BinaryJustin said:

I think this is funnier

BinaryJustin said:

Sitting around and capitalizing on your dead husband's legacy isn't that hard on the skin.

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

irrelevant, because she has none. unless you count counting cash and milking the literally dead cow that put her on the map. Mark David Chapman WAS nuts for gunning down John when he had a perfectly good shot at Yoko.

I wonder if she resents Paul's recent critical success? John knew how formidable a songwriter McCartney was... "Maybe I'm Amazed"...

but of course, Lennon had "Jealous Guy"


hmmm...

"Maybe I'm Amazed" vs "Jealous Guy"

eh.

she's right though.

why is Imagine in a tv ad for a bank? f**k Yoko.
*
[Edited 10/12/05 22:47pm]

She must have been drunk!

kdj997 said:

LMAO!

And some of the comments from some of you guys...


Fuckinghell!

kdj997 said:

Its not that I actually think what shes saying is totally wrong, its just why say it at an awards ceremony? Whoever posted earlier about her being a complete bitch in the way she conducts her business is spot on. She proclaims to be protecting Johns interests and his image, but she tries to do this at the expense of the other Beatles and their wishes. She's a professional widow and shes made a fucking fortune out of it. I've read quite a few books on lennon and the beatles (and McCartney) and the general consensus is that she's a cold calculating woman.

As for what she actually said, its a no brainer that people would rather cover Yesterday than something like Mother. Paul writes generic songs, rarely being blatantly personal in his music, his songs are also better constructed. He's one of the most gifted melodisists out there, so it makes sense they'll have a wider appeal and be more covered.

We all know pauls lyrics aren't exactly profound, but thats not to say he just rhymes June with Spoon. Some of his lyrics are really interesting, more so in the angle or perspective they take than the use of language.

I think the comment is yet another insight into how insecure both men are / were about each other.

RipHer2Shreds said:

And this same discussion is taking place on many other music boards right now all over the net. Interesting how she's still managing to make people so angry after all these years.

Another totally sad fact is that other than John's music, his biggest legacy to the world was supposed to be his fight for peace and spiritual enlightenment. Yoko went along with that too. Until it affected her. She's a shining example of 'actions speak louder than words'.

Sounds like John was a big cry-baby.
Her comments only make me think less of both of them.

minneapolisgenius said:

Totally.

Yoko loves to shake it up - but that's all she's really doing. It's not she can really tarnish McCartney's reputation or legacy as a Beatle or solo artist - that stands for itself. I think both she and John were honest people and when asked about certain issues, would tell it as they saw it, But at this juncture, Yoko's just spuing insulting (and even hurtful) statements for no reason. I've seen McCartney interviewed and when directly asked about Ono and their shakey post-Beatle business dealings, he always refrains from saying anything personal about her, but you can tell he's been to battle.
[Edited 10/13/05 10:16am]

ufoclub said:

Put in this context Yoko needs to shut her filthy mouth

GangstaFam said:

Yeah, and it's funny that she's supposedly the fill-in poster child for peace and love, yet nobody can get alone with her.

Tessa said:

She's a fraud, nothing more.

All that japanophobia

PANDURITO said:

Sure I'd hate this bitch no matter her race or where she was born. A greedy twat is a greedy twat

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Maybe, but you know it's a fact that people, not you of course, people have always hated Yoko , even before the Beatles called it quits and she did all those terrible things you accuse her of.


I still don't see in the original post where/how she BLASTS Paul.

PANDURITO said:

Well I wasn't one of em. I wasn't even born yet

If you couple her comments with her relationship with Paul, I definitely see it as a slam. It's a freakin no-brainer that a woman stands on the side of her husband but she's been milking John Lennon for all he's worth, disrespecting his rightful heir in the process, while lording her control over the work that Paul McCartney created. Take all that into consideration, this wasn't just a comment to defend her husband. It was a definite swipe.

PANDURITO said:

she's clearly putting down Paul's songwriting ability to support John. if she's doing that in bed to comfort her husband, fine. great. she should. but she shouldn't be brining it up at a public event 25 years later. it's tacky. and it's just one more thing on a long list of the awful shit she's said about and done to Paul. it's a blast. it was intentional. she knew what she was doing.

Tessa said:

Exactly, she's no innocent shrinking violet

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

no, she's not at all. more like a withered up thistle.

Yes - I agree - she said those things intentionally and without provocation - which is petty and mean - and probably something John would not condone.

John is definitely spinning in his grave - or should be.

I'm not even sure he said what she said he said.

Maybe John wrote this for her:


She said "I know what it's like to be dead.
I know what it is to be sad"
And she's making me feel like I've never been born.

I said "Who put all those things in your head?
Things that make me feel that I'm mad
And you're making me feel like I've never been born."

She said "you don't understand what I said"
I said "No, no, no, you're wrong"
When I was a boy everything was right
Everything was right

I said "Even though you know what you know
I know that I'm ready to leave
'Cause you're making me feel like I've never been born."
[Edited 10/13/05 11:40am]

SupaFunkyOrgangrinderSexy said:

Absolutely.

And come to think of it, I remember just a few years back when the Beatles were being honored at some awards ceremony or other on TV (Grammys, maybe ) and she was there to do a presentation/acceptance speech, and she kept referring to the Beatles collectively as "John.., and THE OTHERS"; I'm sitting in a room full or singers and musicians watching this with everyone scratching their heads going 'WTF???'....it's ridiculous how she's so subtle in her discounting of the other members of the Beatles, yet so NOT...

Tessa said:

Ain't that the truth! I recently bought a video DVD of John's solo work a gift for my best friend: Now my friend, knowing only little of the Beatles, being from the fucking Himalayan mountains of Nepal and JUST starting to get into the work of Lennon, had enough sense to ask ..."Baby, WHAT THE FUCK is up with that wife being the CENTERPIECE of every damn video???I mean, she produced this DVD, she's a-kind-a-narcissist or what???" .

Actually the choice of songs is fantastic, and even for me as a casual Lennon fan I'm happy that she released a post mortem video collection to honor her dead husband (sort of), but do we REALLY need to see EVERY song accompanied by a home video of YOKO.... walking in the park, Yoko picnicking on the lawn with friends, Yoko listening to the ground with a stethescope, Yoko sitting next to John during a live TV performance KNITTING with a blindfold on, Yoko being rowed across the lake in front of their estate by John in a canoe in stilettoes and veiled hat, Yoko sitting next to John on a piano bench gazing intently into the camera while he plays on song or other in an empty room....? I mean, REALLY....

Tessa said:

I just think it's funny that she's criticizing Paul's rhyming pattern when her own songwriting capabilities are limited to rhyming "eeeeeooooouuungaayaooooouuu!" with "shreeeeeooooouuungaayaooooouuu."

She should really keep her mouth shut.....