|
|
| Some Guy |
My nephews friends were talking and one of them said the Stones are washed up and need to give it a rest. All I could think is Man, youth is wasted on the young. |
|
|
| CraigP |
So speak your peace in the murmurs drawn
But youth is wasted on the young!
Your strength is my weakness, your weakness my hate
"Thru the Eyes of Ruby" - Smashing pumpkins |
|
|
| CraigP |
The Stones are washed up and have sucked for 2 decades.
I am obsessed with them. |
|
|
| open-g |
quote:
Some Guy wrote:
My nephews friends were talking and one of them said the Stones are washed up and need to give it a rest. All I could think is Man, youth is wasted on the young.
The cheeky brat is only asking for a free ticket for Europe. |
|
|
| pdog |
They do have a fresh clean smell... They were smelly in their youth... |
|
|
| gimmekeef |
Their washed up and squeeky clean to lay Europe to waste!..Tell your young friends to get out of the way... |
|
|
| Ten Thousand Motels |
Oh well. You can do an awful lot of washing up for around 500 million dollars. Rake it in boys. |
|
|
| glencar |
LOL I used to say that about Elvis - until he choked to death! |
|
|
| full moon |
Actually, they are right
|
|
|
| mrhipfl |
Pretty much all the kids in my class in school actually like the stones a bit. They're not real "fans" but they enjoy their pop hits. They say that Keith is cool, but that Mick is a fag who can't sing or dance. meh |
|
|
| 72Tele |
In 1975 I thought Louie Armstrong was washed up. What the fuck did I know? What the fuck do they know? What the fuck do we know? Exactly! |
|
|
| Riffhard |
As a creative force the Stones are washed up. However,one thing that these young children never ever take into account is that even though the Stones have not had a major hit since Start Me Up they still manage to put more asses in the seats than any band out there by a long shot. Given that they have been setting and breaking their own tour attendance records since 1972 I'd say that in the touring department there is not a band alive that can touch them. We will probably never see another band that can put up the numbers that the Stones have. I am still trying to wrap my brain around the fact that 45 years after the band's inception they still manage to sell out stadiums around the world and attract a million people on the beach in Rio!! If they are washed up someone forgot to tell the 12 million people that paid dearly for the chance to see them on the North American leg of the Bigger Bang tour.
Riffy |
|
|
| Steel Wheels |
I too am obsessed with this band. I think most of us are. |
|
|
| Poplar |
quote:
Steel Wheels wrote:
I too am obsessed with this band. I think most of us are.
guilty as charged. |
|
|
| Zack |
quote:
72Tele wrote:
In 1975 I thought Louie Armstrong was washed up. What the fuck did I know? What the fuck do they know? What the fuck do we know? Exactly!
He was more than washed up. He was dead.
To state the obvious about the Stones, as we are all doing, they are a shadow of their former selves creatively, but can still put on a good show. |
|
|
| IanBillen |
[quote]Zack wrote:
"He was more than washed up. He was dead."
___________________________________________________________
That is a great response that deserves merit! I laughed out loud when I read that.
Ian
|
|
|
| pdog |
I just washed up... |
|
|
| IanBillen |
[quote]IanBillen wrote:
I really don't see them as being washed up at all. The only difference between now and previous years is many of the younger fan base sees them as old classic music and don't think they are relevant any more.
This is 1.
because hip-hop, pop, and alot of pop oriented garage rock rules the market.
If it isn't any of those three it is stuff that is either way to thrash and silly to be considered any good or way too "trying to be different"
And 2. The Stones are seen as from their parents generation so many of the younger crowd instantly feels compelled to shun them before even considering giving them an open minded ear.
The truth is:
1. the stones still rock live and put on a great show, no matter what age you compare them to.
2. They still put out quality material, especially compared to 90% of what is out there today.
and THREE....They really have truged on and continued to rock years beyond any of their counterpart bands from their original era.
The fact that they are still touring at an enormous level and recording albums, with all the shit they have been through is in itself a feat nobody in music history, as a band has been able to come close to.
I suppose you can ask the younger crowd what the fuck eles do they want?
