Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Mon Jul 28, 2014 12:44 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 111 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Kurt Cobain- 20 years 
Author Message
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 381
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Where you're going wrong is by saying that all American guitar-driven bands are shit when compared to the output of the UK. Now, if you were to say that modern American guitar rock of the past 15 years or so is shit, I would be more inclined to agree. Linkin Park, Staind, 3 Doors Down, Breaking Benjamin, Three Days Grace, Slipknot, Daughtry, POD, System of a Down, Puddle of Mudd, Theory of a Deadman, Limp Bizkit, Creed...yeah, they suck. You'll get no argument from me there. But I think you need to explore American music more.


I agree. Because:

NotHughGrant wrote:
Metallica
Guns and Roses
Aerosmith
Bon Jovi
Van Halen
Limp Bizcit
Linkin Park ...

... too many to mention actually


Are popular bands, yes (or at least used to be), but good? I'm 30 years old, raised entirely in US, have lived on both coasts and in Chicago, and I don't know anyone who likes any of those bands besides Metallica. Some might listen to them as a matter of tradition or junk-food consumption, but no one thinks they're good.

I do agree that the Brits would dominate a list of the 25 best rock bands ever, and if that's the argument you're making, than fine. But I think you need to clarify the context of your statements a big more because it's fairly tough to tell what you mean with some of this stuff.


Wed May 14, 2014 10:55 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Quote:
I do agree that the Brits would dominate a list of the 25 best rock bands ever, and if that's the argument you're making, than fine. But I think you need to clarify the context of your statements a big more because it's fairly tough to tell what you mean with some of this stuff.


Pretty much the bit I've made bold. Is all

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Wed May 14, 2014 11:16 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 601
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
I was in college in the early 80's and most of my friends and I think of Van Halen and Aerosmith as among the best. Gun's and Roses didn't have enough output, but still rank high in my age group. I love much of Van Halen's early releases.

Even then, most of my college comrades (not me) seemed to prefer Led Zeppelin and Rush to the American bands.

As far as good? I don't know much about music, just what I like.


Wed May 14, 2014 11:31 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Shade2 wrote:
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Where you're going wrong is by saying that all American guitar-driven bands are shit when compared to the output of the UK. Now, if you were to say that modern American guitar rock of the past 15 years or so is shit, I would be more inclined to agree. Linkin Park, Staind, 3 Doors Down, Breaking Benjamin, Three Days Grace, Slipknot, Daughtry, POD, System of a Down, Puddle of Mudd, Theory of a Deadman, Limp Bizkit, Creed...yeah, they suck. You'll get no argument from me there. But I think you need to explore American music more.


I agree. Because:

NotHughGrant wrote:
Metallica
Guns and Roses
Aerosmith
Bon Jovi
Van Halen
Limp Bizcit
Linkin Park ...

... too many to mention actually


Are popular bands, yes (or at least used to be), but good? I'm 30 years old, raised entirely in US, have lived on both coasts and in Chicago, and I don't know anyone who likes any of those bands besides Metallica. Some might listen to them as a matter of tradition or junk-food consumption, but no one thinks they're good.

I do agree that the Brits would dominate a list of the 25 best rock bands ever, and if that's the argument you're making, than fine. But I think you need to clarify the context of your statements a big more because it's fairly tough to tell what you mean with some of this stuff.

Are you joking? Lots of people love Guns N Roses, Van Halen Aerosmith, etc and most people don't see them as "junk food".


Wed May 14, 2014 12:51 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
CasualDad wrote:
I was in college in the early 80's and most of my friends and I think of Van Halen and Aerosmith as among the best. Gun's and Roses didn't have enough output, but still rank high in my age group. I love much of Van Halen's early releases.

Even then, most of my college comrades (not me) seemed to prefer Led Zeppelin and Rush to the American bands.

As far as good? I don't know much about music, just what I like.

Same here, I know what I like, and sue me I like Linkin Park, Three Days Grace Stind, Breaking Benjamin, Limp Bizkit, System Of A Down, Slipknot, Puddle Of Mudd, Theory Of A Deadman, Saliva, Hinder, Five Finger Death Punch, 3 Doors Down, Audioslave, I don't think they "suck" at all.

Also I don't think the brits would "dominate" a top 25 list, there might be a few up there for me, but not that many.


Wed May 14, 2014 12:53 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
NotHughGrant wrote:
Vexer wrote:
NotHughGrant wrote:
They were artificially assembled by the industry, weren't they?

And either way, they're shite

They weren't and are not.


Vex, if you're going to position Linkin Park as the guardians of the American castle of rock music, then, well there's not much I can say really.

They're a one-dimensional, teeny-bobber, wannabe goth act with less credibility than Limp Bizkit and all the talent of the Jonas Brothers. They suck so hard they warp time in their vicinity.

