scottST Posted November 11, 2005 Report Share Posted November 11, 2005 okay' date=' as far as i am aware, "I'm Not Okay" needed a re-release before anyone actually gave a fuck. in my book, that's saying something about a band like My Chemical Romance...[/quote']there's nothing wrong with re-releasing songs....i mean for example, Interpol re-releasing Slow Hands......Muse re-releasing Muscle Museum.....Snow Patrol re-releasing Spitting Games....all excellent bands and excellent songs.....but being honest i don't know why they do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattJimF Posted November 11, 2005 Report Share Posted November 11, 2005 all excellent bands and excellent songs.....but being honest i don't know why they do it.Money basically. They re-release the songs to make more money, usually repackaging the single with different songs so the people that bought it originally have to buy it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Posted November 11, 2005 Report Share Posted November 11, 2005 Money basically. They re-release the songs to make more money' date=' usually repackaging the single with different songs so the people that bought it originally have to buy it again.[/quote']What if you originally released your best song as the first single, so you'd get airplay and attention - and then thought "hang on, this song never got where it deserved as a single" and re-released it accordingly? Singles don't make money anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larsen B Posted November 11, 2005 Report Share Posted November 11, 2005 there's nothing wrong with re-releasing songs....i mean for example' date=' Interpol re-releasing Slow Hands......Muse re-releasing Muscle Museum.....Snow Patrol re-releasing Spitting Games....all excellent bands and excellent songs.....but being honest i don't know why they do it.[/quote']I think it's fine to re-release singles where the original release didn't get enough exposure and it's a song with the commercial potential to do better second time round. But all of the songs you mentioned and I'm Not Okay received more than enough exposure first time round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pop-notmyface Posted November 12, 2005 Report Share Posted November 12, 2005 there's nothing wrong with re-releasing songs....i mean for example' date=' Interpol re-releasing Slow Hands......Muse re-releasing Muscle Museum.....Snow Patrol re-releasing Spitting Games....all excellent bands and excellent songs.....but being honest i don't know why they do it.[/quote']but the point is, did YOU think they were excellent when you first heard them or were you beaten into aureal-submission until you liked it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottST Posted November 12, 2005 Report Share Posted November 12, 2005 i did think they were excellent first time round.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pop-notmyface Posted November 12, 2005 Report Share Posted November 12, 2005 i did think they were excellent first time round....one of the few then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marn Posted November 12, 2005 Report Share Posted November 12, 2005 If I recall correctly the original video was mainly filmed in their houses. They were crap then and amazingly, they still are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pop-notmyface Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 If I recall correctly the original video was mainly filmed in their houses. They were crap then and amazingly' date=' they still are.[/quote']Amen Brother! thoust speak the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.