Because the UK isn't as keen on American rock.jszmiles wrote:Yeah there are plenty 90s classics that very incredibly popular in USA flopped so badly in UK... dunno why reallyJimJim wrote:Did this really peak that low in the UK?!
Even more than people that purchase lottery tickets?ManicFan2k wrote:It gets under this musical snobs skin like nothing else.
It simply didn't have the exposure before - it was never performed on UK TV in any way. They played the original on the show after two singers performed it so people heard the original version, not just theirs. It hung around the charts for absolutely AGES though - so it could never have been called a flop. It just needed the extra kick that X Factor gave it. You should be happy. I am. I loved it too.ManicFan2k wrote:It greatly p**ses me off when a truly great song that I've always loved (purely because it's brilliant) but is something of a 'cult' record
Suddenly someone sings a crappy cover of it on the X-Factor and the mainstream public then take interest and start wanting it. Oh you all like it now don’t you! You didn’t when it was released on its own merit. It had to be used in mass crappy singing contest to get you all to take note of it. It happened with Tracey Chapman's Fast Car and now happened with this. It gets under this musical snobs skin like nothing else.
Rant over. Since downloads have been included in the chart it had popped in the lower 90s a few times anyway.
I forgot this had been released THREE times in UK in an attempt to break it. Even a big movie didn't do it.04wayne wrote:Chart runs for: GOO GOO DOLLS
(through August 20, 2011)
* UK SINGLES *
Written by: John Rzeznik
Produced by: Goo Goo Dolls/Rob Cavallo
Date: 01/08/1998 - Run: 50-79-88-114-151-164-163-146-147-170-197 (11 wks)
Re 01: 10/07/1999: 186-*26*-43-77-95-138-160 (7 wks, 18 wsf)
Re 02: 27/04/2002: 174 (1 wk, 19 wsf)
Re 03: 19/10/2002: 184-175 (2 wks, 21 wsf)
Re 04: 08/02/2003: 184 (1 wk, 22 wsf)
Re 05: 15/12/2007: 199-0-0-0-178-167-152-148-152-143-99-110-107-111-80-81-90-86-90-89-96-99-92-124-142-143-135-157-136-115-87-66-77-100-120-111-84-102-89-71-120-152-160-162-148-163-193-199 (45-44c wks, 67 wsf)
Re 06: 17/01/2009: 143-140-145-158-160-162-177-158-184-196 (10 wks, 77 wsf)
Re 07: 25/07/2009: 196-136-121-134-141-149-140-163-129-153-164-143-133-164-153-158-158-164-0-0-157-0-0-0-0- (96 wsf)
16/01/2010: 159-151-154-134-140-98-130-134-146-113-99-114-132-156-175-174-141-145-174-175-178 (40-21c wks, 117 wsf)
Re 08: 17/07/2010: 176-175-164-128-120-122-161-141-133-99-152-187-150-155-152-156-0-196-126-148-170-172-187 (22-16c wks, 139 wsf)
Re 09: 26/02/2011: 183-0-0-166-0-0-0-149-191-170-133-144-125-164-0-105-161-163-155-165-160-147-195-197-159-167 (20-11c wks)
Total # of re-entries: 16
Total # of weeks: 159-44c ( Top 75: 5) (US:#9/14/1)
It's an example of a perfect rock ballad - everything that Bon Jovi failed to understand in the 90s and 00's - it has guts and real heart to it. I hate the typical cheesy rock ballads - this is one of the alltime best, for me.NothingFails wrote:I always thought this song was very mediocre and never understood why it was so popular in the US at the time. A lot of other singles from 1998 that would've been better belated UK #1's.
I second that. I used to hate "Iris" back in the day, although it wasn't a big hit in Europe, MTV was playing it so damn often. I never thought this would get a second life. Sadly it didNothingFails wrote:oh, I don't like anything Bon Jovi's done after 1989. In the US Iris put them into that "mom rock" group ala Train, Maroon 5, Nickelback, Creed, Daughtry, latter day Bon Jovi, etc... I much preferred their earlier harder music before the Goo's became a ballad band.