live) a little too emotionally invested in Kurt's legacy one way or the other, and any new point of view is bound to be a threat to some people's particular feeling of ownership of that legacy. Any documentary, by its very nature, is a point of view. This is a welcome addition to what we know about Kurt and the band. Wonder why Grohl's interview was excluded though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-26 01:31 by 71Tele.

Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

Quote
alhavu1
Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

I don't know if they were so much overrated from a quality standpoint, but their output was certainly meagre (for obvious reasons). I remember people at the time comparing them to The Beatles, and I would alsways say "yeah, if Nirvana had made ten albums, you could compare them". I always thought The Replacements (a band that certainly influenced Nirvana and others) were as good or better, and Paul Westerberg was at least as good a songwriter as Kurt. He covered much of the same angst-ridden territory but with more humor and insight, in my opinion, but the 'Mats lost out to freaking KISS and Cat Stevens in the R&R Hall of Fame, while Nirvana was treated like Gods. Don't get me wrong, I think they were great, but the whole romantic destruction mythology around Kurt (and others like Janis, Morrision, etc) I find juvenile. Kurt conveniently left around the time of his "Satisfaction". He never got to transcend and grow as an artist. He opted out so he didn't challenge himself or us. Instead we have essentially two great records frozen in time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-26 01:43 by 71Tele.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
alhavu1
Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

I don't know if they were so much overrated from a quality standpoint, but their output was certainly meagre (for obvious reasons). I remember people at the time comparing them to The Beatles, and I would alsways say "yeah, if Nirvana had made ten albums, you could compare them". I always thought The Replacements (a band that certainly influenced Nirvana and others) were as good or better, and Paul Westerberg was at least as good a songwriter as Kurt. He covered much of the same angst-ridden territory but with more humor and insight, in my opinion, but the 'Mats lost out to freaking KISS and Cat Stevens in the R&R Hall of Fame, while Nirvana was treated like Gods. Don't get me wrong, I think they were great, but the whole romantic destruction mythology around Kurt (and others like Janis, Morrision, etc) I find juvenile. Kurt conveniently left around the time of his "Satisfaction". He never got to transcend and grow as an artist. He opted out so he didn't challenge himself or us. Instead we have essentially two great records frozen in time.

Generally agree, although I think they did have that magical something the others of that time didn't. Amy Winehouse is another example of relatively current rockers who left only enough to make an impression, not a legacy.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
71Tele

Quote
alhavu1
Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

I don't know if they were so much overrated from a quality standpoint, but their output was certainly meagre (for obvious reasons). I remember people at the time comparing them to The Beatles, and I would alsways say "yeah, if Nirvana had made ten albums, you could compare them". I always thought The Replacements (a band that certainly influenced Nirvana and others) were as good or better, and Paul Westerberg was at least as good a songwriter as Kurt. He covered much of the same angst-ridden territory but with more humor and insight, in my opinion, but the 'Mats lost out to freaking KISS and Cat Stevens in the R&R Hall of Fame, while Nirvana was treated like Gods. Don't get me wrong, I think they were great, but the whole romantic destruction mythology around Kurt (and others like Janis, Morrision, etc) I find juvenile. Kurt conveniently left around the time of his "Satisfaction". He never got to transcend and grow as an artist. He opted out so he didn't challenge himself or us. Instead we have essentially two great records frozen in time.

Generally agree, although I think they did have that magical something the others of that time didn't. Amy Winehouse is another example of relatively current rockers who left only enough to make an impression, not a legacy.

Oh, I agree that they had something magical. The only Seattle "grunge" band that did, in my opinion (and I had all of them forced down my throat at the time, it was hard to live here and not). I just think they were a moment in time, as great as that moment was.

Quote
71Tele
Looking forward to seeing this...There are some people in Seattle (where I live) a little too emotionally invested in Kurt's legacy one way or the other, and any new point of view is bound to be a threat to some people's particular feeling of ownership of that legacy. Any documentary, by its very nature, is a point of view. This is a welcome addition to what we know about Kurt and the band. Wonder why Grohl's interview was excluded though.

