I realise I will get slaughtered for the last 3 selections, but I always find myself turning the radio off when all of the above are being played.
With you on The Stone Roses and add to that The Verve. However, early Oasis had some balls and I quite liked. Remember the big media hype of Blur Vs Oasis?... I'll add Blur to the shitlist.
1) Antonio Banderas: Smooth, suave, stylish Spanish charmer. He makes me sick with his smooth, suave, stylish Spanish charm. He has every woman in the world swooning over him, and still remains happily married when he could be humping every starstruck cutie that walks his way and passing it off as sex addiction. Come on, Tone, this is fucking Hollywood you monogamist twat.
2) Blue Riband: It's supposed to be a chocolate wafer, so where's the fucking chocolate? It's just a wafer that has been shown some chocolate. A fine gossamer thin coating, almost transparent. Look at the Kit-kat. not only is it covered in a chunky layer of choccy, it's split in two (or four) so as to allow the application of even more chocolate. Even Ainsley Harriot put little chocolate chips on his wafers to increase the amount of chocolate on each bar. He personally counts each one, you know, and still finds time to host Can't Cook, Won't Cook. If only they still made Bandits.
3)Rock Band: The ridiculous fucking video game. What a waste of time and effort. What kind of bell-end enjoys air guitar so much that they have to connect themselves to the fucking telly and score points for it. Or pretending to play drums, just like the occasional cock smear that you see at traffic lights playing his invisible drum kit whilst going dff dff dff tssh, and spraying spittle all over his fucking windscreen.
Do you like music? Do you like the idea of being able to play a musical instrument? Here's an idea, instead of spending the money on a game console and game that allows you to pretend to play a musical instrument, why not spend the money on a real musical instrument and learn to play that? You won't, of course, because that would be too difficult and would mean that you have to engage with the real world. Twat.
4) Bandanas: It's a big hanky, and you're wearing it on your fucking head. You may think you look cool, but you don't. You look like a knob. Bandanas are worn by people who try too hard to look cool. Axl Rose wears a bandana. Hulk Hogan wears a bandana. Silvio Berlusconi wears a bandana. Silvio fucking Berlusconi wears a fucking bandana. Look at him. Just fucking look at him.
Does that look cool? Is that how you want to look? Is it?
It's their body of work and also the fact three of the four band members went on to enjoy very successful careers in their own right, actually that's enough isn't it? 3 out of 4 band members? That alone is impressive.
Which one are you saying didn't have a successful post-Beatles career? Surely not Ringo, who had a series of hit singles, including back-to-back US number ones with 'Photograph' and 'You're Sixteen'...
Anyway, back to these 'worst bands'. What about Guns n' Roses? They're a load of sh*t, they are!
Here's an idea, instead of spending the money on a game console and game that allows you to pretend to play a musical instrument, why not spend the money on a real musical instrument and learn to play that?
Here's an idea, instead of spending the money on a game console and game that allows you to pretend to play a musical instrument, why not spend the money on a real musical instrument and learn to play that?
I've got both, where does this leave me?
If you can actually play a musical instrument, why would you then want to pretend you can?
Because it's fun? That's about the only reason I can give.
And the only reason you need give. For fuck's sake. This place is going through one of its fustian phases.
The games are fun, especially if you have a person on every instrument (and singing). Sort of like karaoke crossed with a videogame. (Which I realize probably sounds like hell to some people.)
Anyway, I don't think people are choosing between learning guitar or learning Rock Band.
I think jazz-funk musicians might disagree with you, Sam.
Well, I'm not sure that's a good reason to make it incorrect. For one thing I think a lot of them consider what they play to be jazz-funk, and for another even if some of them do think they're playing jazz, that doesn't necessarily make them right.
If you met Pee Wee Ellis and he told you he was quite convinced he'd spent his whole life playing orchestral classical music, would you bow to his judgement or feel disillusioned that he turned out to be such an idiot?
Ha, you've almost convinced me. But why take such a narrow view of jazz? What are, for example, The Crusaders if not jazz? What about Ramsey Lewis, who could tinkle the ivories trad jazz style and also did plenty smooth fusion stuff?
Ah, this is where our differing ages come to bear I think. When I read 'jazz-funk' my mind immediately jumped to the Acid Jazz bands and the others like the Young Disciples or Jhelisa who, though they weren't on that label, were obviously part of the same movement.
Whereas I think you're talking about what I'd (to avoid confusion with that newer stuff) call fusion, in which case we're in agreement, I've never agreed with with traditionalists insisting that albums like Head Hunters and Heavy Weather aren't jazz.
The Crusaders I think are somewhere between fusion and soul, but that's largely because I've never been a huge fan of vocal jazz, but do like them.
Comment