|
Post by debjorgo on Dec 12, 2013 22:51:01 GMT -5
On the Mindy Project from Nov 26th, Mindy gets a box wedding invitation from her ex-boyfriend that reads (it's voiced by the groom to be) "All You Need is Love, The Beatles". She opens it and it explodes shiny star-shaped confetti. A cool enough invitation.
I would not say that's nostalgia. That's the Beatles as still a part of modern day culture.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Dec 14, 2013 22:29:17 GMT -5
On Raising Hope from Nov/22, the young girl on the show says she names her photos. She shows a picture on her smart phone of an over easy egg between two stacks of hash browns. She says "I call this one Yoko Ono. See how the egg broke up the hash browns."
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Dec 18, 2013 19:26:45 GMT -5
CBS News Up To the Minute did a nearly 3 minute story overnight on the Bootleg and Capitol releases.
I normally would dub down these stories down but I recently switched to AT&T for my cable service. My DVR will not dub this down. I've got the 60 Minutes story on the Beatles from the other day, so I'm not sure what's going on here.
|
|
andyb
Very Clean
Posts: 878
|
Post by andyb on Dec 22, 2013 11:30:57 GMT -5
[/quote]God is there for you. Just talk to Him .[/quote]
I tried (after downing a full case of communion wine) and John Lennon answered, which was weird because I always thought Paul McCartney was God.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 14, 2014 22:27:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 14, 2014 23:47:20 GMT -5
I hope your 12 page running jab is aimed at the author of the article originally cited beause you know the saying, don't shoot the messenger.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 14, 2014 23:53:16 GMT -5
What is Ringo Starr today but the biggest nostalgia personality in popular culture. No one buys his new albums. He plays at third rate venues with third rate artists and the only role he can get in movies or TV is as a cross-dressing Power Puff Girl!
That is nostalgia. Paul's next I am afraid. But such is extreme old age.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jan 15, 2014 4:24:14 GMT -5
Not that extreme, my good man. When there is only 10 years between me and him, it's not extreme! You might bear that in mind in 10 years time when you will be my age!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 15, 2014 6:57:12 GMT -5
What is Ringo Starr today but the biggest nostalgia personality in popular culture. No one buys his new albums. He plays at third rate venues with third rate artists and the only role he can get in movies or TV is as a cross-dressing Power Puff Girl!. Ringo has done better for himself than any other band member who was "just the drummer" in a band, or who otherwise was "the last man in the band's importance ranking". Ringo has been nothing less than amazing for what he has done at his age, and as the 'least member of the Beatles'. He could have disappeared and rested on his laurels 25 years or more ago. JSD, you know that I always shoot straight from the hip too when kit comes to criticizing The Fabs, but man - you are so over the top with your castration of them that you even make me cringe.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 15, 2014 11:15:49 GMT -5
My point was Joe, Ringo is famous today only for being a Beatle, very, very few people care what he has done for the past 30 years as a solo artist.
I appreciate a lot of his solo efforts including Time Takes Time which I think is among the best solo albums out there. Of course, very few joined me as that is a completely forgotten album by all but us on Beatles Message Boards and even there, not all follow Ringo.
I'd say Ringo is the perfect example of a celebrity whose current fame is 99% nostalgia meaning most don't know or care what he is currently up to and only recognize him as an ex-Beatle.
I am allowed an opinion, right?
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 15, 2014 19:00:13 GMT -5
I hope your 12 page running jab is aimed at the author of the article originally cited beause you know the saying, don't shoot the messenger. Jab? There's a misunderstanding here. None of my posts were meant as jabs. The article was about the Beatles as a nostalgic act. My posts are saying the Beatles are still referenced as a current phenomenon. I've been listing when I hear the Beatles mentioned on TV. Occasionally it has a nostalgic ring to it, but usually it doesn't. For instance, this last post. Yahoo top story is about Paul and Ringo being on the upcoming Grammys show. I conceded that since it was a lifetime achievement award and the 50th anniversary, it may be nostalgia. The current top story on Yahoo has Gilligan and Mary Ann picture. Is this nostalgia. I'd say no. The story is about Gilligan's Island being the first time short shorts were worn on TV. It's relevant to today and not just an excuse to remember Gilligan's Island.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 15, 2014 19:10:51 GMT -5
I bought Time Takes Time and thought it was great. I got Choose Love a few years later and liked it even more. I've liked every album since. I went back and bought all the older albums I could get for under $50. They are a little spotty here and there but they are too good to be albums by the drummer.
