The original version of this song will be 50 YEARS OLD in a few months - truly there has never been a band as ahead of their time as CAN. Excellent cover, too.
I think Yorke's voice is a great match for the song, and his upper register is great. Mooney could actually sing in a conventional way (see She Brings the Rain), but whatever he was doing, he did it best in his lower register. On the one hand, this is a pretty straight up cover, but on the other hand, it's a testament to Can's influence on Radiohead that they could play it like that and it would pass for a Radiohead song.
Different people different tastes, that's life. There's music you can't stand that other people have a deep connection to, then other people like the same music as you but maybe in a completely different way. I love Amnesiac and TKOL but the bends and in rainbows are great but no way my go too.
@Kingma1997 The CAN version is him conveying the pain and the voice of simple thief hanging on a cross, abandoned by God, who asks his son "Why must I be the thief??". It's about the brutality of compassion and the worth, sorrow and desperation of a simple thief who never had a break, and in the end gets no break from Jesus himself nor the Romans. He dies alone. Malcolm Mooney wrote it as a semi-autobiographical piece and it's a 100% real as he was having a mental breakdown at the time.
There were two thieves hanging next to Jesus. One of them acknowledged that Jesus was the Son of God and repented before Jesus, and Jesus promised him that he (the thief) would see Him (Jesus) in paradise. The other thief had no one to blame but himself as he did not repent or acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God and joined in the mockery. The song is good, but it is sort of ridiculous the lengths to which people will try to justify the wrongdoings of a "simple thief" as you say in order to make a point against God, perhaps to hide from their own sin? Just food for thought.
@@7colors622 I think that perspective is pretty profoundly lacking in imagination, try thinking about how you'd feel in his place. Some guy who's presumably had a pretty rough life is being crucified, and another criminal next to him claims to be literally god -- can we really blame the thief for saying saying he's not interested? What reason does he have to just believe some guy being crucified next to him that he's an omnipotent being? "Faith"? Faith in what exactly? -- he doesn't even know anything about Jesus. If moments before your death, a criminal you've never met told you they were the creator of the universe, would you believe them? Doesn't seem like you need to go to "ridiculous lengths" to think the thief is treated pretty harshly
@@flame0154 We put so much artistic weight into victimization. Sometimes, in real life, there are moments where the supposed victim must make some progressive steps. Also, it's not unimaginative, that's literally how the account goes.
@@7colors622 Your response misses the point entirely. 1) Your point is unimaginative because you've not put much thought into imagining how you'd feel in the thief's position. This has nothing to do with whether you have the events of the story right, which I never disputed. 2) Sure, we can expect people in hard situations to "make progressive steps". The point is precisely what steps can we reasonably expect, which short comings we should view with compassion and understanding, and which short comings deserve our moral condemnation. If you (someone who has possibly not had a life of hardship and poverty) were condemned to death, and someone sitting next to you on death row told you they were literally god, would you abandon your beliefs about the afterlife etc and decide in your final moments to worship this random criminal? You would not, because that is a crazy expectation. If you wouldn't do it, is it really fair to condemn this thief so harshly? 3) My point has absolutely nothing to do with "artistic weight". It is entirely to do with the question of moral judgement: is refusing to believe in god -- even at the best of times, but especially in this thief's circumstances -- something we should judge so severely? The answer is no. I'm not putting "artistic weight" into anything, I'm showing compassion for someone's situation.
