Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back a page or two to re-sync the thread and this will then show latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
most awful rock bands
Comments
-
Off your high horse slutmonkey!!!!!!!!!!
1.
Disproving a opinion is equal to trying to change a opinion.
My opinion is as valid as yours and the next persons, sorry if this is hard to swallow!
you know more about grunge, i know its **** and to me thats too much to know about it.:D:D
2.
I said image helps sell records. If a band has no image, they dont stand out and their chances of being at least noticed drop.
otherwise there is a strong chance motley may only have been another band like london, great but never quite made it.
you dont get to the top on talent alone(pussycat dolls, dustin the turkey are extreme examples)
As for my point of them being pissed and stoned, it was a response to you bringing the dirt into it, i was saying take the dirt with a pinch of salt.
motleys music was serious, the image was not.
3
Led zeppelin, Aerosmith, The doors,Black sabbath, these bands were all ****ed on drugs and ozzy said it himself they were all he cared for, they still wrote ****ing savage songs which today are regarded as the best.
so yes id say even though nikki was ****ed he wrote some amazing songs.
IMO you have to be high to write good songs, makes you think in a different way.
Id say most pop songs are written sober:p
4
Motleys 90s stuff was amazingly good, imo they were ahead of the times when they wrote it.Lots of amazing stuff doesnt go no1 because mainstream music is like sheep it shifts around the hype. So i wouldnt rely on album charts to guage the class of a band.
5
ye cobain didnt drink drive and get done for manslaughter, but id be willing to bet he has killed more and maimed more han vince did via kids committing suicide and citing him as the catalyst.
6
Take that are selling more records than the foo fighters do you mean to say take that are better than the foo fighters and more credible??
Id be pissed off if motley turned all crap and mainstream pop like the foo fighters.:D
8
motley were never mulleted, afaik def leppard were the only ones with mullets,the closest ,motley came was dont go away mad(just go away) video.0 -
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Off your high horse slutmonkey!!!!!!!!!!
1.
Disproving a opinion is equal to trying to change a opinion.
My opinion is as valid as yours and the next persons, sorry if this is hard to swallow!
you know more about grunge, i know its **** and to me thats too much to know about it.:D:D
Your opinion is as valid as the logic you base it on.
If the next person is as illogical as you, then both opinions have equal validity.
As you haven't yet managed to maintain a coherent (never mind logical) argument as to why the Crue have any musical credibility, your opinion is at best foundering.
Likes and dislikes cannot be disproved. Opinions however must be based on some form of evidence, and therefore can be disproved.2.
I said image helps sell records. If a band has no image, they dont stand out and their chances of being at least noticed drop.
otherwise there is a strong chance motley may only have been another band like london, great but never quite made it.
you dont get to the top on talent alone(pussycat dolls, dustin the turkey are extreme examples)
As for my point of them being pissed and stoned, it was a response to you bringing the dirt into it, i was saying take the dirt with a pinch of salt.
motleys music was serious, the image was not.
I was bringing the Dirt into it to disprove your assertion that Motley were taking the piss. Their image was also not a piss take, as I pointed out before, people who are taking the piss do not set themselves alight with no safety precautions night after night. I also referred to it to prove my points about their clownish get-up. I also used it to highlight the point that you are constantly contradicting yourself.3
Led zeppelin, Aerosmith, The doors,Black sabbath, these bands were all ****ed on drugs and ozzy said it himself they were all he cared for, they still wrote ****ing savage songs which today are regarded as the best.
so yes id say even though nikki was ****ed he wrote some amazing songs.
IMO you have to be high to write good songs, makes you think in a different way.
Id say most pop songs are written sober:p
You have to be high to write good music, eh? "Interesting" point again. I can disprove that quite simply:
Was Mozart whacked out of it on ketamine and speedballs when he was composing at age 5?
No. Therefore your opinion on whether or not you have to be high to write music is entirely invalid.4
Motleys 90s stuff was amazingly good, imo they were ahead of the times when they wrote it.Lots of amazing stuff doesnt go no1 because mainstream music is like sheep it shifts around the hype. So i wouldnt rely on album charts to guage the class of a band.