The article says the film was made at Courtney Love's behest (starting in 2007), and implies that Morgen deferred to her preference to keep Dave Grohl out of it. It will be interesting how he responds directly to that question -- excluding D. Grohl from the movie, as Morgen's "stylistic choice," does seem unintuitive.

It certainly will be interesting to hear how you and your fellow Seattle-ites perceive the film, Tele!

- swiss

Quote
71Tele

Quote
alhavu1
Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

I don't know if they were so much overrated from a quality standpoint, but their output was certainly meagre (for obvious reasons)...we have essentially two great records frozen in time.

Exactly.

Plus, Bleach is really good. (And Incesticide was a great find in 1992)

And it's a band that did some interesting boundary crossing, in terms of genres. And was not overtly political but culturally impactful in ways that were "little p" political.

Quote
24FPS
Generally agree, although I think they did have that magical something the others of that time didn't. Amy Winehouse is another example of relatively current rockers who left only enough to make an impression, not a legacy.

I didn't see your post at first, but was thinking earlier today of the similarities of the two--Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse--that they were nascent talents.

Quote
alhavu1
Sad story but they were sooooooooooo overrated

I'm not gonna knock anyone who likes Nirvana, but I just can't understand the appeal myself. Seems to be a lot like punk music to me, a whole lot of style and not much substance. The songs I have heard have all been really bland/depressing to me, and not that great from a musical standpoint (to my untrained ears).

I also feel that a lot of people (as a few have mentioned here) romanticize everything regarding Nirvana due to what happened and elevate their opinion of the group's work because of it.

Sorry if nobody agrees with me (I'm not trying to upset anyone here who likes Nirvana a few of my friends do) but I just thought I would put in my thoughts as constructively as possible.

I hope you guys enjoy the doc for you Nirvana/Kurt fans the same way I enjoyed Big Star's Doc a few years back - I feel it might be a bit like that from the vibes I am getting in the info so far.

I love Nirvana. My take on their claim to fame was that it was very introspective music, which of course appealed to teenagers worldwide, 'cause if this Cobain guy can bare his soul like that, why can't I..... Something nobody ever got from 80s hair metal.
In Utero is my fave album of theirs. Nevermind is pop compared to it (in a good way). True Nirvana fell off the path sometimes. Milk It being an example. You Know You're Right is another.

JumpingKentFlash

The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

Well, for Nirvana fans sake I hope he comes up with something new and interesting to tell them instead of recycling all the info that everyone and their brother already knows like "Crossfire"..

Quote
Blueranger
The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

I hate their sound but what you wrote is TRUE. Even if I hate Cobain's voice and the shitty 90's guitars sound I ALWAYS have some of their melodies in my head... and I must admit that they are not THAT bad! ><

There was also a new Elliott Smith documentary, didn't see it... Don't like this kind of movie that much but if it brings people into his music, that would be great.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-26 18:03 by RomanCandle.

I have to rethink my evaluation on Nirvana after realizing they were on the scene for as long as some of Rock's greatest heroes. Three years is all we got of Hendrix, and Joplin, and only a little more than that with Jim Morrison. (Also members of the 27 Club). Nirvana is one of those thunderclap bands that creates an attractive alloy of two genres, in their case punk and pop. When trying to explain the Stones alchemy I always play Not Fade Away to novitiates and point out how they smashed together Buddy Holly with the Bo Diddley beat.

The only difference with Nirvana is they seemed incomplete, like they needed maybe one more album to cement everything. Hendrix basically put out four albums worth of studio material (since one was a double) and a live album. You can pine for what he would have done, but what he did is enough for any artist. In Utero was a bummer that might look better if it was bookended with something not as thick and down.

Quote
swiss
To me, that late '80s to early '90s time period seemed to be a last gasp--correction: not "last," but more, a period representing powerful and successful attempts to wrest free of corporate/big-money power and control, find and define alternatives, and make culturally honest and impactful art across all musical genres [except big corporate rock and C&W, but, yes, including incredibly intelligent hip hop].