Fuck Standard Radiohead magnificence. I have no idea how time and time again they pull-off effective covers of bands which just aren't meant to be covered (cf The Smiths, Joy Division, Can)
Why must I be the thief? Why must I be the thief? Oh Lord please won't you tell me Why must I be the thief? Why must I be the thief? He said to the hanging man And how come you're the only one Who's a beggar, that always stares? Why must I be the thief? He asked of the hanging man And how come you're the only one Who lived with an open hand? Well why must I be the thief? He cursed and then he cried And the hanging man put out his hand And looked beyond his eye And the thief he climbed that cross To share that other's fate But the Jesus man said "Not now My brother, not now, it's far too late" Far too late Far too late Far too late Far too late Far too late Far too late Far too late Do what you must Take what you can Steal the pride from every heart Every angered man Every angered man Every angered man I am the thief I am the thief And you may run Yes, and you may hide But I will get you yet Yes I will Because of you, 'cause it's just your pride Just your pride! Pride!, Pride! Pride!, Pride! Pride!, Pride! Pride!, Pride! And I will get you yet Cos it's just your pride I will get you yet It's just your pride I will get you yet It's just your pride!
@interista7878 without this version, generations would never hear the original. i was born in 81 and never wouldve thought to read up on a german band from the 60's. so whether you prefer the original or not, this version is still highly relevant.
@@lefrancais8808 Mooney's vocals aren't easy to get into, but once you do it all makes sense. It blows my mind how he's still considered edgy by today's standards. And that was 54 years ago!
I heard The Thief the first time ever today, it was in the ending credits of 'Steal This Movie Part I'. It was the original Can version. The song was beautiful in the movie, perfection.
Usually bands will cover a song live as a tribute to a band that inspired them, so I don't understand the Radiohead hate. It's not like they re-recorded it and released it as a single.
This sounds like a typical radiohead song, with all their jonny guitar arrangements, collin bass line and phill drums. But isn't actually is a cover. Funny isn't?
+Hernaldo Sandoval Nirvana covered Bowie´s The Man Who Stole The World, and I like both equally. Depends on my mood, I like one over the other. Cobain´s emotions show more. I was not familiar with Radiohead´s cover of Can´s song, but I´m certainly getting to like it!
How you dare to compare Nirvana's cover to the epic original The Man Who sold The World by the Thin White Duke? Nirvana's cover is not bad, ok, but just to think about comparing them it is an insult to Bowie's song. Nirvana would never achieve anything even similar to one of Bowies just ok songs.
did anyone ever see the video someone made featuring scenes of different b&w movies for this song? what happened to that video?? i really enjoyed seeing it and never got the chance to download it.. :,o(
c´mon. all of you seem to be specialists, when it´s about music. just tak the fact, that a band like radiohead is payin tribute and respect to a band like can. a band which they´ve been influenced by, obviously as it is. things went worse, when eric clapton covered the wailer`s "i shot the sheriff" that´s some kind of raping.
I don't get all the hate over this version, I think it's better than the original actually, but I didn't like Malcom Moony's voice anyhow... I prefer later can... lets see how much unwarranted flames this gathers, oh no, I don't have the same opinion as everyone else.
@kristina80ification its not better its just different, and CAN has had a huge influence on Radiohead sound; especially the Malcom Mooney CAN sound...is really astonishing how much Malcom Mooney's sound has impacted music.
Again I say - COMPARISONS ARE ODIOUS. Without trivialising people's opinions, different artists are going to put themselves into a cover. It's impossible to avoid.. and if we want something just like the original, well, we can just listen to the original and ignore any covers. Personally, I find Thom's vocal on this track quite emotive, but it obviously isn't doing anything for some who are passionate about the original.
people here who spend their time worrying about this inane competition, "so and so did it SOO much better," should consider what the actual artists would think of you acting in such a childish way
ya it was Can,...considering they have a recording of this song and theyre from the 70s....idk unless of course Coldplay was around in the 70s? maybe?? I dk but something tells me they weren't
If CAN predicted the outcome of the 2000 election when they recorded it, who knows! “Hail to the Thief” was an actual headline somewhere, referring to the election...not sure where.
The technicality of Radiohead's cover is superior, but Can has that X-factor that just makes the original so better, so much more emotional and gripping, and it makes you feel as if the world is ending which this version fails to capture
Well I'm a huge CAN fan,and I do MUCH prefer the original.Also as much as I love Damo Suzuki I don't think his vocals could come close to capturing the world weary raspy torchered emotional quality of Malcolm Mooney's voice.