If you were going to use someone like Bob Seger and the Silver Bullet Band to defend American guitar music, then I'd give you some credit. But Linkin Park are the worst of it. They are exactly what I am talking about. They ARE the problem. A boyband in leather jackets and shit make-up is still a boyband.

They're inferior to Evanescence and Placebo (whose best song is a Kate Bush cover), and that's really saying something.

Goth is stuff like Within Temptation, Lacuna Coil, Theatre Of Tragedy etc. Linkin Park is not remotely "goth" in the least or a "boyband"

Boybands are groups like Dream Street, N Sync, Backstreet Boys, O-Town etc.

I'm not a huge Seger fan and i've honestly never even heard of the Silver Bullet band.

What about KISS then?


Wed May 14, 2014 12:57 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Quote:
What about KISS then?


I dunno, you'll have to buy me a drink first

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Wed May 14, 2014 2:04 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 381
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Vexer wrote:
Are you joking? Lots of people love Guns N Roses, Van Halen Aerosmith


Where did I say that lots of people don't like them? I'm well aware that they have their fans -- clearly -- but it's like Everybody Love Raymond: Clearly a lot of people were watching it, but I've never met someone who likes it. Sure, some, and probably many, love those bands. What does that prove?

Quote:
and most people don't see them as "junk food"


Says you. Lots of people eat at McDonald's, but that doesn't make it a good choice and that doesn't mean people don't understand that it's horrible for your body. If you got a source for that opinion I'll listen, I'm just saying I don't know people who consider them more than a guilty pleasure.

CasualDad wrote:
I was in college in the early 80's and most of my friends and I think of Van Halen and Aerosmith as among the best. Gun's and Roses didn't have enough output, but still rank high in my age group. I love much of Van Halen's early releases.


I'm not trying to attack those bands. You're just a touch older than me, but I totally get that the bands we listen to in our formative stages of life stick with us, and there's nothing wrong with that. Again, not disparaging those bands.

Vexer wrote:
Same here, I know what I like, and sue me I like Linkin Park, Three Days Grace Stind, Breaking Benjamin, Limp Bizkit, System Of A Down, Slipknot, Puddle Of Mudd, Theory Of A Deadman, Saliva, Hinder, Five Finger Death Punch, 3 Doors Down, Audioslave, I don't think they "suck" at all.

Also I don't think the brits would "dominate" a top 25 list, there might be a few up there for me, but not that many.


I don't think this is about anyone's personal list. You're welcome to love whomever you love. I enjoy Audioslave. I would rather listen to Hanson than any of the rest. That's a matter of opinion. And no one is trying to sue you for your musical taste, don't worry. Are those all-time top-25 bands for you? If so that's fine, but you have to concede that no one else holds them in that high of regard.


Wed May 14, 2014 3:16 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 601
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Shade2 wrote:

CasualDad wrote:
I was in college in the early 80's and most of my friends and I think of Van Halen and Aerosmith as among the best. Gun's and Roses didn't have enough output, but still rank high in my age group. I love much of Van Halen's early releases.


I'm not trying to attack those bands. You're just a touch older than me, but I totally get that the bands we listen to in our formative stages of life stick with us, and there's nothing wrong with that. Again, not disparaging those bands.


I didn't see it as an attack. Just betting that many Americans between the ages of about 45 - 60 would probably place a couple of those bands among the greats due to generational influences. In a similar vein, very few from my immediate post 60's generation cared at all for Dylan or many of the other 60's American icons. Someone older than me may very well rank him among the greatest whereas people in my era might very well place
Van Halen higher. People 10 years younger than me rate Pearl Jam very high. It is very difficult for most people of each period to move forward or backwards from those years.

I do believe that Chemical Edge will overcome those barriers to become the universal sound at high school proms and retirement homes before their members flame out on the excesses of unrivaled fame and adoration.


Wed May 14, 2014 4:24 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1666
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Shade2 wrote:


NotHughGrant wrote:
Metallica
Guns and Roses
Aerosmith
Bon Jovi
Van Halen
Limp Bizcit
Linkin Park ...

... too many to mention actually


Are popular bands, yes (or at least used to be), but good? I'm 30 years old, raised entirely in US, have lived on both coasts and in Chicago, and I don't know anyone who likes any of those bands besides Metallica. Some might listen to them as a matter of tradition or junk-food consumption, but no one thinks they're good.

I do agree that the Brits would dominate a list of the 25 best rock bands ever, and if that's the argument you're making, than fine. But I think you need to clarify the context of your statements a big more because it's fairly tough to tell what you mean with some of this stuff.


I grew up with GnR. For younger folks, it may be hard to fathom how big they were, especially since Axl is a shadow of his former self. But I still own a copy of Appetite For Destruction, and play it now and then. Same with Aerosmith. They were really good at one time; Toys in the Attic has so much boogie in it that it's ridiculous.

