Jump to content

R40 Live cover - Is it Hugh?


Look to Sirius
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've decided I hate the cover because every time I look at it, "Stayin' Alive" starts playing in my head.

 

Keep that song in your head! You may need it one day. I was just reading about how to give adult CPR. In Step 4, it says to: straighten your arms and press down as hard as possible. Repeating at an interval of at least 100 times per minute, or "in time with the tune of the disco classic 'Stayin Alive.'" :)

 

The song came in handy for something.

 

Interesting. Who knew The Bee Gees were such uber genuises!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've decided I hate the cover because every time I look at it, "Stayin' Alive" starts playing in my head.

 

Keep that song in your head! You may need it one day. I was just reading about how to give adult CPR. In Step 4, it says to: straighten your arms and press down as hard as possible. Repeating at an interval of at least 100 times per minute, or "in time with the tune of the disco classic 'Stayin Alive.'" :)

 

The song came in handy for something.

 

Interesting. Who knew The Bee Gees were such uber genuises!

 

:huh: They were always good at making comebacks. This must be their final one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've decided I hate the cover because every time I look at it, "Stayin' Alive" starts playing in my head.

 

Every time I hear that song I think of the scene at the dive bar in Airplane!

 

LOL. Me too! And that guy on the dance floor! That movie is a classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That...can't possibly be Hugh. It's way, wayyyy too hideous to be Hugh. 90's font with a gradient color, amateur photoshop sky, and a disco ball?

 

No, I can't allow myself to believe this is Hugh.

 

I wish they would just re-purpose the r40 package that came out last year, and alter it a bit. That was much, muuuuch more aesthetically pleasing.

Yes. This. :yes:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That...can't possibly be Hugh. It's way, wayyyy too hideous to be Hugh. 90's font with a gradient color, amateur photoshop sky, and a disco ball?

 

No, I can't allow myself to believe this is Hugh.

 

I wish they would just re-purpose the r40 package that came out last year, and alter it a bit. That was much, muuuuch more aesthetically pleasing.

Yes. This. :yes:

 

Sometimes less is more, and it definitely is in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That...can't possibly be Hugh. It's way, wayyyy too hideous to be Hugh. 90's font with a gradient color, amateur photoshop sky, and a disco ball?

 

No, I can't allow myself to believe this is Hugh.

 

I wish they would just re-purpose the r40 package that came out last year, and alter it a bit. That was much, muuuuch more aesthetically pleasing.

Yes. This. :yes:

 

Sometimes less is more, and it definitely is in this case.

I guess I don't REALLY care that much if the content is good but man, WTH were they thinking with this thing? Is it supposed to be gaudy on purpose? Is it an inside joke? WTH is Hugh? If his name is on the credit for this thing I am going to be totally disillusioned. I bought that $100 book and I find it impossible to believe he had anything to do with this. But hey, stranger things have happened I guess. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a conspiracy theory. Were Neil's arms removed out of spite? You pull the plug on your band, we take your arms away. :P

I've considered this. :(

It's probably nothing nefarious really, but I do find it a little astonishing how minimized Neil is in that image. Alex and Geddy look like giants in full rock star pose. And in between, it looks like a Neil head was just pasted in above the drum kit. He looks almost child sized in comparison. Wonder if he's even seen this. Or maybe he has and his approval is another sign he doesn't give a **** anymore.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That...can't possibly be Hugh. It's way, wayyyy too hideous to be Hugh. 90's font with a gradient color, amateur photoshop sky, and a disco ball?

 

No, I can't allow myself to believe this is Hugh.

 

I wish they would just re-purpose the r40 package that came out last year, and alter it a bit. That was much, muuuuch more aesthetically pleasing.

Yes. This. :yes:

 

Sometimes less is more, and it definitely is in this case.

I guess I don't REALLY care that much if the content is good but man, WTH were they thinking with this thing? Is it supposed to be gaudy on purpose? Is it an inside joke? WTH is Hugh? If his name is on the credit for this thing I am going to be totally disillusioned. I bought that $100 book and I find it impossible to believe he had anything to do with this. But hey, stranger things have happened I guess. :huh:

 

It doesn't at all look like his previous work. This looks like they just threw something together to get it over with.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just don't like it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a conspiracy theory. Were Neil's arms removed out of spite? You pull the plug on your band, we take your arms away. :P

I've considered this. :(

It's probably nothing nefarious really, but I do find it a little astonishing how minimized Neil is in that image. Alex and Geddy look like giants in full rock star pose. And in between, it looks like a Neil head was just pasted in above the drum kit. He looks almost child sized in comparison. Wonder if he's even seen this. Or maybe he has and his approval is another sign he doesn't give a **** anymore.