I think the problem with the way Yorke is singing this is that he is sort of warbling the lyrics, while Mooney's vocals on the original were raw, cracked and convincingly anguished, giving the song its power. Similarly, the band descends into a neo-psychedelic, swirly mush, while every note was clear as water in Can's original.
@Klowpapier "who is beggaring" through Yorke phonetic, but if you hear the original you will notice that Malcolm Mooney voice it's even more difficult to understand xD
That was a cool comment, mochacoffee, not for telling me that i suck, but for the fact that no one can rate this comment without insulting themselves or Radiohead.
@interista7878 Luke 23:39-43. "39] One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!" [40] But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? [41] We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
"Go Slowly" was originally referred to by Radiohead as "Canstyle", btw.
Holy shit, you’re so deadon right. Can’t believe I didn’t hear it-so true
The original version of this song will be 50 YEARS OLD in a few months - truly there has never been a band as ahead of their time as CAN. Excellent cover, too.
I had a listen of the original song and it is amazing how it sounds.
😅😅😅😅😅I got rawbed
i think this sounds great.
--from an old time CAN fan!
I think Yorke's voice is a great match for the song, and his upper register is great. Mooney could actually sing in a conventional way (see She Brings the Rain), but whatever he was doing, he did it best in his lower register.
On the one hand, this is a pretty straight up cover, but on the other hand, it's a testament to Can's influence on Radiohead that they could play it like that and it would pass for a Radiohead song.
Radiohead likes good music, no wonder they're good.
Exactly... It all boils down to their own taste in music.
I don't understand how anyone can not like Radiohead.
I used to play in a Brit Pop band song covers but one decided that Radiohead was too depressing.
Different people different tastes, that's life. There's music you can't stand that other people have a deep connection to, then other people like the same music as you but maybe in a completely different way. I love Amnesiac and TKOL but the bends and in rainbows are great but no way my go too.
@@frenchguitarguy1091 oh now I understand. Thanks.
@@iancrause1856Lol
Cover
i'm glad to see that Can was played to a whole theater of people. i bet that was the first time many of them ever heard Can.
This was also played in Oct. 2000 in Warrington, UK at Victoria Park
Hail to the Thief...
@Kingma1997 The CAN version is him conveying the pain and the voice of simple thief hanging on a cross, abandoned by God, who asks his son "Why must I be the thief??". It's about the brutality of compassion and the worth, sorrow and desperation of a simple thief who never had a break, and in the end gets no break from Jesus himself nor the Romans. He dies alone.
Malcolm Mooney wrote it as a semi-autobiographical piece and it's a 100% real as he was having a mental breakdown at the time.
There were two thieves hanging next to Jesus. One of them acknowledged that Jesus was the Son of God and repented before Jesus, and Jesus promised him that he (the thief) would see Him (Jesus) in paradise. The other thief had no one to blame but himself as he did not repent or acknowledge Jesus as the Son of God and joined in the mockery. The song is good, but it is sort of ridiculous the lengths to which people will try to justify the wrongdoings of a "simple thief" as you say in order to make a point against God, perhaps to hide from their own sin? Just food for thought.
@@7colors622 I think that perspective is pretty profoundly lacking in imagination, try thinking about how you'd feel in his place. Some guy who's presumably had a pretty rough life is being crucified, and another criminal next to him claims to be literally god -- can we really blame the thief for saying saying he's not interested? What reason does he have to just believe some guy being crucified next to him that he's an omnipotent being? "Faith"? Faith in what exactly? -- he doesn't even know anything about Jesus. If moments before your death, a criminal you've never met told you they were the creator of the universe, would you believe them? Doesn't seem like you need to go to "ridiculous lengths" to think the thief is treated pretty harshly
@@flame0154 We put so much artistic weight into victimization. Sometimes, in real life, there are moments where the supposed victim must make some progressive steps. Also, it's not unimaginative, that's literally how the account goes.
