Bat out of Hell IV: The Final at Bat - Page 3

nikox1 · 20 May 2010, 03:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by lorenzoduke

Put it this way - I think a 'Bat' project would draw a lot of derision at this point. Imagine the prospect of having that last EP of Jim/Meat songs post-retirement, as a true final blaze of glory.

it would sell shit loads i would expect? but it would have to be the right reasons? and to be honest i think Meat wants to get away from that sound?
but you never know?

**The Flying Mouse** · 20 May 2010, 22:16

I'd love Meat to work with Jim again on a project, but not one called Bat IV.

Trilogies come in 3.
There have been 3 Bats.
Anything over 3 will be an anti climax.

Once you go past a logical finishing place then you have no logical place to finish.

Resulting in a series that will always remain unfinished.

Not good

renegadeangel · 20 May 2010, 23:37

I think if anything happens, it will be done very quietly and with little fanfare. As far as a title, how about LIVING ON THE EDGE OF DESTRUCTION?

Pudding · 21 May 2010, 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Flying Mouse

Once you go past a logical finishing place then you have no logical place to finish.

Since Jim didn't want Meat call it a Bat Out Of Hell album and Meat not liking the end result at all, then one could argue that the trilogy hasn't logically finished at all.

GDW · 21 May 2010, 16:16

How about Bat Out Of Hell 3.1 -The Lawyers Are At Rest (In Hell).

batoutofhell · 30 May 2010, 15:49

Okay, since the series gave me my username, I feel obliged to comment here. I must be one of the few people left in the world who actually enjoyed Bat 3, if there were any of us out there to begin with. Say what you will about the title or Meat and Jim not working together, but it was for all intents and purposes a solid album that tried to live (and love) up to the legacy established by the previous two. I'm putting myself in an even smaller minority by saying I preferred the Steinman tracks to Desmond's half of the album, but that's neither here nor there.

Would I welcome a Bat 4? Well, in interviews, Steinman always made the comparison to The Godfather having three parts, as if that was like the keystone reason for why there were two or three albums instead of one. (Ironically enough, The Godfather also had two really well-received parts and a third part that was widely deemed to be shite as well which featured many of the same people from the first two, but didn't capture the same spirit.) If you go for a fourth album in the series, that's like adding on to The Godfather -- at this point, who would want to take on that task?

I'd be perfectly content with new Meat and Jim product if both of them are up to it. The Dream Engine shows (at least by the looks of track lists on everyone's websites) proved that Jim still has some material knocking around in the old noggin ("Body," "Still the Children," even "Speaking in Tongues" [which I've only seen the lyrics to] would arguably fit on such an album in keeping with the tradition of "Surf's Up"), but the real question is this: Is there enough to fill an album? And if so, is it worth it for either of them, at their advanced age, with their reported health problems, to go in the studio for an extended period of time (presumably for the seven years it apparently took to record Bat 2, if we want it to sound half as good) for a niche audience that may well have depleted in this age of downloads?

On paper, it doesn't look like it. But I'm willing to be proved wrong. :)

renegadeangel · 30 May 2010, 22:51

First of all, it wouldn't take seven years. The songs that would be available are done.
WHAT PART OF MY BODY HURTS THE MOST
STILL THE CHILDREN
SPEAKING IN TONGUES
NOT ALLOWED TO LOVE
PARADISE LOST
THE MONSTER IS OUT OF HIS CAGE
RENEGADE ANGEL
GOD HAS LEFT THE BUILDING
These are all titles Jim has claimed he has. They have yet to see the light of day. I'm sure we've heard bits and pieces here and there but I can't help but wonder if Jim deep down figures they were written for Meat and should be done by Meat.
Could be wrong but I think that Jim has only ever said Meat was the perfect instrument to deliver his songs.

renegadeangel · 30 May 2010, 22:53

Oh forgot the title. Can't see them calling it BAT OUT OF HELL. Starting to sound like the JAWS franchise.
Renegade Angel... too good of a title to let it go to waste.

Evil One · 30 May 2010, 23:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel

PARADISE LOST
THE MONSTER IS OUT OF HIS CAGE
RENEGADE ANGEL
GOD HAS LEFT THE BUILDING
These are all titles Jim has claimed he has.

Titles is the key word. There is no evidence that these songs exist other than the odd snippet of lyrics.

renegadeangel · 31 May 2010, 04:39

Fair enough. But I'd take the chance that he has them more or less written. Meat mentioned God has left the building in the 90's.

Pudding · 31 May 2010, 04:45

Whether Jim has written them or not is irrelevent, it's whether they'd be any good that's important.

Wario · 31 May 2010, 05:55

God has left teh builad has indeed seen the light of day ....

batoutofhell · 02 Jun 2010, 05:30

^ Well, kind of. Look at my avatar if you want to know where an instrumental number by that title was heard. And it might be typical of Jim to stick the big title on an instrumental number (COUGH "Back into Hell" should have been an epic sequel song COUGH). But we don't know for sure if that's the one he wrote for Meat.

As for what renegadeangel listed, only half of those song titles are known to actually exist in full fledged form. Jim also named other songs including "Braver Than We Are." If you add that, we have five, six if you want to count "God Has Left the Building" in instrumental form as the game-changer. Standard albums these days call for at least another eight or nine songs. Even throwing in Jim left-overs like "Stark Raving Love" and "Dance in My Pants," and maybe for desperation giving Meat the songs the label turned down for MATLAF that were hits with other artists, it'd be a pretty lackluster album material-wise overall, because it'd be a retread of the Bat 2 formula - take the rejects, mix them with new songs and a good marketing campaign, stamp Meat Loaf's voice on it, and throw it on the shelves for masses who may not even buy it.

I'm sure Meat would rather not feel like the cog in someone else's wheel. If he never makes another record after HCTB, I'll be perfectly happy. At least he made an album that was what he wanted.

Pudding · 02 Jun 2010, 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by batoutofhell

^ Well, kind of. Look at my avatar if you want to know where an instrumental number by that title was heard.

What avatar?

daveake · 02 Jun 2010, 10:20

It's either very small or very grey.

batoutofhell · 02 Jun 2010, 15:58

It's not bloody showing for some reason. If anyone can be arsed to actually go to my profile and look at it, they'll know what I mean. The Steinman fans should know by context that I'm referring to a specific show where the instrumental appeared.

Sarge · 02 Jun 2010, 17:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by batoutofhell

It's not bloody showing for some reason.

Check if it shows up in the "edit avatar" section. Maybe you've set it up as a profile pic only? Or maybe it is too large? In this case, try to reduce its size to 80 x 80 pixels.

batoutofhell · 02 Jun 2010, 17:53

Thanks, mate, did the trick.

renegadeangel · 03 Jun 2010, 00:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by batoutofhell

^ Well, kind of. Look at my avatar if you want to know where an instrumental number by that title was heard. And it might be typical of Jim to stick the big title on an instrumental number (COUGH "Back into Hell" should have been an epic sequel song COUGH). But we don't know for sure if that's the one he wrote for Meat.

As for what renegadeangel listed, only half of those song titles are known to actually exist in full fledged form. Jim also named other songs including "Braver Than We Are." If you add that, we have five, six if you want to count "God Has Left the Building" in instrumental form as the game-changer. Standard albums these days call for at least another eight or nine songs. Even throwing in Jim left-overs like "Stark Raving Love" and "Dance in My Pants," and maybe for desperation giving Meat the songs the label turned down for MATLAF that were hits with other artists, it'd be a pretty lackluster album material-wise overall, because it'd be a retread of the Bat 2 formula - take the rejects, mix them with new songs and a good marketing campaign, stamp Meat Loaf's voice on it, and throw it on the shelves for masses who may not even buy it.

I'm sure Meat would rather not feel like the cog in someone else's wheel. If he never makes another record after HCTB, I'll be perfectly happy. At least he made an album that was what he wanted.

First off, Meat would never do STARK RAVING LOVE or DANCE IN MY PANTS. I doubt Jim is up to doing much more than writing lyrics and doing the best he can with the music.
Nothing will come out titled BAT 4. I still believe that there is a chance of a RENEGADE ANGEL album of some sort. Imagine Rob producing such an album.

Pudding · 03 Jun 2010, 00:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel

First off, Meat would never do STARK RAVING LOVE or DANCE IN MY PANTS.

How can you be so absolutely certain Meat would never do them? I thought Meat would never do IACBTMN and he did, I wished he hadn't, but there you go.

renegadeangel · 03 Jun 2010, 04:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pudding

How can you be so absolutely certain Meat would never do them? I thought Meat would never do IACBTMN and he did, I wished he hadn't, but there you go.

He has never liked STARK RAVING LOVE and if he was going to do DANCE IN MY PANTS, we would have seen it on BAT 3.

Wario · 03 Jun 2010, 04:30

He did dance in my pants live in 1988.

YouTube Video

he obviously has some soft spot for it.

Pudding · 03 Jun 2010, 07:45

Cheers Wario. So that's half the theory completely blown out of the water.

renegadeangel · 04 Jun 2010, 00:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarioLoaf

He did dance in my pants live in 1988.

YouTube Video

he obviously has some soft spot for it.

Really? How many times has he sang since 1988? I think he was just trying out some songs for BAT 2. By the time he hit North America he wasn't playing BFG or DIMP anymore. He was playing LBAGG and OOTFP.

Wario · 04 Jun 2010, 02:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by renegadeangel

Really? How many times has he sang since 1988? I think he was just trying out some songs for BAT 2. By the time he hit North America he wasn't playing BFG or DIMP anymore. He was playing LBAGG and OOTFP.

Well you said he would "Never" do them and I proved you wrong their.

Mabey he took them off the set cause he wanted to shorten the show in North America. It was his weakest market at the time.

he instead performed All Revved up, Rock n roll mercenaries, and HCW cause unlike in europe, americans really only essentially know the BOOH tracks and stuff from BFG would be too obscure. He put RRM in so he coudl promote his single over there.

Point is he did DIMP.

02 Jun 2010, 05:30	#63
batoutofhell Junior Loafer Join Date: 22.05.2010 Location: In a house. Obviously. Posts: 38	^ Well, kind of. Look at my avatar if you want to know where an instrumental number by that title was heard. And it might be typical of Jim to stick the big title on an instrumental number (COUGH "Back into Hell" should have been an epic sequel song COUGH). But we don't know for sure if that's the one he wrote for Meat. As for what renegadeangel listed, only half of those song titles are known to actually exist in full fledged form. Jim also named other songs including "Braver Than We Are." If you add that, we have five, six if you want to count "God Has Left the Building" in instrumental form as the game-changer. Standard albums these days call for at least another eight or nine songs. Even throwing in Jim left-overs like "Stark Raving Love" and "Dance in My Pants," and maybe for desperation giving Meat the songs the label turned down for MATLAF that were hits with other artists, it'd be a pretty lackluster album material-wise overall, because it'd be a retread of the Bat 2 formula - take the rejects, mix them with new songs and a good marketing campaign, stamp Meat Loaf's voice on it, and throw it on the shelves for masses who may not even buy it. I'm sure Meat would rather not feel like the cog in someone else's wheel. If he never makes another record after HCTB, I'll be perfectly happy. At least he made an album that was what he wanted. Last edited by batoutofhell; 02 Jun 2010 at 05:46. Reason: screwed up counting

20 May 2010, 22:16	#52
The Flying Mouse Armed ba$tard and Jo's other half. Join Date: 06.08.2002 Location: In the middle of nowhere near the end of the line. Posts: 16,104	I'd love Meat to work with Jim again on a project, but not one called Bat IV. Trilogies come in 3. There have been 3 Bats. Anything over 3 will be an anti climax. Once you go past a logical finishing place then you have no logical place to finish. Resulting in a series that will always remain unfinished. Not good

20 May 2010, 23:37	#53
renegadeangel Super Loafer Join Date: 18.05.2006 Posts: 604	I think if anything happens, it will be done very quietly and with little fanfare. As far as a title, how about LIVING ON THE EDGE OF DESTRUCTION?

21 May 2010, 16:16	#55
GDW Super Loafer Join Date: 26.03.2010 Location: Perth Posts: 984	How about Bat Out Of Hell 3.1 -The Lawyers Are At Rest (In Hell).

30 May 2010, 15:49	#56
batoutofhell Junior Loafer Join Date: 22.05.2010 Location: In a house. Obviously. Posts: 38	Okay, since the series gave me my username, I feel obliged to comment here. I must be one of the few people left in the world who actually enjoyed Bat 3, if there were any of us out there to begin with. Say what you will about the title or Meat and Jim not working together, but it was for all intents and purposes a solid album that tried to live (and love) up to the legacy established by the previous two. I'm putting myself in an even smaller minority by saying I preferred the Steinman tracks to Desmond's half of the album, but that's neither here nor there. Would I welcome a Bat 4? Well, in interviews, Steinman always made the comparison to The Godfather having three parts, as if that was like the keystone reason for why there were two or three albums instead of one. (Ironically enough, The Godfather also had two really well-received parts and a third part that was widely deemed to be shite as well which featured many of the same people from the first two, but didn't capture the same spirit.) If you go for a fourth album in the series, that's like adding on to The Godfather -- at this point, who would want to take on that task? I'd be perfectly content with new Meat and Jim product if both of them are up to it. The Dream Engine shows (at least by the looks of track lists on everyone's websites) proved that Jim still has some material knocking around in the old noggin ("Body," "Still the Children," even "Speaking in Tongues" [which I've only seen the lyrics to] would arguably fit on such an album in keeping with the tradition of "Surf's Up"), but the real question is this: Is there enough to fill an album? And if so, is it worth it for either of them, at their advanced age, with their reported health problems, to go in the studio for an extended period of time (presumably for the seven years it apparently took to record Bat 2, if we want it to sound half as good) for a niche audience that may well have depleted in this age of downloads? On paper, it doesn't look like it. But I'm willing to be proved wrong. :)

30 May 2010, 22:51	#57
renegadeangel Super Loafer Join Date: 18.05.2006 Posts: 604	First of all, it wouldn't take seven years. The songs that would be available are done. WHAT PART OF MY BODY HURTS THE MOST STILL THE CHILDREN SPEAKING IN TONGUES NOT ALLOWED TO LOVE PARADISE LOST THE MONSTER IS OUT OF HIS CAGE RENEGADE ANGEL GOD HAS LEFT THE BUILDING These are all titles Jim has claimed he has. They have yet to see the light of day. I'm sure we've heard bits and pieces here and there but I can't help but wonder if Jim deep down figures they were written for Meat and should be done by Meat. Could be wrong but I think that Jim has only ever said Meat was the perfect instrument to deliver his songs.

30 May 2010, 22:53	#58
renegadeangel Super Loafer Join Date: 18.05.2006 Posts: 604	Oh forgot the title. Can't see them calling it BAT OUT OF HELL. Starting to sound like the JAWS franchise. Renegade Angel... too good of a title to let it go to waste.

31 May 2010, 04:39	#60
renegadeangel Super Loafer Join Date: 18.05.2006 Posts: 604	Fair enough. But I'd take the chance that he has them more or less written. Meat mentioned God has left the building in the 90's.

31 May 2010, 04:45	#61
Pudding I'm A Prize Fight Lover... Join Date: 22.10.2003 Location: New Zealand Posts: 5,532	Whether Jim has written them or not is irrelevent, it's whether they'd be any good that's important.

31 May 2010, 05:55	#62
Wario Monstro helps me spell things... Join Date: 05.01.2007 Location: Masculine, Pennsylvania Posts: 9,105	God has left teh builad has indeed seen the light of day ....

02 Jun 2010, 10:20	#65
daveake 200% is the new 110% Join Date: 13.03.2005 Location: Newbury Posts: 2,983	It's either very small or very grey.

02 Jun 2010, 15:58	#66
batoutofhell Junior Loafer Join Date: 22.05.2010 Location: In a house. Obviously. Posts: 38	It's not bloody showing for some reason. If anyone can be arsed to actually go to my profile and look at it, they'll know what I mean. The Steinman fans should know by context that I'm referring to a specific show where the instrumental appeared.

02 Jun 2010, 17:53	#68
batoutofhell Junior Loafer Join Date: 22.05.2010 Location: In a house. Obviously. Posts: 38	Thanks, mate, did the trick.

03 Jun 2010, 07:45	#73
Pudding I'm A Prize Fight Lover... Join Date: 22.10.2003 Location: New Zealand Posts: 5,532	Cheers Wario. So that's half the theory completely blown out of the water.