Feb 282009
Here’s a Last Man Standing suggested by Townsman Mwall for those of you uncomfortable with The Beatles’ as-yet-unparalelled achievements in music. Here’s your chance to air out all the ways in which The Beatles suck. I look forward to what this short list will say about us!
ok…i’ll start with the obvious.
paul’s cutesie songs like ‘honey pie’.
separately.
as in, together The Beatles were the best,
but separately, they sucked in comparison.
They also sucked as actors. Like Elvis.
At least The Stones were smart enough to not try making vehicle movies in which they acted.
At picking girlfriends/wives.
John gets his high school sweetheart pregnant and marries her BEFORE Beatlemania, thereby wrecking his global MOJO, THEN dumps her for Yucko Ohno! George marries a super hottie, who dumps him for…Eric backstabbin Clapton?!?!? bummer. Paul marries a woman who needs to be in his band, then dies, and is replaced by a 1 legged gold-digger. I think Ringo, as usual, is the only one to keep it all on track. Barbara Bach right? Awesome.
At picking Spiritual leaders. I could have told you the Maharishi was full of shit just by lookin at him.
Suckers.
oh, and Hello Goodbye. That song is horrid.
1.Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Heart’s Club Band LP- The most overrated album ever. Gave birth to throngs of hippy bands with sitars, nonsensically whimsical, ‘trippy’ lyrics,self important attitudes, & day-glo satin marching band & dandy-fop outfits.
2.The above was released the same year as, & completely eclipsed, The Velvet Underground’s 1st LP, a more adventurous, groundbreaking work on all points, made on what was probably the tea budget of ‘S.P.L.H.C.B.’
3. Helped spawn the idea that we should be paying attention to the ideas of pop stars/celebrities on subjects they are totally unqualified to be addressing in a public forum.
4. Hailed as geniuses when, without George Martin’s massive contribution, it’s highly debatable whether they would be so highly considered.
5. Doomed the careers of many American Acts, esp. African-Americans, by ushering in The British Invasion, which consisted mainly of white English guys playing watered down, comparatively badly played versions of the music of African-Americans
6. They let John put “Revolution #9” on an album, taking up precious vinyl that could have held 2 or 3 real songs.
7. That cover of ‘Besume Mucho’.
This probably concerns“Things That Suck About the Beatles” rather than “Ways The Beatles Sucked” but I’ll say Over saturation.
I know it’s not their fault but my distain for them in high school was based on the fact that they are crammed down your throat so relentlessly.
My pent up resentment almost lead me to yell “John Lennon sucked” out the window as I passed an impromptu memorial on the steps of the Art Museum on the day he was shot. I’m really glad I didn’t, by the way.
I gradually came to realize that it wasn’t the Beatles fault and I’ve come to appreciate them more and more. Most surprising to me is that I’ve really come to appreciate the Ringo’s (or Bernard “Pretty” Purdie’s) drumming.
Still, even now, I only own two of their albums.
A couple of reminders, as entries begin pouring in:
Per Last Man Standing protocol, you should only list one thing per comment. The idea is that place one hand at a time on the bat handle until someone finally covers the knob.
This Last Man Standing asks for “ways” in which The Beatles suck, not just particular things about them that happened to suck. So I would say Shawnkilroy’s WAYS in which they chose wives and spiritual leaders, for instance, stand, while “Revolution #9″…I’m not so sure that’s endemic of the band, but Sat’s “cutsie songs like…” entry is.
Carry on!
abbey road and rubber soul right?
cdm;I’ve got the complete boxed set of the English LPs, plus sundry US releases, The BBC sessions CDs, a 3CD bootleg of unreleased stuff from way back, & an LP of all their fan club Xmas records. I can’t remember the last time I listened to anything but the fan club Xmas thing. It’s as if I don’t need to put the music on any audio delivery device, I can just play it in my head, it’s all been so embedded through ubiquitousness.
MR.MOD-Sorry squire, I’m still trying to get the hang of the rules in these parts.
Nary a jazz bone in their bodies.
Apple Corps. They would have been better off just handing out their money to strangers in the street. The Maharishi? What about that grifter, Magic Alex? They really were quite the marks for whatever snake oil salesmen happened to be about.
The big one for me is quitting. As the 60s wound down and people were trying to figure out where we were going next, the Beatles packed it in and retreated into cocoons of diminishing relevance. Other artists of that era stepped up their games and dealt with the situation in different ways, but the Beatles just bailed.
Their attempts at writing English dance hall music.
