| December 4th, 2004 11:06 PM |
|
|
| iluvmickjagger07 |
yall are leaving out so many bad acts and adding many great ones. whats wrong with you people? the list of bad acts is countless.
[Edited by iluvmickjagger07] |
| December 4th, 2004 11:09 PM |
|
|
| Bloozehound |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
I know Mick was sort of friendly with John up until he died, but I think their relationship can be summed up in that scene from "Rock and Roll Circus," right before the Dirty Mac come on.
John was subtly dissing Mick there (acerbically calling him "Michael" and all that), and Mick knew it. But all he could do was helplessly shrug it off by smiling and playing along.
I've never understood that little exchange between them in that scene. Lennon's manner seems rather snide and sardonic, (not to mention he appears to be stoned to the bone) but I always thought the two were friends.
What was Lennnon's beef with Jagger? Was he becoming jealous of the Stones at this point? |
| December 4th, 2004 11:20 PM |
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
quote:
Nasty Habits wrote:
Elton John SUCKS. Has sucked completely since, oh, '78. And he's always kind of sucked. Just because Exile on Mainstreet influenced the production of Goodbye Yellow Brick Road does not make YBR a good album because nothing can make YBR a good record. It SUCKS.
I thought YBR was influenced by the Soup? |
| December 4th, 2004 11:37 PM |
|
|
| Mel Belli |
quote:
Bloozehound wrote:
I've never understood that little exchange between them in that scene. Lennon's manner seems rather snide and sardonic, (not to mention he appears to be stoned to the bone) but I always thought the two were friends.
What was Lennnon's beef with Jagger? Was he becoming jealous of the Stones at this point?
What did he have to be jealous about? It was '68. The Beatles had released, or were about to release, one of their best and most acclaimed LPs (the "white" album). The year after that - "Abbey Road." Another home run. Huge sales, far outpacing "Beggars Banquet" and "Let It Bleed."
But who knows. By '69, Lennon was dismissing Jagger for all his "fag dancing" (his words, not mine) and saying, while he liked "Honky Tonk Women," the Stones were guilty of continuous wholesale theft. ("Roll a stone/You can imitate everyone you know," he would sing in "Dig a Pony.")
I'd like to think Lennon was smart and forward-thinking enough to see that what the Stones were doing by '69 - arena rock as we know it, not 20-minute screamfests where no one can hear the music - was a sea change for the industry; that Mick, as a frontman, was nothing less than groundbreaking.
But if your band is falling apart and your nearest competitors are just hitting their stride, maybe you get a little bitchy, envious and, well, homophobic. |
| December 5th, 2004 12:05 AM |
|
|
| Bloozehound |
quote:
Mel Belli wrote:
But if your band is falling apart and your nearest competitors are just hitting their stride, maybe you get a little bitchy, envious and, well, homophobic.
That's what I was getting at, I wasn't sure why Lennon seemed so contemptuous, I was just guessing, but it does seem to make sense.
|
| December 5th, 2004 02:27 AM |
|
|
| beer |
Lennon was obviously pissed off cuz he sobered up and realized he was stuck with that tone deaf cow named Yoko. Then he listened to a rock and roll masterpiece titled "Jumpin Jack Flash", and quietly sobbed while wondering why "Get Back" sounded like a candy ass, paper thin, diet rock soda.
- |
| December 5th, 2004 03:18 AM |
|
|
| Bloozehound |
lmfao!
ain't that the truth beerster |
| December 5th, 2004 03:20 AM |
|
|
| glencar |
LOL @ beer! |
| December 5th, 2004 03:29 AM |
|
|
| beer |
Glencar and Bloozehound, I hope yous guys are havin a great Saturday night/ sunday mornin, or both !!
Some Girls playing dangerously LOUD!
- |
| December 5th, 2004 05:05 AM |
|
|
| Booty |
this one boring thread, sure hope it dies soon. |
| December 5th, 2004 06:18 AM |
|
|
| egon |
go booty! |
| December 5th, 2004 08:56 AM |
|
|
| stewed & Keefed |
1. Paul McCartney
2. Beatles
3. Elton John
4. Phil Collins
5. Tom Jones
6. Kiss
7. Supertramp
8. Cher
9. Paul McCartney
10. Beatles |
| December 5th, 2004 09:13 AM |
|
|
| Sir Stonesalot |
There are not many acts that I dislike. Dislike takes effort. Most of the "worst" acts mentioned in this thread I simply do not care enough about to put any effort into.