@@7colors622 Your response misses the point entirely.
1) Your point is unimaginative because you've not put much thought into imagining how you'd feel in the thief's position. This has nothing to do with whether you have the events of the story right, which I never disputed.
2) Sure, we can expect people in hard situations to "make progressive steps". The point is precisely what steps can we reasonably expect, which short comings we should view with compassion and understanding, and which short comings deserve our moral condemnation. If you (someone who has possibly not had a life of hardship and poverty) were condemned to death, and someone sitting next to you on death row told you they were literally god, would you abandon your beliefs about the afterlife etc and decide in your final moments to worship this random criminal? You would not, because that is a crazy expectation. If you wouldn't do it, is it really fair to condemn this thief so harshly?
3) My point has absolutely nothing to do with "artistic weight". It is entirely to do with the question of moral judgement: is refusing to believe in god -- even at the best of times, but especially in this thief's circumstances -- something we should judge so severely? The answer is no. I'm not putting "artistic weight" into anything, I'm showing compassion for someone's situation.
@@flame0154 send me a private message and I can give you my email, let's continue this there, brother.
Fuck
Standard Radiohead magnificence.
I have no idea how time and time again they pull-off effective covers of bands which just aren't meant to be covered (cf The Smiths, Joy Division, Can)
Wow. A cover of one of Can´s great songs. Very well done!
Why must I be the thief?
Why must I be the thief?
Oh Lord please won't you tell me
Why must I be the thief?
Why must I be the thief?
He said to the hanging man
And how come you're the only one
Who's a beggar, that always stares?
Why must I be the thief?
He asked of the hanging man
And how come you're the only one
Who lived with an open hand?
Well why must I be the thief?
He cursed and then he cried
And the hanging man put out his hand
And looked beyond his eye
And the thief he climbed that cross
To share that other's fate
But the Jesus man said "Not now
My brother, not now, it's far too late"
Far too late
Far too late
Far too late
Far too late
Far too late
Far too late
Far too late
Do what you must
Take what you can
Steal the pride from every heart
Every angered man
Every angered man
Every angered man
I am the thief
I am the thief
And you may run
Yes, and you may hide
But I will get you yet
Yes I will
Because of you, 'cause it's just your pride
Just your pride!
Pride!, Pride!
Pride!, Pride!
Pride!, Pride!
Pride!, Pride!
And I will get you yet
Cos it's just your pride
I will get you yet
It's just your pride
I will get you yet
It's just your pride!
It's a very good cover, in my opinion. I like Thoms voice in it.
@interista7878
without this version, generations would never hear the original. i was born in 81 and never wouldve thought to read up on a german band from the 60's. so whether you prefer the original or not, this version is still highly relevant.
that moment when you realize this is actually live
a river of hot frothy ejaculate
@@isidoreducasse- Of course.
I love CAN but I think I prefer the Radiohead version of this song.
Finally, 4 years later I think I prefer Can's version. But Radiohead's cover is still great imo
@@lefrancais8808 have you change your mind on which version is better again or no?
@@lefrancais8808 Mooney's vocals aren't easy to get into, but once you do it all makes sense. It blows my mind how he's still considered edgy by today's standards. And that was 54 years ago!
Future Days is the best Radiohead album.
Amnesiac is the best Can album.
i've been fan of RH for over 15 years, and this is the first time i heard song and it's amazing
how come hadn't I heard this song before?? I swear, this is pure awesomeness
love you radiohead
Bring tears to my eyes. SO POWERFUL. SOSOSOSOSOSO MUCH Energy...I mean.....Can and Radiohead, they are gods.
damn this is a good find.
Yes, it was only performed once and this is it. There is no studio recording either. Although I do wish there was one.
