Tom Petty's Super Bowl halftime show isn't exactly getting super enthusiastic reviews. Many say he was OK, but not all that special.
From the New York Times:
Tom Petty was not an obvious choice for halftime entertainment at Super Bowl XLII. His most recent album, “Highway Companion,” came out in 2006, and he is by no means a staple of pop radio or MTV. Petty, 57, is yet another of the mature performers chosen for the Super Bowl halftime since Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction in 2004.
But Petty and his band, the Heartbreakers, are still touring arenas — his next tour starts in May — and the brawny, ringing riffs of his songs still give audiences clear arena-rock cues. From the first chords of “Free Fallin’ ” on Sunday night, tens of thousands of cellphones were lit up and waving in the air.
That was one of the visual effects that the Super Bowl show splashed onto Petty and the Heartbreakers, who simply sing, play their instruments and occasionally stroll somewhere onstage.
Presumably to hold the attention of the MTV generation, there was a mildly suggestive graphic of a lighted Flying V guitar piercing a heart (creating a stage shaped like the Heartbreakers’ logo), a stampede of fans onto the field and fireworks as Petty started “American Girl.” Then came strobe lights, giant video-screen animations and some murky graphic effect in “Free Fallin’ ” that looked like a psychedelic oil slick.
Mildly suggestive? Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
But the bearded Petty — wearing a polka-dot black tie and, like the rest of the band, a black jacket — ignored the flash and sang in the frayed but stubborn voice that suits his songs. With a weary quaver, he delivered “I Won’t Back Down” less as a boast than as a matter of fact, the song of someone with no other choice.
His four songs balanced disappointment and aspiration: dead-end characters in “American Girl” and “Free Fallin’,” tenacious ones in “Runnin’ Down a Dream” and, in “I Won’t Back Down,” the ideal song for a Super Bowl in which so much hinged on defense. In Petty’s songs, winning is not as important as holding on and holding out. It is the music that turns tenacity into victory, with rock-ribbed, twangy riffs and a sure-footed beat.
Actually, other than the swipe about Petty being a "mature" act, this review was rather positive.
The game itself this year was so incredible that it would have taken a "wardrobe malfunction" of mammoth proportions to take away from the football drama.
If "mature" means that Petty didn't flash the audience or grab himself during his performance, I think that's a good thing.
This review from the LA Times is less positive:
For a large number of Petty fans, this was surely the only Petty show they'll see this year. So how was Petty and team? Taking to a guitar-shaped stage, Petty and the Heartbreakers looked professional in sport coats, and the feel of the 12-minute set was a band going to work, not trying to connect with an audience. The hooks of "American Girl," "I Won't Back Down" and "Runnin' Down A Dream" are downright undeniable, and the nostalgia, romance and classic Bryds-like guitar work in a song like "American Girl" makes it perfect for stadiums.
Yet it never quite connected at Super Bowl XLII. Petty is not a larger-than-life performer. He doesn't ham it up like a Bono or a Mick Jagger, and was out of place on the Super Bowl stage, even in a sing-along like a "Free Fallin'." Petty's appeal is in his unassuming nature, a working musician who takes the stage and gets down to business. He's one of the most consistent artists America has to offer, but his appeal sneaks up on you -- it doesn't (thankfully) hit you over the head like a soda commercial featuring Justin Timberlake.
No matter, Petty will back on the road this spring, where he belongs, and his momentary shilling for the NFL and a tire company, which not-so-subtly sponsored the affair, will be a thing of pop-culture past.
Petty connected as well as anyone can connect with an audience of about 100 million.
I certainly wouldn't call his performance at halftime "shilling for the NFL and a tire company."
That's just weird.
Being invited to perform at halftime of the Super Bowl is an honor. It's not shilling or selling out.
Derrik J. Lang of the Associated Press wasn't overly impressed:
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers' surprisingly subdued Super Bowl halftime show was as uncomplicated in person as it looked on television. There were no wardrobe — or any other kind — of malfunctions.
