Personally, there are a lot of great things about their older music, and there are a lot of great things about their newer music. They’re different, but not THAT different. The main differences are that their newer music is more complex, using more instruments, the production quality, and the lyrical content.

People always talk about “old” Green Day and “new” Green Day. I can never decide which I like more. (I take old Green Day to mean 1039/SOSH through either Insomniac or Nimrod, and new Green Day either Nimrod or Warning through now.) It all depends on my mood. I split it where I split it because, as far as production goes, that would split after Nimrod. But where they started expanding musically, that would be before Nimrod.

Anyway, I realize I’m somewhat biased. In my eyes, they’ve almost done no wrong. But at the same time, I am informed about the band, and plenty familiar with their music.

That said, many legit points here. I’d love to see Jack respond! I love Insomniac, but after that, I’m sad to say much of Green Day’s music has left me wanting more. My general sense is that the bulk of what I don’t like about much of their recent material has to do with the production. Ginormous production just makes everything sound the same to me. The new record is a slightly mixed bag. I like some of the songs, LOVE the “Viva la Gloria” track (which somehow makes me think of My Chemical Romance) and flatly can’t stand a few tracks. “21 Guns” has a great message – like all of Green Day’s music, especially the later catalog – but for me is the song equivalent of watching C-Span. I still love Green Day as a band – why can’t I love their records? Someone help.

To start, it’s not aimed at teenagers. In fact, this is the first time my DAD has cared about a Green Day album.

It’s also not about “growing up” in a post-Bush America. It’s about LIVING in a post-Bush America.

Green Day were never throwaway pop, either. While their lyrics have become more of a social commentary than about girls and drugs, their older music wasn’t any less good. They were just restraining themselves because they were trying to fit into a stereotype. I’m just glad they finally started making the music THEY wanted to make instead of what they thought their fans wanted to hear and what would get them the most cred in the punk community.

And what do you mean, defending themselves by saying they were never really punk rock? They never were! Gilman Street wouldn’t let them play until they had John in the band. John had street cred from Isocracy. That’s the only reason they ever were allowed to play in there. Gilman Street may be where they got their start, and that may be the “scene” they came from, but that doesn’t mean their music was ever punk. I do believe they have punk ideals and may live the lifestyle, but their music never was. There’s some punk influence, but they’re barely punk enough to even be considered POP-punk.

The ONE part of the review that I agree with is that they’ve evolved to understand what punk is about. They’ve DEFINITELY evolved to understand that the ideals are more important than the music, not to say that the music isn’t. In their earlier years they were trying to hard to fit into a stereotype, but have evolved to make the music they want to make without regards to what their audience wants to hear. As I said, they may have gotten their start at Gilman, but it was never loyal to them. Gilman never wanted them in the first place for the most part. And as soon as they signed to a major label, they disowned them, even though their indie label couldn’t support the demand for their albums at the time and it was 100% necessary if they wanted to continue making music. Insomniac was a retaliation to that whole situation and all the backlash they got. After that, they stopped caring about their supposedly “punk” image. In Nimrod they really started to expand on their style. They finally released Good Riddance, which had been written YEARS before. It was the farthest thing from punk they’d ever written, but it was a good song that they enjoyed, so they finally put it out. When Warning came out, they’d already had three successful albums and had more to lose than they had to gain. They started writing more about social issues than personal issues, and further expanded on their sound. The change could have been seen as selling out…had they not already had such an established fan base. It was a risk, and it flopped. I respect them for that. American Idiot was also a risk, what with having such a strong concept, and having nine minute songs. It was still very Green Day, but it was also very different. In hindsight, it was a very steady progression leading them to where they are now.

Many people see it as them betraying their original scene and style and catering to the public, but if you know anything about them, you know that it’s the opposite. They were catering to an audience when they started, and they grew up and realized how stupid that was and started to make music for themselves and really found what they wanted to do. They realized what an impact they could make with their music.

A lot of people think American Idiot, and now 21st Century Breakdown is somewhat “preachy” and seems a bit like propaganda. However, the message in American Idiot is quite clear: Don’t listen to what the media force-feeds you. Find the truth for yourself. They may make statements, but nothing too blatant or in-your face. Most of their opinions are presented as such. They don’t want to tell anybody WHAT to think…they just want people TO think, and for THEMSELVES. Personally, I think that’s a pretty good message.

Also, I personally think 21st Century Breakdown is more mature than American Idiot both musically and in subject matter. American Idiot was too concerned with the story and the concepts. The loose themes and conceptual ambiguity makes 21st Century Breakdown feel much more natural. And less preachy. I don’t necessarily agree with everything said in their music, but they aren’t shoving it in your face.

As for the comment(s?) saying that they have a formula, I would like to know where they’re getting this. They have songs ranging from 30 seconds to over nine minutes. They have some minimalist songs with just an acoustic guitar and vocals. They have purely instrumental songs. They use a wide variety of instruments, including: guitar, bass, drums, piano, harmonica, mandolin, farfisa, trumpet, saxophone, accordian, etc. They have fast songs. They have slow songs. They have songs about everything from girls, to religion, to drugs, to cross-dressing, to moving, to sex, to dealing with death, to being a parent, to growing up, to the fashion industry, to politics. They draw influence from many genres. Punk, classic rock, ska, blues, pop, and even polka, for Pete’s sake.

With each album, they expand on their previous sound. Keep it the same at heard, but with a complete overhaul in how it’s presented. They change everything from their instrumentation to the formula of each song (because it is different for each song) and the lyrical content.

They’ve spent 20+ years evolving. There’s no formula. Yeah, they’re still the same Green Day at heart, but they’ve definitely changed and grown as they’ve grown up. It’s not like they’ve put out the same album eight times…it’s always something new and refreshing, but you’re still getting the same band you loved before.

Anybody who thinks they have a set formula CLEARLY is not familiar with anything outside of their singles. And clearly not even familiar with those very well considering Jesus of Suburbia was a single.

Green Day have the most variety of just about any band I know. Calling them formulaic is just about the most untrue thing anybody could possibly say about them.

I am a fan in it for the long haul. They’ve never disappointed me. They’re always maturing, and definitely not looking for a teenage audience. In fact, I saw them in concert last night, and it was one of the most diverse crowds I’ve ever seen. There were young children there, with parents who had probably grown up listening to them. There were people in their 30s, 20s, and teens. I’m pretty sure I even saw some white haired elders there. Green Day are a culturally relevant band that appeal to everybody. They have such a wide variety in their repertoire that if one can’t find a single thing to like about them, it’s rather sad.

I really enjoyed this – keep up the great work John!