Sex Pistols vs. Ramones (punk, The Ramones, tunes, tracks, quote)

shandapanda · 06-12-2005, 11:28 AM

i like them both but the sex pistols make me feel bad*ss..and i like feeling bad*ss!!

partisan · 06-12-2005, 02:57 PM

Sex pistols all the way! At the time the ramones did **** all for the punk scene compared to the pistols. If it weren't for them the ramones would be virtually obselete.

Trauma · 06-12-2005, 03:49 PM

^
I disagree with that, but to an extent.
What Big3 said was true, Sex Pistols were more inclined to image than to making music, but this poll isn't about what band's music is better.
I mean Sid couldn't play bass worth ****.
I dig the Sex Pistols more because even though The Ramones had the whole "gang" thing going on, Johnny and Sid frickin' lived through the punk perspective.
Yes, The Ramones may have pissed in soda and gave it to the Pistols.
But, just look at a picture with Sid on stage with cuts on his chest spelling "God Save the Queen" while smoking a cigarette.
Mind you, this was during a huge concert, and sometimes he didn't even play the bass, due to the fact that the amp was turned too low for anyone to hear..
Most Musical Talent: Ramones
Most Musical Success: Both
Most "Punk": Sex Pistols
I voted Sex Pistols because even though they're tied when I list things each band had going on....
It's better to go out in a huge flash than to fade away.

**boo boo** · 09-26-2005, 06:53 AM

The Ramones were better as a band, but then again instrumental talent has never been a big deal in punk, i prefer the Sex Pistols by a fair margin, though i love The Ramones too, in terms of greatness its really close, i can't really choose but i might give The Ramones a slight edge.

ThePinkNightmare · 09-26-2005, 02:29 PM

yeah, sex pistols cared more about image. but thats cos one of the biggest things about punk in the 1970's was their image! the whole ripped clothing/safety pins/tartan and leather thing was what made punks, punks. it showed a rebellious 'we dont give a **** what you think' attitude which is what punk was all about. it played a major part in the punk movement cos it was easily emulated by punk fans. so the fact that sex pistols were obsessed with image actually makes them extremely 'punk'.

malcolm mclaren was NOT a rich man, he got rich off the sex pistols. he saw how much money could be made from the punk movement when he was in america and signed the sex pistols, THATS what made him rich, then they found out and kicked his ass to the curb! and who cares if sid couldnt play? they only signed him for his image cos it was THE epitome of punk and thats what was important.

before anyone tries to argue...i studied punk's rise to 'power' for three months as part of my media course and i got the highest mark in the centre for my knowledge so im sorry but im most probably right (sorry just a bit of bragging there!!!)

anyway, in my opinion i prefer sex pistols, although i do quite like the ramones

**sleepy jack** · 09-26-2005, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePinkNightmare

yeah, sex pistols cared more about image. but thats cos one of the biggest things about punk in the 1970's was their image! the whole ripped clothing/safety pins/tartan and leather thing was what made punks, punks. it showed a rebellious 'we dont give a **** what you think' attitude which is what punk was all about. it played a major part in the punk movement cos it was easily emulated by punk fans. so the fact that sex pistols were obsessed with image actually makes them extremely 'punk'.

malcolm mclaren was NOT a rich man, he got rich off the sex pistols. he saw how much money could be made from the punk movement when he was in america and signed the sex pistols, THATS what made him rich, then they found out and kicked his ass to the curb! and who cares if sid couldnt play? they only signed him for his image cos it was THE epitome of punk and thats what was important.

before anyone tries to argue...i studied punk's rise to 'power' for three months as part of my media course and i got the highest mark in the centre for my knowledge so im sorry but im most probably right (sorry just a bit of bragging there!!!)

anyway, in my opinion i prefer sex pistols, although i do quite like the ramones

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

p.s. jesus says your a faggot.

HAHAHHAHA YA DONT KNOW SHIT HOMESLICE

ThePinkNightmare · 09-27-2005, 11:34 AM

oh dont i? well what exactly am i so wrong about? twat.

Josephine · 09-27-2005, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePinkNightmare

before anyone tries to argue...i studied punk's rise to 'power' for three months as part of my media course and i got the highest mark in the centre for my knowledge so im sorry but im most probably right (sorry just a bit of bragging there!!!)

That's so anti-punk, baby!

ThePinkNightmare · 09-27-2005, 11:52 AM

ah hush! i dont give a **** how punk it is or isnt, i had to do the damn thing, might as well make it interesting!

**Urban Hatemonger** · 09-27-2005, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePinkNightmare

yeah, sex pistols cared more about image. but thats cos one of the biggest things about punk in the 1970's was their image! the whole ripped clothing/safety pins/tartan and leather thing was what made punks, punks. it showed a rebellious 'we dont give a **** what you think' attitude which is what punk was all about. it played a major part in the punk movement cos it was easily emulated by punk fans. so the fact that sex pistols were obsessed with image actually makes them extremely 'punk'.

Just because you have an image doesn`t mean it`s the most important thing. There was no 'punk image' when the Pistols started because there wasn`t punk.Yes the look was a statement , but it was to compliment the music, not overshadow it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePinkNightmare

malcolm mclaren was NOT a rich man, he got rich off the sex pistols. he saw how much money could be made from the punk movement when he was in america and signed the sex pistols, THATS what made him rich, then they found out and kicked his ass to the curb! and who cares if sid couldnt play? they only signed him for his image cos it was THE epitome of punk and thats what was important.

What american punk movement? When McLaren was in America The Velvet Underground & MC5 had long since spilt up , the Stooges were on their last legs & If you mean The New York Dolls then McLaren managed them anyway so if he did see "how much money could be made from the punk movement when he was in america" as he was managing the biggest band in that 'movement' at the time then wouldn`t he be rich from it? But you`ve already said he wasn`t rich so that just shows you`re talking crap.
Also the Sex Pistols did not kick him to the kerb , he was their manager right until the end in 1979.It wasn`t until 1986 that they took him to court over royalties.And Sid joined because he was John Lydons best friend & the rest of the band hated Matlock so much.McLaren said yes because he looked good but the Pistols never listened to McLaren anyway

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePinkNightmare

before anyone tries to argue...i studied punk's rise to 'power' for three months as part of my media course and i got the highest mark in the centre for my knowledge so im sorry but im most probably right

3 Months?

Try 15 years

View Poll Results: Sex Pistols vs. Ramones
Sex Pistols	53	39.55%
Ramones	81	60.45%
Voters: 134. You may not vote on this poll

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

06-12-2005, 11:28 AM
shandapanda Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: bababbabababaaa Posts: 356	i like them both but the sex pistols make me feel badss..and i like feeling badss!! __________________ The Law of Awesome states: Those who are more awesome will cast down those less awesome than themselves, thus climbing the Hierarchy of Awesome and maintaining a balance in the world of Awesome Me poo you

06-12-2005, 02:57 PM
partisan Music Addict Join Date: May 2005 Location: cambridgeshire, england Posts: 152	Sex pistols all the way! At the time the ramones did **** all for the punk scene compared to the pistols. If it weren't for them the ramones would be virtually obselete.

09-26-2005, 06:53 AM
boo boo Dr. Prunk Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Where the buffalo roam. Posts: 7,000	The Ramones were better as a band, but then again instrumental talent has never been a big deal in punk, i prefer the Sex Pistols by a fair margin, though i love The Ramones too, in terms of greatness its really close, i can't really choose but i might give The Ramones a slight edge. __________________ http://www.progarchives.com/

09-26-2005, 02:29 PM
ThePinkNightmare Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: in the middle of nowhere Posts: 51	yeah, sex pistols cared more about image. but thats cos one of the biggest things about punk in the 1970's was their image! the whole ripped clothing/safety pins/tartan and leather thing was what made punks, punks. it showed a rebellious 'we dont give a **** what you think' attitude which is what punk was all about. it played a major part in the punk movement cos it was easily emulated by punk fans. so the fact that sex pistols were obsessed with image actually makes them extremely 'punk'. malcolm mclaren was NOT a rich man, he got rich off the sex pistols. he saw how much money could be made from the punk movement when he was in america and signed the sex pistols, THATS what made him rich, then they found out and kicked his ass to the curb! and who cares if sid couldnt play? they only signed him for his image cos it was THE epitome of punk and thats what was important. before anyone tries to argue...i studied punk's rise to 'power' for three months as part of my media course and i got the highest mark in the centre for my knowledge so im sorry but im most probably right (sorry just a bit of bragging there!!!) anyway, in my opinion i prefer sex pistols, although i do quite like the ramones __________________ Dream as if you'll live forever Live as though you'll die today - James Dean

09-27-2005, 11:34 AM
ThePinkNightmare Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: in the middle of nowhere Posts: 51	oh dont i? well what exactly am i so wrong about? twat. __________________ Dream as if you'll live forever Live as though you'll die today - James Dean

09-27-2005, 11:52 AM
ThePinkNightmare Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: in the middle of nowhere Posts: 51	ah hush! i dont give a **** how punk it is or isnt, i had to do the damn thing, might as well make it interesting! __________________ Dream as if you'll live forever Live as though you'll die today - James Dean