Big Steve said: “The big one for me is quitting.”
I like them for that. They went out on top.
How much better would it have been if the Stones quit after Exile? Sure we would have missed a handful of stray classics like Angie and Waiting on a Friend but they wouldn’t have diluted their legacy as much as they have with stuff like I’m so Hot For Her and what ever else they’ve churned out for the last 30 odd years.
Their music ruined that otherwise perfectly charming Bee Gees/Frampton movie.
Mr. Mod, I’m not sure I’m quite comfortable with your analogy of hands on bats, covering knobs, & such. The thinly veiled homoeroticism in this hallowed hall is thick enough, thanks.
I always thought that movie was a Steve Martin/George Burns vehicle.
The way they got rid of Pete Best
Yes, the whole business angle in general is a good example of suckiness. Most artists of the era got ripped off in various ways (not Dylan apparently), but the Beatles generated zillions of pounds of cash and then woke up sometime in 1969 to discover they didn’t actually have any of it. Allen Klein was not such a great solution to this problem.
cdm is right. Everyone knows that The Kinks are the kings of English Dance Hall Rock!
Their greasy-hair Look around the time of the White Album. Since when is lack of basic hygiene “cool”?
I don’t think they did go out on top. Going out on top would have been quitting after Strawberry Fields.
I must comment on bobby bittman’s #5 above, where he says:
“5. Doomed the careers of many American Acts, esp. African-Americans, by ushering in The British Invasion, which consisted mainly of white English guys playing watered down, comparatively badly played versions of the music of African-Americans”
I disagree w/this, considering the fact that the prime years of the British Invasion were also the prime years of Motown, as well as the fact that there were many soul classics from Stax & other non-Motown sources that made the Top 40 in those years.
The fact that none of them drove a really cool car when they were actually Beatles. Come on, man! When you’re the world’s coolest rock star, you gotta drive a cool car!
Using cuteness as a marketing tool.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on that, Steve. I’m not that big a fan of Strawberry Fields to begin with and there are parts of Let It Be, Abby Road and the White Album which totally eclipse it.
I take back my comment about the Beatles never owning any cool cars. This story tells me they owned a couple of Aston Martins and an XKE — they should have owned more, but I’ll give them a pass.
Typical of the Beatles to be so into Mini Coopers — and for John to settle for a Rolls he could be chauffeured in.
Whoops — here’s the link:
http://www.beatlebrunchclub.com/articles/Cars.php
cdm, I’d agree with your statement about The Beatles going out on top had they released Let It Be before Abbey Road, instead of after it.
BigSteve, When has the music industry NOT used cuteness as a marketing tool? It was certainly already a marketing mainstay long before The Fab 4.
“Mr. Moonlight”
I don’t get why Let It Be, or Abbey Road, for that matter, are held in such low esteem around these parts. I acknowledge that I’m a more casual Beatles fan than a lot of other Townsmen (and that Townswoman), but aside from the Phil Spector production, whats wrong with that album? It has Great songs and Great performances, and the Naked version corrected the excessive Spectorishness.
bobby, the thread is not titled “Unique Ways in which the Beatles Sucked.”
I can take or leave pretty much everything from Sgt Pepper on.
They sucked for not going to that party in Manila. There were jam butties and everything.
I had to stay with a weird kid once while my parents were on a vacation during the school year. Mom and dad goave me money for the ten days or so, and I immediately went to the record store and blew it all. I was hoping that I Am the Walrus and it’s line about letting your knickers down would piss off Weird Mom, something the 13 year old in me desperately wanted to do.
Instead she loved it and actually asked me to play that damned Beatles album all the time because they were “cute.” Just a few years later and that album would have been Never Mind the Bollocks and Weird Mom would have been properly offended.
Thanks, Beatles. You lousy poofs.
cdm, Abbey Road has Maxwell’s Silver Hammer on it. That alone should be enough to discredit their entire career.
diskojoe, OK, maybe “doomed” was overstating the case, but the Brit Invasion definitely put a major crimp into the careers of many US acts for a couple of years. I can’t remember which documentary about soul it was in (it could have been in one of the chapters of that PBS “Rock & Roll” series), but the artists themselves say as much. Something to the effect of, “If you weren’t a cute English boy, you couldn’t get any work at the time”. At least some white U.S. acts could adopt the trappings & come off as English (Sir Douglas Quintet, Paul Revere & the Raiders, etc.). If you were a black dude from Georgia it was a little harder to pull off.
Hey Jude. Man, that sucks.