Because of the nature of the era --i.e., disdainful of and subversive to dominant power structures-- which is reflected in Nirvana's work, and Kurt's attitude, mainstream depiction of Kurt must discredit and trivilaize him. To make what he was saying and doing childish, and ultimately not-credible.

So...it serves the corporate-drawn and other restrictive societal narratives reinforcing adherence to conventionality that Kurt Cobain was a nut job. That his subversive and deeply irreverent nature in which he (often with humor, an important personality element, unfortunately often left out of the cartoonish mopey characterizations of Kurt Cobain) called into question the validity of any sort of presumed status quo power structures, are retrospectively drawn all as symptoms of instability and mental illness (i.e., evidenced by his eventual suicide). a sad figure in history.

- swiss

Interesting analysis swiss. But even people who don't die young often don't get to design their own narrative. In the end I believe the best view of who a person is/was is what get's them out of bed in the morning, what they do with their time and energy, secondarily what they say but the actions define the man. In Kurt's case it was obviously music and drugs, hard to make much out of the guy's life when he was basically a very private guy, didn't do much outside his music in the public realm and was obviously heavily addicted to heroin. The drugs were Kurt's real downfall, imo, if he would have lived longer and overcome them we might have been able to have a more complex and meaningful narrative of his life. Without more substance than what he left behind we are left with the music, the lyrics of which are probably the best glimpse of who Kurt was.

It Kurt's case he was certainly a magnet for the disenfranchised youth of the day, just like the rock music was for young people of the late 60's. Lots of punk kids out there looking for identity and community obviously found it through Nirvana and their music. Of course it was big corporate money power and control which facilitated his mass appeal, Kurt realized this and was apparently somewhat uncomfortable with the association but there are plenty of honest depictions of Kurt which don't depict him as a nut job or try to show in the context of their own "corporate" or restrictive narratives. The ones done by the people who were a part of the whole Seattle music scene at the time seem pretty honest and factual. It was a dark era and music scene which not only comes out in the music but in the stories of Kurt Cobain and Layne Staley.

Looking at Courtney Love, her history, her motivations, etc., I'm convinced she is exactly the wrong person to represent the legacy of Kurt. She has always seemed to have been drawn to the money, fame, lifestyle etc in a way Kurt never was. He would likely be appalled by what she has become with his money and I'm suspicious of anything she is involved with at this point. She has always seemed to have nothing but her own self-interests in mind, before, during and after her relationship with Kurt. One of the biggest narratives still popular with Kurt fans is the whole issue of Courtney being involved in his death. Based on what I've read it's a very good possibility.

That being said I'm looking forward to the interviews in this film but will probably take the overall message of the film with a grain of salt knowing it was the brain child of Courtney, probably financed with Kurt's money and not really done by an independent entity without a personal interest in the overall impression. It will be interesting to re-visit this thread after folks here have seen the film.

peace

Quote
Blueranger
The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

Very true. Many hardcore grunge or punk people don't want to admit that Cobain was as influenced by the Beatles as he was by punk. He was not the first writer to fuse punk attitude to great melody - I give Elvis Costello credit for that - but he was certainly not ashamed of his pop influences, to his credit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-26 23:17 by 71Tele.

Love Goon Squad and Accidents Will Happen by Elvis Costello.......

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Blueranger
The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

Very true. Many hardcore grunge or punk people don't want to admit that Cobain was as influenced by the Beatles as he was by punk. He was not the first writer to fuse punk attitude to great melody - I give Elvis Costello credit for that - but he was certainly not ashamed of his pop influences, to his credit.

Got to give producer Butch Vig some of the credit too. That Nevermind record was really done well to appeal to the mass market. Listening to Nirvana's live stuff prior to Mr. Vig's involvement and afterward, he obviously had a huge influence on their appeal to a wider audience.

When the heavy riffs, melodies and great songs of Nirvana, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains met good record production the results were pretty awesome.

peace

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Blueranger
The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

Very true. Many hardcore grunge or punk people don't want to admit that Cobain was as influenced by the Beatles as he was by punk. He was not the first writer to fuse punk attitude to great melody - I give Elvis Costello credit for that - but he was certainly not ashamed of his pop influences, to his credit.

