Jump to content

borntohula

NF Supporters
  • Content Count

    3,408
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • NF$

    3,719

Everything posted by borntohula

  1. best overall band considerring sales, popularity, actual talent, the amount of work made in only 6 years, and the actual diversity of that work, would have to be the beatles. not only that, but we can see from their solo careers that the whole was bigger than it's parts. sure, they were moderately successful post-beatles, but material and popularity wise, they were never that successful again. so that itself makes them a good band, because their chemistry together was something special. they masterred the music of their time, emulating performers like buddy holly and chuck berry, and then they took what they knew and made it their own. by doing so, they totally changed music.
  2. "with teeth" will be halo 19. i think the rat who would be queen is taking a disliking to me OWNING this thread like i am. too bad. that's the last time i give that guy 3 NF$$$.
  3. frankly, i was tired of hearing the same old bands until this year. i've found that more people are finally tapping into an actual canadian music scene, and are not just listening to BNL, OLP, treble charger, sum 41, gob or avril lavigne. (no offence to said bands... or anyone who likes them. you can like them... i don't) there's a whole poop load of bands out there for us to finally listen to and experience. or at least, that's what it feels like. maybe it's always been this diverse, but i haven't realized it until now. thoughts?
  4. man i hope they have something out before the end of 2005. hey: the_rat_who_would_be_king, im sorry i keep turning the NIN thread into a tool-maynard one.
  5. i've heard the whole thing. more than once. i liked "take me out" and "darts of pleasure" that was about it. i dont think they deserve all the attention they've been getting this year. its dance rock made by people who don't like to dance for people who don't dance. nice. and no, they're not very original. they're just newer. they're very flash in the pan, when you think about the fact that bands like them existed in the 80s and arent around any more (information society, london beat) AND there are dance rock bands out there that do what they do a lot better (death from above 1979, hot hot heat, controller.controller, scissor sisters, etc.). they're a guilty pleasure for most. you cant honestly say that what they do is original. sure it hasn't been done this decade, but that doesn't make it original. matthew good's career is one that has longevity. his music is relevant to today and will stay that way because his lyrics mean something. he's one of the few canadians from the 90s that stayed true to themself and weren't just some novelty act.
  6. bono seems like a tool to me.
  7. who try to sound like pearl jam. therefore, high holy days are a derivative of a derivative. and even pearl jam were though of as the "poser" band in the 90s by some.... refer to michael keaton's movie "multiplicity". the ones who are derived from a derivative, end up being quite stupid. thats how i feel. however you can keep listening to them all you like.
  8. yeah i know what you mean. i think you almost have to pretend the others dont exist in order to enjoy them. like people have been saying "maynard fucked up 'gimme gimme gimme' by black flag"... they might have... but if a perfect circle were trying to be like black flag, then they might've gone in a different direction. the one thing i do like about that album is that it is very a perfect circle. minus "people are people"... even though it's a bunch of covers... it sounds like a perfect circle songs.
  9. emotive wasn't that bad. i enjoyed those reinterpretations better than straight off covers. plus, right now he's busy making the new tool record.
  10. finally someone said it. i was just waiting lol. they seem to be very... dependent... on other musical styles to fuel their own. or lackthereof. they remind me a lot of what at the drive-in were like (the song "river below" particularily sounds like a waterred down at the drive-in song from their "relationship of command" days). they totally emulate the hardcore scene, but don't really make it their own.
  11. i'd say that the worst band THIS YEAR would have to be franz ferdinand or billy talent. because you already mentionned good charlotte and simple plan.
  12. lets hope it doesn't turn out to be like guns n roses "use your illusion" 1 + 2.
  13. hopefully the tenacious d movie comes out soon. it's supposed to explain their origins. ben stiller's production company is making it. or was. havent heard much about it recently.
  14. i think you should have added jersey to that list. they all kind of suck. however, blink have been able to remove themselves from that fake punk rock/juvenile kind of attitude with their latest album.
  15. yeah. trent said though that if it were any good, it wouldve been released. hopefully he works with maynard in some capacity in the future.
  16. i just want to hear the song they did with mike patton for the oringal demo or EP (not sure what they actually did prior to this upcoming release). anyone know anything about that song?
  17. yes, agreed. bloc party are awesome. and i hope that giant drag get some noteriety as well. autolux are the "it" band in california right now. they kick lots of ass. my bloody valentine styles.
  18. oops. maybe i shouldve hit the quote button. i meant it towards the person who started this topic.
  19. basically, if police suspect something, they have viable grounds to search your car. so if you get pulled over for speeding, and they have the dog with them and it in turn goes nuts, then you've got a problem. if you feel that doing drugs is a victimless crime, what about the dealers themselves? not many people with dirty drug habits can get by without some kind of pusher. do you feel the same way about them?
  20. back to jesus and the bible... no one is going to agree on this. not even two christians. first off, the bible was initially written in hebrew. a language that happens to not have any vowels. that makes translating a bit difficult. also, punctuation did not exist at the time of the bible's inception. so a lot of it could be made up. also, the stories told in the bible have been passed down by many generations before they were actually written, and im sure for those of you who played a game of "broken telephone" when you were younger, you know that when stories are passed from one person to the next, information can be alterred. sometimes drastically. seeing as the new testament wasn't actually written until many years after jesus' death, how do we know that what is written is fact? similarly, the fact that jesus himself seems to represent the traditional epic "hero", who is present in stories written by people like virgil, who was around prior to jesus' time, shows to me that the bible is more of a literature than a history. heroes usually are some kind of foundling (like moses or mowgli), they endure some kind of trial (like beowulf, henry v), they "die", either figuratively or literally, and then experience a kind of rebirth. however, the bible is a historical text and has greatly affected who we are as human beings, regardless of what is actually written inside of it. in actuallity, the bible contains many of what jung would call archetypes. in many religions and faiths, prior to christianity, there have been "great flood" stories. things like that, which in my opinion, shouldn't be forgotten. man i've written too much. end.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.