I’m certainly not defending Maxwell’s Silver Turd but there is a tendency around these parts to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
cdm, It’s just that they should have gone ahead and released those last two in the order they were recorded. Also, I think you have to look at Let It Be as it was released in 1970, & not a version of the album that came out 30 yrs after the fact. Abbey Road just would have been a less dejected, lackluster, more celebratory capper to their career. Plus, Abbey Road ends with, “The End”. It just woulda played better.
2000man, So does that mean you can discredit The Sex Pistols entire recorded legacy with, “Belsen Was A Gas”?
For the record, I have had a deep, long, and satisfying personal relationship with Let It Be since childhood – and I HATE what they did with it on that Naked thing. If I could hold The Beatles responsible for how we’ve sometimes reacted as fans and fanboys, I’d add that to the list, but there was little precedence for what they would inspire.
I’m pleasantly surprised at what you are making of Mwall’s call for sour grapes. Do we need to wait all day, Mwall, for you to complain that they had no blooz chops? Thanks, btw, dbuskirk, for bemoaning their lack of jazz chops. I was counting on you for that one!:)
I’m as big a Beatles lover as anyone around here, so it’s tough for me to think of entire ways in which the band sucked, but I don’t want to be called a Stepford Fan. There’s one way that comes to mind in which I feel The Beatles sucked: they had the nerve to carry on after Paul died – with an imposter no less!
They stopped playing live. If they’d just done a little gigging, I think their final three years would’ve produced better music. As it was, the studio seems to have become an alchemist’s lab for each of them individually — leading to pointless wankeries like “Ob-la-di, Ob-la-da,” “Ballad Of John and Yoko” and “”For You Blue.”
BB: It may be a fair point that Abbey Road might have been a better final album (I don’t really have an opinion about it one way or another but I agree the End would have been a cool final song). But I don’t find LIB to be dejected or lackluster.
Free As A Bird
Or should I hold off on that until we have the inevitable Ways The Threetles Sucked?
Wow, I’m just getting out of bed and there are already 45 comments on this thread.
Their “brilliant” idea of a psychedelic lyric is to mention pretty colors and an animal.
“Free as a Bird” reminds me of one I’m surprised no one has said until now – and this has been especially endemic in their post-Beatles years: the way in which they want to control their product. I’m all for being a codger about iTunes and digitally breaking up album sequencing and the like, but no band has benefited more from the love of The People than The Beatles. It’s time the remaining parties open the floodgates and let it be in the modern age.
The sucked at being dangerous. I guess really I should blame Brian Epstein for crafting their image. But they sold out c. 1962.
For sucking at being dangerous, though, they did do their part in bringing danger into the mainstream: Lennon through his revolutionary leanings, Paul through his drug-taking admissions, George through his Eastern mysticism, and Ringo through his singing.
guh….the thread isn’t called “things I hate about the beatles” although this is inevitably going to be a subjective enterprise.
also, it’s a last man standing thread, not a battle royale.
bobby’s lack of compliance to the rules of a “last man” thread is understandable, since this is probably his first one.
bobby, you’re supposed to name one item. upon naming of said item, you are the so-called ‘last man standing’ until someone else names an item.
THEN you can list something else, see? so you should’ve saved some of those great ideas. as it is, you shot yer wad, son.
Their British character sketches are usually hokey or sentimental and in fact the Kinks’ character sketches blow theirs out of the water.
here’s another way in which the Beatles have sucked:
their trendsetting packaging and repackaging and repackaging their back catalog.
Mr. Mod, that is B.S. No one was afraid of them, maybe in Japan they were afraid of Paul’s drug taking. The most revolutionary thing they sung directly was a George line about taxes. Revolution’s lyrics are decidedly against revolution, because you know it’s gonna be, alright. Ringo’s dancing was pretty scary, I’ll grant you that.
They sucked at collaborating — not among themselves (though they sucked at that, too, by the end) — but with other musicians. They should’ve leveraged their fame to bring cool musicians to their sessions, or organize cool side projects. The John and Yoko stuff doesn’t count!
Seriously, they could’ve picked up the phone and brought John Coltrane into the studio, or Jimi Hendrix. Instead we got Brian Jones and Eric Clapton — and that was, you know, *it*.
I’ve always contended that saving items is contrary to the spirit of Last Man Standing. I think you should blurt them out as they come into your head. If someone comes up with one after you, it’s up to you to dig deeper for more.
Another way the Beatles sucked was contributing to the idea that hairstyle is a matter of great cultural import.
