|
Post by Tin on May 10, 2008 0:21:27 GMT -5
Cheating? Never. Playing? -- You betcha!
|
|
|
Post by nightboat13 on May 10, 2008 0:31:47 GMT -5
;D
|
|
|
Post by RO on May 10, 2008 1:16:59 GMT -5
...onwards to page 7 we go. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Attention Whore on May 10, 2008 3:59:21 GMT -5
Yeah, but that's cheating! Wanna try for 7? How's this: Who read the John interview where he says Andy was the soul of the band and RCM is a flop? Thats like saying Johns favorite Koolaid flavor is RED. -BOS
|
|
|
Post by sueb1863 on May 10, 2008 5:14:09 GMT -5
I read the interview, but what John said was:
"From the point of view of the soul of the band, there was something wonderful about that reunion..."
meaning that he was looking at it from the band's soul's viewpoint, how having Andy there affected that, not that Andy was the soul of the band. I don't think John thinks that way about Andy, he seems perfectly happy not to have him around.
He also griped against how pointless the Hall of Fame is, although I read that as sour grapes that Madonna got in already and they haven't even be nominated yet.
|
|
policia
A few more posts....
Posts: 34
|
Post by policia on May 10, 2008 13:50:36 GMT -5
Just keep in mind that Andy is not entirely the victim. <------------- You want sunshine and bunny rabbits?? ;D Policia, when you say 'according to him', do you mean the apology *is* a lie? Either Andy had a work visa (in which case it should be easy for DD to refute this and we'll be seeing a correction from them very soon) or he didn't (and then I think it'd be only natural to wonder *why* the management didn't get one for him).
|
|
|
Post by ultimatemind on May 10, 2008 17:25:43 GMT -5
Come on people, this thread isn't going to get to page 7 by itself!
|
|
|
Post by sueb1863 on May 10, 2008 18:54:55 GMT -5
Just keep in mind that Andy is not entirely the victim. Fair enough, but the question is, did Andy have a visa or not? And another question is, is the band going to stop saying 'We don't know why Andy didn't show up in NYC' since this apology implies very strongly that this simply isn't true?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2008 20:27:45 GMT -5
How about this?
The next person to meet any member of the band ask them about this topic and see what sort of response they get.
Going back to what was on the Times website:
An interview with and an article about Duran Duran (The band plays on, The Times Magazine, November 3 2007 and Wild boys always shine, The Sunday Times Culture, November 4 2007), referring to Andy Taylor’s departure from the band, said respectively that he had failed to turn up for a recording session in New York and had “quit” the band, and that he had sent a “blunt message … that he was leaving the band, with immediate effect”. It was also suggested that his departure was “still unexplained”. Andy Taylor’s departure from the band is the subject of continuing legal proceedings, but we wish to make clear that it was not unexplained, that he did not quit, leave or walk out on the band – the Duran Duran partnership was dissolved by the other members. He was unable to get a US working visa to attend the New York recording session due to administrative failures by the band’s management. We apologise and are happy to correct the record.
Being that there are still legal proceedings occurring perhaps the 'we don't know why Andy didn't show up' comment is the best non-comment that the band has been told to use concerning the subject.
Just a guess of course.
|
|
|
Post by Tin on May 10, 2008 22:10:15 GMT -5
I'm sure, if legal proceedings ARE occurring, then they can't comment on it at all. Kel is right, it's probably the best response they can give in the current situation.
|
|