Comparative levels of dryness from dry to really dry Crackers Gobi Desert My Elbow Marco Rubio's Mouth Barbara Walter's crotch Father John Misty's humor
okay but he told them that "father john misty" is a name he goes by and not a character and they continued to refer to fjm as a character, i mean come on ??? basic common sense man
6:00 "his oevre" "okay...(sigh)" says it all. they're either making fun of the way he speaks or desperately trying to relate to him. disrespectful interviewers imo.
This is excruciating. I don't think either's to blame. FJM probably has a certain suspicion of interviewers, and just didn't 'get' Radcliffe and Maconie's sense of humour. They just don't work together, as people.
You don't dis the RadMac, you just don't!! :`( I'd delete my rash response but, a week being nothing on RUclips aside, I've never had such a great comeback here ever.
Why would you put a picture of yourself on youtube ffs. And if we're talking about substance, as you've responded to another commenter, the only thing you put on the table was a mispronunciation. So... shut up kid.
+dancheyne rhetorical, mate, we know exactly the type that are coming out of the rafters to defend these plums. Never said a picture of yourself either. It's hilarious that they've been saying 'what was he on about' and painting him as a shallow rock star when he was clearly mocking that during the intverview. All of that culminates in how out of touch them, and on a broader scale, the medium/time slot they represent, well and truly are. Get tae fuck, "kid".
heres the thing. these guys are just doing their job, and as josh tensd to do, hes turning it into a little deadpan performance. which is fine, but these guys arent in on the joke and that aint their fault. josh isnt a very inviting person ive gathered. youre either there with him, or youre not.
Awkward af. So painful. Listening to it live I thought they were getting on ok at first basically until the 'I really am not fella'. Listening again it sounds like the aggro was there from the start and just grew. They tried to rescue it after the first song but...
I like all the people involved in this interview - I am not sure if there is any value in attaching blame for its failing..... did it fail? I found it interesting and listenable. I'd certainly rather this than the horrifically disconnected, contrived media trained PR that passes for most interviews today. Josh has since said that the nights and day before this interview were spent living in fear and loathing style blaze of destructive glory.... and perhaps he was a little 'tired and emotional'... when he went in for this interview
They didn't do research. If they did a search on google they could have known that Father John Misty is nothing else than a band name. Also, are they really starting the interview with "Our eyewitnesses said you did crowd surfing is that a common scheduled feature?" Come on, it's not only something they could have easily known watching FJM's concerts on RUclips, it is also a question that will be obviously answered with an affirmation, there is no way to have an interesting interview with questions like that.
@@imanoljesusdelpozo4907 You obviously haven’t done YOUR research on Mark and Stuart. They generally don’t take ‘things’ too seriously and like to have a laugh WITH their guests, not at them. They’re both very amiable and easy going fellows.
this isn't an interview, it's just two guys trying to take the piss out of misty by asking pointless questions which misty handles quite well and ultimately listening to this was a waste of time
I can here expecting to hear JT being a bit of a prick, but really I don't think Mark and Stu handled it very well. He was pretty clear about what was annoying him and why, but they took no heed of it.
So different to the interviews they do with for example Noddy Holder, when it's like a lad's night down the local and everyone is having a great time! 😳
They didn’t quite click, he was a bit cross-patchy, they didn’t quite manage to put him at ease, but also it was quite an interesting interview, even though it was with someone I’ve never heard of or heard.
I think you misinterpreted that. He mentioned post-punk and no-wave, both of which are genres associated with Joy Division and their ilk. I think he just thought the song title "Joy Division Oven Gloves" sounded stupid.
Oh, absolutely. He's just another in a long, long line of Pitchfork-approved "edgy" singer-songwriters who gets fawning notices from "serious" critics, but for whom most people in the world couldn't give a single shit. People like him seem to think of what they do as some kind of high art, and it comes off in their cooler-than-thou shitty attitude. The guy was in Fleet Foxes, for fuck's sake. You know, that awful band that were directly responsible for the horror that is Mumford and Sons.
@@snapsnappist4529 Are you kidding?? Father John Misty sucks but Fleet Foxes are the least controversial, least pretentious, most easygoing and well-to-do band there is. They totally revitalized folk music. Although I do agree that Mumford and Sons' sad existence is partially their fault. Lol.
@@CL2- Well, yes, that's sort of the problem. "Least controversial, least pretentious, most easygoing" aren't exactly the things that rock n' roll dreams are made of. Personally, I I'd take pretentious and controversial over a bunch of sandal-wearing beard-bros whining their helplessness blues any day of the week.
It really is just him being clever and biting to begin with but the interview style is super blunt, he was accurate. I've paused it at when one of the hosted called him "Fella" I'm not sure what that means where you guys are from, but to me (and likely the guest) it is considered down talking. I'm guessing by the hosts style it was probably meant to lighten the mood if they were uncomfortable with the guests sensibilities. That is what I can say from an outside American perspective, not that anyone asked haha
One additional thought at 6:02 it's obvious the guest feels disrespected because he clearly says not minutes before that his name is not a "character" and one of the hosts seems to intentionally deliver his comment as a slight or maybe he just wasn't listening. I feel like there is a bit of intentional prodding going on, and if not it's just horrible interviewing technique
@@GooberMagonk No, he's a precious, self-aggrandizing, humourless narcissist from the beginning. You - and by that I literally mean you personally - would never become so passive aggressive at being asked some questions. It's totally unreasonable.
This was an atrocious interview by Radcliffe and Maconie, they'd not done any research, it was a Friday and they wanted to get off and have a beer. Shit work by the BBC, they should expect better.
Radcliffe & Maconie know so much about music and are so professional that they always research their interviewees, but they are pitching the interview at an audience that may know nothing about FJM. FJM was the one who walked out while his track was being played, so he's the one who flounced off for beer.
