Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile


Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?

Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 06, 2005 11:19PM
Ira started a Bruce Springsteen thread that started a chain reaction, thrashing the hell out of his music and entire career by several posters to this message board. I participated in it myself. Is there another artist or band deserving of a massive shitstorm of bile? Wouldn't it be a great way to show those deserving "artists" how the public really feels about them, by using the most colorful language imaginable, in describing their worth to music?
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 06, 2005 11:22PM
sting stinks
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 12:33AM
Lucinda Williams' Car Wheels on a Gravel Road was one of those albums that it seemed like every critic in the world had agreed ahead of time was going to be a classic, and they didn't let the fact that it was a barely listenable piece of crap that couldn't hold a candle to her two previous albums deter them from proclaiming it to be a masterpiece. (The same phenomenon happened with U2's thoroughly average Joshua Tree.) Williams obviously bought into all the hype and seems to have convinced herself that she's some sort of poetic genius (after all, her daddy read a poem at a presidential inauguration!) and replaced a perfectly nice singing voice with an annoyingly affected caterwaul that befits such a creative (but rootsy) giant - if Dylan cain't sang worth uh dayum, then goldurnit, Lucinda ain't goin' ta, nayther. At the same time she seems to have decided that endlessly repeating a song's title instead of bothering to write an actual chorus will somehow make that title meaningful.

She reaches her nadir (at least one hopes it can't get any worse) with her drunken chimpanzee howling on Elvis Costello's otherwise halfway decent (but nothing to write home about) The Delivery Man. EC, of course, proclaims her braying to be brilliant, but sadly, these days the word "brilliant" when spoken by Elvis Costello all too often translates to "unlistenable" for everyone else.

Loved. loved, loved the Lucinda Williams of "Passionate Kisses," "Sweet Old World," and "Changed the Locks." Can't tolerate the pretentious artiste who replaced her and is adored by all the latte sippers who decided that Bonnie Raitt wasn't hip enough for them anymore.

And Ryan Adams is a jackass who needs to be hit in the face with a shovel.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 01:23AM
I'll chime in with U2. Started off as a watered down version of the Clash, moved on to be a watered down techno art-pop band a full 5 years behind the curve and now basically make faux garage rock for people to listen to while waiting in line at Starbucks. They are exhibit A in the theory that if you take yourself seriously, others will also. In the mainstream press they often get called one of the greatest bands of all time, despite the fact that they've never been among the worlds best bands at any given point in their career. How desperate was "Vertigo" to sound edgy? There is everything thrown into that song except the moaning from a porn soundtrack and it's as phony a sounding tune as I can think of. When they try to be sincere, it's cringe worthy. Lyrically, some of Bono's stuff reads like the journal ramblings of a spoiled 12 year old girl who wants desperately to save the whales. Oh, and I blame them for the popularity of Coldplay too, who in true U2 fashion have managed to become perhaps the biggest Rock band in the world without actually playing Rock and Roll. Whew, that felt good .......

Re: Who Truly Deserves A Mad-Lib Now?
July 07, 2005 01:33AM
I think ___________(artist currently on MTV) sucks so bad. Possibly worse than __________(artist currently on rotation on a radio station, rock format, owned by the conglomerate). And after releasing album number ______(pick a number from 2 to 4), ___________(artist currently at the top of the Billboard chart) went so far downhill that even his __________(professional title) is likely to ___________(verb) his_________(noun) into his__________(noun). Just because _________(hip folk artist of the season) quotes __________(classic 70's artist) in his lyrics, all the critics think he's the ________(noun) but all he really did was rip off __________(classic 60's artist). ________(artist named artist of the year in the late 80's) owe they're popluarity entirely to _________(mainstream music magazine). If it weren't for the dissenting opinion of _______(music magazine now defunct) ________(the lead singer) would have been elected ________(political office). And then there's _________(current pseudo-punk artist). If they really were the ________(adjective) darling's everyone says they are, they'd reference _________ (classic New Wave artist circa 1982) or _____________(class of late 77 punk artist) instead of merely waving their _______(adjective) flag and beating their __________(body part) in the studio. I'm wavering on __________(early 90's artist attempting comeback) as well. They really seemed important when they toured with ______(early 90's artist still making good music) back in the day but how could they reference _________(famous painter) on they're album cover in good conscience? And for the record, __________(70's artist considered classic who return to do a massive tour every 5 years and sell-out to the office/elevator music crowd who see 1 concert a year and only in stadiums) always did suck, in my opinion, except for that duet that ________(the lead singer) did with _________(female movie star from the 80's) after ________(he/she) was sentenced to ________(drug rehab facility) for ____________(gerund verb) that _________(professional title) in the middle of ____________(chain store) and then ___________(gerund verb) a _________(noun) on ___________(famous street). And don't get me started on _______(band that bacame famous in the 80's from the strength of the 1st few releases). They had a few brilliant albums then went downhill; particularly after ______(lead guitarist) began posing on stage while using an auxilliary guitarist to fatten the sound, after they replaced ________(name of the drummer and bassist), and after ________(lead singer) came out. Oh well, their sound was actually the product of ________(famous rock producer) anyway.

Re: Who Truly Deserves A Mad-Lib Now?
July 07, 2005 03:17AM
Damn, you have the bastards pegged, Paganizer.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 12:07AM
The Eagles totally suck
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 03:59AM
I liked U2 around the time of "Boy" but I'd concur now...
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 09:06AM
I bought that album way back but pretty much think U2 blows.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 05:46PM
Ummm, no, it wouldn't be "a great way to show those deserving 'artists' how the public really feels about them." It would be a good way to vent, though.

