A theory regarding Maiden History part 4

I also don't believe there will be a History Of Iron Maiden part 4 anytime soon. That being said I surely wouldn't mind they released it and if the main concert would be taken from the reunion/ Ed Hunter tour (provided they have footage with good quality) I would certainly buy it. One of the best setlists ever in Maiden history IMO. Some clips from the remainder 4 tours would be cool too: there's Raising Hell and Donnington 92 from Fear Of The Dark Tour and some TV broadcasts from The X Factour and Virtual XI tour. Regarding No Prayer On The Road I believe the only quality recording out there is Sanctuary and Run To The Hills during the 1991 Roskilde Festival. Nevertheless plenty of stuff to make a cool DVD.
 
To be honest, I have no interest in the documentary itself since the quality has been spiraling downward. Part 1 was done professionally and although part 2 also had some quality, it didn't really look like a "band" documentary, since it cover only 1 album/tour (compared to previous 7 years and four albums). ME is... some college student's work. I have no idea what their direction was for it, but they manage to make a fan bored while watching it and I have no interest in watching it ever again.

And the ship for 4th part has sailed when LOTB ship came in. What somebody here said, if someone else comes in (like Sam Dunn) there is a possibility for rest of the history (90s and reunion). Also, I don't think Bruce and Adrian have problem talking about their departures, but I also have a feeling they're not too enthusiastic about it. And same probably goes for the rest of the band. If I'd have to put my money on another documentary, I'd bet it would probably start in 1999.
 
Spambot said:
To be honest, I have no interest in the documentary itself since the quality has been spiraling downward. Part 1 was done professionally and although part 2 also had some quality, it didn't really look like a "band" documentary, since it cover only 1 album/tour (compared to previous 7 years and four albums). ME is... some college student's work. I have no idea what their direction was for it, but they manage to make a fan bored while watching it and I have no interest in watching it ever again.

And the ship for 4th part has sailed when LOTB ship came in. What somebody here said, if someone else comes in (like Sam Dunn) there is a possibility for rest of the history (90s and reunion). Also, I don't think Bruce and Adrian have problem talking about their departures, but I also have a feeling they're not too enthusiastic about it. And same probably goes for the rest of the band. If I'd have to put my money on another documentary, I'd bet it would probably start in 1999.
Click to expand...
Part 1 and 2 were filmed at the same time.
 
That doesn’t really take away from the point that parts 1 and 2 do have different feels. Part 1 is much more about the history of the band and their overall story, while part 2 feels more like a deep dive on a particular period. I think the quality would’ve been much higher if they followed a similar format and covered the 85 - 88 period as a whole (with an overarching narrative about Maiden’s intensive touring). These are things that happen in the editing phase.

I always assumed that they filmed enough interview footage to cover the band’s entire history up until that point (2002ish?). Would be curious about what’s in the vault. Did they interview Janick and Blaze?
 
Spambot said:
And the ship for 4th part has sailed when LOTB ship came in.
Click to expand...
I love documentaries, so I'm for whatever Maiden documentary. Maybe you're right that the ship for 4th part (covering the 90's) has sailed when they started the LOTB tour, but I think they still can re-release the stuff from the 90's (with a documentary included) without a specific tour for that era - some live recordings or video footage from NPFTD tour, Live At Donington '92 and A Real Live Dead One from FOTD tour, some live/video stuff from the Blaze era and from The Ed Hunter tour (the last two really deserve it). There is enough material. And let's not forget that Part 3 ends with ''to be continued''...

Or they can release a documentary for the Reunion era - although we have one for DOD, AMOLAD and TFF albums.

The best move is to make one big documentary spanning their entire career imo.
 
Mosh said:
That doesn’t really take away from the point that parts 1 and 2 do have different feels. Part 1 is much more about the history of the band and their overall story, while part 2 feels more like a deep dive on a particular period. I think the quality would’ve been much higher if they followed a similar format and covered the 85 - 88 period as a whole (with an overarching narrative about Maiden’s intensive touring). These are things that happen in the editing phase.

I always assumed that they filmed enough interview footage to cover the band’s entire history up until that point (2002ish?). Would be curious about what’s in the vault. Did they interview Janick and Blaze?
Click to expand...

I'm not so terribly bothered with that in principle. I remember thinking before LAD came out how I was tired of how all the biographical material of Maiden put so much emphasis on the Soundhouse-NOTB era of Maiden while glossing over the period of their greatest international success. So I'm okay with greater emphasis on this period. However, it didn't really end up being that. If we assumed that the original "history" concept was more balanced, the second documentary would have covered the period from Powerslave through SSOASS, and there was a lot of speculation at the time whether NPFTD would be included or not. What we got were two documentaries about Powerslave/World Slavery and SIT-SSOASS, but when combined they are just ten minutes longer than the "Early Days" documentary. So in terms of documentary space it's not really a deeper dive than we'd gotten had they stuck with what may have been the original plan.

Also, they did interview Jan for sure, I think there is a snippet of it in the Early Days documentary.
 
Mosh said:
part 2 feels more like a deep dive on a particular period
Click to expand...