Josh was more magnanimous about it: “Sometimes I just suck,” Tillman says, sighing. “The truth of the matter is it has not been a good year. I have substance-abuse problems. That morning, I was completely fucked up. This was Fear and Loathing level. I’ve got these lizard men with English accents doing this Laurel-and-Hardy act on me and I just couldn’t deal with it. It’s not as if those guys were so horrible. It’s me. It’s my fault.”
@@vermilliongecko You've got to admire the fanboys who suggest things like "it was Friday and they wanted to get off and have a beer". I'm a fan of FJM but, come on, he's being a wanker and that's where things nosedive.
It started off ok with them getting the dry jokes about merchandise, but fjm seemed to misinterpret the oven gloves reference as some kind of slight and it all got a bit narky from there on in, I found it all highly amusing, good work all round chaps.
+bazzabaz I think he was pissed off because they called FJM a character right after he corrected them saying it wasn't a character. indicating they weren't listening to him nor respected him.
It's like none of them are really bad, it's just like something went wrong in the interview, somehow. FJM seems like a no-nonsense guy (good thing) who just happens to not be polite about it (bad thing). R+M are 'some-nonsense' guys who do ask meaningful questions, albeit interspersed with said nonsense, although here they seem to be lost in FJM's (completely understandable, but unfortunate) frustration and his ventings thereof. But what do I know? I've honestly never listened to FJM's music so maybe in context this was all bullshit. But they do tend to make interesting interviews with others. There's far more lamentable content in the comments section. Everybody is so angry. It makes me sad. (Because I am a jessie)
The thing is that most of the things for which theses guys wanted explanations actually are total nonsense. If they had done any research they would have known that Father John Misty is neither a character nor an alter ego. It's a band name, which he openly has said has little or no meaning. And if they had read the listening instructions instead of just being like, "What is this little booklet?" they probably would have had a more stimulating question about it.
And like 90% of rock musicians stage dive at some point, so that's kind of a terrible way to start the conversation as well. It really seemed like they just weren't trying very hard.
Father John Misty (live at 6Music Festival) just apologised to RadMac for being a "miserable wretch" during THAT interview. "Sometimes I'm not a cool guy", he added. So all you Father John Misty apologists can shut up now.
I don't think it's that bad. It soured towards the end where Maconie got the wrong end of the stick at FJM's "flustered" comment. I'd say it's as much on Maconie as it is FJM.
Thanks for posting this.I find the music of Father John Misty to be less entertaining than Radcliffe and Maconie. If you are going to name yourself Father John Misty you have to expect every interviewer to ask about your spiritual background. I think he was too sensitive and/or hung over to match wits with two of the best presenters on the BBC. All the RadMac haters will be happy to know they won't be on weekdays after the first of the year. That dampens my spirits for the holiday season.
What's the issue with this interview? Tillman answered all the interviewers questions coherently. He didn’t ramble or seem antagonistic. Personality mismatches, maybe. A brilliant interview, if he was as fucked up as he later claimed.
This was a really embarrassing interview for the BBC. No research done whatsoever. Just rude really. Asking empty and non-direct questions. Handled pretty well by J. Tillman - BBC 6 really should know better.
Well that's what happens when you go into an interview clearly knowing nothing about the guy you're about to talk to... FJM handed them some due criticism
Radcliffe & Maconie know so much about music and are so professional that they always research their interviewees, but they are pitching the interview at an audience that may know nothing about FJM.
For context (for Americans or those too young to know), Maconie had a long career as a music journalist stretching back to the 1980s and has written for the NME, Q, Select and Mojo (among others), and interviewed countless bands and musicians. Radcliffe has worked for national radio since the early 90s and, similarly, has had hundreds of musicians and bands on his shows over the years. It's very telling that, despite the "difficult" characters they've encountered throughout their careers, they lost their patience when confronted with this pompous hipster and his obtuse, long-winded, non-answers. At least they tried. I would have given up trying to engage this guy long before they did.
I remember hearing this at the time and finding it a little awkward....but only because FJM clearly wasn't getting into the groove of Rad Mac. It's a real shame that some people will just hear/see this and think Rad Mac are the problem; they're both serious music journalists, writers and broadcasters and are all about having the craic with their guests. They interview someone virtually every day, 5 days a week and 99.9% of the time the guest gets it, feels welcome and riffs along with them. FJM was clearly uncomfortable here and, given that he's since apologised and cited this interview as a case of him being a dick, the blame is clearly at his door and he graciously concedes that.
Part of his evolution seems to be self accepting that he’s a pretentious dick. When he owns that, all of the tension turns into humor. He really is self aware so I let it slide. But man, FJM is so full of himself it’s unreal.
They just sound like typical brittish radio DJs. I don't think that they are bad in any way, they are trying to meet FJM but he doesn't give anything back. He's an interpersonal stone wall in this interview.
I thought this was going to be him being awkward (which he certainly is in quite a lot of interviews) but he's just desperately trying to be cool and sensible, and they're being ridiculous
Okay Mr. Tillman owned this interview and it was hilariously endeering to listen to him tolerate each and every moment he stuck their insufferable shit into his dehumidifier. That being said, he did sound cranky.
I wish Radcliffe and Riley would work together again. They bounce of each other better and make a better duo than Radcliffe and Maconie (who just seems to be a right grumpy git these days).
What stupid banal questions they were asking. Perhaps they should ask what his favourite colour is next. Good on you Father John Misty and he was fantastic at Nottingham last week.
Soooo many people get the wrong idea of Radcliffe and Maconie, they are usually great with guests. Father "Josh" Misty has said he was on a bit of a "low point, with excess..." It was good towards the end, and they aknowledged the social media outrage. What the problem?!?
