How shit were The Beatles?

Three Dataloungers and the underage Instatwink they spend hours obsessing over.

Yes, OP, they WERE the shit!

Meh...

They didn't know their place.

Also, OP are you the same OP that started the "Best English Rock Bands" thread and omitted The Beatles because they were "not a rock band" and were "an ancient band" (as opposed to the Rollings Stones and The Who choices on than list.)

Ringo has a very nice Twitter.

No, that wasn't me, r4.

This is the only Beatles-related song of any worth.

[quote]Ringo has a very nice Twitter.

How big is it?

Overrated with some good songs thanks to George.

Not shit in any way whatsoever.

Seriously? So many classics, I'm too exhausted to even list them.

Surely we can all agree that "Yellow Submarine" is naff?

OP: *bloop bloop bleep* 12 year old Reddit troll reporting for duty! *bloop bloop bloop*

OP, fuck yourself with a rusty tuna can lid.

Paul could get too twee ("Maxwell's Silver Hammer" and "Rocky Raccoon," ugh), otherwise I don't think they were shit at all. Neither is Yoko.

Those pics are the wax dummy versions, OP.

I like "Rubber Soul" the best.

Paul is a greedy cunt. I swear if Ono dies he'll find an excuse to release another remaster and go on tour.

r14 And not forgetting the execrable...

r13

Meh, too simplistic for me.

I don’t mind the other three but man was John Lennon a whining baby.

He never had anything positive to say, always nagging and complaining, always a negative downer.

He was not the least bit attractive even though he was billed as handsome. And don’t get me started on his massive, undeserved ego. He did not get the message that talented musicians are a dime a dozen, a few get lucky as he did.

He should have given more credit to luck and circumstances instead of the delusion that he was some god.

The Beatles were basic. There was nothing special about any of them. Sure there was some decent talent in the mix, but nothing that rises above average.

They appealed to me between the ages of 5 and 13. That pretty much sums up the juvenile and bouncy fun they epitomized until they got dark, stupid, and desperate. I liked their harmonies and they make for great road music the whole family can enjoy. Would you like some Campbell's Chicken and Rice with that?

I've always loathed Lennon since I heard a radio interview where he criticized Mick Jagger's "faggy dancing".

I’m not a huge fan of the Rollig Stones but they were 10 times as talented as the fan four, and also were interesting people. The Beatles were cogs. The Stones were organic.

The Rolling Stones and The Beatles both sucked.

And there are literally no good Beatles songs at all.

I agree, R16. "Rubber Soul" was their transition from teenyboppers to "artists". Then it all started going downhill after that.

My friend's sister looks like the wax Ringo Starr in OP's pic. And she has one boob much larger than the other.

Mein Gott, those are without doubt the worst wax figures I've ever seen. They've made them all looks like inbred freaks.

They weren't all that IMO, but they were certainly better than the Rolling Stones. Mick Jagger hasn't been able to stay in tune his entire singing career. And they've all looked like cadavers for decades.

Those aren't even the worst Beatles waxworks. These ones are, from a now closed museum in Great Yarmouth:

In their prime, 1964-68, they were fresh and exciting.

Today they seem naive. They only age well because they are considered The Biggest Group Ever.

In 15 years, only the very elderly will remember them.

And here's the same museum's models of Cliff Richard, Telly Savalas and The Fonz...

^Museum of the Uncanny Valley

At R31 it looks to me they just took some of the figures from the Dave Clark Five display and slapped some Beatles clothes on them and called it done.

I'm an ex pat Brit living in the US and always astonished by the Beatles worshipping here. They had some merits for sure, but they get way too much credit imo. John Lennon and George Harrison were talented, but Paul McCartney is absolute shite and a giant tool. Can we at least agree on that?

I always saw Paul as the ass in the group, R36, until John and Yoko got together. That shit was embarrassing.

True R37, and by all accounts John was an asshole, but Paul's post Beatles music was mortifying. Band on the Run? Mull of Kintyyre? Wtaf?

I'm embarrassed for him.

The Stones carried on making incredible albums all the way through the 70s. One or two good songs since.

R38, I agree. There is no contest for that crap. Linda on keyboards was more embarrassing than Yoko vocals. R39, I loved that album! Disco it might have been (as much as they could be) but I have many fond memories of dorm dancing to Hang Five.

Paul can still put on a 3 hours show with no breaks. I was too young for The Beatles, but he was unbelievable.

The Stones area glorified bar band but I love them. And Sympathy For the Devil is one of the best rock songs ever.

That song will always make me cringe, R42. It was playing in the background when some pervy store clerk exposed himself. I've tried to listen to it without the visual, but it's no use. Somewhat appropriate and creepy.

I've always thought that the Beatles long-term reputation would have been better served without all the insipid McCartney treacle and novelty songs: Yellow Submarine, When I'm 64, Octopus's Garden, Martha My Dear, Ob Bla Di etc etc etc. Too bad the other three didn't think to toss him out of the group early on.

Paul was a hottie. Faul was fug. But Faul has endured and still plays 3 hour concerts.

No, Paul was the hottie of the group. He was never a hottie over here, where we know the difference.

They wrote most of their catalogue in just under 8 years.

Why the wax figures OP?

The Beatles are overrated.

R44 Paul may write insipid sap but he played and still plays a mean bass. I was very pro-George and anti-Paul growing up, but I can admit when I am wrong. I'd forgive him his hack tendencies just for his guitar solo on Taxman.