For the sake of argument, here are who I think are the 25 most important artists in modern music (20th century onward):

The Beach Boys
The Beatles
Chuck Berry
Black Sabbath
David Bowie
James Brown
Ray Charles
Miles Davis
Bob Dylan
Duke Ellington
Woody Guthrie
Jimi Hendrix
Robert Johnson
Kraftwerk
Led Zeppelin
Nirvana
Pink Floyd
Elvis Presley
Public Enemy
The Ramones
Smokey Robinson
The Rolling Stones
The Velvet Underground
Muddy Waters
Hank Williams

So that's 18 Americans, 6 Brits, one German, 2 bluesmen, 2 jazzmen, 2 folk singers, one country artist and a partridge in a pear tree. I'm not saying my take on this is definitive, but I think it's hard to argue against the significance of any of them.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Wed May 14, 2014 5:35 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 381
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
So that's 18 Americans, 6 Brits, one German, 2 bluesmen, 2 jazzmen, 2 folk singers, one country artist and a partridge in a pear tree. I'm not saying my take on this is definitive, but I think it's hard to argue against the significance of any of them.


That's a nice list. And if you were raised in the UK, you might very well have 18 UK bands and 6 US ones. However, if you were from Norway or Australia, you're list might be evenly split with mostly UK and US bands, with the odd locally-raised band making the cut.


Wed May 14, 2014 5:51 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
CasualDad wrote:
I didn't see it as an attack. Just betting that many Americans between the ages of about 45 - 60 would probably place a couple of those bands among the greats due to generational influences. In a similar vein, very few from my immediate post 60's generation cared at all for Dylan or many of the other 60's American icons. Someone older than me may very well rank him among the greatest whereas people in my era might very well place
Van Halen higher. People 10 years younger than me rate Pearl Jam very high. It is very difficult for most people of each period to move forward or backwards from those years.
I'd rate Van Halen very highly. They're a successful union of a lot of different styles of music--old-school rock 'n' roll, jam rock, R&B, funk, even a little bit of classic metal--and I think a lot of people overlook that or don't appreciate it. That goes for the early years of the band, of course, before they discovered their inner schmaltz.

Incidentally, a lot of the bands that supposedly replaced Van Halen's generation were actually influenced by Van Halen. Pearl Jam for one, Alice In Chains for another. Nirvana, too, I'd bet, at least on some level. Cobain's dirty little secret was that his first concert was a Sammy Hagar solo show, and he liked it.

Perhaps people find Van Halen's lyrics frivolous, but really, is singing about cruising for chicks any more ridiculous than singing about Gollum kidnapping your girlfriend in Mordor?

CasualDad wrote:
I do believe that Chemical Edge will overcome those barriers to become the universal sound at high school proms and retirement homes before their members flame out on the excesses of unrivaled fame and adoration.

Your name will be included in the histories.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed May 14, 2014 6:16 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
If you ask me it's silly to compare bands to "junk food"(besides, fast food is only truly bad for you if you eat it all the time), because those bands aren't actually "bad" for you in a scientific sense.

Just cause you've never met anyone who likes a band dosen't mean the fans don't exist. I've never met a single person who liked Justin Bieber, but I know they're out there.

SexualChocolate- I mostly agree with that list, except for Nirvana(though I can see why you'd put them on there). Kraftwerk also seems like a bit of an odd choice, i'm genuinely curious how you feel they were one of the most important bands.


Wed May 14, 2014 7:09 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Kraftwerk is one of the foundational bands of electronic music. Even if that's not a genre (or, rather, umbrella of genres) that you dig, you can't deny their importance. Electronic music is one of the biggest innovations in popular music since... well, since Kraftwerk's time.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed May 14, 2014 8:14 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Ken wrote:
Kraftwerk is one of the foundational bands of electronic music. Even if that's not a genre (or, rather, umbrella of genres) that you dig, you can't deny their importance. Electronic music is one of the biggest innovations in popular music since... well, since Kraftwerk's time.

Oh I quite like electronic music actually.


Wed May 14, 2014 9:19 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1666
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Vexer wrote:
SexualChocolate- I mostly agree with that list, except for Nirvana(though I can see why you'd put them on there). Kraftwerk also seems like a bit of an odd choice, i'm genuinely curious how you feel they were one of the most important bands.


Kraftwerk is the most important band in the history of electronic music. Every innovation and subgenre in electronic music - techno, house, trip-hop, dubstep, ambient, disco, New Wave, EDM, acid house, rave, and some forms of hip-hop - can all be traced back to Kraftwerk. Their influence on popular music is incalculable; they are arguably as important to the development of modern music as The Beatles.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Wed May 14, 2014 9:29 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Flash fact: the nihilists in The Big Lebowski are named after Kraftwerk's album Autobahn, and are basically intended to be low-rent expies of Kraftwerk themselves.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Wed May 14, 2014 10:05 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Shade2 wrote:


NotHughGrant wrote:
Metallica
Guns and Roses
Aerosmith
Bon Jovi
Van Halen
Limp Bizcit
Linkin Park ...

