You know what? I have to give Paul McCartney credit.

OK, let's look at the "cons" first.

1). Many, many MANY of Paul's post-Beatles songs have the tendency to...how shall I put this...suck.

2). At age 62, an generation of people who think they will NEVER get old (ha HA, bee-yatch) might think "he's too old."

3). It's not that the Beatles WON'T reunite...it's the fact that they CAN'T.

OK, NOW THE "PROs."

1). This man has the balls to go out on tour, in the shadow of HIS OWN LEGACY, and has done so since the Beatles broke up. He is FEARLESS. He's an EX-BEATLE, fer Chrissake, and he's not afraid to go on stage and SING BEATLES SONGS.

2). HE TRIES. Ya know what? FUCK anyone who's afraid to take a risk. McCartney CONSTANTLY takes risks, and if the results suck, GUESS WHAT. He BEAT THE ASS of everyone who SAT ON THEIR ASS and NEVER TOOK A RISK.

3). This is what he was born to do, and he's doing it. HE DOES NOT NEED THE MONEY, folks. He was born with a gift, and he's using it, and he will most likely continue to do so until the day he dies.

4). In amongst the songs that suck, HE HAS written some very, very fine ones. Better than The Beatles? Maybe not. As good as John Lennon at HIS BEST? BET YOUR ASS, BWAH...

Sir Paul...This cold 'n' frosty one is for YOU. Have fun at the Super Bowl.

:toast:

I'm a huge Beatles fan, and I've never taken a side in the McCartney/Lennon debate. Paul McCartney at his worst is still several times better than most dreck released by the labels today.

I'm a huge Beatles fan here. Tried to get a Beatles DU group started, but didn't get enough responses.



Scene from "Help."

Help! is one of my all-time very most favorite of movies.

As a Florida kid swimming in lots of pools, I always hoped the Beatles would surface in the pool I was in the way they did in the Bahamas.

(That, and I always looked for pirate treasure on the beaches.)

Sir Paul McCartney can do anything he wants. Forever. Unconditional love from me.

Rich people endlessly bankrolled are not taking any risk, sheesh. Do you admire Paris Hilton? She does the same thing -- gets out and calls attention to herself in public when there is absolutely no need or no reason other than, I guess, an ego that can never be healed.


The real risk would be to find out if he could live without the constant touring and attention. I don't find 50 and 60 somethings who just won't give it a rest very attractive. There is only so much money out there and the more money and attention spent on "dinosaurs" the less spent on opportunities for people who aren't already gadzillionaires.

Why is enough never enough?

Even Dylan is turning into just another over-the-hill attention-seeker and tireless self-promoter.

I almost wish there was a law against multi-zillionaires being allowed to perform. There are lots of young, fresh, unusual, and unknown talent that will never get a chance, but we still have to listen to the same old stale stuff over and over.

Sorry, if I sound grumpy, but this man is not taking any risk. He is just hogging the limelight way, way too long, and it is very unattractive.

I want to hear something I haven't already heard.

The conservation movement is a breeding ground of communists
and other subversives. We intend to clean them out,
even if it means rounding up every birdwatcher in the country.
--John Mitchell, US Attorney General 1969-72

...and maybe, just maybe he does. SOMETIMES.

The "risk-free" life for an ex-Beatle is to sit on his ass and live off the royalties.

McCartney didn't do that. He made new music, and didn;t try to make it "as good as" The Beatles. He made what he made. He went on tour without the other three Beatles, and he played his songs, knowing full well that people might say "it's not as good as The Beatles."

If you think McCartney is "over-the-hill attention-seeker and tireless self-promoter," that's your opinion, and I respect your right to express it. As you might be able to tell from my post, I don;t share it. That's OK, I don't have to, and neither do you.

Regarding your comment that "I want to hear something I haven't already heard," no offense, but I don't accept that responsibility.

:toast:

"The real risk would be to find out if he could live without the constant touring and attention. I don't find 50 and 60 somethings who just won't give it a rest very attractive. There is only so much money out there and the more money and attention spent on "dinosaurs" the less spent on opportunities for people who aren't already gadzillionaires."

that attitude costs your career, when your experience, if you've learned more over time, is far more valuable than your youth! If you don't like the horse manure evaluation, then donkey will do fine. As for the "young talent," they will find a way to break in if the people who control those things help it happen. Or they find a new way on their own initiative. Then you can be sure that they will want to keep going until they are as old as the dinosaurs.

All discrimination is stupid, but AGE discrimination is perhaps the most prevalent and stupid of all.

Like Band on the Run. That album is great. It's the first one I can remember ever listening to. My mom used to play it all the time. I think he still had a lot of "Beatles" in him then, if that makes sense. I imagine that is a lot like how the Beatles would have sounded if they had stayed to together a couple more years.

...I'd have to say that Stevie Wonder and Michael Jackson took far greater risks with their reputations when they teamed up with McCartney for those horrid duets in the early '80s. By then, McCartney was well past washed-up. "Ebony and Ivory," "The Girl Is Mine," and "Say, Say, Say," fer chrissake! :puke:

eom

I'm not sure who took the greater risk, bit those songs S-U-C-K-E-D.

GOD, those songs SUCKED.

But that's what I'm saying. He took a risk, and he fucked up, but instead of his withdrawing into a hidey-hole, HE TOOK MORE RISKS.

Another way of looking at it...which I fully acknowledge...is that when McCartney takes a risk on a song that SUCKS and I'm the one who BUYS IT, I get screwed and he gets rewarded.

BUT FUCKING BON FUCKING JOVI bought a bunch of high school kids some Kentucky Fried Chicken and played them the tracks from the "New Jersey" album in the name of "market research," because they were AFRAID to just PUT OUT THE FUCKING ALBUM, so in the final analysis, I toast Paul McCartney and FLIP OFF Jon "Bongiovi" Bon Jovi.