What, when they had a new guy in the band writing songs and guitar parts for them you mean? Or when they reacted to grunge by attempting to ditch their hairspray, glam, and pyro-laden past? As Nikki put it:
"I remembered too late that kids don't go to a Motley Crue concert to think about their own mortality, they go to a Motley Crue concert to hopefully get a blowjob in the back of a car."
Which proves the point that their lack of artistic credibility dooms them evermore to be a cheesy glam rock band reliant on massive stage shows to cover over the cracks in their musical ambitions.5
ye cobain didnt drink drive and get done for manslaughter, but id be willing to bet he has killed more and maimed more han vince did via kids committing suicide and citing him as the catalyst.
a) Dead people aren't to blame for anything that people do in their name.
b) Because they're dead you see.6
Take that are selling more records than the foo fighters do you mean to say take that are better than the foo fighters and more credible??
Id be pissed off if motley turned all crap and mainstream pop like the foo fighters.:D
JC 2k3 already answered this.8
motley were never mulleted, afaik def leppard were the only ones with mullets,the closest ,motley came was dont go away mad(just go away) video.
I was talking about the mulleted fanbase.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
slutmonkey,
honestly i have lost sight of this argument.
but what i have sight of is that
a)YOU ARE illogical
b)full of ****
c)still on your high horse
i can accept that you dont like the crue and tbh i dont give a sh!t what you think about the crue.
you say i contradict myself?? you posts are all over the shop you attack one thing, i argue back, then you apply it to somthing else
WTF???
you cant accept that i dont like grunge. WHY NOT???
a opinion is a opinion and its as valid as anybody elses, youre perception of the person leads to you not accepting it.
So because i like the crue and glam rock, you think i wear a bra hanging off my belt,leopard skin and a mullet:rolleyes:
so this in youre eyes makes my point full of ****, and my opinion as valid as a bus ticket from 1982.
this is because you see yourself as having a unquestionable taste in music, all your music collection is great music, all the other albums in the metal section are merely filler.
when you go out you think you are the "big cheese", "the man" "I love grunge so get the **** out of my way".
get a life.:rolleyes:
The crue rock and Rock t the **** out of Nirvana:D:D
P.S Remember when you said glam has lost its credibility now and isnt relevant????
Guess who are back??
Queen
in the words of sebastian bach and skid row
"this party is over so get the **** out"0 -
-
slutmonkey,
honestly i have lost sight of this argument.
but what i have sight of is that
a)YOU ARE illogical
b)full of ****
c)still on your high horse
i can accept that you dont like the crue and tbh i dont give a sh!t what you think about the crue.
you say i contradict myself?? you posts are all over the shop you attack one thing, i argue back, then you apply it to somthing else
WTF???
you cant accept that i dont like grunge. WHY NOT???
a opinion is a opinion and its as valid as anybody elses, youre perception of the person leads to you not accepting it.
So because i like the crue and glam rock, you think i wear a bra hanging off my belt,leopard skin and a mullet:rolleyes:
so this in youre eyes makes my point full of ****, and my opinion as valid as a bus ticket from 1982.
this is because you see yourself as having a unquestionable taste in music, all your music collection is great music, all the other albums in the metal section are merely filler.
when you go out you think you are the "big cheese", "the man" "I love grunge so get the **** out of my way".
get a life.:rolleyes:
The crue rock and Rock t the **** out of Nirvana:D:D
P.S Remember when you said glam has lost its credibility now and isnt relevant????
Guess who are back??
Queen
in the words of sebastian bach and skid row
"this party is over so get the **** out"
F**king LMFAO!!!!
Best rant of 2008 hands down!!!!!!!!0 -
Mental Mickey wrote: »F**king LMFAO!!!!
Best rant of 2008 hands down!!!!!!!!
glad you liked it;)
just waiting for slutmonkey to PM me his number and tell me he will kill me,(at least this is what happened earlier in the thread from irish bob gob****e!:D:D)
god glam really gets people, im well glamming up some nite for the laugh:D:D0 -
-
-
-
-
-
slutmonkey,
honestly i have lost sight of this argument.