Just stop it already. It's a Randy Johnson photo. It's not Hugh Syme. Neil's arms are obscured by rack toms. You can clearly see his hand in the middle. He's seated behind a very large kit, and he's farther back than Geddy and Alex, so of course he looks small. Geez. "Waaaah waaah! They used a photo instead of commissioning a major work of art for a live album!" Anyone remember the ATWAS cover? Anyone remember the Replay X 3 cover? It's not a new studio album. Get over it already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The disco ball saves the cover from being a complete flop. :LOL: ;)

Pretty sure this confirms they HAVE been spying on us Lorraine. This doesn't look that much different than ours... :LOL:
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a conspiracy theory. Were Neil's arms removed out of spite? You pull the plug on your band, we take your arms away. :P

I've considered this. :(

It's probably nothing nefarious really, but I do find it a little astonishing how minimized Neil is in that image. Alex and Geddy look like giants in full rock star pose. And in between, it looks like a Neil head was just pasted in above the drum kit. He looks almost child sized in comparison. Wonder if he's even seen this. Or maybe he has and his approval is another sign he doesn't give a **** anymore.

Ultimately I do not think it is anything nefarious either, but I did consider it for a minute. I agree with you - Neil's head looks pasted on. I do not see any arms at all.

 

Look at photo #4 of 10 here (Randy Johnson photographs Rush). http://mlb.mlb.com/photos/gallery.jsp?content_id=125665406&c_id=mlb

 

That photo seems to be the basis for Neil on the cover. You clearly see his one arm twirling a stick, and clearly see his other arm down by his side.

 

My recent thought on this is, since they did not extend the tour, they knew they had to get this product out for the Christmas shopping season. There are a number of things one can speculate on, but if Hugh was not involved it is possible that it was a scheduling conflict due to the tight release schedule that prevented him from working on this cover.

 

I admit I could be entirely wrong on this and Hugh did do the cover, but I just can't shake the feeling that this isn't his work. The main reason for that really is that I cannot see Neil's arms. I cannot see his hands. I do not see any drumsticks. As they say, something's wrong with this picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Rush has had a variety of design aesthetics over the years, but it's at least slightly weird that both of these designs are for the same band

http://www.rushbackstage.com/images/products/RU/R4/RUR4BLU40T000_000.jpg?preset=details

http://www.rushbackstage.com/images/products/RU/30/RU30DVDREG000_000.jpg?preset=details

 

The more I think about CA Live starting the trend of the band being on the cover, the less I like it. It feels super tacky, like a Hard Rock Casino band

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being a photographer, I would have grabbed 10 shots of that moment with Geddy and Alex on the drum riser. I'm sure Randy Johnson did too. To bad this is the best shot out of that 10.

 

That was my thought. Surely this isn't the best picture from the tour?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the aesthetic is just in keeping with the moment from their career re-imagined on stage at this time - a band playing high school dances under a disco ball, a band not making much money. In other words, maybe the tackiness is "on purpose."
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the aesthetic is just in keeping with the moment from their career re-imagined on stage at this time - a band playing high school dances under a disco ball, a band not making much money. In other words, maybe the tackiness is "on purpose."

Probably so and they hit the tack right on the head...
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the aesthetic is just in keeping with the moment from their career re-imagined on stage at this time - a band playing high school dances under a disco ball, a band not making much money. In other words, maybe the tackiness is "on purpose."

 

They were on their down the tubes tour when disco saw the light of day, so I'm not sure it has anything to do with Rush at any point in their career.

 

But I'm sure you are right in that there is a good reason for the picture they chose. We just don't know what that reason is. :)

Edited by Lorraine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the aesthetic is just in keeping with the moment from their career re-imagined on stage at this time - a band playing high school dances under a disco ball, a band not making much money. In other words, maybe the tackiness is "on purpose."

 

They were on their down the tubes tour when disco saw the light of day, so I'm not sure it has anything to do with Rush at any point in their career.

 

But I'm sure you are right in that there is a good reason for the picture they chose. We just don't know what that reason is. :)

 

It turns out that "disco balls" precede disco - apparently they were even hung in ballrooms in the late 19th century, and decorated dance halls in the 1920s. I guess most people call 'em disco balls because they're so associated with that time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...