Oh yeah.. his BROTHER is in the record business. Tony Bongiovi. Doesn't anyone think Bon Jovi made it ON TALENT????? HE GOT A RECORD CONTRACT because HIS FUCKING BROTHER IS IN THE INDUSTRY. That's why.

:grr:

Pretty...

I would be interested to see the gender break down of his fans..

But "Livin' On A Prayer"..."Tommy used to work on the docks"...

SPRINGSTEEN WANNABE.

And before anyone flames me, REMEMBER THIS...

30 seconds after Bush stole a second term, Bon Jovi was on stage telling Kerry supporters to "get over it an move on"...let the "healing begin"

FUCK this no-talent little worm.

Just my opinion, folks.

:toast:

but a lot of his attraction imho can be attributed to the fact he's a very pretty man....

Pretty men with pretty hair who have brothers in the industry can sell a truckload of CDs.

:grr:

But At Least They Were Talented...

I'm not knocking Bon Jovi but like Kid Rock who I detest Bon Jovi does seem like a formula musician ala Janet Jackson, Paula Abdul, et cetera...

You're 100% correct on this one.

Morrison...remember that Rolling Stone headline, "He's Hot, He's Sexy, He's Dead?"

And yeah, even though McCartney wrote some CLASSIC songs, when he was a Beatle, he will ALWAYS be "The Pretty Beatle."

But Jon Bon Jovi was a pretty boy who wrote songs that sucked and had a brother in the recording industry. And WHO ASKED US TO GET OVER IT WHEN BUSH STOLE A SECOND TERM.

I don't dislike Bon Jovi half as much for his suck-ass music as I do his telling us TO GET OVER IT AND "HEAL" when Emperor Bunnypants STOLE a second term.

F-BJ.

has a personality that tends to leave a bad taste (i.e., trying to change Lennon/McCartney song credits so his name is listed first). But this tendency and his many truly awful songs do nothing to detract from the truly great ones, and some great performances.

As somebody who admires Paul McCartney I am disappointed...


But, hey, none of us are perfect....

he wrote. It was silly and a shame, bit not as arrogant as it might seem.

...and "Helter Skelter" is one of the best songs..."heavy metal" or not...of ALL TIME. It does not get more classic than that.

He tried to re-introduce the Lennon "quality control" by collaborating with Elvis Costello. I still like "My Brave Face." But...unfortunately...Sir Paul's post-Beatles catalog will ALWAYS be "hit and miss."

:toast:

who could never be more than a pimple on john lennon's ass, but now demands approval rights for EVERYTHING beatles?

they only thing she had to do with the beatles was the BREAKUP!

yet now she has to approve everything suggested. and she says no, quite frequently.

her only saving grace is occasionaly doing something beneficial with lennon's money, mainly to try to buy respect.

i think paul is tired of yoko playing the controlling bitch role, and pushing back.

ask julian lennon how HE feels about mrs. john lennon.

there is always background to what goes on.

...more than Paul does. Good for her.

That said, while I'm no fan of Paul's solo work, nor some of the things he's done, he's real, and that makes him the best choice that the SB folks have made for halftime entertainment in years. I hope he takes the opportunity to make a statement of some sort.

I wish I had something positive to add to her legacy.

seems like a decent guy and a hard worker.

Some of his music since 1970 has been OK, but mostly it's forgettable. In life there are always some people who do their best work when their young. I have no interest, for instance, in Bob Dylan's latest, but his work from the sixties and seventies is still interesting and powerful.

I think all of the Beatles lost out on the synergy they had.

The best music made post Beatles break-up in my view was George Harrison's.

malfunction because they were all going to play naked.

It almost made me forgive him for that horrible Freedom song....:)

in an interview when asked about working with Paul McCartney:

"...it's funny, almost all music critics can't stand him and almost all music fans think he's great...I mean, compared to WHO is Paul McCartney not any good? Compared to the Inspiral fucking Carpets?!... he survived being one of the most famous people in the world."

...I mean, DAMMIT, YES...if there is ANYONE on DU who had previously been "one of the most famous people in the world" and can SHARE WITH US how they survived it, THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THIS THREAD.

He seems like a GOOD MAN. He has done a GOOD JOB of raising his kids. They seem to be well-adjusted, they have families, they have careers, and THEY STILL LOVE HIM.

FUCK The Beatles. His parenting skills ALONE make him a success.

He LOVED HIS WIFE and lost her and TOOK A RISK on loving again.

YES, a LOT of his solo music BLOWS. But as a MAN, McCartney has a set of stones that MOST OF US would be EXTREMELY FORTUNATE to have...

:toast:

I like the Ram album and some of the Wings stuff. The stuff that sucks sells, so someone likes it.

Spotlight hunter.

he is going to do another tour.

and it will probably be one of the biggest grossing tours of the year.

some people just hate it when others won't just go away and die, leaving the stage for all the tired wannabes that are so eager to demand their 15 minutes.

well, paul's 15 minutes started in 64, and are still going.

one day all us boomers will be gone. then you'll have to make it alone. but UNTIL we are all gone, we are here and we are a force, and we are NOT going away quietly. you are going to have to stuff us into the coffin, kicking and screaming, then nail the coffin shut and plant a huge boulder over us to keep us down.

when the time comes, good luck trying to fill some very big shoes.

I don't say it in a mean way...


If he really wanted to be in the spotlight or hip he would go out of his way to stay in the media...

He doesn't do any of that....


He just lives his life being Paul...


I think what some folks finds so grating about him is how regular he seems...

5) He wrote "Maybe I'm Amazed"

That right there says a lot.