Shocking I know but....

Options
12467

Replies

  • FerretBuellerr
    FerretBuellerr Posts: 468 Member
    Options
    I cant stand Pink Flyod, Greatful Dead and Phish. that has to be the music they play in Hell.

    WHAT? How can anyone not stand Pink Flyod?! :sad: What do you listen to then?

    just about everything else(rock, rap, jazz, pop,top 40, etc....). except for a lot of country...i like very little of it.

    Interesting. I'm in the exact same boat as you - except I like the bands you can't stand :laugh:

    At first I thought you were going to say you were a country fanatic, and then I would have done this :huh: (No offense country fans - it's just not my thing)
  • dbmata
    dbmata Posts: 12,950 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.
  • Hodar
    Hodar Posts: 338 Member
    Options
    Simple question. Beatles came out in the early 60's and faded in the early 70's. That was about 50 years ago. Paul McCartner is STILL touring to sold-out concerts.

    Can you name one band that will be even recognizeable in 5, maybe 10 years?

    I had this discussion with my younger brother 5 years ago - he swore "Live" and "Toad the Wet Sprocket" would survive the test of time. When was the last time you heard them on the radio?

    The Beatles and Rolling Stones created what passes for Rock n' Roll today. Today, we have one-hit wonders who's chief talent seems to be the use of a drum machine, auto-synth vocals, and chosing scantily clad women to dance and perform suggestively to their music.

    Love them; hate them ... whatever ... you have to respect them for what they accomplished.
  • rml_16
    rml_16 Posts: 16,414 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.
  • sixout
    sixout Posts: 3,128 Member
    Options
    Simple question. Beatles came out in the early 60's and faded in the early 70's. That was about 50 years ago. Paul McCartner is STILL touring to sold-out concerts.

    Can you name one band that will be even recognizeable in 5, maybe 10 years?

    I had this discussion with my younger brother 5 years ago - he swore "Live" and "Toad the Wet Sprocket" would survive the test of time. When was the last time you heard them on the radio?

    The Beatles and Rolling Stones created what passes for Rock n' Roll today. Today, we have one-hit wonders who's chief talent seems to be the use of a drum machine, auto-synth vocals, and chosing scantily clad women to dance and perform suggestively to their music.

    Love them; hate them ... whatever ... you have to respect them for what they accomplished.

    I actually saw Live in concert a few weeks ago.
  • Laces_0ut
    Laces_0ut Posts: 3,750 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.

    wait are you trying to say Potter is equal or better than Lord of the Rings? i really, really hope not.

    Potter fans really want it to be equated with the better works of fiction. thats why they try to shoehorn theories into it.

    they should just accept it for what it is...its fantastic young adult, kids, juvenile...whatever fiction and thats it. nothing wrong with that.
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,229 Member
    Options
    Simple question. Beatles came out in the early 60's and faded in the early 70's. That was about 50 years ago. Paul McCartner is STILL touring to sold-out concerts.

    Can you name one band that will be even recognizeable in 5, maybe 10 years?

    I had this discussion with my younger brother 5 years ago - he swore "Live" and "Toad the Wet Sprocket" would survive the test of time. When was the last time you heard them on the radio?

    The Beatles and Rolling Stones created what passes for Rock n' Roll today. Today, we have one-hit wonders who's chief talent seems to be the use of a drum machine, auto-synth vocals, and chosing scantily clad women to dance and perform suggestively to their music.

    Love them; hate them ... whatever ... you have to respect them for what they accomplished.

    "Avenged Sevenfold" and "Muse" will still be relevant in decades to come... but these bands have already been around for years so they might not count.

    "Live" and "Toad the Wet Sprocket" weren't even relevant 5 years ago. Your brother seems a bit out of touch.
  • _crafty_
    _crafty_ Posts: 1,682 Member
    Options
    This thread is full of people that offer nothing to society....



    The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Star Wars and LOTR should have never been mentioned in a negative light, if god existed, SHE would strike you down....

    there, fixed it for ya
  • Laces_0ut
    Laces_0ut Posts: 3,750 Member
    Options
    Simple question. Beatles came out in the early 60's and faded in the early 70's. That was about 50 years ago. Paul McCartner is STILL touring to sold-out concerts.

    Can you name one band that will be even recognizeable in 5, maybe 10 years?

    I had this discussion with my younger brother 5 years ago - he swore "Live" and "Toad the Wet Sprocket" would survive the test of time. When was the last time you heard them on the radio?

    The Beatles and Rolling Stones created what passes for Rock n' Roll today. Today, we have one-hit wonders who's chief talent seems to be the use of a drum machine, auto-synth vocals, and chosing scantily clad women to dance and perform suggestively to their music.

    Love them; hate them ... whatever ... you have to respect them for what they accomplished.

    im going to guess Justin Timberlake will be going strong for decades.
  • beachlover317
    beachlover317 Posts: 2,848 Member
    Options
    I can not tell how old you are. You obviously are not old enough to appreciate classic rock, which is a real shame. Pink Floyd is an acquired taste, but the Beatles? I am stunned that you can not find one song that you can love.

    However, maybe you are a country and bluegrass lover. As they are at odds with classic rock, your comment makes perfect sense.

    ETA: Bohemian Rhapsody? Really? Again, I am stunned. Freddy Mercury had an amazing voice.
  • landodewd
    landodewd Posts: 43 Member
    Options
    Harry Potter
    Lord of the Rings
    Star Wars

    My heart breaks for you.
    You must not know joy :[

    Agreed! I love my science fiction and fantasy! Great escape from my stressful life.
  • LauraMacNCheese
    LauraMacNCheese Posts: 7,198 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.

    wait are you trying to say Potter is equal or better than Lord of the Rings? i really, really hope not.

