"And I suppose the Beatles wern`t , what with movies , dolls , and tons & tons of merchendise aimed at teenage girls , seriously get off your high horse."
We were clearly talking about their MUSIC. The fact that you have to keep bringing up total irrelevancies doesn't help your already failed arguments.
The movies and merchandise are just one more clear proof that the Beatles were overwhelmingly superior to and more popular than the Stones.
The public WANTED Beatles movies and merchandise. All of their movies were tremendously popular, while virtually nobody was interested in a Stones movie. Beatles merchandise over the years has out-sold Stones merchandise by hundreds to one---yet more proof of Beatles dominance.
And at least the Beatles appealed to a lot of teenage girls!
Talk about cheesy merchandise--years ago you could buy men's underwear with the Stones' trademark bright red tongue and lips imprinted on the crotch---the UBER G*Y Stones!
"If you bother to listen to the 'Some Girls' album which you clearly have not , or at least not for a while you`ll know that 'Miss You' is the only disco song on there , myself I just see it as an extention of the soul & funk that was ALREADY an influence in their music. As for the album itself it`s generally considered one of their best albums since Exile On Main Street and has some of their most aggressive rock songs on it as well as stuff like Shattered & Beast Of Burden which are considered among 2 of their best songs they ever wrote."
More clear proof that you don't have a clue what you're talking about. I bought the album on the original vinyl in 1978, when it was first released. I never said that all the songs were disco, I also clearly mentioned CRAP-POP songs.
"Shattered" and "Beast of Burden" were sleazy pop songs, and a clear betrayal of their roots. Gee, I thought you Stones fanboys liked the Stones so much because of their alleged "dark side". You call those songs "dark"?! Anybody who's not a fanboy calls them what they are---third-rate lightweight pop songs aimed at the mass market---and pathetic compared to their earlier music.
"Well i`m not a Stones fanboy they`re just one of many bands I like. But to claim the Stones are only about money & The Beatles were only in it for music is laughable.Especially with the 'New' Beatles album currently in the shops.And then there was the Lennon graverobbing for that other compilation that came out a while ago which were never even supposed to be Beatles songs in the first place.Your arguement is starting to look a bit shaky there."
I never said the Beatles were in it strictly for the music, so your argument has been completely shaken to pieces.
I said that the Stones were two dollar whores who sold out with disco and pop-crap like what they released on "Some Girls". The fact that you think it's one of their best albums, is a clear indicator of your "taste" in music.
Bottom line---the Stones sold out like the two dollar whores they are---the Beatles never sold out.
"Maybe if Yoko Ono didn`t exist you`d have a point."
Maybe if Yoko Ono had been a member of the Beatles, which she was not, YOU would have a point. Which you clearly don't. Not to mention that you clearly don't have a credible argument, or you wouldn't have to make such an irrelevant and nonsensical statement.
Paul, George and Ringo couldn't stand the woman, and took issue with John bringing her to practice and recording sessions.
__________________
"Paranoid is just like an anchor. It really secures everything about the metal movement in one record. It's all there: the riffs, the vocal performance of Ozzy, the song titles, what the lyrics are about. It's just a classic defining moment."
--Rob Halford of Judas Priest
|
Linear Mode