But there are 3 that just grate on my nerves. I hear them and I actually get angry. It pisses me off that i have to share a planet with them. A complete waste of space and air.
Peter Frampton
Eagles
Journey
That shit is antirocknroll. Andy Gibb used to be on that list, but he's dead. One down 3 to go.
>Just because you have ears, doesn't mean you're qualified to tell ANYONE they're wrong. <
Right...so what are you doing telling people that they are wrong? Dumbass.
Keith knows what he likes. You know what you like. I know what I like. Keith doesn't know me, and can't speak for my tastes. I don't know you, and can't speak for your tastes. You don't know Keith, and can't speak for his tastes.
See how that works?
We are all individuals, not Keith clones. I have written songs, but that doesn't mean that my musical tastes are any better than anyone else's tastes. It just means that I wrote some songs. I have written and directed movies, does that mean that I know better than you what movies you should like??? Of course not. That's ridiculous. I have written short stories and poetry, does that give me the right to tell you what books to read??? Fuck no! That's just crazy.
No one here doubts Keith's greatness as a musician and songwriter. I think we all pretty much dig the dude. But that doesn't mean that he gets to dictate my personal taste in music. That is strictly my domain, and mine alone.
I'll say this, when it comes to The Rolling Stones, and the workings of THAT band, then you would be right....Keith, or any of the band members, trumps us all in that regard. I'm just a fan, it's their band. Still doesn't mean that I have to like Emotional Rescue. But when it comes to the work of others....Keith and I and you and every other live soul are equal peers. We like what we like, dislike what we dislike.
If you ask for my opinion, I'll give it to you. But that's all it is....just an opinion, for you to respect or disregard as you see fit. We all gotta decide for ourselves. |
| December 5th, 2004 09:33 AM |
|
|
| F505 |
Does the fact that Keith has proven in the last 25 years that his ability to write classic songs has gone over the hill mean that his tastes also have gone down? That is the absurd logic of this crazy opinion.
[Edited by F505] |
| December 5th, 2004 08:39 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
quote:
F505 wrote:
Does the fact that Keith has proven in the last 25 years that his ability to write classic songs has gone over the hill mean that his tastes also have gone down? That is the absurd logic of this crazy opinion.
In summary?
yes |
| December 5th, 2004 09:27 PM |
|
|
| corgi37 |
Joey or JB asked why acts stay so long in Oz.
The answer?
To get away from Americans.
I thought that would be pretty obvious.
Oh, and the reason the Eagles stayed so long was because the demand for their shows was so great.
Makes me want to vomit.
They were promised something like $1.5mill per show, but only agreed to extra shows after the promoter promised them, their families and all the crew, a thanks giving dinner with all the trimmings (whatever all the trimmings are, as its only a Yank event).
So, they agreed.
The bastards. |
| December 6th, 2004 05:44 AM |
|
|
| piratekeef |
I don't understand why some of you ( e.g. Stewed and Keefed) piss on Macca and the Beatles. I thought this Beatles vs. Stones battle is long gone. A PR trick of the 60's. Both bands have admired one another - even in the heyday of their public rivalry. Thus, if you're a a Stones lover you should not put down the Beatles/Macca camp. I'd rather you stick pissing on bands like Journey or the global hype of the Sex Pistols. |
| December 6th, 2004 12:51 PM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
piratekeef wrote:
I don't understand why some of you ( e.g. Stewed and Keefed) piss on Macca and the Beatles. I thought this Beatles vs. Stones battle is long gone. A PR trick of the 60's. Both bands have admired one another - even in the heyday of their public rivalry. Thus, if you're a a Stones lover you should not put down the Beatles/Macca camp. I'd rather you stick pissing on bands like Journey or the global hype of the Sex Pistols.
I think JB will answer your question soon |
| December 7th, 2004 01:15 PM |
|
|
| stewed & Keefed |
quote:
piratekeef wrote:
I don't understand why some of you ( e.g. Stewed and Keefed) piss on Macca and the Beatles. I thought this Beatles vs. Stones battle is long gone. A PR trick of the 60's. Both bands have admired one another - even in the heyday of their public rivalry. Thus, if you're a a Stones lover you should not put down the Beatles/Macca camp. I'd rather you stick pissing on bands like Journey or the global hype of the Sex Pistols.
I piss on Macca and the Beatles (as you put it)because I don't fucking like them. |
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]