Got to give producer Butch Vig some of the credit too. That Nevermind record was really done well to appeal to the mass market. Listening to Nirvana's live stuff prior to Mr. Vig's involvement and afterward, he obviously had a huge influence on their appeal to a wider audience.

When the heavy riffs, melodies and great songs of Nirvana, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains met good record production the results were pretty awesome.

peace

I don't think Alice In Chains, in particular, were in the same league as Nirvana.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Blueranger
The real reason Nirvana became as big as they were is pretty simple: Kurt Cobain was great in composing great straight-forward pop-melodies!
The Grunge-style was only an approach. They could have chosen to play any musical style and I'll bet they would still have reached succes.
No matter how chaotic they played, there was always a great chours to sing along to. The ultimate proof that Cobain's songs could work in any style, is their Unplugged album.

Very true. Many hardcore grunge or punk people don't want to admit that Cobain was as influenced by the Beatles as he was by punk. He was not the first writer to fuse punk attitude to great melody - I give Elvis Costello credit for that - but he was certainly not ashamed of his pop influences, to his credit.

Got to give producer Butch Vig some of the credit too. That Nevermind record was really done well to appeal to the mass market. Listening to Nirvana's live stuff prior to Mr. Vig's involvement and afterward, he obviously had a huge influence on their appeal to a wider audience.

When the heavy riffs, melodies and great songs of Nirvana, Soundgarden and Alice in Chains met good record production the results were pretty awesome.

peace

I don't think Alice In Chains, in particular, were in the same league as Nirvana.

Nirvana was certainly more darkly original, Kurt's compositions were probably better overall while AIC morphed into more classic rock. But Layne was a much better singer than Kurt imo, just amazing pipes and the haunting harmonies he developed with Jerry Cantrell were pretty special. Chris Cornell on the other hand kind of encompasses the best qualities of both Kurt and Layne, good singer and songwriter. Saw a solo Chris Cornell show where he played lots of his tunes on acoustic, mostly using strange tunings and was pretty blown away by his approach and creativity....it reminded by of some of Cobain's stuff.

I think Nirvana stood out because, except for a few exceptions, they really made a point to not sell out to the popular rock formulas which guaranteed big record sales and radio play, which both AIC and Soundgarden seemed to embrace.

The book Grunge is Dead by Greg Prato tells a very interesting oral history of the whole Seattle music scene through lots of interviews of the people who were there.

peace

Many rave reviews following Brett Morgen's "Kurt Cobain" documentairy in the Dutch major newspapers.
Bleach was my very first cool vinyl I bought, a dark and dirt album which was produced with a budget of some $600.
One track from the album Bleach: "Love Buzz" by Dutch rock band Shocking Blue was covered by Nirvana.

Quote
runaway
Many rave reviews following Brett Morgen's "Kurt Cobain" documentairy in the Dutch major newspapers.
Bleach was my very first cool vinyl I bought, a dark and dirt album which was produced with a budget of some $600.
One track from the album Bleach: "Love Buzz" by Dutch rock band Shocking Blue was covered by Nirvana.

Love Buzz is my favorite Nirvana cover -- adore that song!

Quote
swiss

Quote
runaway
Many rave reviews following Brett Morgen's "Kurt Cobain" documentairy in the Dutch major newspapers.
Bleach was my very first cool vinyl I bought, a dark and dirt album which was produced with a budget of some $600.
One track from the album Bleach: "Love Buzz" by Dutch rock band Shocking Blue was covered by Nirvana.

Love Buzz is my favorite Nirvana cover -- adore that song!

Thanks Swiss and here's some more info about Love Buzz

It was Kris Novoselic who convinced Kurt to cover the song and the song ended up being Nirvana's very first single - backed with Big Cheese.
Shocking Blue reached number 1 in the American Billboard in 1970 with the song: Venus.

Love Buzz Nirvana Live Paradiso 1991:





Love Buzz Shocking Blue:







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-28 15:30 by runaway.