I am taking a class on the beatles and they are not overrated and im not even a fan. The key to the beatles was doing whate most music do not not do, be original, and lucky for them, the chances they made where good. And they changed in a time when the concept of sell out did not exist. BTW, Yoko sucks she was in EVERY practice and recording they made! Every show of John, she is right behind. Never allow anyone who is not playing or adding music to the practice and recording environment! it always turns out bad.
Are the Beatles Overated?
- Thread starter crimsonfloyd
- Start date
Vimana
Member
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
I think they are very overrated, people think they were Gods of Rock N' Roll but they weren't really, A lot of there stuff I wouldn't even call Rock N' Roll, like Eleanor Rigby. They influenced pop music in a great way with the use of lots of instruments and instruments of different cultures, I've heard sitar in some pop songs today and I know people wouldn'tve done that if the Beatles had not been there. I think the Beatles are a great band, but they weren't that big of a rock thrown into the ocean of music, and there ripples were that big. The Beatles do help you appreciate lots of different types of music though. On another forum where lots of people worship The Beatles someone said they "tapped into human nature to make songs sound good to people", that was just bullshit, they just had talent and did their own thing.
The Beatles had some good songs. They tried some different ideas. Im not a fan and they are highly overrated in their effect on the type of music I listen to. I suppose my leanings are toward the Rolling Stones side of things.
Satanstoenail
My Larpstyle determines my Derpstyle
mdmatt4ever
Member
- Sep 27, 2006
- 2,741
- 23
- 38
i'll agree the stones are a better band and i like them more than the beatles. since the stones formed in 1962 they could possibly be the only rock band out there to honestly claim the beatles didn't really have a big influence on them. the stones early albums were basically blues cover albums with a few blues sounding originals on there. only between the buttons and satanic majesties request are beatles influenced.
anyways i don't agree that the beatles are overrated, i think they are overhyped which is different. to many people say they are the greatest band ever or what not. as far as the critics go the beatles are rated the way they should be. they are a hugely influential band who changed the world of music period. whatever some shmo on the street says about them and how good they are is that person hyping them up
mdmatt4ever
Member
- Sep 27, 2006
- 2,741
- 23
- 38
that remark was taken by the public the wrong way. i think john was trying to say more people listen to the beatles than go to church or read the bible which was probably true
zoidberg
Mallcore Kid
I believe he said "we're bigger than God" and you are right he was talking about the rediculous popularity they had and the bizare impact they had on the female population when they came to the States. I dont recall if he was a believer, Im thinking he was not.
Everything was taken wrong by the public in those decades and still today. theres always someone in the public eye that says something that came out wrong or makes the politically correct wankers start sobbin.
Vimana
Member
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
You're kidding right? As overrated as they are they kick the piss out of Fall Out Boy and Panic! At The Disco.
It was an interview or something wasnt it? I know I saw actual footage of him saying that and I dont believe the word he used was "more popular", seems it was bigger or larger, along that line.
hibernal_dream
A Mind Forever Voyaging
They are overrated in the same way as Elvis, to the extent that their style originated from black music. That they did not cite their influences means they do not deserve high level of recognition for what they did not create.
Vimana
Member
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
Modnar
Mindworm
Beatles is not overrated. Their music is still alive. Though I am not fan, I can say what they have done is something that just anybody can't do.
Vimana
Member
- Mar 2, 2007
- 11,671
- 20
- 38
I think they are, back in the 60's and 70's The Beatles were clearly more popular than Led Zeppelin. Now chances are if you ask someone if they like Led Zeppelin they will say: "Hell yeah! They're the best band ever!" and if you ask someone if they like The Beatles they will say: "I've never really listened to them that much" or "I've heard Strawberry Fields Forever and Day Tripper."
Zeppelin is a lot more popular than The Beatles to people my age.
Not really. People just say Elvis was the "King of Rock N' Roll" I don't disagree with that but by people saying he's king a lot of people think he started Rock N' Roll but he was just the first big white Rock N' Roll musician.
Elvis used to watch poor black men playing music when he was a kid. And I heard Elvis was really shy and had no friends, so all he did was play guitar and sing.
Zeppelin is a lot more popular than The Beatles to people my age.
Not really. People just say Elvis was the "King of Rock N' Roll" I don't disagree with that but by people saying he's king a lot of people think he started Rock N' Roll but he was just the first big white Rock N' Roll musician.
Elvis used to watch poor black men playing music when he was a kid. And I heard Elvis was really shy and had no friends, so all he did was play guitar and sing.
challenge_everything
Active Member
The Beatles are massively overrated. Most of their material is either bubblegum pop with the depth of a puddle of piss, or borrowed heavily from blues/rock artists who preceded them. The fact that their best song is a cover of Chuck Berry (Rock N Roll Music) speaks volumes.
Perdition's Light
dinosaur jr.
- Apr 5, 2004
- 1,497
- 1
- 38
Similar threads