Moderately intelligent people in a "thesaurus off" Fortunately one can write very decent songs. Why did I waste some of my finite tenure of sentience both watching/ listening to this pissing. I should have been listening to 'Guided By Voices'
I remember listening to this at the time. My ears pricked up at "I really am not, feller." from Stuart. Tillman clearly didn't want to be there. The album had been out for a year, so everyone who was going to buy it already had. The concert had sold out as they mention so he had nothing to lose. If he was drunk or stoned then turning up was unprofessional and disrespectful. Mark and Stuart are serious and knowledgeable music journalists of long-standing who admired Tillman's music a great deal. They have interviewed scores if not hundreds of people without a problem. Go figure.
Radcliffe and Maconie are very experienced and intelligent journalists. Their shtick can sometimes be misunderstood, FJM clearly does not understand English humour, not his fault, but still a self obsessed tosser... "I bow to your superior knowledge...." haha !
James, you deliberately pick the best of UK vs. the worst of USA. Stop pretending British TV is inherently superior. I watch tons of each through the years. Both are about equal in proportion of the crap they produce. Curb your Enthusiasm, Seinfeld, Larry Sanders Show, All in the Family (based on an inferior UK version), Tracy Takes On, Arrested Development, Mr. Show, I can go on and on. Some of the best Brit comedies are imitations of these, although I do love Peep Show and there's nothing in America quite like it.
No I'm sorry, I know that comedy is subjective but to claim that Til Death Us Do Part was an inferior version of All In The Family is utter bollocks. Til Death, in its various guises, ran from the '60s right up to the 90s and spawned two feature films, one man shows and a host of other media spin offs. You don't get to do that by being inferior. It might not be to your taste, but that;s the point Yolanda is making in the original comment here; there is something about British humour that gets lost in translation. You'd have to know what British life is like to appreciate Til Death, just as much as you'd have to know American life for All In The Family. I don't, because I've never lived there, but I'd never presume to call the US remake 'inferior', just different. For the record too, there are far more direct and indirect remakes of British sitcoms in the US than their are of US sitcoms remade here in the UK. At the end of the day yes funny is funny, but culture matters a lot too.
While it's true I haven't seen enough episodes (only eight) to definitively say *Til Death Us Do Part* is inferior to *All in the Family* - based on my experience and taste that's my understanding of it. And I reject the premise that a show running on the air longer in various incarnations makes it superior. By that rationale, The U.S. version of "The Office" is better than the original. After all, the fanbase and acclaim is much bigger and louder for the yank Office. Culture matters, yes. *Perry Mason* is an important cultural artifact that ran through the decades. That doesn't make it necessarily superior to *Peter Gunn* or *The Leftovers*.
This is what happens when you put an incisive, intelligent, introspective person in front of interviewers who are, simply and bluntly, professional entertainers. I doubt they even understand what genuine, consistent soul-searching is all about. If they did, I doubt they would be so quick to deflect and play the "Ooh, look how smart you think you are" game. If they did, they would know how important it is to listen and apply critical thought to an interviewee's statements before chattering off down the rabbit hole. Give me a break. They're not the slightest bit interested in genuine questions and answers. They don't want to share legitimate information. They only want to create storylines and generate ratings. It's both typical and indicative of the imminent fall of western civilization.
What a catastrophic and embarrassing car crash of an interview by these two time served 'presenters', Radcliffe's attempt to imbue humour was perhaps a little perhaps lost on FJM. The awkwardness of the interview was cringeworthy at times.They came across as being poorly informed or lacking in research judging by the off point 'character' question they asked and at other points during the interview Maconie was just unprofessional and rude when persistently talking over FJM and his response 'I bow to your superior knowledge' speaks for itself. If you want to learn how not to interview an artist, this is a good example. I actually think FJM did well to remain in the studio for the duration of the interview. If you have not taken the time to listen to FJM in other interviews or the lyrical content of his music, you could be forgiven for thinking he was being arrogant during this interview but I don't think that was the case at all. Very poor form by Radcliffe and Maconie on this occasion.
i think they did their best. regardless of how knowledgeable on the subject they are, they have to ask questions that the general demograph of their audience might ask. for example, i've only ever heard of him in passing, so whether or not FJM is a result of his upbringing is a valid point, as is "is FJM a character?" - had he answered the questions as straight as they were asked, i might have learned something positive about him. as it is, he jsut comes over (to me) as pretentious. i feel he perhaps was not briefed on who R&M were and what the tone of their show is, and went into the interview expecting something a little more highbrow. from reading comments he made about this interview subsequently, it seems what went on behind the scenes may have had more to do with how it went, than the actual questions that were asked. R&M would have sussed early on ("blunt questions...") that he was trying to show them up live on air so at some point it became a game rather than a straight interview, and their interruptions would have been part of that.
If Tillman didn't want to do the interview (which he clearly didn't from the start) then he should have just not shown up, Fifteen minutes of radio silence would have been better than listening to his spoilt brat act. He ought to have known that the interviewers were big supporters of his music (if they were not they would not have INVITED him onto THEIR show) and they have been since the first Fleet Foxes album was released. At the end of the day the sole purpose of these interviews is to promote the artist, Tillman needs to ask himself if coming across the way he did was the best way of doing that. But of course, he wont.
An interview isn't just promotion, it should at least have interesting questions that bring out interesting answers. They asked him stuff they would have known if they did a quick search on google. They seriously started the interview asking him if he crowd surfed, which is a boring question cause the only answer can be "yes" or "no" and also is something they could have known if they actually were interested in FJM and watched one concert from RUclips. Also interrupting the person you are interviewing mid-sentence doesn't make the invited feel comfortable.
Also one more thing, he told them that Father John Misty is nothing but a band name and not an alter ego or a character and they instantly contradict him again. This is something they could have known by doing their research, and to not contradict him in this situation is common sense. If you are an interviewer you simply can't ask something and then ignore the answer completely.