Mockcarr, Lennon would end up with an FBI/CIA file and all that jazz, right? Someone was afraid of him. Only having been a little boy at the time, I cannot be sure but I suspect they were Straight America’s first taste of the hippie culture that Hrrundi so fears. Some of our slightly older Townspeople may be able to share the anxieties their parents and older relatives may have had over The Beatles. I doubt, for instance, that Straight America went from observing those loveable moptops to being confronted directly with Jefferson Airplane. Wouldn’t they have gotten their first taste of the increasingly revolutionary times through The Beatles?
In fact, almost all their “big statement” lyrics blow.
“Whisper words of wisdom/Let it be.”
“All you need is love.”
“Take a sad song/ and make it better.”
Puh-leeze. At least “Let It Be” is a pretty song if you don’t think about it too much.
bobby bittman sez:
“If you were a black dude from Georgia it was a little harder to pull off.”
You mean like James Brown from Augusta, GA? He was doing well around that time.
BigSteve, I agree with the concept of “blurting out” answers, but I think what the one answer per comment does foster is a chance for everyone to share in the discussion. You KNOW there are some Townspeople among us who’d be all too happy to immediately show how smart we are and blurt out 20 answers, hogging some spotlight from a less easily distracted Townsperson from catching up with the thread and chiming in with his or her one great suggestion. The other thing this courtesy does is make it possible to accumulate triple-digit amounts of comments. Don’t think there’s not some unstated competition among Main Stage authors to come up with the Most Commented Upon Ever post! I’m sorry I just shared that secret…
Great point, Hrrundi, about the lack of collaborations! This ties into their control-freak hangups.
BigSteve, we’ll have to agree to disagree on the value of their placing an importance on hairstyles. Rock hasn’t been the same since rock guys started getting buzz cuts. Totally defeats one of rock’s main objectives, if you ask me.
Mwall, lyrically, what “blows” about a song meant to cheer up a 7-year-old boy who was in the process of losing his father? How might you, RTH’s Poet Laureate, have done a better job of writing the lyrics inspired by the plight of young Julian Lennon?
To clarify, Mwall, I meant to say what “blows lyrically.” I would never challenge anyone for thinking a song blows. I’m really asking you to reconsider the lyrics in light of their audience/subject.
I took that to mean lyrics that are not particularly dangerous. Lennon was on Nixon’s list when he was in the US, not as a lovable moptop. In fact, not until Lennon pointedly told us all that he was no longer a lovable moptop. Certainly the Beatles expressed regret at not commenting on the Vietnam war, but had they done so they would have sucked for commenting on it when they were mere pop stars.
Fair enough, Mod. It’s a cute, loving and healing ditty right up there with Clapton’s “In Heaven.” But the others: no thanks.
They sucked for needing Dylan to give them pot.
George Harrison was “the philosophical one.”
Are you kidding me?
They were terrible fighters, getting back to the bands beating up other bands thread.
Remember that famous photo of Ali knocking out all four Beatles with one punch? I realize it was Ali and all, but you’re telling me the four of them couldn’t have gangpiled on him, or at least held him off by kicking at his shins like Antonio Inoki? I don’t know, I bet The Who would have lasted longer if they’d fought Ali. Even The Doors would have done better in a Doors vs. Ali handicap match, since you know Manzarek would have had to literally been beaten to death before he would have let Ali land a blow on Morrison.
Other than being terrible hand-to-hand combatants, though, The Beatles were perfect in all ways.
Good answer, mwall. I’m calling backstory alert/sincerity fallacy shenanigans on the Mod for his comment on Let It Be.
I hear you, mockcarr.
For the most part, I’d say The Beatles sucked at leaving behind worthwhile outtakes.
BigSteve, what are you calling on Mwall regarding his assumption that “Hey Jude” is supposed to be a “big statement,” long coda fallacy?
The White Album would have been better as an EP.
You may not realize it, but — ever since the dawn of RTH “Chess” as a listserv, many years ago, there’s been a Grouch Marx-like “secret word” contest underway. Well, it’s taken nearly seven years, but…
Congratulations, Alexmagic! You win the longest-standing competition in RTH history, and a giant, fruit-flavored No-Prize for having uttered the words “Antonio Inoki” in the hallowed Hall.
For the record, as of this moment, a new “secret word” contest has begun. Good luck, all!
HVB, Quizmaster
You have to remember that fight between Ali and the Beatles was unfair because none of their dozen or so fifth beatles were allowed in the ring.
The Beatles sucked at keeping track of Paul’s grandad.
And to paraphrase Groucho, I’ve had a wonderful time, but this wasn’t it.
No. As far as I can tell you’re the first one to mention long codas. Anyway I hate Hey Jude, no matter what size its statement is.
Oh yeah, long codas are another way the Beatles suck.
“The other thing this courtesy does is make it possible to accumulate triple-digit amounts of comments.”
I thought I was the only one with that hang-up.
I must say that I was very disappointed when a recent thread I started died at 95 comments, a mere 5 short of syndication. My disappointment was made all the more pronounced because I really didn’t think that thread would have legs in the first place. It was a bit like if my alma mater, Wheeling College, made it to the NCAA tournament and then lost in the final round.
When they try for a heavier sound, they always sound lite.
The Beatles were groundbreaking in unnecessarily long codas, weren’t they? Good one, BigSteve.
Most of the songs written for Ringo sucked.
Beatles suck at getting up when they fall on their backs.
Saturn, Thanks for pointing out the rules to me (seriously, I SHOULD have read the manual 1st), but I’ll let you know when my wad is blown,”SON”. Excuse me if I had some other things to take care of, & was away from the computer for awhile.
diskojoe, I DID say that I initially overstated the case about the effect the Brits had on US acts. I’m not saying everyone’s career was totally destroyed, but The Invasion definitely had a negative effect on U.S. acts for a couple of years. The acts themselves have been documented as saying this. J.B. was probably doing OK, but probably not as well as he did before & a few yrs after The Brit Inv. Though, I’m not exactly sure how many white kids were into James in the U.S., so I’ll leave it to you to look up his chart #’s (on the POP charts) during this era. Motown, according to Mr. Gordy, was initially set up to appeal to an across the board demographic (much the way Chuck Berry has said he specifically wrote for the largest possible audience). Remember, this country was only just coming out of what was essentially a system of apartheid, so despite the fact that they were foreigners with long hair, the English boys were still more acceptable to the majority in this country than anyone of a darker skin tone.
Another way they sucked is by not wearing the leather jacket & toilet seat combos for the whole of their career, rather than the twee suits & moptops. Would’ve been much more memorable a gimmick. Leggy Mountbatten there, really did leave them rather nutless.
Their album titles.
mockcarr, “suck at getting up when they fall on their backs”!!!BHHHHRRR-UMMMM-BUHHHHM-CHHHSSSHHH!!!
Can I steal that one for my set at The Dunes this weekend. Gold! Pure gold! It’ll kill!!!
They sucked for not reforming to play on Saturday Night Live when I used to actually watch it in the 70s.
Their failure to record a secret album of brilliant material between either Rubber Soul and Revolver or between Revolver and Sgt. Pepper, and then not release it until all of them were gone from this earth. Bastards.
They suck for not writing a song about capybaras.
Good one, Tvox. They also suck for not releasing a great live album. Although I like Hollywood Bowl, it has some issues.
Mockcarr complained:
They suck for not writing a song about capybaras.
J’accuse:
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
Hey, we’re not talking about why I suck, that thread would be a lot longer.
On “Mr. Moonlight” they sound like a (failed) wanna be lounge act.
hvb: “Most of the songs written for Ringo sucked”
I say: with the notable exception of ‘What Goes On’, which I have endless love for…
They suck for putting Dig It on an album, instead of leaving it on those Let It Be bootleg tapes.
I’d much rather hear Dig It than some of the other things that wound up on their records.
Crap, now I have to paraphrase s’more, as AndyR might say, the Beatles were only good at jamming if it was all planned out.
Badfinger.
bobby – Never Mind the Bollocks is the only thing by The Sex Pistols I ever cared about. I care about it a lot, but I don’t care about the rest at all, so Belsen Was A Gas has no affect on me one way or another. I discount their entire career after that one album. How Punk am I?
The Beatles suck because of The Butcher Cover and all it’s “states” and professional peelers and crap.
they suck for spawning, Breakfast with the Beatles
they suck for spawning countless shitty cover bands like 1964 as…THE BEATLES
they suck for Let it Be…NAKED
mwall; I already brought up ‘Mr. Moonlight’, which also features among other suckitatious elements, their worst released vocal performance. And it wasn’t even Ringo singing!
2000 man; OK! OK! Here, take my wallet, just don’t hurt me, you crazy, wild-eyed, spikey-haired punk person!
Telewacker; Ringo sings ‘What Goes On’? I always thought that was Lou.
Damn you, Bobby B.
I’m starting to run out of ways to hate on The Beatles. But I must say, it’s been refreshing.