Actually they should be applauding and respecting The Stones for what they still are and doing, and what they have done for music in 5 decades of Rock n Roll. These kids make me laugh. They like one group one week and another group the next and the second week have forgotten that the previous group ever even existed and they, nor any of us will probably ever care again. These newer bands come and go like street cars and could not carry The Stone's ball hair if you gave them a crain.
Tell them to put that in their crack pipes and smoke it.
Ian
|
|
|
| pagey666.6 |
Really, the problem is that we judge the Stones on their classic output (1968-72). Those albums from Beggars to Exile are so good, that everything else seems pale in comparison. It is inevitable that we judge the rest of the catalog by those albums and say "they've lost it". It's not fair that we judge an artist's recent work by their past, but it happens and it's natural. I know people who only got into the Stones through ABB and think it's fantastic - because they have nothing to compare it to in their past catalog!!! The "real" longtime fans know the difference that it doesn't measure up to their past, and because we idolize the past we have problems hearing anything new. It is really inevitable in any artist that has a storied past -we will always unfavorably compare the present with the past....and let's face it; the past was so great that it's hard to keep up that quality control. (Same thing with McCartney and the Beatles....there is no way on earth you can compete with it).
Plus, times change. The inspiration for the "classic" era is long gone. The inspiration could be anything from society at the time, current events, an excitement in knowing that you are breaking new ground, hunger to succeed or "show the world", or just plain youthful exuberance. The Stones have accomplished everything that they have ever wanted to do.....how hard is it to be "hungry" when you charge $150 a ticket and consistantly sell out? Times are different now, society has changed, they are rich, they have a legacy that will last and outlive them, so what do they need to prove anymore? It's a drag, but it happens to every artist who has a long career with a gloried past. Instead of bitching about it, we should just enjoy what albums we do like, and accept it that while they may never approach Exile (or Some Girls or even Tattoo You - probably the last album when they were truely "relevant" as "movers and shakers"), they are still performing and releasing new music, no matter how we think it compares. I understand that it's easier to bitch and complain - I do it myself sometimes....but c'mon!!!! No one could keep up the same quality level forever.........and we should feel thankful that we have those "classic" albums to amaze us.
Oh, and one other thing. Even with each successive new album, despite the fact it's not Exile, there are always a few good songs on, so we still get some enjoyment....if we are open enough to realize it!!!!
PS: As to the comment that Rap and hip hop is what is "happening" now......okay, so Eminem is the "big" thing in the world now. First off, will he last 40 odd years? And if he does, the people that are fans will bitch and moan that his new stuff is not as good as his old stuff and that he's "lost it". It's inevitable!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
| LadyJane |
quote:
Some Guy wrote:
My nephews friends were talking and one of them said the Stones are washed up and need to give it a rest. All I could think is Man, youth is wasted on the young.
I'd like to take them to a show and just sit back and watch.
Jagger would have them in the palm of his hand within minutes.
LJ.
|
|
|
| mojoman |
dirty |
|
|
| glencar |
quote:
LadyJane wrote:
I'd like to take them to a show and just sit back and watch.
Jagger would have them in the palm of his hand within minutes.
LJ.
Yes, I took 2 of my nephews to the East Hartford show in 2005 & we ended up right at the B-stage. The younger boy is into hip hop & some of that crap but he's a really cool kid & I'll never forget howe happy he was by the end of the show. |
|
|
| Saint Sway |
quote:
Some Guy wrote:
My nephews friends were talking and one of them said the Stones are washed up and need to give it a rest.
is this your way of suggesting the Stones need a 14 yr-old bassist? |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
CraigP wrote:
The Stones are washed up and have sucked for 2 decades.
I am obsessed with them.
LOL..we're hopeless cases, arent we? |
|
|
| Bitch |
Washed up high up on the beach
Well now look at your face now baby
Look at you and look at me
All washed up now, as they ride ride ride ride ride, in their long black limousines! They used to shine shine shine shine shine, say what a band, say what a team! |
|
|
| sammy davis jr. |
They are washed up. For the next tour they should all grow mustaches. |
|
|
| glencar |
quote:
Saint Sway wrote:
is this your way of suggesting the Stones need a 14 yr-old bassist?
Marlon's son is halfway there! |
|
|
| pdog |
 |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
sammy davis jr. wrote:
They are washed up. For the next tour they should all grow mustaches.
|
|
|
| pdog |
joey!
 |