Well, you're obviously not willing to learn anything about the people you're slagging off, because you're not prepared to be proved wrong. Just stick to your uneducated, ill-informed opinions, then, that's what bigots do best.
The irony is that FJM is kinda engaging in "English humour" when he very drily discusses his music as a way of maximising merch sales of jeggings. But whatever, who gives a shit. FJM is a bellend who possesses the sort of cynical, pretentious, above-it-all sarcasm befitting a teenager. And teens, incidentally, are the only kind of people he impresses.
FJM aptly demonstrates the difference between UK and US hipsters. UK hipsters are broad minded, witty and acctually understand the irony they are using. US hipsters like to dress up and look moody while behaving like spoilt teenagers, basically just goths who have decided on a whim to dress as backwoodsmen.
Speak for yourself dude. FGM has spoken out agains the same aspects of hipsterdom. And I dont think you understand what a hipster is if you think these old prunes qualify
Normally like Maconie but he was a bit unprofessional here. I know next to nothing about FJM but thought he didn't do much wrong. Mark was just trying to rescue things.
People having a go at the skills of these two presenters. They know more about music collectively than any of us posting comments on here. And also having a go at British humour ??? We invented humour. See Monty Python for starters. This guy couldn't be arsed on the day to give a decent interview. Seen him talk to Zane Lowe and all Zane did was kiss his butt. A decent interview but still... These two are talented guys that know their stuff. He fucked with them
FJM has a fine opinion of himself typified by his 'How y'all doin tonight' followed by 'Who cares' comment at the Roundhouse on Wednesday, so he's going to be bored by R&M's line of questioning which didn't allow him to show case his clever and engaging reposts. Listening to this interview, if I wasn't already aware of his great talent and wit I'd have taken him for a trite pompous twat who probably needs a slap or at least a beard tug.
+jdvbrennan I was also at the RH on Wednesday. He mentioned the interview at some point and said he has his faults, and that for some reason he always chooses to display them in public (one of the few times I heard him use self-deprecating humour). Also looking at his tweets the days after the interview, it shows that he feels pretty bad about how it went. That said, the interviewers did a miserable job. Minimum of research and they wouldn't let him talk. He was frustrated.
+TheGerAms Agreed, but couldn't resist a side swipe by his comment 'bring back lauren laverne' don't get me wrong I understand his frustration and admire his spunk. There's nothing wrong with knowing you're at the top of your game when you actually are. The first time i saw the smiths Morrissey stated 'you may not like us now but you will' there was only a few people in the audience but it make me laugh.
![[LIVE TV] AWKWARD & EMBARRASSING MOMENTS 2019 😁😁 CRINGE](/img/1.gif)
FJM later said he was completely fucked up, "fear and loathing" level, for this interview. Wouldn't have had a clue. The guy can handle his drugs damn
Yeah drugs lol
because he's lying to save face. He's just a prick.
Comparative levels of dryness from dry to really dry
Crackers
Gobi Desert
My Elbow
Marco Rubio's Mouth
Barbara Walter's crotch
Father John Misty's humor
hahaha
Goddamn there's enough sarcasm in this interview to kill a small village
"Oven gloves... I heard you trying to get that one earlier... you're really proud of that one, aren't you?"
Fantastic cynicism.
And yet he came off really badly when the reference was explained moments later.
Fantastic arrogance.
thats not what cynicism means.
this is one of my favorite things ever
This interview is so ridiculously stupid it's pure comedy.
'A sequence of phonetic sounds that looks good on a t shirt...'
okay but he told them that "father john misty" is a name he goes by and not a character and they continued to refer to fjm as a character, i mean come on ??? basic common sense man
FJM is a no bullshit kinda guy
You are right. He is a chickenshit biatch!!
No he loves to bullshit but he doesn’t make it obvious enough when he’s bullshitting and when he’s serious lol
He's an all bullshit kinda guy
honestly it sounds like FJM is just tired and hungover and anyone knows that when you're in that state, your emotional state is really fragile
6:00 "his oevre" "okay...(sigh)" says it all. they're either making fun of the way he speaks or desperately trying to relate to him. disrespectful interviewers imo.
“Didactic hair splitting post punk competing ideologies makes me puke”-Misty
This is excruciating. I don't think either's to blame. FJM probably has a certain suspicion of interviewers, and just didn't 'get' Radcliffe and Maconie's sense of humour. They just don't work together, as people.
Right off the bat, the guy pronounces meme as 'mem'. Good lord.
why are there so many accounts without pictures coming out of the woodwork to defend these fuckwits.
Shut up kid.
You don't dis the RadMac, you just don't!! :`(
I'd delete my rash response but, a week being nothing on RUclips aside, I've never had such a great comeback here ever.
Why would you put a picture of yourself on youtube ffs. And if we're talking about substance, as you've responded to another commenter, the only thing you put on the table was a mispronunciation. So... shut up kid.
+dancheyne rhetorical, mate, we know exactly the type that are coming out of the rafters to defend these plums. Never said a picture of yourself either. It's hilarious that they've been saying 'what was he on about' and painting him as a shallow rock star when he was clearly mocking that during the intverview. All of that culminates in how out of touch them, and on a broader scale, the medium/time slot they represent, well and truly are.
Get tae fuck, "kid".
This is the audio version of watching a really gory bullfight.
heres the thing. these guys are just doing their job, and as josh tensd to do, hes turning it into a little deadpan performance. which is fine, but these guys arent in on the joke and that aint their fault. josh isnt a very inviting person ive gathered. youre either there with him, or youre not.
thanks for this...I remember listening live and thinking this is a car crash in slow motion...
na English sarcasm and silliness is all over this
It's almost 6 years to the day, I remember regaling my, now wife, about the day I heard the interview with FJM and RadMac...