How about this: except maybe on “Hard Day’s Night” or “Helter Skelter,” they never really deliver The Power and Glory of Rock.
2000man; I think it would have been cool if The Beatles had refused to release that album UNLESS it was ‘The Butcher Cover’. Also, it should’ve been titled, ‘Havin’ A Butcher’s’ & not the suckadacious, ‘Yesterday & Today’.
They told Charles Manson to go on a killing spree through their lyrics.
& then turned their Judas backs on him, leaving him to twist in the wind; the wind of ‘The Man’s’ “justice”, Jack! They’ll see. They’ll ALL see, when Helter Skelter comes down! Well, except for John & George, but the rest of ’em. LOOK OUT, JACK! COMIN’ DOWN FAST!!!
Beatle boots sucked. Especially walking to school in the snow.
2000 Man; How would you know? Were you not stomping through the snow in your ox-blood Doc Martins?
Their name sucks. “The Beatles” is a really lame band name.
Man, I wore Florsheim versions of beatle boots for a long time. Mostly so I didn’t have to buy dress socks, I think.
Yeah, to think, if they’d been on the ball they would have picked up on the psuedonym Macca used on checking into hotels. They could have been The Ramones!
The Beatles suck because their foreheads really weren’t all that surprising once we saw them.
while they were pretty good at staying broken up, they sucked at breaking up (or maybe you could argue that they set the gold standard for hte sloppy ugly rock breakup, and therefore, they were good at it…idunno…).
I’ve saved one of my best ones for last. My thermo-nuclear, hate-fueled salvo in this Last Man Standing:
The Beatles sucked because they were a bunch of fucking crybabies. Seriously — John wouldn’t/couldn’t shut up about whatever socio-political bee flew into his multi-trillionaire bonnet *this week*. Paul was a complete passive-aggressive asshole who secretly held just about everything he didn’t think of first in contempt — and the things he didn’t hate, he claimed to have thought of first. George wasn’t “the quiet one” — he was “the whiny one.” Western civilization not good enough for ya, George? Sheesh! And Ringo… well, Ringo left the ashram ’cause the food was too spicy.
Assholes! The Beatles sucked!
George spawned the whole “raga-as-teen-psychedlia” thing, which trivialized a musical culture that’s lasted thousands of years.
Has anybody mentioned that treacly song that Paul sung in French? Ugh.
The fact that the surviving member of the songwriting duo of Lennon/McCartney is, forty years later, pained by the order of their names in the small print of the credits.
mwall; you mean ‘Michelle’? But that’s the one where the backing vocals go, “tit,tit,tit,tit,tit,tit,tit,tit,tit”! Ya know, because it’s about a girl, & girls have breasts. Clever, non?
mwall; Sorry, that was ‘Girl’ I was thinking of. Still, that’s genius, right? SUCKS!!!
Hey I always liked Mr Moonlight. Seriously.
How about Slow Down for P&G of R.
Pace cdm, I think they suck more because they didn’t really tell Manson to kill. You know, they just weren’t capable. Probably overlaps with the glory of rock and no-balls comments.
Yeah, Bobby. I know the title of that song but didn’t want to say it because Paul says the name enough times in that song that I never want to hear it again. In college I knew some girls with that name and I always thought “You must be kidding.”
They refused to make Yoko a full member in ’68.
eh; Are you tryin’ to tell CHARLIE what he heard, JACK!!! They were talkin’ to HIM, maaaan, not YOU, brother! Remember, CHARLIE’S still got people out there, JACK! He’s got ’em on the streets & in the TREES!!! He’s got ’em on their FEET & on their KNEES, MAN!!! Jack, you just better remembARBARBARBARBARBARABAJANGELMAHRNING-G-G-G-G-G-L-O-R-IAAAAAYYYYYYWWWEEEEWWONGETFOOLONTHEHEEBEBEBEBEBEMOELARRYCHEESE!!!!+TAX!!!
mwall, I always thought Michelle was a fairly common name. Or did they pronounce it Mee-chelle?
Jeez, What the hell happened up there? Looks like somebody threw a wobbler!
Holy Thread!!!
bobbitt: Hey, it would be even weaker if they WERE telling Charlie to kill and then just denied it when the shit went down. Did they ever put Paul on the stand? NO. I rest my case: Charlie might be a patsy.
Towards the end there, the dominant players in the band definitely let their egos get in the way of bringing up the one songwriting talent who hadn’t lost his mojo — that being George.
First off, I love the Beatles! Okay… one way in which they suck is that they are credited for doing things that they did not do. For example, they broke up the traditional way the studios worked, with two or three sessions a day, ending in time for everyone to go home for dinner. But they worked late because they heard Sinatra did it. Or Geoff Emerick claiming he broke Abbey Roads’ rules to close mic things, when in fact a senior engineer at EMI was already known for his close micing techniques with Cliff Richard, Johnny Kidd and the Pirates, etc.
And for this short, short moment… I am the last man standing!
eh;Huh?… I dunno, maybe you’re right. Anyway, Charlie’s not here anymore. I think I exorcised him by ramming through the border up there. Everything got kinda fuzzy for a bit….JACK!!!(OH SHIT. HERE WE GO AGAIN…..) I gotta g-go now…..
Whenever they made movies the way *they* wanted to have them made, they totally sucked.
I love the beatles. so for me, they sucked at sucking.
They suck by virtue of having been so singular and so dominant that for many people of a certain age they are music, and after they broke up music existed for those people only in the past tense.
They sucked at wearing pendants. Seriously, the only rock pendant I remember any of them wearing was that weird looking thing you see Lennon sporting on a thong around ’69-’70. No puka shells, no rock crosses, no mardi gras beads, no love beads. Just that weird looking necklace of John’s which always gave me the creeps when I was a kid.
In fact, you know what? I’m going to go on record as saying that the Beatles jumped the shark when John started wearing that necklace. It was emblematic of a turn inwards, towards the “organic” and “natural” — which they weren’t good at being. Except when it came to not washing their hair. They were pretty “natural” about that, during the late “pendant years.”
HVB
They sucked at being “bigger than Jesus.”
They were unable to make a rock so big that they couldn’t lift it.
The Beatles sucked at rocking. There are only rare moments of them pumping out the full-on ROCK and as good as those are they suck compared to their strengths.
I’m with Big Steve’s analysis. They were so perfect as a rock band, that we now must live with the fact that the greatest rock band will always live in our past and never in our future. That’s how they suck.
They gave snooty, out-of-touch classical listeners a rock band to namecheck so they could pretend they were open-minded. “Me, I’m into everything from Bartok to The Beatles”.
A friend once told me her father started liking the Beatles when he met his heroes, The Sons of the Pioneers, in the 1960’s. Once they assured him the Fab Four had their “okay” in was fine for her to listen.
Didn’t The Beatles jam with Hendrix on a version of Day Tripper? Lots of:
“Got a good reason, ‘yeah hear what Jimi’s talking about’…”
“For taking the easy way out, ‘heh heh heh, look out'”
“Got a good reason, ‘move over Ringo and let Jimi take over’…”
Big Steve, Actually, they were pretty good at being bigger than God, at least in the context Lennon meant. Hey, if they were big enough to BE music for a whole generation, & have their every move so scrutinized & taken as ‘gospel’ by so many, then I’d say it was a pretty astute observation on Winston Legthigh’s part. Also, if you can get even more people to buy your albums just to burn them, all because of something uttered of the cuff, well, if not Godly, it’s at least superhuman power. And I bet plenty of those folks who burned up their original records went back after the storm had passed & bought them all over again.
I would agree w/you and chUckenfrank on the rest of it, though. They sucked in the same way that only Elvis, & maybe Sinatra sucked before them. They made it impossible for others to get around & move past their influence. They were the biggest rock & roll/pop group ever, probably bigger than,… uh, I better not say it. No, I wasn’t gonna say Bono!
Frankie, and then what? Did Jimi take a drum solo? Maybe HE was God.
I believe Lennon said specifically Jesus, not God. It matters.
And I was also thinking of the back-pedaling interview Lennon gave after the comment blew up, where he apologized/explained himself. There’s real fear and pleading in his voice. If the Beatles really were bigger than Jesus, he wouldn’t have had to back down. That’s what I was getting at anyway.
BigSteve, OK, fair enough. Once again, I have completely missed the point. Thanks for the clarification.
I still think what Lennon said initially was a pretty accurate observation, just one he shouldn’t have shared in front of the press. You can’t tell the truth about what REALLY matters to people (I don’t doubt that, for most teenagers at the time, The Beatles really WERE bigger than Jesus) in such a direct way, without expecting the requisite hypocritical backlash. I’m sure he WAS in fear; people were threatening his life. BURN THE WITCH!
Yeah, there was no way Lennon was about to take on the Holy Spirit.