...When the stadium lights dimmed for "Free Fallin,'" those weren't lighters the audience just happened to have in their pockets, ready to whip out in unison for some groovy ambiance. They were actually tiny flashlights that had been previously distributed among the crowd. Hey, free souvenir!
I don't get the "surprisingly subdued" comment.
What was Lang expecting?
Greg Kot of the Chicago Tribune doesn't mince words:
The biggest surprise about the performance was that he agreed to do it at all; the rocker has refused to license his songs for advertising and corporate sponsorship for his tours. So what was he doing playing a halftime event sponsored by a tire company? Apparently, the chance to perform in front of a worldwide audience was too tempting to turn down --- particularly on the eve of a national arena tour, which Petty announced a few days ago.
If that was the motive, Petty did a good job of reminding fans of some of his biggest songs. But it really wasn’t a great performance; it was more of a Tom Petty commercial.
What is the big deal about a tire company sponsoring the halftime show? That's not the same as having a corporate sponsor for a tour. Anyway, I don't see a problem with corporate sponsorship if it helps keep ticket prices down.
Apparently Kot believes no self-respecting artist would agree to perform at the Super Bowl, too commercial.
Yes, 100 million people would rather be entertained by a marching bad playing "You Don't Know How it Feels" at halftime.
Dave Tianen of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes:
Ever since the Great Nipplegate Calamity of 2004, the NFL has opted for halftime shows that resemble the musical equivalent of a four-year run off-tackle.
That's meant a procession of middle-age vets who could be depended upon not to get flagged by the FCC: Paul McCartney, the Rolling Stones, Prince and, now, Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers.
All of those acts represent a certain guaranteed level of professionalism and brand-name familiarity. Petty brought the same workmanlike dependability established by his predecessors, although there's a definite sense that the assignment is to rock the house without rocking the boat.
...Petty and the Heartbreakers are way too seasoned a group of pros to not hold their own in a quick sprint like the halftime show. That said, Sunday's show didn't deliver the excitement of last year's rain-drenched set from Prince. It could be argued that a harder rocker than "American Girl" would have been a better choice to launch the set. "Free Fallin' " is hooky and familiar, but not exactly high-energy. If it hadn't been for "Runnin' Down a Dream," this would have been a halftime show that never quite hit fourth gear.
I thought Prince put on a great show last year.
I think Petty was equally entertaining, in spite of the lack of that "exciting" rain. I give him high marks.
I liked the songs Petty chose for his set, including opening with "American Girl."
You don't get much more American than the Super Bowl.
15 comments:
Sounds like you really wanted the show to be good, which is admirable, but it doesn't make it good. What struck me was how old and fragile the guy looked. I was worried he would fall over. With the graying beard, I wondered if he was auditioning for ZZ Top. Not a Prince fan, but it would be hard to top last year's show. Unfortunately, TP didn't even come close. Snoozefest.
Just because he LOOKED fragile doesn't mean that he IS fragile.
Just because it LOOKED liked the Patriots would win doesn't mean they did. Is that all we really care about these days? How someone looks? Petty is a tough rock and roller who has been doing this since the 70's with the same guys, When you see him live he doesn't need flying pigs or rain to entertain you. Because he and his band are a true talent it goes way beyond how they look. His tour is quite demanding and yet he still just lives for that. The live shows I have seen are no nonsense and instead very energetic and crowd pleasing.
I think the whole "snoozefest" commment comes from the fact that though he was sponsored by the tire company (because BTW that's the way it works at the Superbowl)
he didn't sell out by having half dressed girls wriggling around on stage with him. He has too much class for that. Of course they wanted him to do the BIG hits, that he had sung thousands of times. They were great and just maybe a bit awestruck by the whole thing. The show was good and he was far from "falling over". In my opinion it's refreshing to see someone who doesn't have to depend on glitz and glamour to do their job. Just like Eli Manning.
Well said, Showgirl.
All the corporate sponsorship for the Super Bowl has to be traced to the NFL, not Tom Petty. Blaming him for the halftime sponsor is really not fair. It's a reach to criticize Petty for that.
Of course, he played the hits. The idea was to appeal to as many people as possible. It's the Super Bowl, a huge and diverse audience.