They're all big boys. No harm done 🙂
Awkward af. So painful. Listening to it live I thought they were getting on ok at first basically until the 'I really am not fella'. Listening again it sounds like the aggro was there from the start and just grew. They tried to rescue it after the first song but...
“I abide to your superior knowledge..”
“Oh god come on, man”
That's more flustery than what came before.
Why do they keep interrupting him ffs
becaues FJM is boring.
I like all the people involved in this interview - I am not sure if there is any value in attaching blame for its failing..... did it fail? I found it interesting and listenable. I'd certainly rather this than the horrifically disconnected, contrived media trained PR that passes for most interviews today. Josh has since said that the nights and day before this interview were spent living in fear and loathing style blaze of destructive glory.... and perhaps he was a little 'tired and emotional'... when he went in for this interview
They didn't do research. If they did a search on google they could have known that Father John Misty is nothing else than a band name. Also, are they really starting the interview with "Our eyewitnesses said you did crowd surfing is that a common scheduled feature?" Come on, it's not only something they could have easily known watching FJM's concerts on RUclips, it is also a question that will be obviously answered with an affirmation, there is no way to have an interesting interview with questions like that.
@@imanoljesusdelpozo4907 You obviously haven’t done YOUR research on Mark and Stuart.
They generally don’t take ‘things’ too seriously and like to have a laugh WITH their guests, not at them.
They’re both very amiable and easy going fellows.
@@GK1976A Hey dude, I made the comment 3 years ago, I dont remember anything really, so it’s very likely that I was wrong. anyhow, cheers!
I thought Josh was being quite patient with them lol.
LOL
Fucking hell what a helmshine!!
this isn't an interview, it's just two guys trying to take the piss out of misty by asking pointless questions which misty handles quite well and ultimately listening to this was a waste of time
I can here expecting to hear JT being a bit of a prick, but really I don't think Mark and Stu handled it very well. He was pretty clear about what was annoying him and why, but they took no heed of it.
So different to the interviews they do with for example Noddy Holder, when it's like a lad's night down the local and everyone is having a great time! 😳
They didn’t quite click, he was a bit cross-patchy, they didn’t quite manage to put him at ease, but also it was quite an interesting interview, even though it was with someone I’ve never heard of or heard.
they interview him and don't know when his show was.
They interview him with basic questions for the people who have NEVER heard of him. He left a lasting negative impression.
+Clair Duffy you judge musical talent on interviews? both fear fun and i love you honeybear are amazing albums.
+Rohdizafa Blake No no!! I was surprised by his great voice but he was sooo unprofessional. Thats my point.
+Rohdizafa Blake he had never heard of Joy Division and got very moody about -Oven Gloves.
I think you misinterpreted that. He mentioned post-punk and no-wave, both of which are genres associated with Joy Division and their ilk. I think he just thought the song title "Joy Division Oven Gloves" sounded stupid.
His interviews are just like his music.. totally puts me off
Oh, absolutely. He's just another in a long, long line of Pitchfork-approved "edgy" singer-songwriters who gets fawning notices from "serious" critics, but for whom most people in the world couldn't give a single shit. People like him seem to think of what they do as some kind of high art, and it comes off in their cooler-than-thou shitty attitude. The guy was in Fleet Foxes, for fuck's sake. You know, that awful band that were directly responsible for the horror that is Mumford and Sons.
@@snapsnappist4529 Are you kidding?? Father John Misty sucks but Fleet Foxes are the least controversial, least pretentious, most easygoing and well-to-do band there is. They totally revitalized folk music. Although I do agree that Mumford and Sons' sad existence is partially their fault. Lol.
@@CL2- Well, yes, that's sort of the problem. "Least controversial, least pretentious, most easygoing" aren't exactly the things that rock n' roll dreams are made of.
Personally, I I'd take pretentious and controversial over a bunch of sandal-wearing beard-bros whining their helplessness blues any day of the week.
It really is just him being clever and biting to begin with but the interview style is super blunt, he was accurate. I've paused it at when one of the hosted called him "Fella" I'm not sure what that means where you guys are from, but to me (and likely the guest) it is considered down talking. I'm guessing by the hosts style it was probably meant to lighten the mood if they were uncomfortable with the guests sensibilities. That is what I can say from an outside American perspective, not that anyone asked haha
One additional thought at 6:02 it's obvious the guest feels disrespected because he clearly says not minutes before that his name is not a "character" and one of the hosts seems to intentionally deliver his comment as a slight or maybe he just wasn't listening. I feel like there is a bit of intentional prodding going on, and if not it's just horrible interviewing technique
@@GooberMagonk No, he's a precious, self-aggrandizing, humourless narcissist from the beginning. You - and by that I literally mean you personally - would never become so passive aggressive at being asked some questions. It's totally unreasonable.
@@MissBlennerhassett876 Ya you're prolly right about all that
This was an atrocious interview by Radcliffe and Maconie, they'd not done any research, it was a Friday and they wanted to get off and have a beer. Shit work by the BBC, they should expect better.
Radcliffe & Maconie know so much about music and are so professional that they always research their interviewees, but they are pitching the interview at an audience that may know nothing about FJM. FJM was the one who walked out while his track was being played, so he's the one who flounced off for beer.
Well I'm sure they're both losing lots of sleep after your ticking off. Are you going to see them next Tuesday?
Utter bollocks. He was at fault for being a pretentious douche. Northerners don't play that shit.
Josh was more magnanimous about it: “Sometimes I just suck,” Tillman says, sighing. “The truth of the matter is it has not been a good year. I have substance-abuse problems. That morning, I was completely fucked up. This was Fear and Loathing level. I’ve got these lizard men with English accents doing this Laurel-and-Hardy act on me and I just couldn’t deal with it. It’s not as if those guys were so horrible. It’s me. It’s my fault.”