To practically any big-name artist, "the public" consists of people who buy his CDs and tickets to his shows. Anyone who doesn't is pretty much irrelevant.

And, although I know virtually nothing about the backgrounds of most of the individuals who post to this board, I'd say that, from a standpoint of music fandom, we're not particularly representative of "the public." Nor would we care to be.

("A massive shitstorm of bile"? That would be a contradiction in biological terms. At least I *hope* it would!)
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 06:48PM
"A Massive Shitstorm of Bile" - that's a Robert Pollard song title if I've ever heard one.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 07, 2005 09:50PM
I hope he gives me some royalties if he uses it.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 08, 2005 12:42PM
Don't expect a massive shitstorm of royalties.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 09, 2005 08:56PM
REM, U2 and Springsteen have all been thrashed pretty well over the past week. It seems that anybody who stays around longer than five years seems to have an inevitable decline as an artist. Older acts like the Stones have put out so, so albums for many years and still sell out stadiums. I wonder if it's the memory of their former greatness that the public is buying. Has Paul McCartney made a great solo album? His tours seem to focus heavily on Beatles music and is light on the stuff he's done since then. I wonder why he seems to crap on his own music.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 09, 2005 09:30PM
Chronic Town, Murmur and Reckoning are all fantastic. It is quite sad that a majority of people (I guess) don't know how great they once were. I also have gotten blank stares from people who only know them from their 90s output when I praise their early work. It's the same look when I tell them Rod Stewart used to be good - it's beyond their comprehension that it could actually be true. In another thread I bashed "Automatic For The People" and I stand by it. By that time 10 years of people telling them they were great had taken it's toll, and it was time for the "big heavy sad death record", about as far away from "Wolves, Lower" as you could get. That is the period where to me they became insufferable, each record a contrived statement : AFTP ("serious artiste record"), Monster ("Glam Rock" record), New Adventures....("experimental record"). They were something special at one time though, I just wish they hadn't lived to be a million years.

Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 10, 2005 03:21AM
"...something special at one time.." might refer to a certain 'healing' quality unbeknowst to rem that filled a vacum midst a slew of exceptional bands that voiced their dissatisfaction with the times on a more disempowering level. i can't categorize bands of this era, but here are examples: some were more into depression (neats 'sad', dinosaur junior's 'repulsion'), or sarcasm (violent femmes, replacements), or complaining (db's, repoman movie bands) or tension (dream syndicate, pylon), which, by no means lessens their ingenuity alongside of any of their contemporaries. plenty of bands also captured interest because of humor (flipper), rythms (oh ok), energy (joe king carrasco)or poetics, throwbacks, pop....list can go on, obviously. my point is rem happened to fall in an unpopulated niche that had themes about getting into balance about who one is. 'losing my religion' might lack the "something special at one time" but still follows the thread of personal evolution in 'stumble.'
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 10, 2005 06:28PM

Post Edited (04-09-07 16:45)
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 10, 2005 08:04PM

everly bros
wyatt--soft machine/solo
isley bros
james brown
cale--VU and solo
james carr
jerry lee
gene clark--byrds/solo
sweet marvin gaye

not many but a strong dozen or so of maintaining quality for longer than 15 years

Post Edited (07-11-05 22:01)
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 09, 2005 12:57PM
Adopt voice of Rick Moranis' SCTV impersonation of David Brinkley here:

Why the hell does R.E.M. bother to record anything anymore? After a string of albums that were, at the very least, interesting to listen to, we now get baby steps towards Michael Stipe's inevitable solo projects -- and those portents are not inviting. I remember this old interview where they said they'd break up the moment one of them quit or the century ended. Great. They're still here though, and when someone asks them the question, they answer, "We still have things to say." What things? I prayed they'd give up after Automatic because it seemed such a perfect ending to the band's work. Instead, we get bad versions of old R.E.M. songs and lousy experiments that Radiohead might **** out during a B-side session (which is not intended to slur Radiohead that much). They keep putting out crap and damaging what rep they had left. Monster was an embarassment to listen to, full of crap guitar-god licks from a man who spent better time mocking them on "Burning Hell". New Adventures an attempt to distance itself from its new, large audience by making a horrible record disguised as an experimental one. Up! is an experimental record that shows what a great pop band R.E.M. were, at the core. It does this by illustrating how badly they experiment. Reveal has two catchy tunes surrounded by bad keyboard usage and an obvious contempt for having to return to the formula that actually worked for them. After years of camping out for new releases, waiting for announcements, etc., I no longer care what they do. I'm waiting for the inevitable breakup notice -- years too late -- and Stipe's first solo album. Buck and Mills should begin trolling for olives. Next up, why did Mott the Hoople even try to continue without Ian Hunter. Obvious answer: money. Not-so-obvious: Overend Watts' addiction to haircare products.
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 09, 2005 04:51PM
a syndrome for many bands - try as they might, they can't go back to the first album/e.p. red hot chili's material since their first album appears to lack in inspiration (since i don't follow them much i could be wrong) except for 'behind the sun' which supposedly was written by fishbone. dylan had a recording hiatus because he said the songs that came to him out of seemingly now where stopped coming. however, if the money does continue to roll in, the 'rocknroll womb' is a tempting way to go.

Post Edited (07-09-05 21:58)
Re: Who Truly Deserves A Bashing Now?
July 09, 2005 08:06PM
REM....noticeable....Chronic Town and Murmur.
blah blah
coasted with Reckoning
they stopped playing those songs
later fans
blah blah
REM went MOR
blah blah
once carried the banner

Post Edited (04-09-07 16:44)
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login