Had he played a new song, that would have been self-serving and crassly commercial.
To "anonymous" --
Yes, I was looking forward to the show, but that doesn't mean I would say it was good if I thought it wasn't. I've PAID for concerts that I've really wanted to attend and they've been disappointments. Tom Petty hasn't been among them.
I don't think Petty looked "old and fragile." Did you see Willie Nelson on the pre-game? Were you watching in HD? If so, maybe that had something to do with your impression.
Petty looks his age. For a celebrity, that is admirable. I don't expect celebrities to be ageless in their appearance. I like when they aren't afraid to show that they're human like everyone else and not exempt from the effects of time.
Bottom line: Prince and Petty have completely different styles. I enjoyed both halftime shows.
I also have to agree with showgirl. It was a classy show.
I truly enjoyed Petty's set, but I have been a fan for many years. Perhaps I am a little biased. Those timeless tunes were professionally and crisply well-performed.
But in all honesty, the only folks I have heard complaining were the ones hoping for a cruddy hip-hop group out there babbling un-recognizable jibberish (yeah..yeah... uh-huh uh-huh) accompanied by half-naked hootchie girls that used to be the half-time staple prior to Janet's "hooter haul-out" back in '04.
I was pleased, my kids were pleased, my guests at the Super Bowl party were pleased. Wow, imagine that, a performance that all 100 million people could enjoy without having to send the kids into another room or hold your breath worrying about something inappropriate happening.
Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers don't rely on gimmicks...they just rock. It was the most enjoyable SuperBowl halftime show I have ever experienced. Mike Campbell's guitar is brilliant and an asset to all things rock-n-roll. Their set will never be topped.
Music, the way it's meant to be.
Tom Petty rocked, anyone who's able to post negative comments on the band's performance is either looking to draw heat or simply lacks good taste when it comes to music and putting on a good show. It was a great, elegant performance, the best I've seen in years.
I agree.
I was absolutely blown away by Tom Petty. I've never been a big fan of Tom Petty but I thought that was an awesome half time show. Instead of the childish shows like Janet Jackson there was something really good for a change. Even all the sports talk shows in Dallas said it was the first time they actually watched the half time show. Way to go TP. Planning to catch one of his shows this year because I enjoyed the show so much. I just wish I could find a hi-definition video of the half time show.
NH Boomer says -
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away musicians sang songs and people listened. Sometimes they played in concert halls seating 1,000 or less. Sometimes they played in arenas.
Regardless the size of the venue; people listened. Lyrics mattered. Tunes became embedded in one's soul.
Then came MTV. Flashpots. Dancing. Groping. Girls, Techno. Perfect, electronic drumming. Music became visual, not aural.
Tom Petty has been through the RIng Of Fire. The fire of corporate greed. The fire of person al loss. The fire of love reborn. He's a survivor. And he has nothing to prove.
If you seek artistic integrity and truth, you listen to artists like Petty. If you find him, old, tired, fragile, or uninspiring, click onto TMZ and get your Britney fix.
Pettys got soul. 'nuff said
-out-
Well said.
I was one of the lucky people to get to be on the field during the Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers halftime show and it was AWESOME. They all seemed to enjoy themselves and sounded great. I have seen Tom Petty 13 times in concert and he put as much into this halftime show as he does his actual concerts. I believe he was thrilled to be there and showed it. I have had people tell me it was the best halftime show they have seen in a long time. I have to agree!
Lucky you, Karla!!!
Superbowl XLII banned commercials and Tom Petty Videos: http://go-yocal.com/pages/superbowl.php?referer=freedomedenblog
I liked Petty's set fine, but it cetainly wasn't electrifying. His music isn't that type of music really, but I'm not saying it isn't good. I consider him one of my favorites in fact. What I would have loved to see, though, is one of his bandmates come over during the set and rip his shirt open, revealing a tape-covered nipple. Wouldn't that have been incredible!
how boring, first off he didn't use a zip line or a jet pack, plus hes almost 60 so he should of tap danced or something. plus its actually music which thieve made illegal practically, you have to play instruments and sing so of course my generation wouldn't like it.
Post a Comment