<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cV2EUUF47Ms&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cV2EUUF47Ms&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
^ I pretty much agree. There are some other songs that I think are ok to good though. and I don't find REM that special. Plus NIN made "hurt" and without that Johnny Cash couldn't have made his last masterpiece. <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mDsqpeiTqg8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mDsqpeiTqg8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
R.E.M. was the schizz. NIN was very good, kind of made the spearhead to industrial music, but R.E.M. is one of the few bands who literally bent the mainstream in their direction. NIN to a lesser degree, but they (Trent Reznor) couldn't sustain it the same way as, to quote Neil Young, "them REM boys." I would argue that only U2 did it better than REM from that standpoint.