A thread by a millennial written for fellow brain dead millennials.

Are we talkin' jive, OP? Shit = good?

I like them. I do think Paul could be very hit-or-miss and his post-Beatles stuff is mostly crap. Lennon and McCartney probably worked best as a unit. Poor George, though, was suppressed and had to wait till the band broke up to release some of his best stuff. Isn't it a pity?

Yeah, no where near as talented as Cardi B.

I think George improved over time- Paul and John were good from the beginning. Although, if he only wrote Something- one of the greatest songs ever that was an achievement.

R55

Paul and John had each other. George was essentially on his own. I give him credit for not letting the Lennon and McCartney partnership prevent him from writing his own tunes. The purposefully left him out of it. Early on having a discussion if they should allow George into their songwriting sessions. They decided against it. I think works in George's favor. There can be no argument about who contributed what.

That doorbell song was the worst

Behold, the mouthpiddle of the fetal terriers, incapable of criticism beyond the anecdote and blind reflex and smugly ignorant of musicology and cultural history. Especially ridiculous was the assertion by a faux English person that Americans are unbalanced about the Beatles, with a "shite" thrown in to try to show authenticity.

One could complain that children are loose on the DL, but this kind of low wattage is what we have with all ages from the proud Dolt Generations. There is Trump in all of them, no matter who they may have intended to vote for but never got around to it.

(Just in case, for those who don't recognize the name, "Trump" is currently the fascist traitor occupying the White House. But do go on pretending that you listen to the Stones. As if.)

==========================================

They didn't know their place.

Also, OP are you the same OP that started the "Best English Rock Bands" thread and omitted The Beatles because they were "not a rock band" and were "an ancient band" (as opposed to the Rollings Stones and The Who choices on than list.)

I've always thought that the Beatles long-term reputation would have been better served without all the insipid McCartney treacle and novelty songs: Yellow Submarine, When I'm 64, Octopus's Garden, Martha My Dear, Ob Bla Di etc etc etc. Too bad the other three didn't think to toss him out of the group early on.

I'm an ex pat Brit living in the US and always astonished by the Beatles worshipping here. They had some merits for sure, but they get way too much credit imo. John Lennon and George Harrison were talented, but Paul McCartney is absolute shite and a giant tool. Can we at least agree on that?

I don’t mind the other three but man was John Lennon a whining baby.

He never had anything positive to say, always nagging and complaining, always a negative downer.

He was not the least bit attractive even though he was billed as handsome. And don’t get me started on his massive, undeserved ego. He did not get the message that talented musicians are a dime a dozen, a few get lucky as he did.

He should have given more credit to luck and circumstances instead of the delusion that he was some god.

The Beatles were basic. There was nothing special about any of them. Sure there was some decent talent in the mix, but nothing that rises above average.

Meh...

There are some good documentaries on Amazon and YouTube about their early years. It’s fun to watch and see how fresh and exciting they were. It wasn’t just in America or Europe either, I was living in the Middle East then and they were hugely popular.

Paul McCartney, a hottie? On what planet? He has always looked like he was either a fetal alcohol baby, or a Thalidomide baby.

R58, no we cannot agree that Paul was shite.

but it took Laibach to truly interpret their work.

R60 yup, totally an FAS/thalidomide face here.

and also the Rolling Stones

The Stones will always kick the Beatles ass.

Yes The Beatles had some great songs but they are so revered essentially because they did things first.It wasn't hard doing what they did, other bands would have eventually done it too

and I'm listening to a live version of Midnight Rambler and it kicks fucking ass

r66 Is it the version from GET YER YA-YAS OUT? One of the greatest live albums ever!

Did Paul and John fuck or not?

Well?

R67 No it's this version but GET YER YA-YAS OUT is fucking fantastic.

Mick: "You don't want my trousers to fall down now do ya?"

Follow their career from Love Me Do through Let it Be and you will see a group of true musicians who grew as no other musicians grew in my life time They simply were the best and as someone who was in the 4th grade when they first appeared on the Ed Sullivan show , there was never a time I was no fully aware of every record they released. If you had been there you would understand, they simply were the best!

Well??

I've heard rumors about John and Stu, John and Brian Epstein, but never John and Paul

No, actually they're just good friends.

Look like shanty low class chimney sweeps. Especially Paul.

R8 agree. George was the standout in looks and talent.

Simply having a wonderful Christmas time by Paul was a CRIME!

This is what happens when you lock Paul alone in a room with too much weed and some synthesizers

The problem with the Beatles is that they were better together than they were apart.

Yes, which is why they were the best group.

They were total bum.

The Crickets called and want their act back.

R82

The Beatles improved on it.

The Beatles had the best song catalog while the Stones were better as live performers.

The Beatles started to drift apart from each other in their later years and the last few albums are mostly collections of solo songs. George enhanced "Abbey Road" with "Here Comes the Sun" and "Something" while Paul assembled his closing suite.

After they broke up there is a scattering of good songs across their solo careers but there was not too much of lasting value from any of them after the 1970s ended.

I wish I could go back in time and boo them.

They wouldnt be able to hear you because of all the screaming girls

Too bad they never wrote anything as profound as Bodak Yellow.

Florence Henderson appeared on a local talk show in my town and sang Hey Jude and Lady Madonna. It was surreal.

[quote]I wish I could go back in time and boo them.

#MeToo

If the Beatles were truly shit. Would people still be talking about a terrible band from the 1960s that only had a run of 8 years?