There isn't an argument. An argument requires cogent thought. Two people with opposing points of view debating. What we have here is a ranting idiot spouting incoherent rubbish while someone points out the failings in his rants.but what i have sight of is that
a)YOU ARE illogical
b)full of ****
c)still on your high horse
I wasn't on a high horse to begin with. You started ranting about grunge before I even posted on the thread. I merely pointed out the 80's was a hideous embarrassing artistic mess of a decade that grunge put an end to, just like punk put an end to the 70's. Since then, you've been rabidly frothing at the mouth, posting all kinds of contradictory rubbish, which I've been kind enough to expose for the tripe that it is.i can accept that you dont like the crue and tbh i dont give a sh!t what you think about the crue.
Beggars the question why you're still attacking me then doesn't it. This is the problem. You claim one thing, then turn right around and disprove yourself. Then I point out you've shot yourself in the foot and you rant some more. I won't deny it's mildly entertaining but at this stage I'm beginning to feel like I'm unwittingly conducting a psychological experiment.you say i contradict myself?? you posts are all over the shop you attack one thing, i argue back, then you apply it to somthing else
WTF???
Confused doesn't begin to describe you. As you haven't managed to follow your own posts, I certainly don't expect you to follow mine from one post to another. You can't even seem to keep a focus within one single post, never mind a whole thread.you cant accept that i dont like grunge. WHY NOT???
When did I not accept you don't like grunge? I never suggested you did like grunge. I suggested that your arguments (varied and wild as they are) are generally baseless ranting. It doesn't bother me that you don't like grunge. But if you're going to go from one post saying
"Motley Crue were taking the piss" to defend your opinion, then
"Motley Crue were deadly serious like a heart attack" to defend the same opinion, then I'm unable not to point out that you're talking through your arse and essentially whirling round plucking at excuses to defend an point of view you've no basis for.a opinion is a opinion and its as valid as anybody elses, youre perception of the person leads to you not accepting it.
Didn't I answer this once already?
Likes and Dislikes have equal validity, because they're ephemeral and baseless.
Opinions, however, have to have a source. Yours don't have any kind of source.
I'll explain it again.
If you said
"I like Motley Crue"
Nobody can disagree with you.
If you say
"Motley Crue were taking the piss"
I can simply point to the passages in their autobiography where they are clearly not taking the piss, and say "See, you're wrong."
Which is exactly what I did.So because i like the crue and glam rock, you think i wear a bra hanging off my belt,leopard skin and a mullet:rolleyes:
so this in youre eyes makes my point full of ****, and my opinion as valid as a bus ticket from 1982.
Again, you're applying my generalised "mulleted fanbase" comment to a specific individual (in the first case, the Crue themselves, in this case, you).
Your opinion has no validity because you're spouting random, baseless, easily disproved gibberish to support it. What you wear, listen to, or look like has nothing to do with it.this is because you see yourself as having a unquestionable taste in music, all your music collection is great music, all the other albums in the metal section are merely filler.
when you go out you think you are the "big cheese", "the man" "I love grunge so get the **** out of my way".
get a life.:rolleyes:
Your Internet Glasses are working perfectly I see.
You were the one who originally posted that Grunge and Indie music (as a whole genre, not even a couple of specific acts) were a load of ****e.
You were the one who posted that 80's glam rock was superior in every way.
You were the one who started the whole argument. You're now getting pissy because somebody a) doesn't agree with you; and b) is poking very large holes in your various rantings.The crue rock and Rock t the **** out of Nirvana:D:D
Put up a poll: Which rocks harder:
"Girls Girls Girls" by Motley Crue;
"Gallons of Rubbing alcohol flow through the strip" by NirvanaP.S Remember when you said glam has lost its credibility now and isnt relevant????
Guess who are back??
Queen
Queen have been allegedly " coming back" for years. Pretty much every 2 years like clockwork they're rumoured to be coming back. But they never do. You know why?
Their lead singer is dead and they've noone to replace the guy.in the words of sebastian bach and skid row
"this party is over so get the **** out"
In the words of Sebastian Bach:
"Where's my money? They kicked me out of the band and kept the name. That sucks man. What do you mean they were around years before I joined? That's my band man. Spare some change?"0 -
Advertisement
-
Slutmonkey57b wrote: »There isn't an argument. An argument requires cogent thought. Two people with opposing points of view debating. What we have here is a ranting idiot spouting incoherent rubbish while someone points out the failings in his rants.
