A truely sad thing to wake up to George will be missed by all. Paul
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Well, the Beatles are that much closer to a reunion tour. Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Wah, wah, wah. I forget...was he the pedophiliac Mophead? Or the Warsaw Pact tranny one?
Hacks. Hacks with impeccable TIMING, but hacks nonetheless. I shed no tears. Indeed, I clap giddily in true GIR fashion.
Posted by The359 (Member # 37) on :
What the bloody hell are you talking about, Shik?! Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
I'm talking about how the Beatles were vastly overrated & vastly mediocre. The only reason they're so revered is because they were in the right place at the right time. Had they come around a year earlier or a year later, they'd've been forgotten in the same breath as Moby Grape, Strawberry Alarmclock & the Fugs.
Look, it's not like it's a huge thing. Happens all the time. I love Nirvana, but even I know that they weren't that talented. They were just in the right place at the right time.
Posted by Mojo Jojo (Member # 256) on :
Wether the Beatles were 'overrated and mediocre' is your opinion. Wasn't too big a fan of them myself, but that doesn't mean I go around 'clapping' when one of 'm (or for that matter, any member of any band) kicks the bucket.
[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: Mojo Jojo ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Shik: Remind me to celebrate the next time May 29 comes 'round, in honor of the joyous anniversary of the death of Jeff Buckley.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I'd have to take issue with the descriptions of The Beatles and Nirvana.
Of course, The Beatles were hardly alone in what they were doing. But no one remembers the Kinks...
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
Death ain't something to be sad about, Tim. I'm just tired of the vast Boomer masturbational juggernaut that is the Beatles. Everytime I turn around, there's something about these fucks. No one cares anymore. Just die.
Posted by USS Vanguard (Member # 130) on :
geez, i haven't seen this much hostility toward a music group since the backlash to new kids on the block.
[ November 30, 2001: Message edited by: USS Vanguard ]
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
In fairness to Shik, he was the same when Aaliyah died. He's not singling out famous people in random.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Well, all I can say is that I have great appreciation for the Beatles' music and I am quite saddened. And Shik, you are quite rude and very inappropriate to be saying such things about a man who has died at such a young age, and who will forever be known as part of a virtual legend in music history. I for one am not amused by your statements.
Sorry for contributing to "the Boomer masturbational juggernaut that is the Beatles."
-MMoM
Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :
[insert cannibalistic-related comment here]
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
58 isn't really *young*.
I mean, its not "Can You Change My Diaper Please?" old, but certainly he's not a young man and his age isn't *young* ... (Aaliyah, on the other hand ... )
Posted by USS Vanguard (Member # 130) on :
Well I guess its young because most people expect a lot of years beyond 58.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
At least he got more of an innings that Douglas Adams.
