News Burning Ambition Documentary

srfc said:
Steve's not a fool, he knows the 90's, and specifically when Blaze was in the band, was not Maiden's heyday, but beyond that, I would say, no other band leader has been prepared to stand over their lesser periods as much as Steve stands over the Blaze era. If anything he has often been referred to as being stubborn in that regard.
Click to expand...
I think when people refer to Steve wanting to forget some of the 90’s I don’t think they are specifically referring to just the blaze years.

You are right that Steve stands over the Blaze years proudly and rightly so. The issues with the 90’s period that maybe the band doesn’t want to dwell on is the whole Bruce leaving affair. When Bruce announced he was leaving but then still did the FOTD tour that must have been so awkward for the band to go out every night with a singer they know doesn’t want to be there.

I remember in the uk press around this time there was a lot of mud slinging and name calling. Steve once said in an interview “Bruce would record a country and western album if he thought it would sell” lol. The band all accused Bruce of putting no effort in during the tour and mumbling words on stage and only ever put effort in if cameras were filming like at Donnington.

That’s the 90’s stuff that Steve and the band don’t want to drag up. Plus Steve was in a dark place going through a divorce. The band ploughed on with Blaze but I imagine it was tough when a lot of fans and press were unkind about blaze and the band were playing small venues and album sales were low.

Then the band had to deal with firing Blaze which couldn’t have been easy as I recall Steve has said he was happy for him to stay but other members of the band wanted him out.

Steve might stand by the blaze years but the 90’s was the decade of un rest and un happiness within the band, more than any other time in their history.
 
AncientMariner_Essex said:
I think when people refer to Steve wanting to forget some of the 90’s I don’t think they are specifically referring to just the blaze years.

You are right that Steve stands over the Blaze years proudly and rightly so. The issues with the 90’s period that maybe the band doesn’t want to dwell on is the whole Bruce leaving affair. When Bruce announced he was leaving but then still did the FOTD tour that must have been so awkward for the band to go out every night with a singer they know doesn’t want to be there.

I remember in the uk press around this time there was a lot of mud slinging and name calling. Steve once said in an interview “Bruce would record a country and western album if he thought it would sell” lol. The band all accused Bruce of putting no effort in during the tour and mumbling words on stage and only ever put effort in if cameras were filming like at Donnington.

That’s the 90’s stuff that Steve and the band don’t want to drag up. Plus Steve was in a dark place going through a divorce. The band ploughed on with Blaze but I imagine it was tough when a lot of fans and press were unkind about blaze and the band were playing small venues and album sales were low.

Then the band had to deal with firing Blaze which couldn’t have been easy as I recall Steve has said he was happy for him to stay but other members of the band wanted him out.

Steve might stand by the blaze years but the 90’s was the decade of un rest and un happiness within the band, more than any other time in their history.
Click to expand...
That its true the country album and the critics about his mumbling when the cameras were not there. That was nicko i remember nicko saying that couldnt remember bruces name in a promotion of virtual xi.
 
GhostofCain said:
To be fair to Mick Wall, he was not the writer of the additional chapters on subsequent editions. I seem to remember Dave Ling was responsible for the updates on one edition and a different person on the other one (I will check later today at home).

Edit: To this day, I am yet to find the answer about the reasons for the fallout between Mick Wall and Rod Smallwood that meant subsequent editions of the biography were completed by different people. I have always wondered if a tongue-in-cheek review of the Shepherd's Bush Empire 2001 fan club shows could have been the reason. I have been unable to find it online, but if I remember correctly the different members of the band were described as Mr Men characters (Mr Cocky was one of them :lol: ).
Click to expand...
I guess I never paid attention to who wrote the additional material on the newer editions, just paid attention to the name on the cover. Thanks for the info!
GhostofCain said:
I think @CA Bryers is probably referring to not openly discussing in-depth the reasons for the changes and turmoil during the 90s, including how the reunion was agreed.

Less than 4 weeks to know how this is dealt with in the documentary.
Click to expand...
This exactly. I blame Steve for a small handful of things--he is, after all the Boss so the buck stops with him most of the time--but I try not to hammer him needlessly. One of the things that's most apparent is, yes, the band's stance on talking about the latter days of the Blaze era and the split itself is that he and the band choose not to talk about it. Personally, I respect that, because it's a policy of "not kicking Blaze when he's down"--i.e. fired.

Like I said: we all know Steve is proud of the era. I LOVE that he is, because I am too. I probably spoke too carelessly by using "sweep under the rug" in that context (on second thought, I 100% did). Since they don't talk much about the time prior to and including Blaze's firing, I could see Steve disliking aspects of the documentary because they did focus on that controversial span of time. If the documentary-makers did, that is. We'll see.

But yes. Terribly poor choice of words. My apologies.
 
AncientMariner_Essex said:
The band all accused Bruce of putting no effort in during the tour and mumbling words on stage and only ever put effort in if cameras were filming like at Donnington.
Click to expand...

This bootleg does two things at the same time: it validates the band's version about Bruce not giving a shit, and also showcases that Steve cannot sing for toffee.

Warning: this is a painful thing to listen to if you are an Iron Maiden fan.

 
I think it's pretty refreshing and fun to hear all the imprompto-rewrites of the vocal lines. Pretty obvious he feels there's no obligation to sing the songs the way they are supposed to be sung, but it's not bad singing (to be fair, I've just listened to random snippets). He just... Does whatever the hell he wants in the spur of the moment.
 
GhostofCain said:
This bootleg does two things at the same time: it validates the band's version about Bruce not giving a shit, and also showcases that Steve cannot sing for toffee.

Warning: this is a painful thing to listen to if you are an Iron Maiden fan.

Click to expand...
I would take Aces High 2025 over this any day! Imagine thinking you'd seen the last of Bruce with Maiden on this tour and then seeing the band a few years later on the reunion tour, I would think it was a miracle.
 
UpTheIrons said:
I would take Aces High 2025 over this any day! Imagine thinking you'd seen the last of Bruce with Maiden on this tour and then seeing the band a few years later on the reunion tour, I would think it was a miracle.
Click to expand...

I saw them on both those tours, luckily the Dublin gig on the Real Live Tour was one of the better ones from that tour, plus it was my first gig so I probably would have enjoyed it anyway even if it was like Turin.
 
GhostofCain said:
It is fairly convenient for me as I live quite close to London (35 minutes by train), but as far as competitions go, this is somewhat underwhelming.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Prize is to stand in the crowd along the red carpet and see the movie a day or two before the release IIRC? Very underwhelming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top