This continues to be good stuff, peeps. Mad props, as well, to the Townsperson who cited the band’s weakness in celebrating The Power and Glory of Rock. I’m thinking the single version of “Revolution” may have been their shining moment in that area with “Back in the USSR” a distant second.
Helter Skelter’s pretty hard, too. Especially for a song about an amusement park slide. Or was it? Charlie didn’t think so, JACK!!!
The Beatles suck in that it took until The White Album to get more than 11 songs out of them per LP (US only)
The Beatles suck because their final message, “The love you take is equal to the love you make” isn’t as great a line as people pretend it is.
The Beatles suck because they drove Brian Wilson insane.
dr.j – You’re right! And Charles Manson was a well regarded C.P.A. before those evil wizards drew him into their aural web of insanity. Those Bastards!
dbuskirk, For that matter, neither were any of their previous “messages”, which all could have been pinched from your average Hallmark card. Those guys stopped living in the real world after the 1st hit of acid. Frikkin’ hippies, man.
All kidding aside, I’d like to say, seriously, as a comedian, I loved that band, too. All of it, no matter how goofy, or who played or didn’t play on whatever. I think chickenfrank would back me up on this (I’d hope), but we both felt stricken going to school the day after Lennon was shot, & couldn’t believe the obliviousness of some of our peers. Best. Band. Ever.
PINCE-NEZ:
“I’d like to say, seriously, as a comedian…”
should read:
“As a comic, in all seriousness…”
Sorry, I forgot my contacts & couldn’t really see the cue cards clearly.
So either take off those silly little glasses, hdbakshi, & give ’em to me, ‘cuz I need ’em more than you, or shut yer trap! And I mean that in all seriousness, as a comic. C’mon, I can’t see two feet in front of me! I’m dyin’ out here!
That was me who made the initial comment about the Beatles’ difficulties with (or, you know, principled avoidance of) the Power and Glory of Rock.
For me, again, “Hard Day’s Night’ is the closest the band came to a genuine fist-pumping moment. I see what you’re saying about “Revolution,” Mod, but for me, the wishi-washiness of the sentiment being expressed undercuts some of the power of the song.
The only “sucky” thing about The Beatles is that they let their management present them as too clean cut at first. Although I guess the way they successfully got away from that would cancel the initial “suck ” out…ok, I got nothin’
ok, maybe the Help Movie?
bobbybittman said:
“J.B. was probably doing OK, but probably not as well as he did before & a few yrs after The Brit Inv”
Sorry to be a bit late, but I have to answer this. Let’s see, “Papa’s Got A Brand New Bag” & “I Got You (I Feel Good)”, JB’s two most famous songs, songs that people instantly think of when they think of JB, both hit the Top 10 in 1965, right in the middle of the British Invasion. There was also his apperance in the TAMI Show in which he upstaged the Rolling Stones.
Ready to pounce (after hiding in the wings):
The fact that they took the effort to airbrush the ciggies from their hands for the cover of the “Real Love” single. It’s so obvious that they were posing for that shot with smokes in tow.
Even worse, when they put out those Capitol albums box sets, they used the same picture!
How many millions upon millions of the Beatles are out there? How many millions of those do NOT portray our guys with their cigarettes? Why, OH WHY did they insist on that ONE shot to adorn these covers? Is the shot that special? Nope. Could they have used a different one? Easily.
I’m perhaps too bothered by this practice, but revisionist history does not bode well on the guys. They were smokers. If they don’t want to be seen with a cigarette, then just use a different picture.
TB
The offending pic in all its glory:
http://www.fab4collectibles.com/RealLoveSLEEVE.JPG
Yeah. Ringo was just making a peace sign…
TB
Okay…I should have researched this, but I’m going to gives the guys a pass on this. It seems this is one of those dumb record company things. Maybe they sucked in all the ways described in the thousands of other posts stated above, but they are off the hook with erasing the cigarettes.
http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=9fa355d2-e0fe-46b4-9666-1fcfef719233
TB
Diskojoe, Fair enough on J.B.’s chartings, but as far as the T.A.M.I. show things goes; did I ever claim that The British Invasion guys made Soul/R&B performers worse performers? I don’t believe I did. What exactly is this disagreement about? All I said is that the English thing eclipsed everything else for awhile as the main product being pushed by The Industry. Were the artists I saw in the documentary who said the whole B.I. thing took a toll on their careers just lying? How many Purify Brothers wigs, lunchboxes, bedsheets do you ever recall seeing? How many people in general would even know who I’m talking about. Not everyone in R&B/Soul is James Brown. That’s why he’s called The Godfather. Or was.