    Potter fans really want it to be equated with the better works of fiction. thats why they try to shoehorn theories into it.

    they should just accept it for what it is...its fantastic young adult, kids, juvenile...whatever fiction and thats it. nothing wrong with that.

    Harry Potter is equal to or better than LOTR?!?! Into what alternate reality have I stumbled & how do I escape?
  • chris42376
    chris42376 Posts: 83 Member
    Options
    Harry Potter
    Lord of the Rings
    Star Wars

    My heart breaks for you.
    You must not know joy :[

    This x's 100
  • escloflowneCHANGED
    escloflowneCHANGED Posts: 3,038 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.

    wait are you trying to say Potter is equal or better than Lord of the Rings? i really, really hope not.

    Potter fans really want it to be equated with the better works of fiction. thats why they try to shoehorn theories into it.

    they should just accept it for what it is...its fantastic young adult, kids, juvenile...whatever fiction and thats it. nothing wrong with that.

    Harry Potter is equal to or better than LOTR?!?! Into what alternate reality have I stumbled & how do I escape?

    This whole thread makes me want to rage quit my life....
  • rammsteinsoldier
    rammsteinsoldier Posts: 1,556 Member
    Options
    I have never seen any of the godfather movies. I don't worry that I am missing anything really.
  • NinjadURbacon
    NinjadURbacon Posts: 395 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.

    wait are you trying to say Potter is equal or better than Lord of the Rings? i really, really hope not.

    Potter fans really want it to be equated with the better works of fiction. thats why they try to shoehorn theories into it.

    they should just accept it for what it is...its fantastic young adult, kids, juvenile...whatever fiction and thats it. nothing wrong with that.

    its a "young adult" book series that was written so that kids could "grow up" with the characters each year. That is why the book get more "adult" as you get to the end of the series. Word usage and type of words used get more adult as the series goes on. Which in its aspect alone is unique and neat. But it was in fact written for a younger crowd when it started and "matured" with the characters as it went along.
  • NinjadURbacon
    NinjadURbacon Posts: 395 Member
    Options
    So the Author said it wasn't about that.... yet you think it is.... wat

    A lot of people who grew up with it try to ascribe a hidden deeper meaning to it. What it was is fifty shades of grey, for kids, without the dirtiness.

    It is no Lord of the Rings.

    I was 22 when the first book was published and didn't read them until two years ago.

    I won't even address the other comment. It's ridiculous on its face.

    haha nice passive aggressive jab at me. :laugh: :laugh:
  • CorvusCorax77
    CorvusCorax77 Posts: 2,536 Member
    Options
    Potter is a bunch of kids books based in fantasy.

    If you can describe them that way, you can't possibly have read them.

    The entire story is an analogy of WWII. I know Rowling claims she wasn't thinking of Hitler when she created Voldemort, but if you think about it, a lot of the characters take on the roles of the Allied and Axis countries and the whole "pure race" stuff even though Voldemort himself was half muggle (Hitler had Jewish ancestry) tells me she's full of it on that.

    It's a great story. The first two books are a little on the young side for reading, but after that it's pretty dark and deep.

    Maybe you only watched the movies, though. They aren't as detailed and leave a lot of important things out.


    right because it can not be the simple good vs evil, so what hero was in WWII that Harry Potter could have been.

    That is just a little stretch of the imagination. I have read all the books.
    He wasn't a specific person. He was England. As was Dumbledore. It's been a while since my last read, but I had a bunch of them figured out. Draco is Italy. That potions teacher (can't remember his name) who comes in book 6 is the US.

    And of course it COULD be a simple good vs. evil. But it isn't.

    LMFAO. you are killing me.

    it is good vs evil. HOW THE **** is Draco italy? HOW THE HELL IS HARRY POTTER ENGLAND? This is the funniest thing i have heard all day.
    I'm glad my knowledge of history and ability to read past the surface of a novel is so amusing to you. :flowerforyou:

    And since WWII pretty much boils down to good vs. evil, you really aren't negating my point at all.

    hehehehe. I didn't realize it was good verses evil. I mean, you'd think the good guys wouldn't reimprision pink triangle victims of the concentration camps, nor would they have sit on their haunches until Germany started invading other countries.
  • UsedToBeHusky
    UsedToBeHusky Posts: 15,229 Member
    Options
    wait are you trying to say Potter is equal or better than Lord of the Rings? i really, really hope not.

    Potter fans really want it to be equated with the better works of fiction. thats why they try to shoehorn theories into it.

    they should just accept it for what it is...its fantastic young adult, kids, juvenile...whatever fiction and thats it. nothing wrong with that.

    I'm pretty sure people were saying the same thing about LOTR back in the 1930's. LOTR classified as young adult fantasy fiction. Personally, I don't think the two are comparable. But no one really gave a flying crap about LOTR until Peter Jackson came along. Both have carved out their place in the history of literature and pop culture.
  • CorvusCorax77
    CorvusCorax77 Posts: 2,536 Member
    Options
    WWII does not boil down to Good vs. Evil. It boiled down to a lot of people with different ideals of what the world should be. Saying the opposite side from that that you're on is evil is somewhat close minded.

    You're right. It's just a difference of opinion to torture, starve and gas 12 million people simply for being the wrong religion, having the wrong political leanings or having the wrong sexual orientation.

    Just a difference of ideals about the world there. How close-minded of me to call it evil.

    I think we all agree that was evil. I think we aren't sure about who was good.

Categories