@@vermilliongecko You've got to admire the fanboys who suggest things like "it was Friday and they wanted to get off and have a beer". I'm a fan of FJM but, come on, he's being a wanker and that's where things nosedive.
hilarious
merch algorithm for the jeggings
It started off ok with them getting the dry jokes about merchandise, but fjm seemed to misinterpret the oven gloves reference as some kind of slight and it all got a bit narky from there on in, I found it all highly amusing, good work all round chaps.
+bazzabaz I think he was pissed off because they called FJM a character right after he corrected them saying it wasn't a character. indicating they weren't listening to him nor respected him.
That's what you call a nonsequitur. One does not follow the other.
Wow, you're a pretentious bellend.
What, because I used a word you didn't know? Your poor education is your problem, not mine.
Non sequitir is two words, jackass.
i love him ❤
It's like none of them are really bad, it's just like something went wrong in the interview, somehow. FJM seems like a no-nonsense guy (good thing) who just happens to not be polite about it (bad thing). R+M are 'some-nonsense' guys who do ask meaningful questions, albeit interspersed with said nonsense, although here they seem to be lost in FJM's (completely understandable, but unfortunate) frustration and his ventings thereof.
But what do I know? I've honestly never listened to FJM's music so maybe in context this was all bullshit. But they do tend to make interesting interviews with others. There's far more lamentable content in the comments section. Everybody is so angry. It makes me sad. (Because I am a jessie)
The thing is that most of the things for which theses guys wanted explanations actually are total nonsense. If they had done any research they would have known that Father John Misty is neither a character nor an alter ego. It's a band name, which he openly has said has little or no meaning. And if they had read the listening instructions instead of just being like, "What is this little booklet?" they probably would have had a more stimulating question about it.
And like 90% of rock musicians stage dive at some point, so that's kind of a terrible way to start the conversation as well. It really seemed like they just weren't trying very hard.
Father John Misty (live at 6Music Festival) just apologised to RadMac for being a "miserable wretch" during THAT interview. "Sometimes I'm not a cool guy", he added. So all you Father John Misty apologists can shut up now.
amazing
I don't think it's that bad. It soured towards the end where Maconie got the wrong end of the stick at FJM's "flustered" comment. I'd say it's as much on Maconie as it is FJM.
Thanks for posting this.I find the music of Father John Misty to be less entertaining than Radcliffe and Maconie. If you are going to name yourself Father John Misty you have to expect every interviewer to ask about your spiritual background. I think he was too sensitive and/or hung over to match wits with two of the best presenters on the BBC. All the RadMac haters will be happy to know they won't be on weekdays after the first of the year. That dampens my spirits for the holiday season.
What's the issue with this interview? Tillman answered all the interviewers questions coherently. He didn’t ramble or seem antagonistic. Personality mismatches, maybe. A brilliant interview, if he was as fucked up as he later claimed.
Well I beg to your superior knowledge.. oh come on man.
This was a really embarrassing interview for the BBC. No research done whatsoever. Just rude really. Asking empty and non-direct questions. Handled pretty well by J. Tillman - BBC 6 really should know better.
These guys are really the worst.
Well that's what happens when you go into an interview clearly knowing nothing about the guy you're about to talk to... FJM handed them some due criticism
Radcliffe & Maconie know so much about music and are so professional that they always research their interviewees, but they are pitching the interview at an audience that may know nothing about FJM.
If by awkward you mean that Josh Tillman is not willing to dumb it down for the benefit of Radcliffe and Maconie's audience.
❤️❤️❤️❤️ josh
there's a lot of glory involved...
these guys just will not drop the whole name thing.
if he says it means nothing, it means nothing.
cue theme from twilight zone
Lesson #1 for interviewers: Never get flustered.
For context (for Americans or those too young to know), Maconie had a long career as a music journalist stretching back to the 1980s and has written for the NME, Q, Select and Mojo (among others), and interviewed countless bands and musicians. Radcliffe has worked for national radio since the early 90s and, similarly, has had hundreds of musicians and bands on his shows over the years.
It's very telling that, despite the "difficult" characters they've encountered throughout their careers, they lost their patience when confronted with this pompous hipster and his obtuse, long-winded, non-answers. At least they tried. I would have given up trying to engage this guy long before they did.
I remember hearing this at the time and finding it a little awkward....but only because FJM clearly wasn't getting into the groove of Rad Mac. It's a real shame that some people will just hear/see this and think Rad Mac are the problem; they're both serious music journalists, writers and broadcasters and are all about having the craic with their guests. They interview someone virtually every day, 5 days a week and 99.9% of the time the guest gets it, feels welcome and riffs along with them. FJM was clearly uncomfortable here and, given that he's since apologised and cited this interview as a case of him being a dick, the blame is clearly at his door and he graciously concedes that.
Part of his evolution seems to be self accepting that he’s a pretentious dick. When he owns that, all of the tension turns into humor. He really is self aware so I let it slide. But man, FJM is so full of himself it’s unreal.
They just sound like typical brittish radio DJs. I don't think that they are bad in any way, they are trying to meet FJM but he doesn't give anything back. He's an interpersonal stone wall in this interview.
I thought this was going to be him being awkward (which he certainly is in quite a lot of interviews) but he's just desperately trying to be cool and sensible, and they're being ridiculous
Okay Mr. Tillman owned this interview and it was hilariously endeering to listen to him tolerate each and every moment he stuck their insufferable shit into his dehumidifier. That being said, he did sound cranky.
There's only one insufferable, pretentious prick here and it's neither of the presenters
Eamonn Holmes with David Blaine!!
I wish Radcliffe and Riley would work together again. They bounce of each other better and make a better duo than Radcliffe and Maconie (who just seems to be a right grumpy git these days).
Didn't they get bored. There was some pretty risque stuff done on radio 1 when Mark and Lard were on.
