| lifetimefanofqueen 13.07.2011 06:43 |
trying to get into them, their songs are ok, god save the queen is pretty cool though the vocalist dude seems to be pissed constantly and makes ozzy osbourne look like a drug virgin and make me feel sane anyway, cool band, they got the looks and everything, got the sound and the alcohol definatly what dose everyone think of 'em then? i think their alright, early days yet though |
| Mr.Jingles 13.07.2011 11:25 |
Excessively overated IMO. The Pistols got a load spotlight thanks to the controversy they created. That being said, I can somehow appreciate punk for it's simplicity, but it's definitely the one rock genre that requires the least amount of talent. The Clash without a doubt was the one band of the scene that stood out the most. |
| catqueen 13.07.2011 13:07 |
hehe, i wish the convo between Freddie and Sid Vicious had been recorded :D |
| lifetimefanofqueen 13.07.2011 14:47 |
catqueen wrote: hehe, i wish the convo between Freddie and Sid Vicious had been recorded :D =========== same! from what ive heard of it they properly bitched it out! xD wanna come back in time with me and see it? xD LOL |
| catqueen 13.07.2011 16:03 |
lifetimefanofqueen wrote: catqueen wrote: hehe, i wish the convo between Freddie and Sid Vicious had been recorded :D =========== same! from what ive heard of it they properly bitched it out! xD wanna come back in time with me and see it? xD LOL sure, where's ur time machine? :D |
| Thistle 13.07.2011 16:47 |
I have quite an eclectic taste in music, and appreciate a broad range of genres. Punk, and the Sex Pistols in particular, have no place in it! Cannot stand them. |
| lifetimefanofqueen 13.07.2011 17:07 |
catqueen wrote: lifetimefanofqueen wrote: catqueen wrote: hehe, i wish the convo between Freddie and Sid Vicious had been recorded :D =========== same! from what ive heard of it they properly bitched it out! xD wanna come back in time with me and see it? xD LOL sure, where's ur time machine? :D ===================== its in my bedroom disguised as an old blue police phone box, i call it "the tardis" comes in very handy in them bored afternoons, last sunday i met queen victoria :) very nice lady indeed, anyway, remember your camera then! we'll make history! queen vs the sex pistols! that'll be a hit on youtube for sure! |
| brENsKi 13.07.2011 17:24 |
Thistleboy 1980 wrote: I have quite an eclectic taste in music, and appreciate a broad range of genres. Punk, and the Sex Pistols in particular, have no place in it! Cannot stand them. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ would have to disagree. 1. punk took music back to it's rock n roll basics.....if you listen to the sex pistols stuff - esp NMTB.....jones/cook played some pretty good/catchy rock n roll ...and underneath the snarls and anger there's some good tunes 2. lyrically, some of NMTB is excellent 3. the punk movement that they helped to kick-start, gave the established rock bands the shakeup they needed.....it's not a co-incidence that, the who, queen, mcartney, lez zep, and floyd were all a little jaded...then as punk crash-landed those bands produced something totally different and almost expreiemental for themselves. at the very least it made those bands start to approach music differently queen - news of the world wings - london town the who - who are you? (actually had two tracks called "new song" and "music must change" led zep - in thru the out door pink floyd - the wall in conclusion, what punk did for music was huge......it changed the face of a corporate and acceptable dull business into somehting vibrant, fresh and open to change...i'm sure those five bands are only a small example of the "dinosaurs" whose very next albums following punk's birth were real departures from their usual sound. |
| JoxerTheDeityPirate 13.07.2011 17:34 |
lifetimefanofqueen wrote: trying to get into them, their songs are ok, god save the queen is pretty cool though the vocalist dude seems to be pissed constantly and makes ozzy osbourne look like a drug virgin and make me feel sane anyway, cool band, they got the looks and everything, got the sound and the alcohol definatly what dose everyone think of 'em then? i think their alright, early days yet though reply: the "look" you can put down solely to Malcolm Mclaren and Viviene Westward as its their designs without punk and the pistols you would not have the clash or any other punk/new wave band to emerge from the scene,it was the best thing to happen to british music in the 70's and if you want proof watch Top of the Pops 76 on BBC4 on thursdays... |
| Thistle 13.07.2011 19:14 |
brENsKi wrote: Thistleboy 1980 wrote: I have quite an eclectic taste in music, and appreciate a broad range of genres. Punk, and the Sex Pistols in particular, have no place in it! Cannot stand them. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ would have to disagree. 1. punk took music back to it's rock n roll basics.....if you listen to the sex pistols stuff - esp NMTB.....jones/cook played some pretty good/catchy rock n roll ...and underneath the snarls and anger there's some good tunes 2. lyrically, some of NMTB is excellent 3. the punk movement that they helped to kick-start, gave the established rock bands the shakeup they needed.....it's not a co-incidence that, the who, queen, mcartney, lez zep, and floyd were all a little jaded...then as punk crash-landed those bands produced something totally different and almost expreiemental for themselves. at the very least it made those bands start to approach music differently queen - news of the world wings - london town the who - who are you? (actually had two tracks called "new song" and "music must change" led zep - in thru the out door pink floyd - the wall in conclusion, what punk did for music was huge......it changed the face of a corporate and acceptable dull business into somehting vibrant, fresh and open to change...i'm sure those five bands are only a small example of the "dinosaurs" whose very next albums following punk's birth were real departures from their usual sound. ============================================================================================= I think you might have got the wrong end of the stick mate - I am in no way questioning their influence and am not saying that they don't fit in as far as music history is concerned, I am just saying that they don't fit in with my taste in music. Of course they have their place! I just don't like them :) |
| pittrek 14.07.2011 01:55 |
I loved punk when I was about 15, and I started to love it again cca 5 years ago (I'm 30). The Pistols were an important part of the music history, they have basically shown the world that every angry junkie can make music loved by millions and they really started the "punk revolution". Without Sex Pistols, the world would never have bands like The Clash, or the Buzzcocks, or even U2. Their first album, and their ONLY PROPER album - Never Mind The Bollocks is a great piece of musical work. However to be honest, their later work simply sucks. Holiday In The Sun - 10/10 Liar - 9/10 No Feelings - 10/10 God Save The Queen - 10/10 Problems - 5/10 Seventeen - 5/10 Anarchy In The UK - 9/10 Bodies - 10/10 Pretty Vacant - 10/10 New York - 5/10 EMI - 5/10 together 8/10 Paul Cook is an excellent drummer, Steve Jones is an excellent guitar player, a good singer and both of them are great songwriters. However I can't stand Sid Vicious and Johnny Rotten - probably the 2 biggest assholes in showbusiness |
| jpf 14.07.2011 02:35 |
Shitty "band". They were nothing more than a fashion show (a bad one at that). |
| jpf 14.07.2011 02:43 |
pittrek wrote: I loved punk when I was about 15, and I started to love it again cca 5 years ago (I'm 30). The Pistols were an important part of the music history, they have basically shown the world that every angry junkie can make music loved by millions and they really started the "punk revolution". Without Sex Pistols, the world would never have bands like The Clash, or the Buzzcocks, or even U2. Their first album, and their ONLY PROPER album - Never Mind The Bollocks is a great piece of musical work. However to be honest, their later work simply sucks. Holiday In The Sun - 10/10 Liar - 9/10 No Feelings - 10/10 God Save The Queen - 10/10 Problems - 5/10 Seventeen - 5/10 Anarchy In The UK - 9/10 Bodies - 10/10 Pretty Vacant - 10/10 New York - 5/10 EMI - 5/10 together 8/10 Paul Cook is an excellent drummer, Steve Jones is an excellent guitar player, a good singer and both of them are great songwriters. However I can't stand Sid Vicious and Johnny Rotten - probably the 2 biggest assholes in showbusiness ----- Ramones' first lp was released before the SP's first lp. Ramones were punk. They did it before SP and they did it better. End of story. |
| pittrek 14.07.2011 02:46 |
Ramones were American. Sex Pistols were (are) British. I'm wearing a Ramones t-shirt today btw :-) |
| GratefulFan 14.07.2011 08:08 |
jpf wrote: Shitty "band". They were nothing more than a fashion show (a bad one at that). ============================== Wow. Steely. No...wait. I mean brassy. But that's not quite right either. Irony! YES that's it. It's irony. |
| GoRog! 14.07.2011 09:40 |
pink floyd issued animals 1977 , not the wall ( that was 1979 ) sex pistols were a great one-off adventure , funny , silly , they shouldve toured with queen :)) |
| brENsKi 14.07.2011 10:08 |
my point was that those bands "next recorded work" after the arrival of punk. Animals was written in 75/early 76 and recorded and completed BEFORE december 76. Floyd's next "creation" after punk's arrival was "the wall"....so my point stands. it's worth noting that animals is a real hack and slash criticism of society (much like punk) so even tho' it didn't fit the argument in relation to chronology, you could argu that the "floyd rich kids" were in touch with the vibe of the time |
| mooghead 16.07.2011 12:40 |
Sex Pistols are the perfect example of being in the right place at the right time. The luckiest mofo's in the history of music. |