Hi, do you know where this recording was done? I was under the impression they’ve played this around 10 times between 2000-2002
It’d be interesting to hear Thom’s vocal placed over the original recording.
I heard The Thief the first time ever today, it was in the ending credits of 'Steal This Movie Part I'. It was the original Can version. The song was beautiful in the movie, perfection.
this song must be what radiohead was trying to sound like when they made big boots. Awesome
a truely amazing cover does the amazing original a great tribute
The original was recorded in 1968. Can is amazing.
Although released on 'Delayed.... 1968', "Thief", and most of the album, minus a couple tracks were recorded in 1969.
this song is wild; it really explodes
When I heard that Radiohead probably would make the next Bond theme, I inmediatly came here to hear this...
great to see them bringing back one of the forgotten geniuses of the 70's... its alright for a cover i quite like it
I must say that Thom's voice fits really well with Radiohead's cover!
Although it might not suit the original that well.
Considering the quality of this recording is definitely FM sourced, this is either 2000-8-8 Warrington or 2001-6-29 Mountain View.
perhaps this is the first time i prefer a cover to the original. Yorke's voice is perfect for this song.
this song was also played in Victoria Park in 2000
Thanks, didn't know it was played a second time. I added that to the side information.
Usually bands will cover a song live as a tribute to a band that inspired them, so I don't understand the Radiohead hate. It's not like they re-recorded it and released it as a single.
The riff is very similar to "go slowly"
that song was actually originally nicknamed "can stylee" by the band
just in time for the reissue of Cans back catalogue too. he he
This sounds like a typical radiohead song, with all their jonny guitar arrangements, collin bass line and phill drums. But isn't actually is a cover. Funny isn't?
+Hernaldo Sandoval Nirvana covered Bowie´s The Man Who Stole The World, and I like both equally. Depends on my mood, I like one over the other. Cobain´s emotions show more. I was not familiar with Radiohead´s cover of Can´s song, but I´m certainly getting to like it!
Radiohead's sound is heavily influenced by Can, so it's not really surprising that they sound similar.
How you dare to compare Nirvana's cover to the epic original The Man Who sold The World by the Thin White Duke? Nirvana's cover is not bad, ok, but just to think about comparing them it is an insult to Bowie's song. Nirvana would never achieve anything even similar to one of Bowies just ok songs.
It is called “The Thief”...lol
00
holy cow. forgot all about this one, and then BOOM.
@roejogan8 love the word "pontifiicating", great use
Soberbia interpretación de Can. Sólo @radiohead podría dar la talla.
Genial music .original from can.Tom yourke nails it!❤
It was also played in Spain in 2002
this is awesome.
Can's version was released in 1970 on a Live double of rare German bands....
@gamester57 I don't care if he is singing out of tune, as long as it sounds good to me.
@CanRarities
well i think it suits well
i dont want to argue :)
did anyone ever see the video someone made featuring scenes of different b&w movies for this song? what happened to that video?? i really enjoyed seeing it and never got the chance to download it.. :,o(
c´mon. all of you seem to be specialists, when it´s about music.
just tak the fact, that a band like radiohead is payin tribute and respect to a band like can.
a band which they´ve been influenced by, obviously as it is.
things went worse, when eric clapton covered the wailer`s "i shot the sheriff"
that´s some kind of raping.
I don't get all the hate over this version, I think it's better than the original actually, but I didn't like Malcom Moony's voice anyhow... I prefer later can... lets see how much unwarranted flames this gathers, oh no, I don't have the same opinion as everyone else.
Kandi Gloss You're so right. Moony's voice sounds horrible. Like Ren from Ren and Stimpy. This Radiohead cover makes this song listenable.
But actually not a lot of people hate it?
@CanRarities
it suits it perfectly.
@kristina80ification its not better its just different, and CAN has had a huge influence on Radiohead sound; especially the Malcom Mooney CAN sound...is really astonishing how much Malcom Mooney's sound has impacted music.