Enjoyed FJM slowly deflating the British pompous whoopie cusion that is these 2 DJs
you can't tell me the interviewer didn't flip through a thesaurus just before the interview
What a misery guts.
1:00
Dorthy Knoll
What stupid banal questions they were asking. Perhaps they should ask what his favourite colour is next. Good on you Father John Misty and he was fantastic at Nottingham last week.
Soooo many people get the wrong idea of Radcliffe and Maconie, they are usually great with guests. Father "Josh" Misty has said he was on a bit of a "low point, with excess..." It was good towards the end, and they aknowledged the social media outrage. What the problem?!?
I remember this when it was broadcast. Put me off him and made me love Radcliffe even more.
any musician that says "I have very obtuse merch sensibilities" deserves to get trolled
this is elite
Moderately intelligent people in a "thesaurus off" Fortunately one can write very decent songs.
Why did I waste some of my finite tenure of sentience both watching/ listening to this pissing. I should have been listening to 'Guided By Voices'
ANDY KING are you the singer from Gang of Four?
exactly my feelings brother
Kassulke Course
Finally, someone made those chaps sound like the clowns that they are👏🏻👏🏻
+knifer743 such chumps
I remember listening to this at the time. My ears pricked up at "I really am not, feller." from Stuart. Tillman clearly didn't want to be there. The album had been out for a year, so everyone who was going to buy it already had. The concert had sold out as they mention so he had nothing to lose. If he was drunk or stoned then turning up was unprofessional and disrespectful. Mark and Stuart are serious and knowledgeable music journalists of long-standing who admired Tillman's music a great deal. They have interviewed scores if not hundreds of people without a problem. Go figure.
Radcliffe and Maconie are very experienced and intelligent journalists. Their shtick can sometimes be misunderstood, FJM clearly does not understand English humour, not his fault, but still a self obsessed tosser... "I bow to your superior knowledge...." haha !
Peter Singer I get English humour, being English myself, and I find them to he utterly irritating and not remotely funny
I don't think they understand American humor. The fact that they got upset when he corrected them was too funny....
it seems like papa j doesnt really jive with brits
4:20
I love fjm
wowee
I feel like there is a bit of a clash between the English sense of humour and the american sense of humour here
Yolanda maria piotrowicz But I'm English and what the interviewers are saying is not funny at all haha
Monty Python, Mr Bean, Blackaddar, The Office
VS
Friends, The Big Bang Theory and The Fucking Cosby show
Pretty sure British humour wins
James, you deliberately pick the best of UK vs. the worst of USA. Stop pretending British TV is inherently superior. I watch tons of each through the years. Both are about equal in proportion of the crap they produce.
Curb your Enthusiasm, Seinfeld, Larry Sanders Show, All in the Family (based on an inferior UK version), Tracy Takes On, Arrested Development, Mr. Show, I can go on and on.
Some of the best Brit comedies are imitations of these, although I do love Peep Show and there's nothing in America quite like it.
No I'm sorry, I know that comedy is subjective but to claim that Til Death Us Do Part was an inferior version of All In The Family is utter bollocks. Til Death, in its various guises, ran from the '60s right up to the 90s and spawned two feature films, one man shows and a host of other media spin offs. You don't get to do that by being inferior. It might not be to your taste, but that;s the point Yolanda is making in the original comment here; there is something about British humour that gets lost in translation. You'd have to know what British life is like to appreciate Til Death, just as much as you'd have to know American life for All In The Family. I don't, because I've never lived there, but I'd never presume to call the US remake 'inferior', just different. For the record too, there are far more direct and indirect remakes of British sitcoms in the US than their are of US sitcoms remade here in the UK. At the end of the day yes funny is funny, but culture matters a lot too.
While it's true I haven't seen enough episodes (only eight) to definitively say *Til Death Us Do Part* is inferior to *All in the Family* - based on my experience and taste that's my understanding of it. And I reject the premise that a show running on the air longer in various incarnations makes it superior. By that rationale, The U.S. version of "The Office" is better than the original. After all, the fanbase and acclaim is much bigger and louder for the yank Office.
Culture matters, yes. *Perry Mason* is an important cultural artifact that ran through the decades. That doesn't make it necessarily superior to *Peter Gunn* or *The Leftovers*.
worst interviewers ive ever heard, let the man speak
This is what happens when you put an incisive, intelligent, introspective person in front of interviewers who are, simply and bluntly, professional entertainers. I doubt they even understand what genuine, consistent soul-searching is all about. If they did, I doubt they would be so quick to deflect and play the "Ooh, look how smart you think you are" game. If they did, they would know how important it is to listen and apply critical thought to an interviewee's statements before chattering off down the rabbit hole.
Give me a break.
They're not the slightest bit interested in genuine questions and answers. They don't want to share legitimate information. They only want to create storylines and generate ratings.
It's both typical and indicative of the imminent fall of western civilization.
What a catastrophic and embarrassing car crash of an interview by these two time served 'presenters', Radcliffe's attempt to imbue humour was perhaps a little perhaps lost on FJM. The awkwardness of the interview was cringeworthy at times.They came across as being poorly informed or lacking in research judging by the off point 'character' question they asked and at other points during the interview Maconie was just unprofessional and rude when persistently talking over FJM and his response 'I bow to your superior knowledge' speaks for itself. If you want to learn how not to interview an artist, this is a good example. I actually think FJM did well to remain in the studio for the duration of the interview. If you have not taken the time to listen to FJM in other interviews or the lyrical content of his music, you could be forgiven for thinking he was being arrogant during this interview but I don't think that was the case at all. Very poor form by Radcliffe and Maconie on this occasion.
This guy's music is infinitely more interesting than his commentary on, well, anything.
isnt his music the commentary itself?