I wasn't on a high horse to begin with. You started ranting about grunge before I even posted on the thread. I merely pointed out the 80's was a hideous embarrassing artistic mess of a decade that grunge put an end to, just like punk put an end to the 70's. Since then, you've been rabidly frothing at the mouth, posting all kinds of contradictory rubbish, which I've been kind enough to expose for the tripe that it is.
Beggars the question why you're still attacking me then doesn't it. This is the problem. You claim one thing, then turn right around and disprove yourself. Then I point out you've shot yourself in the foot and you rant some more. I won't deny it's mildly entertaining but at this stage I'm beginning to feel like I'm unwittingly conducting a psychological experiment.
Confused doesn't begin to describe you. As you haven't managed to follow your own posts, I certainly don't expect you to follow mine from one post to another. You can't even seem to keep a focus within one single post, never mind a whole thread.
When did I not accept you don't like grunge? I never suggested you did like grunge. I suggested that your arguments (varied and wild as they are) are generally baseless ranting. It doesn't bother me that you don't like grunge. But if you're going to go from one post saying
"Motley Crue were taking the piss" to defend your opinion, then
"Motley Crue were deadly serious like a heart attack" to defend the same opinion, then I'm unable not to point out that you're talking through your arse and essentially whirling round plucking at excuses to defend an point of view you've no basis for.
Didn't I answer this once already?
Likes and Dislikes have equal validity, because they're ephemeral and baseless.
Opinions, however, have to have a source. Yours don't have any kind of source.
I'll explain it again.
If you said
"I like Motley Crue"
Nobody can disagree with you.
If you say
"Motley Crue were taking the piss"
I can simply point to the passages in their autobiography where they are clearly not taking the piss, and say "See, you're wrong."
Which is exactly what I did.
Again, you're applying my generalised "mulleted fanbase" comment to a specific individual (in the first case, the Crue themselves, in this case, you).
Your opinion has no validity because you're spouting random, baseless, easily disproved gibberish to support it. What you wear, listen to, or look like has nothing to do with it.
Your Internet Glasses are working perfectly I see.
You were the one who originally posted that Grunge and Indie music (as a whole genre, not even a couple of specific acts) were a load of ****e.
You were the one who posted that 80's glam rock was superior in every way.
You were the one who started the whole argument. You're now getting pissy because somebody a) doesn't agree with you; and b) is poking very large holes in your various rantings.
Put up a poll: Which rocks harder:
"Girls Girls Girls" by Motley Crue;
"Gallons of Rubbing alcohol flow through the strip" by Nirvana
Queen have been allegedly " coming back" for years. Pretty much every 2 years like clockwork they're rumoured to be coming back. But they never do. You know why?
Their lead singer is dead and they've noone to replace the guy.
In the words of Sebastian Bach:
"Where's my money? They kicked me out of the band and kept the name. That sucks man. What do you mean they were around years before I joined? That's my band man. Spare some change?":D:D:D
plenty of people have said the music i listen to is ****e, motley, acdc etc, i didnt do a slutmonkey and get all offended, you need to get LAID, grab anything that appears female you will chillax
i just said i THOUGHT , that IN MY OPINION, grunge is ****e.lol
you couldnt swallow this.
most of what you used to expose my tripe is unfounded ****e tbh:)
opinions dont need fact or evidence, "in my opinion aliens are among us" random, but happy days.
now the governmant releasing a STATEMENT , A REPORT, etc will need evidence,
have youve gone to college??, tell us as some of the younger crowd can avoid the place.
your lack of reasoning/cop-on/education amazes me.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
This thread's taken a turn for the worse, but with that title what do you expect? For the record i love cheesy 80s music AND grunge (the good grunge) in equal measure. By good grunge I mean Soundgarden, Alice in Chains and the like, not f*cking Nirvana.
All this is is two people that like different music that can't accept that music is something completely subjective. What're ye trying to do here? Do you thinkk you're going to convince the other person they're wrong in their tastes? Grow the f*ck up tbh. It's music. Entertainment. Not a competition.
ive accepted it i dont give a **** about his tastes, likes/dislikes.
im dumbfounded by his ignorance tbh
They are clearly taking the piss, i anyways i shouldnt have to answer my music taste to anybody.
0 -
:p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_w5V0tyaPo
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement