What does it sound like?:
Like many, I’ve been snotty about Marillion. The fact is, they are a different and far, FAR better band than they were in their earliest incarnation. Steve Hogarth’s description of themselves as akin to “Radiohead and Pink Floyd in touch with its feminine side” is about right; emotionally intelligent modern progressive rock (which is what Radiohead are, albeit hipper). The first half of the concert DVD is their most recent (and excellent) album, “F.E.A.R” which goes through styles, textures, emotions, amuses, excites, and soothes in a way few albums by bands into their 4th decades do. The band are clearly top of their game in what they do, but unstarry with it. Lead singer Hogarth is a quality frontman who engages and emotes through the songs with wit and charm, and seems close to being overcome by the warmth and love the evening evoked. The second half is a selection of songs from the back catalogue played with a string section and a horn (COR!), but no “greatest hits” as such, nor anything pre-1989. It wasn’t needed, would have lowered the tone, and isn’t missed. It also looks like a million quid, which i am sure it must of cost to stage it; the blokes on the lamps must have got repetitive strain injuries from their knob-twiddling – and very good it was, too.
What does it all *mean*?
Let’s face it, “cool” is a rubbish concept used to justify emotional distance and denial of openness to what you personally like by wrongly caring about fashion and social pressure. To like Marillion is to define “uncool”, and the fans and band know it. And you know, this makes them warmer, kinder, more accepting people happy to be who they are and their pleasures. I’ve been thinking about fan bases as communities for a while, and Marillion define it. Many cult bands exist beyond the traditional music industry, and this “disruption” and “outsourcing” might actually be quite good for the artists who retain some artistic control and so please themselves and their fans more than artists who have to change according to marketing pressure. Marillion’s adoption of the Internet and crowd-sourcing was prescient. Also, progressive music as music with all sorts of music in it involving more complex themes can carry on if it keeps moving forward; the classic progressive bands were great, but are utterly ossified now, and when you think about it, their output was actually in quite a brief period, with subsequent decades producing mediocre work generally sustained by their earlier reputation. Marillion get better with time. So does Stephen Wilson. There is a lesson here.
Goes well with…
Not caring about your shape, diet, cool, what other people think, getting over yourself, tea, coffee, beer, wine, raki, a jazz-woodbine if you still do, driving (don’t watch the DVD, listen to the album), being kind and thoughtful.
Release Date:
Might suit people who like…
Progressive rock, Stephen Wilson, casual Radiohead fans, The Blue Nile, Sting, Todd Rundgren, even bloody Coldplay. Many Marillion songs, covered by big mainstream artists could be classics (“Pour My Love” from “Songs that Can’t be Made”, for example).
NigelT says
Thanks for the review Vince but, having seen Marillion at Cropredy in August, wild horses couldn’t drag me anywhere near this. I love The Blue Nile, and like a lot of Sting and lots of Coldplay (who really are terrific live), but I don’t see the common ground that you have! I found them plodding and frankly tedious, and Hogarth was plainly off his tits on something, which was amusing him much more than us. Each to their own, and they obviously please many people so good luck to them, but this isn’t for me I’m afraid!
Oh, Fish is at Croppers this year…is he any good now?
Vincent says
I think we will respectfully disagree on this. I’m alluding to modern intelligent pop with sometimes contemporary textures, but an old school foundation. One man’s plodding and tedious is another man’s Americana. But you enjoy what you like, mate, this isn’t written to convert or troll. I personally find Fish era Marillion extremely irritating. There again, I don’t like the Beatles till they start taking drugs. What do I know?
NigelT says
Exactly – I tried to base my opinion on what I’d seen and heard at a recent concert, and was interested in your review as I had had that experience. I wasn’t trying to be contrarian, and I didn’t think for a minute you would agree…mate. By the way, The Beatles were on drugs from the start, just different ones.
Vincent says
I’d forgotten that. Obv. not the ones I felt helped. OOAA.
Bargepole says
I really enjoyed this set – captures their excellent live show perfectly. And yes, Fish is still good!
Tiggerlion says
I’m not a fan of Marillion and I have no intention of buying the album but I really enjoyed your review. Thank you, Vincent.
Baron Harkonnen says
A good review Vincent. I have found it hard to love Marillion but I kept buying the albums, I’m daft like that.
Then ‘The Grateful Dead Effect’ kicked in. All of a sudden it all made sense. Marillion have progressed but I would avoid Radiohead influences, nobody can be that tedious and moanful. That’s my opinion for what it’s worth.
Nigel, Fish is much better than Coldplay so you should enjoy him. If only for his tales.
bobness says
I’m a big fan, and even had the parody T-shirt.
“Marillion – uncool as f**k”
dai says
Not sure where the “Radiohead are prog” comes from. They started out as a crunchy, punky guitar band, more or less perfected on The Bends and OK Computer, then moved almost completely into ambient, electronic, noodling (which I think is brilliant). Their songs are short and the lyrics have nothing to do with castles, fairies or ancient minstrels.