|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 13, 2011 9:17:20 GMT -5
In the 80s Motley was a little better live but while Poison has remained consistent if not gotten better Motley has dropped off some. Nikki, Mick, and Tommy sound ok but Vince sounds like an out of breath fat 14 year old girl. ...here's a review of their show Tuesday... The past 15 years have found the aging Crüe relying more and more on their stage set to mask the sloppiness of their live playing, and last night was no exception. Singer Vince Neil was a complete mess, forgetting lyrics left and right and getting so out of breath that he even stumbled over the lines he did remember. Nikki Sixx looked like he was going through the motions. I've seen the Crue live. Their stage show definately is the reason why you go see them in concert. I love the band, but Vince is definately a weak link, and always has been. The older I get the more I get annoyed by his voice. I have seen the band numerous times and their set list has become so predictable that I will not spend money to go see them again.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 13, 2011 9:11:52 GMT -5
lol
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 13, 2011 9:10:57 GMT -5
Still doesn't matter. Times were different back then and the people running American Idol are evil parasitic creatures when it comes to the music industry. Thats my opinion and I stand behind it 110 % . Its cool though that kids are being exposed to Aerosmith and Judas Priest.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 10, 2011 15:09:48 GMT -5
do the guys in Motley Crue like anything... Not Poison obviously. But I have to give them credit. They are touring with a band that they can't stand because their fans and Poison's have always wanted to see the two tour together.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 10, 2011 12:45:50 GMT -5
Not too long ago, Poison singer Bret Michaels told the Arizona Republic that Motley Crue’s Nikki Sixx had said he was “really sorry” about derogatory comments that had been made by his bandmates in the past about Poison, with whom the Crue is touring this summer (along with the New York Dolls). Nikki quickly tweeted that he made no such apology, clarifying what he did say was “I personally never had anything against you guys as people but Motley just sorta thought you sucked as a band but let's give the fans what they want and go out and have a good time.” Bret responded that he doesn’t understand why Nikki continues to say “negative stuff.” “I don't know what the rhyme or reason is,” Michaels told the Birmingham News. “I like some of their music. Fans want the tour. I think it could be a great tour for fans if we could just put our feelings aside. I think we can have a great time.” Sounds like Funville backstage, huh? It's definitely rockin' on stage, though...check out this fan footage of Tommy Lee's un-freakin'-believable 360 vertical drum rollercoaster set-up. Now THAT's metal!
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 9, 2011 12:52:42 GMT -5
Thats the cheesiest , gayest, dumbest, and most obnoxious video I have ever seen. Thanks for sharing. Y'know...I really don't get this kind of attitude? No!...really,......... I don't. It's quite obvious that some here are sheltered in a mind set that doesn't allow for for 2 guys even singing together? It's Mick fucking Jagger singing a fucking song with David fucking Bowie............ WHAT"S THE FUCKIN' PROBLEM!!!!!! ?? This was the 80's my friend!!!!!!!!!! The new age is worse buddy if you want to witness 2 dudes goin' at er!!!!!!! Check out "The United States of Tara" on HBO for starters... You want to call to iconic rock stars GAY, that's one thing, but you had best ask their wives what they have to say. If they crossed over to the "dark side" that's their business...but to dismiss their music because of it.......well then you're one scared pussycat buddy!!!!!!!!!!!!! "Watch out"!!!!!!!! Next time a guy shakes yer hand....or holds a door open for ya........he might be GAY!!!!!!!!!! GASP SHOCK HORROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bottom line...give yer head a "really good shake"..... Mick and David had a wonderfull time making this great video to an otherwise pretty decent song. Anyone with testosterone running through their system is not offended by it... grow up!!! Thanks Kim I hope you understand that in the world we live in, a man can have kids and a wife and still like men at a sexual level. They call themselves bi-sexual. Jagger and Bowie are bi-sexual men. So yes they are gay. And the video is gay as well.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 9, 2011 11:14:36 GMT -5
I don't enjoy seeing Judas Priest perform on American Idol. Bands like that should not be on American Idol.
Joe Perry of Aerosmith has said that he won't appear on the show because he refuses to have his name associated with the show. Thats one of the reasons why the rest of Aerosmith did not perform with Steven when he performed on the show. So Steven had to have Stone Temple Pilots perform with him instead.
American Idol just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Everything about the show is against what made the bands I love great. Do you think that the people that run American Idol would allow James Durbin to sign a three album deal and allow him to grow as an ARTIST? Nope they will not. But the people that were in charge of music when bands such as Judas Priest started out, allowed Priest to grow as a band and artist and that is the reason why they are still around today.
American Idol is all about finding the next one hit wonder. They are not about finding the next true artist, especially in rock n roll. Are you really naive to think for a second that the fans of American Idol care about rock music? LOL Seriously? Unfuckinreal. If they did rock would win every year. I find it sickening and corny that Priest was performing to a bunch of people that could care less about rock. How many of them know Judas Priests catalog? Fuck how many of them know any Judas Priest songs at all? BTW all those kids snickering at home and in the crowd and looking at the band with the reaction of "what a bunch of old ugly farts", they were not doing that cause they thought the band was "cool."
If you have any pride in standing behind what you believe in, and not wanting to give in to people who are using you to fill their pockets, instead of using you to become a great artist, you will boycott American Idol. It really upset me to see Judas Priest on the show. Its one thing if a guy who is auditioning is a rocker and sings rock songs, but for the "metal gods" to go on the show and agree to make it money, that is an insult to what is good in music. If there is anything left at all.
P.S. If James Durbin had any balls, he would have performed "Beyond the Realms of Death or Some heads are gonna roll." If Steven Tyler had any balls and really wanted to show the American Idol fans what rock is all about.. Instead performing dream on, he would have performed something off of Rocks! Get the Lead out or Combination would have been awesome. Fuck American Idol and their pop driven bullshit philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on Jun 3, 2011 11:55:12 GMT -5
Could it be as "awesome" as this incredibly uncomfortable to watch (gay) super duet with Bowie? Thats the cheesiest , gayest, dumbest, and most obnoxious video I have ever seen. Thanks for sharing.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 31, 2011 12:29:37 GMT -5
Myself I HATE seeing bands I respect and love on these retarded shows. It was pure crap. next we will have Sabbath fronted by Lady Gaga. Exactly, it was pure crap. I sure hope we will never see Sabbath with Lady Ga Ga. Another thing also. Can we get any cheesier having that boy play dress up as Rob Halford? Check please. I won't be coming back anytime soon to watch this show.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 26, 2011 16:31:22 GMT -5
Thats pretty fucking GAY. Sorry guys.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 26, 2011 13:51:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 24, 2011 17:10:36 GMT -5
Do you think over the years that the Stones put out alot of filler along with their hits?
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 14, 2011 16:04:48 GMT -5
Actually, Doc, yer right. It was a breath of freash air...for those that needed to breathe. I can honestly tell you that I clung to the older days and ways. I recall being in a bar when the owner, a friend of mine, watched the premier of "Sweet Child O' Mine" on the MTV channel...and we both agreed, it was "okay", but nothing earth shattering. Little did we know huh? In fact, I recall telling my buddy..."the guy sounds like Ron Tabak of Prism" We were partial to the older stuff at the time...and sadly, there wasn't much of it coming out. I can honestly say, it was at this time that Steve Earle started sounding pretty damned good...simply because the older crowd got lost and the younger crowd simply wasn't there to help us through the night???......and then along came the 90's!!! YIKES! Actually, it just goes to show...that's how sad the music landscape was at the time and kids were willing to accept whatever was coming down the pipes back in the day during the late 80's. That's the best that came across the waves and the stages back then. I for one as a 20 something music fan back then wasn't impressed. Since then, this GNR group really didn't carry on very far now did they?...............that's how great they were I guess? As great as that debut album was to some, it was also a let down for some of us that were waiting for something a tad better in terms of decent music back in the day. As far as rock & roll being "dirty like it should be", I don't agree. Rock and roll doesn't have to be dirty......it just has to be good. Thanks Kim The thing is, I still cling on to the old days & ways, but that's the reason WHY Guns N' Roses were so popular, they sounded like they were right out of the 70's. Can you name one band in the 80's who were better? Not more successful, just better? To me their debut sounded like a cross between Aerosmith, Rose Tattoo, Nazareth & was not wimpy in a Motley Crue, Poison or Ratt sort of way. It has attitude which is 50% of rock n' roll. I also think rock n' roll needs to be dirty. I don't mean in a sexual way, I mean in a gritty way. I want my rock bands to ROCK! Aerosmith, The Stones, hell even Quo are at their best when they (to quote the MC5) 'Kick Out The Jams Motherfuckers'. That's one reason why I never saw The Beatles as a rock band the way they are seen in America. Their music was just too ..... nice & fluffy. They are seen as a pop band in the UK not a rock band. When Motley Crue first came out they were a dirty Rock n Roll band. Too Fast for Love is one of the best rock n roll albums ever.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 14, 2011 14:51:36 GMT -5
Don't make me post a Beatles vs. Guns & Roses thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha............ Any takers?!!! Let's go toe to toe............. Song for song. I challenge anyone!!! Granted, the Fab Four will lose some votes to the younger crowd here, simply because they don't know the early stuff, but I'll try and put it up as a contender...and in fact, some of you have never even heard some of the great tracks on the albums that this group has put forth. You all bitch about "She Loves You", "Lucy in The Sky" and "Get Back"... Fuck off!................LISTEN to the rest of the music! Can anyone here admit to listening to their early version of "Please Mr. Postman"?...........Listen to the damn thing...it's great!!!!! Anyway....... .......you put yer "Guns & Roses" song up...and I'll counter with a Beatles tune.... Let's have some fun! (Oh yeah...let's keep in mind...I'm one against many). Thanks Kim Say what you will, but this forum would be pretty fucking boring if we all agreed that the Beatles were/are the best Rock'n Roll band the world has ever seen and will ever see and that Guns'n Roses sucks donkey balls. Every Rock'n Roll forum needs an asshole like me who prefers "Rocket Queen" over the best Beatles song you can throw my way. It makes things more interesting. I'm with Jesse on this one. Sorry, but Guns is better than the Beatles in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 14, 2011 9:57:27 GMT -5
No I don't, and thats that.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 7, 2011 15:13:57 GMT -5
The last album had one alright song on it. It was nominated amongst a weak class of rock acts. Big fucking deal.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 4, 2011 9:30:12 GMT -5
With his money and interest in drugs over the years, it would be pretty easy to go through 20 million on cocaine. Its not like he was getting bullshit either. He had the best connections in any city he toured in. Back in the 80's a gram of really high grade Coke was going for about $600 a gram. When you are going through ounces at a time, its not that hard to go through 20 million. Plus remember not only was he buying for himself, but also for the women that came around and also his close friends and the people that he wanted to party with him when the time called for it. So when you throw in all the factors contributing to his drug use, you understand that its not that hard to go through all that money on partying.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 3, 2011 9:23:54 GMT -5
He's a fuckin flamer.
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 2, 2011 11:50:26 GMT -5
Uh huh, ok! LOL Give me a break!
|
|
|
Post by bluecheer on May 2, 2011 11:49:22 GMT -5
Troll.
|
|