Anyway, my main point was that if you're going to accuse people of jumping the shark, it's best done retrospectively once you can see if that even truly caused a change in the band dynamic or was just a temporary stumbling block. otherwise the term has pretty much no meaning at all and you could just apply it to whatever the heck you want just cus you thought the album was worse than another.
Rush's dynamic and approach to making music didn't change much at all between 2112 and Kings or from Kings to Hemispheres. They just tried some different stuff and weren't as successful with it.
I don't think Rush really ever jumped the shark for that reason. Some albums are far worse than others, but they always did their thing without changing the way they approached making music. Their most dramatic "Huh?" moments in their catalog were either recovered from within an album or two rendering it as a sign of their demise mostly moot (EX: the Roll The Bones rap), or was a drastic change in sound that mattered at the time but don't seem that drastic any more (like suddenly using synths everywhere with Signals or suddenly switching to a far heavier sound on their more recent albums). The most clear moment that could have been one for them would have been Neil Peart's tragedies and the band's reunion following that, since Vapor Trails more or less showed a band in the state of not knowing what they heck they were doing. But they rebounded from that on the next record as well. Rush are more of an ebb and flow kind of act. "jump the shark" moments are more for acts with dramatic contrasts and changes.
Message Thread | This response ↓
« Back to index