Ace said:

Holy crap. I don't think I've EVER been able to do that.

Cinnie said:

I'm sayin'! And before Nils had his double hip replacement, he would do all sorts of crazy shit onstage (backflip off a mini trampoline, running somersault - BOTH WHILE PLAYING HIS FREAKIN' GUITAR! ).

Those dudes are crazy!

Ace said:

I love the fuck out of Bruce Springsteen.

Even though I was a fan of Prince first and probably like Prince's catalog more, I think I get more emotionally out of Bruce's work. And call me a fool, but I think Bruce puts on the better show. Prince puts on the best "pop show" out of all of the 80's mega-stars, but there's just something about a Springsteen show that Prince is unwilling (or can't) do. I think a big part of it is that Prince wants some sort of distance between himself and the music. I remember reading something about P erasing a song from a tape that was too "real"; Bruce's music is just a big emotional outpouring. I gotta give it up for that. Can't imagine P releasing something like "My Hometown" or "Streets of Philadelphia". Even when a little glimpse of the real Prince leaks out (like Old Friends For Sale), he has to fuck with it and remove most of the humanity from it (compare the '86 version of the song with the take that was actually released in '99).

Anyway, my point being... the Boss rules.

Springsteen did a good job...not as great at Prince's..but he did a satisfactory job. I can say at least Springsteen's performance was more entertaining that that year that Paul McCartney performed...I was bored out of my fucking mind.

but am I the only one who was disappointed that Springsteen didn't perform "Born in the U.S.A."????? I just knew that he was going to perform that song, especially with our new president in office and all...but he didn't. I was bummed.
[Edited 2/1/09 19:40pm]

missfee said:

'U.S.A.' is an anti-war song. I thought there was a teeny chance he might play it with a reference to troops returning from Iraq, but I'm kinda glad he didn't. His stated intention was to make those 12 minutes "a party" and I think he succeeded. I had predicted he would dedicate "Working on a Dream" to Obama (after all, he debuted it at an Obama rally) and was surprised that he did not.

Ace said:

I'm actually glad he did that too. He didn't make it patriotic, he made it a party and he fulfilled that promise.

I'm not really disappointed by that. I think of that song as the equivalent of Prince's "Purple Rain" or "When Doves Cry". Everyone who sees Prince live expects to hear those songs, and I really love the periods when he refused to pull those songs out on tour. Bruce didn't play "Born in the USA" when I saw him live last year, and I was quite content with the show, nonetheless.

Timmy84 said:

On another board, before the Super Bowl, I said this is what I would put in that 12 minutes, if I were Bruce:

1. "Glory Days" - Throws Wal*Mart a bone and it can be fun when he does a little spoken piece with Steven.

2. "Working on a Dream" - Dedicated to President Obama

3. "Ramrod" - A slight song on record, but ridiculously fun live!

You are all overblowing Prince's performance big time. Sure it was great, but he was not on top of his game that nite by any means, and the selection of songs? 2 freaking covers? I do give him props for playing in the rain, the Purple Rain performance kicked ass, his playing was on and off at times throughout, good performance, not great.

I liked Springsteen performance but I liked Prince's and Tom Petty's performance better. Prince is still the best one. I think his halftime show had a lot of emotions. That stage was beauiful. It was cool he performed Purple Rain and it started to rain actually.
[Edited 2/1/09 20:27pm]

I know Bruce is a great live performer and songwriter but don't you ever feel that musically, his stuff is simple? It seems i've seen him tread the same folk and 50's rock and roll chords over and over.

Compare Max Weinberg to John Blackwell and you get my point.

Ace said:

He was way 2 excited... I watched it with a bunch of young adults who didnt know who the Boss was and totally mad fun of him throughout his performance

Sorry, but no one's gonna top Purple Rain in the rain. That was classic.
Bruce seems like a nice guy but I've never been a fan of his music. It looks like he's in pain when he's singing, then I end up getting a headache. But he's one of those performers who even though I don't like his music, I admire him for other things like his political views.

jdcxc said:

Well, yes Max and Blackwell are entirely different kinds of drummers.

As for the simplicity of his music, I guess my question would be, "So what?". In the words of Mick Jones, "It don't need no complicated thing", wouldn't you agree?

That said, Springsteen wasn't always about the I/IV/V/VIm. Go back and listen to his pre-'78 work and the music's much more complex.

pennylover said:

With age comes wisdom.

shygirl said:

He also wrote this, which means he gets a pass from me no matter what:

PicassoFace said:

Well for people for who aren't really die hard Bruce Springsteen fans, I did expect him to play "USA"...other than that, I felt the performance was just good, or just okay. It was even a little boring. Wonder what old wonder they going to get to play the next Superbowl half time show....Bob Dylan??? Willie Nelson????

AlexdeParis said:

From Dave Marsh's Two Hearts:

Purplestar88 said:

That part was so touching how fate played a part in his performance!

Springsteen was good,but it seemed too short. I also wanted to hear Born In The USA.

A lot of energy into the show, but the sound dude really needed to turn up Bruce's mic. At the party I was at, everyone was like: "What's he singing?"

i slept through the whole thing. when i woke up the game was over.

Springsteen's set was great & his attempt to connect with his audience both in the stadium & at home was largely unique & special for this type of event.

Axchi696 said:

I'm a big Springsteen fan (have been for 25 years now) but I have seen quite a few poor shows with him between 1988 and 1995).
Prince shows can go totally mad as well and he has a huge catalog of emotional tunes as well.
It's not because you don't sing about your mum cooking in the kitchen or about your brother who lost his job and your dad who was killed at war that your music is not real. It does not make sense at all.
[Edited 2/2/09 2:44am]

jdcxc said:

Same recipe over and over again. I love Bruce but his limits are obvious.

ThreadBare said:

I was surprised he hit the wrong notes a few times. He couldn't sing high notes last night and was breathless at some stage as well. I had never seen him having such issues before.

sarkozyiszeman said:

As are Prince's. However, Bruce has been considerably more productive in recent years & does not bore his audience with cover after cover. Furthermore, Springsteen is not afraid to take a stand politically, to express himself & to identify with his fans. He's a much bigger talent & a much bigger person than Prince in a lot of ways.

viewaskew said:

Sorry but you won't find many artists as versatile as prince, capable of composing stuff as different from each other as Alexa de Paris, DiscoJellyFish and Colonized Mind.
Prince is way better technically.
But don't get me wrong I love Bruce's compositions.

Regarding covers you must be joking. Springsteen has done a whole tour of covers with the Pete Seeeger Sessions.

I saw twice last summer and had 4 covers in the first show and five in the second one.

When I saw Prince at the O2 arena, he played up to 3 covers in each show I have attended. You kinda exagerate here mate.

Then you're talking about talent. You're right; Prince is not in the same league, he is a genius, not simply talented. hehe


[Edited 2/2/09 3:31am]

OMG, I loved his performance
He's so charismatic and energetic. And he really has a shit hot band.
But I have to give it to Prince. I think Bruce would have tied Prince if the song selection was less vanilla.