... too many to mention actually


Are popular bands, yes (or at least used to be), but good? I'm 30 years old, raised entirely in US, have lived on both coasts and in Chicago, and I don't know anyone who likes any of those bands besides Metallica. Some might listen to them as a matter of tradition or junk-food consumption, but no one thinks they're good.

I do agree that the Brits would dominate a list of the 25 best rock bands ever, and if that's the argument you're making, than fine. But I think you need to clarify the context of your statements a big more because it's fairly tough to tell what you mean with some of this stuff.


I grew up with GnR. For younger folks, it may be hard to fathom how big they were, especially since Axl is a shadow of his former self. But I still own a copy of Appetite For Destruction, and play it now and then. Same with Aerosmith. They were really good at one time; Toys in the Attic has so much boogie in it that it's ridiculous.

For the sake of argument, here are who I think are the 25 most important artists in modern music (20th century onward):

The Beach Boys
The Beatles
Chuck Berry
Black Sabbath
David Bowie
James Brown
Ray Charles
Miles Davis
Bob Dylan
Duke Ellington
Woody Guthrie
Jimi Hendrix
Robert Johnson
Kraftwerk
Led Zeppelin
Nirvana
Pink Floyd
Elvis Presley
Public Enemy
The Ramones
Smokey Robinson
The Rolling Stones
The Velvet Underground
Muddy Waters
Hank Williams

So that's 18 Americans, 6 Brits, one German, 2 bluesmen, 2 jazzmen, 2 folk singers, one country artist and a partridge in a pear tree. I'm not saying my take on this is definitive, but I think it's hard to argue against the significance of any of them.


That's pretty goddam subjective list to say the least. Ignoring the ones that weren't or weren't part of guitar bands, you also stretching the definitions of great to notions of historical significance. Not the same thing. No one really rates the first King Kong movie as the greatest film ever, but it's a significant leap forward.

Let's put it this way, how many times a year do you get into your car and churn out a Muddy Waters, Duke Ellington, Woody Guthrie or Hank Williams record??

I'm betting the square root of fuck all. Whereas the Stones, Pink Floyd, David Bowie and the records of numerous others can be played like they were released last year.

I play the Stones every week without fail. Songs that are well in excess of 40 years old. That's what I'm talking about. I'm talking about 60-odd year old men who can still headline Glastonbury without a hint of irony. That's greatness beyond historical footnotes and largely academic opinions on who started what. And they key here is 'without irony' because although Aerosmith and Van Halen and Bon Jovi also sell out venues, it's an exercise in nostalgic twee. A colleague of mine went to see Bon Jovi a few years ago, not because she thinks they're great, but because it's all a bit of a joke. No-one thinks The Who are a joke. No-one thinks Pink Floyd are a joke. If they announced a tour tomorrow, they'd sell out without a single ticket bought in irony. They'd sell tickets because people would legitimately cut off a nut to see those guys play music. All the country cared about in Live Aid 2005 was Pink Floyd playing music on TV.


By real, tangible metrics, the UK kicks the US's ass. America may have offered up the genesis, the foundations, the concept of popular music. But we ran away with it and made it matter. Made it great.

And your appeals to the deeper recesses of the music archives, rather than great American bands of the 60s, 70s and 80s proves this point.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Last edited by NotHughGrant on Thu May 15, 2014 4:47 am, edited 3 times in total.



Thu May 15, 2014 4:20 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3370
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
No one thinks Aerosmith are a "joke" either, they too would sell out without a hint of irony.

I personally never got what the big deal about the Stones was, they have a few decent songs but I rarely have any real urge to listen to any of their albums.

Don't see how "appeals to the "deeper recesses"(whatever the hell that even means :? ) proves your point at all.


Thu May 15, 2014 4:44 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2384
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Kurt Cobain- 20 years
Vexer wrote:
No one thinks Aerosmith are a "joke" either, they too would sell out without a hint of irony.

I personally never got what the big deal about the Stones was, they have a few decent songs but I rarely have any real urge to listen to any of their albums.

Don't see how "appeals to the "deeper recesses"(whatever the hell that even means :? ) proves your point at all.


Well no offence but your opinion of the Stones means squat when you profess your admiration for Linkin Park.

And the deeper reassesses means what it says. Sexy Chocco has moved the debate to largely academic notions of who started what rather than who is tangibly relevant and great

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Thu May 15, 2014 4:52 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 111 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr