Anyone think The Beatles are overrated?

[PermaBanned]

Not overrated at all. I don't like all of their songs, but I like some and they're great. I can see why they are regarded as the best.

What I do hate seeing is 15 year olds wearing their Beatles t-shirts when in reality they've probably heard one song and can't name any of their albums.

Don't underestimate somebody's knowledge and appreciation of the Beatles based on age, not all teenagers listen to what they're told to

 

[easyrider]

They whipped up hysteria, got a massive fan base and did practically what JB is doing now with all these girls dribbling over him. Its called taking advantage of the opportunities that have been presented to you and knowing how to capitalise on them. Lets face it, they weren't the best band in the world, they were just amazing businessmen with a good team and they knew fully well how to gain massive influence in the sector.

Lol

The Beatles were the worst businessman at the time and Epstein made massive mistakes.

They didn't have a Team Behind them either.

More nonsense....

 

[AberystwythLAD]

Of course they were.
The Beatles were influenced by Buddy Holly & Chuck Berry but it was the whole package of 4 characters, great harmonies and acting like Oasis before Oasis.
Even at 53 and around at the time, I didn't see the influence but my Dad who was a working musician saw it first hand and what it did to the scene.
It's a case of 'You had to be there' and I wasn't and neither were any of you.

Well, thats a fair point I'm willing to accept but its annoying when people say 'how can you not like The Beatles' and I tell them and they disregard it. Its nothing more than the same type of attitude you get from Intel/AMD, Apple/Microsoft fanboys who cannot accept your opinion.

I don't like them purely as their music does not appeal to me in the slightest. It sounds dreadful mostly and its not to my liking. I love songs like Let It Be and Hey Jude and fair enough, for a band that old, for me to like even 2 songs is something.

However, had I been there, back when they were massive, I probably would, as you pointed out have a different opinion and would be a fan as I would have been caught up in the hysteria and the movement, but I wasn't. Therefore, nothing they have ever done in real terms has an effect on me.

I've seen Oasis live twice, both times they were amazing and I loved their songs before that. However, Oasis appeal to me more as a person. Their image, their links with football and so forth. They're a band that has been part of what I regard as a culture in Britain, football. I've gone to away games, heard Oasis on the bus, around grounds and so forth, on FIFA, etc and so on. So therefore, thats why I'm going to prefer them and thats why personally they're going to have more influence on me as a person.

And before someone says, The Beatles influenced Oasis, I know. Michael Jackson influenced Usher but you can still see some massive differences in the music they make. Yes Usher dances like Michael Jackson, produces fast and slow beats but they all have their unique point and for me Oasis' stands out.

Yes its all opinion but I don't get how anyone can label one band the best ever, its beyond retardation. Its all a matter of opinion and thats why no band is the best ever.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

exactly. they were a manufactured band,

They had been together for years playing small gigs to dance hall gigs - how the hell is that manufactured?

You obviously don't know what a manufactured band is so I'll give you a clue:
The Monkees
Take That
Girls Aloud
Little Mix

and not JLS because they had already been formed.

or do you think that as soon as a band is signed they suddenly turn into a manufactured band?

 

[easyrider]

They had been together for years playing small gigs to dance hall gigs - how the hell is that manufactured?

You obviously don't know what a manufactured band is so I'll give you a clue:
The Monkees
Take That
Girls Aloud
Little Mix

and not JLS because they had already been formed.

or do you think that as soon as a band is signed they suddenly turn into a manufactured band?

Aged sixteen, John Lennon formed a skiffle group called The Quarrymen, in March 1957. Fifteen-year-old Paul McCartney joined as a guitarist after he and Lennon met that July.When McCartney in turn invited George Harrison to watch the group the following February, the fourteen-year-old joined as lead guitarist

The guys a noob...I couldn't of put it better myself.

 

[cm1179]

This is Marketing....Has no connection with being manufactured...You are confusing the two.

In fact....The majority of the dolls etc...had no connection with the Beatles what so ever...People just went ahead and made them.

One of the biggest Mistakes Epstein made....The Beatles saw none of the money.

Next you will say that the Doors were manufactured as there existed a morrison doll

Get a grip mate, Do some research before posting its cringe worthy.

the only thing that's cringeworthy is your beatle vision

 

[easyrider]

the only thing that's cringeworthy is your beatle vision

No

I'm just posting the Facts mate.

You could do with posting the same.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Well, thats a fair point I'm willing to accept but its annoying when people say 'how can you not like The Beatles' and I tell them and they disregard it.

Well you wouldn't get that reply from me - if you don't like them you don't like them and why should you when it wasn't from your era.

Yes its all opinion but I don't get how anyone can label one band the best ever, its beyond retardation. Its all a matter of opinion and thats why no band is the best ever.

The thing is that 'Best Ever' is based on world record sales, merchandise, royalties and other such things and The Beatles must be right at the top.


The other week I had a bloke arguing with me in a pub when I announced that the next song we were going to play was by probably the biggest rock band in the world.
We then launched into Shout it Out Loud by KISS and when I came off he took delight in telling me I was talking balls.
I asked him what other rock band had sold as many records, merchandise & concert tickets as KISS so on paper they were probably the biggest rock band in the world.
He carried it on, he got others involved in the debate, they put him right on what would constitute the biggest rock band and he just said 'Well I don't like them' and I said 'Neither do I but I accept their place in rock history'.

 

[cm1179]

They had been together for years playing small gigs to dance hall gigs - how the hell is that manufactured?

You obviously don't know what a manufactured band is so I'll give you a clue:
The Monkees
Take That
Girls Aloud
Little Mix

and not JLS because they had already been formed.

or do you think that as soon as a band is signed they suddenly turn into a manufactured band?

no, i don't think that as soon as band is signed they become manufactured but it is quite clear for anyone who see's it without being a massive fan boy is that the beatles were pushed into a direction that they themselves probably wouldn't have gone when it came to image and marketing. they were moulded, (i agree, manufactured by its definition is not what the beatles were) but had it not been for certain people in a management role, they would not be the icons they are now.

 

[cm1179]

I asked him what other rock band had sold as many records, merchandise & concert tickets as KISS so on paper they were probably the biggest rock band in the world.

you stand by this, just how much thought have you given it to reach this thought?

 

[easyrider]

no, i don't think that as soon as band is signed they become manufactured but it is quite clear for anyone who see's it without being a massive fan boy is that the beatles were pushed into a direction that they themselves probably wouldn't have gone when it came to image and marketing. they were moulded, (i agree, manufactured by its definition is not what the beatles were) but had it not been for certain people in a management role, they would not be the icons they are now.

The only influence Epstein had was the suits.

No one wanted to Sign them...They tried many times... Many Record Companies called them old fashioned.

It was only George Martin who decided to take a punt on them...

More nonsense from you.

Your forgetting what the Appeal was with the Beatles...It was there quick witted charm and talent as songwriters....The Media loved them...This wasn't Marketing...They were just doing what they had been doing for years before.

After Epstein died in 1967 The Beatles Managed themselves until the lawsuits in 1970

Now you can post Fanboy comments all you like....But I'll tear your posts to pieces with the facts. In fact its quite fun reading the inaccuracies in this thread.

 

[cm1179]

Your forgetting what the Appeal was with the Beatles...It was there quick witted charm and talent as songwriters....The Media loved them...This wasn't Marketing...They were just doing what they had been doing for years before.

oh right. i thought they were that rock n roll that they'd put the gallaghers to shame? though i'd hardly say that the gallaghers were short on wittiness either, they just didn't pour the charm on like the beatles. heck, atleast the gallaghers knew what they wanted to be and stuck to their dodgy roots. what did the beatles do? keep the good boys image for the fans and chuck a tv out of the hotel window but keep it under wraps?

i think every beatle is ok but john lennon was a complete arse, no matter how talented he was. here he shows what kind of bloke he was. a complete arse.

i notice the uploader of the video (probably a beatles fan) titles it 'john lennons interesting sense of humour. i'd title it 'another example of lennon being an arse

 

[SexyGreyFox]

you stand by this, just how much thought have you given it to reach this thought?

When I say 'rock bands' I'm talking about the heavy brigade and not Rolling Stones, Queen, The Who and U2 who are obviously all near the top.
I'm talking about the bands that my own bands cover like Black Sabbath, ACDC (obviously near the top), Deep Purple, Iron Maiden and that genre of music.
A Channel 4 documentary also confirmed that Kiss were the best selling rock band and they had overtaken Led Zeppelin but Zeppelin did stop making records 3 decades ago and have only done one concert in the last 32 years.

 

[cm1179]

When I say 'rock bands' I'm talking about the heavy brigade and not Rolling Stones, Queen, The Who and U2 who are obviously all near the top.
I'm talking about the bands that my own bands cover like Black Sabbath, ACDC (obviously near the top), Deep Purple, Iron Maiden and that genre of music.
A Channel 4 documentary also confirmed that Kiss were the best selling rock band and they had overtook Led Zeppelin but Zeppelin did stop making records 3 decades ago and have only done one concert in the last 32 years.

kiss have coined in more than iron maiden?

 

[SexyGreyFox]

i think every beatle is ok but john lennon was a complete arse, no matter how talented he was. here he shows what kind of bloke he was. a complete arse.

i notice the uploader of the video (probably a beatles fan) titles it 'john lennons interesting sense of humour. i'd title it 'another example of lennon being an arse

I don't know what point you're making!!
I also think Lennon is an arse and I could have easily punched him in the face and Liam Gallagher tries to act like him and I could also punch him in the face.
However, it doesn't take from the fact that Lennon & Co had been performing live for 5 years before somebody eventually signed them.

 

[nydryl]

kiss have coined in more than iron maiden?

You're splitting hairs. Music is subjective, everyone with a brain knows this. As such to define the best or the biggest band you can only really go to record sales to see what the general consensus is.

Whilst I think they are a bit overrated (I hate that expression, what does it really mean?) I'll happily accept that The Beatles are the biggest band in the world.

 

[cm1179]

You're splitting hairs. Music is subjective, everyone with a brain knows this. As such to define the best or the biggest band you can only really go to record sales to see what the general consensus is.

.

no i'm not, i'm asking a question. i watched flight 666 the other day and iron maiden have been masters of coining it in but flight 666 showed me another level of touring that i could only see being surpassed by u2

 

[SexyGreyFox]

kiss have coined in more than iron maiden?

Easily.
Kiss started in 1974! and were virtually playing Stadium tours immediately.
I first saw Iron Maiden supporting Judas Priest at Trentham Gardens around 1980 and then another couple of times at the 1500 seater Victoria Hall.
Iron Maiden became stadium headliners around the mid 80s but both bands have never stopped touring and Kiss always sell out.
I believe Kiss have sold over 100 million albums where Iron Maiden have sold around 70 million.
I don't need to go into merchandise because everybody knows that Kiss destroy everybody in that department.

 

[cm1179]

I don't know what point you're making!!
.

my point was i don't see the beatles witiness and charm, myself.

 

[cm1179]

Easily.
Kiss started in 1974! and were virtually playing Stadium tours immediately.
.

i guess they owe rush a beer then