Ugh deep dive is not what I would call it,

even if we factor in that 'band doesn't like SiT' and that any joint SIT/Seventh Son affair will be skewed 2/3 on Seventh Son side, did they show anything we haven't seen yet?

Maybe they're just oblivious to what fanbase knows, but I doubt it. On the other hand if you want to give added value with the documentary you should discover what's already out there and build on it, not just pass the entirely same material around. For SiT, there is nothing in the official History that wasn't already present on YT.
 
GhostofCain said:
No interviews with Martin Birch? Give me a break!
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is a pity.

And to think of it now... You can still interview Blaze. Heck, you could still interview PAUL(s) or Dennis Wilcock too. But Martin Birch is not around here anymore. Whatever documentaries were planned, if at all, (I think that is the case) must be done without him now. Pity.

Yes, an documentaric dive into the 90's or revisiting the earlier history through documentary and such doesn't seem to be that high on the priority list in the first place, but still...

Don't know why this suddenly "hit" me like this. Oh well.
 
Zare said:
Ugh deep dive is not what I would call it,

even if we factor in that 'band doesn't like SiT' and that any joint SIT/Seventh Son affair will be skewed 2/3 on Seventh Son side, did they show anything we haven't seen yet?

Maybe they're just oblivious to what fanbase knows, but I doubt it. On the other hand if you want to give added value with the documentary you should discover what's already out there and build on it, not just pass the entirely same material around. For SiT, there is nothing in the official History that wasn't already present on YT.
Click to expand...
Agreed, also with Perun. Not a deep dive. Diving -or ducking- away would be more suitable imo.
 
But to be completely fair to them (and probably on the track of what Mosh was thinking about), they haven't covered any of the albums well in those three films.

For instance having less than 1/4 of the documentary covering both Piece of Mind and World Piece Tour does not cut it for me.

In case you didn't notice, Maiden is always in some 'era', they have a theme, ongoing tour, audio and video release. So these documentaries were more of a companion film to respective history tour, targeting casual fans, a product made out of pattern.
 
So the question is, if you had the say in everything, what would you want those documentaries to look like?

EDIT: I don't mean this polemically. I mean this as an invitation to just have our minds spin around what we would like.
 
Zare said:
In case you didn't notice, Maiden is always in some 'era', they have a theme, ongoing tour, audio and video release. So these documentaries were more of a companion film to respective history tour, targeting casual fans, a product made out of pattern.
Click to expand...
Good call. I still believe in Part 4 because of the ending of Part 3 with ''to be continued''.
 
Perun said:
So the question is, if you had the say in everything, what would you want those documentaries to look like?

EDIT: I don't mean this polemically. I mean this as an invitation to just have our minds spin around what we would like.
Click to expand...

I suspect a lot of people demanding fantasy footage that doesn't exist.
 
Perun said:
So the question is, if you had the say in everything, what would you want those documentaries to look like?
Click to expand...
I personally want the documentary to be for every song (like the AMOLAD one) - then the recording process, the tour and some live footage (I think they have for every tour after 1986) and that's it. I like the History documentaries... yeah, they could have been longer, but the content is very interesting.
 
srfc said:
I suspect a lot of people demanding fantasy footage that doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

If that fantasy footage is the band actually retrospecting the said period on camera, then yes, it hasn't been shot but only due to Maiden not wanting to open up.

There was some stuff to be addressed especially at Somewhere in Time period.

However like I said these are not confessional documentaries these are low depth sums of albums and tours.
 
Perun said:
So the question is, if you had the say in everything, what would you want those documentaries to look like?

EDIT: I don't mean this polemically. I mean this as an invitation to just have our minds spin around what we would like.
Click to expand...
I'd love in-depth interviews, with different members, per album (but also comparing situations and choices per album), about ..

.. what this band is about: the music, the content we love.

About the creation of the songs (songwriting (combinations)), studio experiences. Inspirations. I also like it when they talk about favourite albums (also by other bands).

Band members can be accompanied (and helped!) by people who were there at the time. Crew members, technicians.
You see it often with other bands (e.g. Beatles or Stones). Other people than band members can tell interesting stories.
 
Last edited:
I think Part 4 will happen and will almost certainly cover the whole of the 90's. Live at Donington 92/Maiden Hell still haven't received new releases since VHS. I reckon we'll get a double disc release with those two concerts plus the documentary and hopefully a Blaze show from the archives.

Wishful thinking but I honestly don't see them ever doing a standalone Blaze era dvd.
 
If I had my way, I would get a real documentary filmmaker (Sam Dunn would do just fine) to put together a career spanning documentary that covers the band’s history extensively with interviews from former and current members, producers, crew members, fans, and musicians who have been influenced by Maiden to tell their story in a way that does the music justice. I want to know about the albums and tours, the Blaze years and what went down to get Bruce back in the band. Something that explains how Maiden is still around and bigger than ever.

The thing is, as hardcore fans a lot of us know everything there is to know about the band. It would be impossible for them to get as granular as they need to give us new information. I think a more effective documentary would be one that spans the band’s entire history while attempting to get to the heart of why Iron Maiden is a band so many people care about. I also enjoy hearing the band members assess the good and bad of their past endeavors rather than simply waxing nostalgic on stories most of us have probably heard before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top