Again I say - COMPARISONS ARE ODIOUS. Without trivialising people's opinions, different artists are going to put themselves into a cover. It's impossible to avoid.. and if we want something just like the original, well, we can just listen to the original and ignore any covers. Personally, I find Thom's vocal on this track quite emotive, but it obviously isn't doing anything for some who are passionate about the original.
I don't get why people complain about this cover, I think it's an awesome cover with GREAT instrumentals.
@tubbythug92 haha! thanks buddy! i just reread my comment too and started laughing. i don't even remember using that word. LOL!
people here who spend their time worrying about this inane competition, "so and so did it SOO much better," should consider what the actual artists would think of you acting in such a childish way
CANNNN
ya it was Can,...considering they have a recording of this song and theyre from the 70s....idk unless of course Coldplay was around in the 70s? maybe?? I dk but something tells me they weren't
@calvinmontgomery i heard of can in johnny rotton's book. they were an influence on pil.
Is this the thief radiohead told us to hail to? :)
If CAN predicted the outcome of the 2000 election when they recorded it, who knows! “Hail to the Thief” was an actual headline somewhere, referring to the election...not sure where.
good shit
CAN > Pink Floyd.
Cheers mate :)
awesome
instrumental part is so similar to 'go slowly'.
The technicality of Radiohead's cover is superior, but Can has that X-factor that just makes the original so better, so much more emotional and gripping, and it makes you feel as if the world is ending which this version fails to capture
I prefer this version to the original, but I'd probably prefer the original if Damo Suzuki did the vocals.
Well I'm a huge CAN fan,and I do MUCH prefer the original.Also as much as I love Damo Suzuki I don't think his vocals could come close to capturing the world weary raspy torchered emotional quality of Malcolm Mooney's voice.
Such vocals are from Michael Mooney
I think the problem with the way Yorke is singing this is that he is sort of warbling the lyrics, while Mooney's vocals on the original were raw, cracked and convincingly anguished, giving the song its power. Similarly, the band descends into a neo-psychedelic, swirly mush, while every note was clear as water in Can's original.
ahora si....RADIOHEAD....de la basura haces oro y afinado..jaja
They also played at warrington, England, not sute of the date.
I believe the band Can made the original
Some say this song is about cormac Mcguckin
@Klowpapier "who is beggaring" through Yorke phonetic, but if you hear the original you will notice that Malcolm Mooney voice it's even more difficult to understand xD
That was a cool comment, mochacoffee, not for telling me that i suck, but for the fact that no one can rate this comment without insulting themselves or Radiohead.
@raedeeohed i agree.
Does anybody know which performance this version is from?
@biitumen
i looked for it and this is what came up:Ciudades Culturales (Salamanca) 7
Does it make me cool if I heard the Can version first?
Reading RUclips shoutboxes makes me feel that humanity is fucked. It is only a matter of time
@interista7878 Luke 23:39-43. "39] One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: "Aren't you the Christ? Save yourself and us!"
[40] But the other criminal rebuked him. "Don't you fear God," he said, "since you are under the same sentence? [41] We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong."
@magicstar911 No, it doesn't.
Same opinion.
@Yokonono99 Thanks broheim. We're bros now.
@kristina80ification I agree with you.
except...it wasn't Damo
It was Mooney
@FondlingReply
the cooliest
Hey your my old account. I cant believe I forgot your password.
Can radiohead cover anything?
Yes we "can"
I gotta say , I prefer this to Can's version... I dislike Can's singer's voice. Just a personal opinion.
I know im guna get abuse hailed at me but /careface. Who did the original then? :)
The original is soooooo superior, but is nice hearing Radiohead covering a band so good and forgotten as Can.
can
@Klowpapier *one
what is this song about?..
Crucifixion.
Canny
I stand by the comment I made 2 years ago.
I think this song is the Tribute to Chesus Christ, The God.
0:49 whos begarang...lol