I'm speechless, I really am

OK, not sure what you're talking about here. I know the two JD records, but not what it is that you are saying.

Winky, click on the link...

Capitalism appropriating the counter-cultural for its own ends.

Chris

If it is about Joy Division then the only I like about them is their oven gloves 

Something to give to the new girlfriend who is yet to, er, put-out?

The film 'Control' is showing on Film4, late on Saturday 4th. It charts the life of Ian Curtis and is directed with flair by Anton Corbijn.

Sam Riley does an impressive job of portraying a mesmeric Ian Curtis on stage.

(It doesn't show up well, but I've linked to the film's IMDB entry by clicking on 'Control' above.)

John.

I think it all comes down to the hotness of the woman who is wearing them...

Great movie.

I was well impressed the actors played the music themselves as opposed to miming which is usually the case in such movies.

And not a bad job for Anton's first movie outing.

I thought it was a well done film as well.

Oven Glove.,

I have a signed one.

John,

I think its been on before?

Stu, luv ya guy but that is complete rubbish on a number of (actually, every conceivable) levels and you are talking out of your bum:

1. JD's music is NOT bland. In the late 70s/early 80s it was regarded as very challenging - in many ways it still is.

2. The easiness to play, or otherwise, of music is no indication of its quality, or lack thereof. The Beatles' early music is comparatively easy to play. Does that make it not very good? Hook, Sumner and Morris were not musos like the members of Genesis or Greenslade or Ten Years After or Santana or the LSO or Steely Dan, but so ****ing what?

3. It's not just about Ian's voice. Joy Division were a great band - one of THE greatest, up there with Zeppelin and the Fabs - because... they were a band. Four individuals, much greater than the sum of their parts.

4. Early on, JD were a rather spiteful-sounding, not-terribly competent punk band with arty pretentions, not that much different from many others. But reviewing their first-ever gig, as Warsaw, Paul Morley spotted that they had something indefinably different, even special, about them. They received a lot of knockbacks but worked and worked at it. By mid '78 they were moving at frightening speed. They started to gain an understanding of light and shade, of dynamics, texture and the drama and contradiction within their music, to develop their own, unique, voice - and in this they were aided immeasurably, of course, by Martin Hannett.

5. Joy Division were special - the greatest band of their generation - because of their commitment. This is a quality that transcends mere "musicianship" and is extremely hard to come by. The blessed Tony used to always tell a story about the first time he ever heard JD, at a "battle of the bands" contest. He'd seen many bands that evening, many of them very good, some of them mediocre, a few of them terrible. But they were all the same - they all wanted to be pop stars, or to "express" themselves, or to earn a few bob. The last band on that night stood out for him. Why? Because, Wilson said, "all the other bands on that evening had lots of reasons to be on that stage. But the last band - JD - were on stage because they had no ****ing choice." There was something in them, collectively, that had to get out. I saw JD live a few times, and I can testify to that - there was. Go off and listen to "Heart and Soul" or "Transmission" or "New Dawn Fades" or "Dead Souls" or "Passover" or "Shadowplay", or indeed any of their extraordinary music. You, Stu, or any other musician so inclined, might be able to play any of their songs or even replicate the sound to a degree. What you'll never be able to do - not in a trillion years - is reproduce the spirit, the unique animus of Joy Division. Not so easy to play after all.

What Kev said....

Jono