I come back to this now and again just to remind myself not to be a pompous wanker, like Father John Misty.
i think they did their best. regardless of how knowledgeable on the subject they are, they have to ask questions that the general demograph of their audience might ask. for example, i've only ever heard of him in passing, so whether or not FJM is a result of his upbringing is a valid point, as is "is FJM a character?" - had he answered the questions as straight as they were asked, i might have learned something positive about him. as it is, he jsut comes over (to me) as pretentious. i feel he perhaps was not briefed on who R&M were and what the tone of their show is, and went into the interview expecting something a little more highbrow. from reading comments he made about this interview subsequently, it seems what went on behind the scenes may have had more to do with how it went, than the actual questions that were asked. R&M would have sussed early on ("blunt questions...") that he was trying to show them up live on air so at some point it became a game rather than a straight interview, and their interruptions would have been part of that.
Maconie was the issue here
If Tillman didn't want to do the interview (which he clearly didn't from the start) then he should have just not shown up, Fifteen minutes of radio silence would have been better than listening to his spoilt brat act. He ought to have known that the interviewers were big supporters of his music (if they were not they would not have INVITED him onto THEIR show) and they have been since the first Fleet Foxes album was released. At the end of the day the sole purpose of these interviews is to promote the artist, Tillman needs to ask himself if coming across the way he did was the best way of doing that. But of course, he wont.
An interview isn't just promotion, it should at least have interesting questions that bring out interesting answers. They asked him stuff they would have known if they did a quick search on google. They seriously started the interview asking him if he crowd surfed, which is a boring question cause the only answer can be "yes" or "no" and also is something they could have known if they actually were interested in FJM and watched one concert from RUclips. Also interrupting the person you are interviewing mid-sentence doesn't make the invited feel comfortable.
Also one more thing, he told them that Father John Misty is nothing but a band name and not an alter ego or a character and they instantly contradict him again. This is something they could have known by doing their research, and to not contradict him in this situation is common sense. If you are an interviewer you simply can't ask something and then ignore the answer completely.
My dad won't listen to FJM because of this interview. He loves Radcliffe & Maconie. I love FJM...
Same, it completely tainted me against him.
I am sorry but these guys would have annoyed me too! They are clearly just Lads .....and CLEARLY Father John Misty is NOT!
Look up Stuart Maconie on Wikipedia. He is SO not a lad. Do your homework.
Vermillion 303 I do my homework when it's worth my time ! These guys clearly are not ! Whatever ! More important things in this world !
Well, you're obviously not willing to learn anything about the people you're slagging off, because you're not prepared to be proved wrong. Just stick to your uneducated, ill-informed opinions, then, that's what bigots do best.
Vermillion 303 you're welcome !
The irony is that FJM is kinda engaging in "English humour" when he very drily discusses his music as a way of maximising merch sales of jeggings. But whatever, who gives a shit. FJM is a bellend who possesses the sort of cynical, pretentious, above-it-all sarcasm befitting a teenager. And teens, incidentally, are the only kind of people he impresses.
At least he knows he's said awful things
What awful things was that?? I cant even imagine one
@@bjuliene I know, he would make the ideal husband
It would deffinately be interesting, not stagnant. I'd rather be married to a self aware thinker like him than the alternative ♡
FJM aptly demonstrates the difference between UK and US hipsters. UK hipsters are broad minded, witty and acctually understand the irony they are using.
US hipsters like to dress up and look moody while behaving like spoilt teenagers, basically just goths who have decided on a whim to dress as backwoodsmen.
Speak for yourself dude. FGM has spoken out agains the same aspects of hipsterdom. And I dont think you understand what a hipster is if you think these old prunes qualify
I thought Brits were supposed to be sophisticated. These guys sound like coked up American shock jocks. "Can I finish my thought?" says it all.
"Sophisticated"? Oh, you poor thing. No wonder this went over your head.
Fuck i need this jeggins.
Normally like Maconie but he was a bit unprofessional here. I know next to nothing about FJM but thought he didn't do much wrong. Mark was just trying to rescue things.
90% of what hes saying is just ironic extensions off of his jokes, i love it, its almost impossible to take him seriously though.
Father John Pissy more like
People having a go at the skills of these two presenters. They know more about music collectively than any of us posting comments on here. And also having a go at British humour ??? We invented humour. See Monty Python for starters. This guy couldn't be arsed on the day to give a decent interview. Seen him talk to Zane Lowe and all Zane did was kiss his butt. A decent interview but still... These two are talented guys that know their stuff. He fucked with them
Radcliffe and Maconie can't keep up with the kid so try and act aloof and fail
There is no trying to act aloof with them; they are struggling to get an obstinate interviewee to cooperate.
he's enlightened and calling out fictional stories we live in this realm
LOL they're both so upset about his humor. They just handle American humor I suppose
FJM has a fine opinion of himself typified by his 'How y'all doin tonight' followed by 'Who cares' comment at the Roundhouse on Wednesday, so he's going to be bored by R&M's line of questioning which didn't allow him to show case his clever and engaging reposts. Listening to this interview, if I wasn't already aware of his great talent and wit I'd have taken him for a trite pompous twat who probably needs a slap or at least a beard tug.
+jdvbrennan I was also at the RH on Wednesday. He mentioned the interview at some point and said he has his faults, and that for some reason he always chooses to display them in public (one of the few times I heard him use self-deprecating humour). Also looking at his tweets the days after the interview, it shows that he feels pretty bad about how it went. That said, the interviewers did a miserable job. Minimum of research and they wouldn't let him talk. He was frustrated.
+TheGerAms Agreed, but couldn't resist a side swipe by his comment 'bring back lauren laverne' don't get me wrong I understand his frustration and admire his spunk. There's nothing wrong with knowing you're at the top of your game when you actually are. The first time i saw the smiths Morrissey stated 'you may not like us now but you will' there was only a few people in the audience but it make me laugh.