New topic
PrintableI've been reading today at various places on the net how Paul's voice sounded raspy and bad, how the show was boring, etc etc etc.
But I really enjoyed his performance and I thought he did a fine job. Sure, his performance could be called "uneventful" in comparison to last year's boobfest/publicitymongering, but the music was great (imho) and Paul doesn't need gimmicks. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
It's funny reading these posts you can tell who has a true appreciation for musicianship....and those who get all wet over some over choreographed dance crazed image driven pop tart...as far as I'm concerned you seen one chick dance you've seen them all...especially nowadays. even though I am not a fanatic I like Janet...but I am soooo glad they switched it up this year.... I am not African. Africa is in me, but I cannot return.
I am not taína. Taíno is in me, but there is no way back. I am not european. Europe lives in me, but I have no home there. I am new. History made me. My first language was spanglish. And I am | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
waw2002 said: does anybody know what he did that made him sound so much better than he did 3 years ago?
Two reasons: I think he quit smoking pot because his new young hot wife doesn't smoke. Not that I'm anti-pot, but all pot and no John makes Paul a dull boy. It's good to take the edge off of a 23 year old and give him some introspection, but a 63 year old needs all the edge he can get and has all the introspection he needs. Check this song out at:
http://www.soundclick.com...tmusic.htm | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: Not everyone is a fan of Paul's.
 I still haven't gotten over the fact that he wanted to claim Yesterday as his own.
Paul wrote yesterday on his own. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Isel said: I still haven't gotten over the fact that he wanted to claim Yesterday as his own.
what the fuck? Paul wrote yesterday on his own, and no'one disputed that.. I even have john lennon vocally stating the he, nor the rest of the beatles had anything to do with it.. so Im really wondering why u arent getting over a proven fact.. damn, if u cant get anything straight from the beatles at all.. at least get that straight.. . . [Edited 2/8/05 19:03pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
If there is ANY dispute on song credits.. it would be E. Rigby.. and to be honest, I believe paul wrote 90% of that song.. including the score for it.
The only thing that is possibly "another" beatles part that was writtenin E. Rigby is the "I Look at all the lonley people".. thats it . [Edited 2/8/05 22:35pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sdldawn said: If there is ANY dispute on song credits.. it would be E. Rigby.. and to be honest, I believe paul wrote 90% of that song.. including the score for it.
The only thing that is possibly "another" beatles part that was writtenin E. Rigby is the "I Look at all the lonley people".. thats it . [Edited 2/8/05 22:35pm] Exactly; quite frankly, in John's last few days/(years?) he tried to take too much credit for Beatles songs, saying he was the main writer for songs that he hardly had anything to do with. Don't really see how one is different from the other. I'm the first mammal to wear pants. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Axchi696 said: Sdldawn said: If there is ANY dispute on song credits.. it would be E. Rigby.. and to be honest, I believe paul wrote 90% of that song.. including the score for it.
The only thing that is possibly "another" beatles part that was writtenin E. Rigby is the "I Look at all the lonley people".. thats it . [Edited 2/8/05 22:35pm] Exactly; quite frankly, in John's last few days/(years?) he tried to take too much credit for Beatles songs, saying he was the main writer for songs that he hardly had anything to do with. Don't really see how one is different from the other. I think they both were concerned how their part was gonna play in history... thats why I think they both had words about it | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sdldawn said: Axchi696 said: Exactly; quite frankly, in John's last few days/(years?) he tried to take too much credit for Beatles songs, saying he was the main writer for songs that he hardly had anything to do with. Don't really see how one is different from the other. I think they both were concerned how their part was gonna play in history... thats why I think they both had words about it Apparently the public dispute regarding "Yesterday," occurred LONG AFTER John's death, soon after Yesterday was voted the #1 track of all time. Let's put it this way, it made the news long after John's death because Paul publicly talked about it time and time again. It may have been an "innocent" statement, but it "appeared" to be sour grapes on his part. And from what I've read, Yoko wasn't too happy about it either. If Paul was so concerned about "rights" or history, he should have just insisted that he receive full credit for the song when it was released long ago. I don't know about John taking too much credit for The Beatles, but at least he didn't make a huge media issue over it. Well, he didn't have much of chance as an 50 or 60 something-year-old to make an issue of it, did he? Really, when John WAS alive, both of those guys egos got the better of them more often than not. In fact, from a bio I read, it wasn't really Yoko who "broke up" The Beatles: it was the constant bickering and power struggle between John and Paul. As I said before, I've NEVER been a fan of Paul as a solo artist. I much prefer John's material and George's over Paul's. I respect Paul's work with The Beatles and with John, though, and obviously can't deny their impact on music and his status as a legend. As far as the half-time show was concerned, I didn't really watch it, so I can't comment. None of us really watched it coz we were talking to each other and waiting for the game. But as I also previously mentioned, if Prince, Lenny, or even Janet(reveal or not), Madonna had performed, we may have taken a moment to watch because frankly, they put on a better show or at least a show that would appeal to us. The thought of Paul performing by himself is just a little bland: that doesn't mean the guy sucks. WE, along with many people, just weren't that interested in seeing HIM perform. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
theAudience said: I owe Paul McCartney an apology.
When I heard that he was going to be the half-time act my initial thought was... 
But while watching it I was pleasantly surprised. I was glad there weren't 1000 useless dancers twitching around the stage and no crotch-grabbing guest rapper. I guess if you grew up on MTV (which I didn't) you expect every act to put on some heavily choreographed Busby Berkeley type production (generally to mask their lack of talent). Outside of the fireworks, what I saw was a guy that wrote some cool tunes having a good time performing them. Oh, and not once did the thought, "Is this live or is it *MEMOREX.", ever cross my mind. *(maybe Seagate, Western Digital or Maxtor would have been a more contemporary reference) tA  Tribal Disorder
http://www.soundclick.com...rmusic.htm LMAO at the Busby Berkeley reference. 
Anyway, I didn't see the Superbowl. Thank God. But I would have liked to see Paul.  It was on at about 4 a.m. over here though."I saw a woman with major Hammer pants on the subway a few weeks ago and totally thought of you." - sextonseven | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