But yeah, I'd say most people see Ringo as a nostalgic act. His concerts certainly are. He even has the one-hit wonder acts from yesteryear with him to sharpen the point.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 15, 2014 22:47:46 GMT -5
My point was Joe, Ringo is famous today only for being a Beatle, very, very few people care what he has done for the past 30 years as a solo artist. I appreciate a lot of his solo efforts including Time Takes Time which I think is among the best solo albums out there. Of course, very few joined me as that is a completely forgotten album by all but us on Beatles Message Boards and even there, not all follow Ringo. I'd say Ringo is the perfect example of a celebrity whose current fame is 99% nostalgia meaning most don't know or care what he is currently up to and only recognize him as an ex-Beatle. I am allowed an opinion, right? Of course I would agree that Ringo is more known as "A Beatle Of The Past", rather than for his own material. I just shrug and think "okay -- so?" . I really don't care how many people follow Ringo, or not. I've enjoyed his last few albums and I'm glad he's always been there for a TV appearance, or something. He has become my second favorite Beatle, hence my recent change in avatar!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 16, 2014 18:12:38 GMT -5
I hope your 12 page running jab is aimed at the author of the article originally cited beause you know the saying, don't shoot the messenger. Jab? There's a misunderstanding here. None of my posts were meant as jabs. The article was about the Beatles as a nostalgic act. My posts are saying the Beatles are still referenced as a current phenomenon. I've been listing when I hear the Beatles mentioned on TV. Occasionally it has a nostalgic ring to it, but usually it doesn't. For instance, this last post. Yahoo top story is about Paul and Ringo being on the upcoming Grammys show. I conceded that since it was a lifetime achievement award and the 50th anniversary, it may be nostalgia. The current top story on Yahoo has Gilligan and Mary Ann picture. Is this nostalgia. I'd say no. The story is about Gilligan's Island being the first time short shorts were worn on TV. It's relevant to today and not just an excuse to remember Gilligan's Island. Gilligan's Island got the cover story on Yahoo again today. Unfortunately for a bad reason. The Professor has passed away. The Yahoo link takes you to this site. www.tmz.com/2014/01/16/professor-gilligans-island-died-dead-russell-johnson/?ncid=webmail1
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jan 16, 2014 18:42:03 GMT -5
And now it's Dave Madden, Rueben Kincaid on the Partridge Family.
|
|
|
Post by anyoneanyhow on Jan 16, 2014 20:16:51 GMT -5
Ringo is a nostalgia piece. His hits are in the past, and while he releases excellent new music, people go to see him for his history as a Beatle and his hits from four decades ago. He goes on talk shows, but let's face it, he would no longer be invited if he wasn't n ex-Beatle with Beatles stories to share. He tours, but only performs a couple of his recent songs along with songs from the sixties and seventies. So as much as I love his recent works, there's no denying his relevance is in the past; he's not going to make a ton of fans with his new music, it's for the old fans.
Feel free to substitute "Paul" for Ringo, it works just as well. Or fill in just about any star if the sixties or seventies.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 17, 2014 7:13:49 GMT -5
Ringo is a nostalgia piece. His hits are in the past, and while he releases excellent new music, people go to see him for his history as a Beatle and his hits from four decades ago. He goes on talk shows, but let's face it, he would no longer be invited if he wasn't n ex-Beatle with Beatles stories to share. He tours, but only performs a couple of his recent songs along with songs from the sixties and seventies. So as much as I love his recent works, there's no denying his relevance is in the past; he's not going to make a ton of fans with his new music, it's for the old fans. Feel free to substitute "Paul" for Ringo, it works just as well. Or fill in just about any star if the sixties or seventies. So what's the point? Like you've said, we can easily substitute Paul (or other older artists) as well -- people mainly go to Paul's shows because he was once a Beatle, and he hasn't had a #1 single in over 30 years. The crowd mainly wants "Beatles Moldy oldies" in the set list. Paul would not be selling out like he does if he wasn;t one of the main Beatles members. So I'm asking, what is the point of this observation? As long as we can enjoy our favorite people, and they're still out there making us happy, so what?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 17, 2014 13:14:08 GMT -5
The point on nostalgia was I posted a link to an article in post #1 where the writer told us Beatles fans and James Bond fans that we are wallowing in nostalgia and that we need to get in the current world.
I was lamenting that Ringo Starr is the perfect example of an artist who 99.999% of Western Culture views soley from a nostalgic perspective. We are that 00.001% that view Ringo as still a viable artist making good music.
Fairly large segments still crave new McCartney music, new Dylan music, new Roger Waters music so I don't think we can completely substitute Paul or Dylan for Ringo on the nostalgia scale but for Paul at least, he is sliding that way.
Sure we enjoy Paul and Ringo no matter what but the writer of the article says we only enjoy even their new music because we are trapped in yesterday!
But hey, last night I put on Ringo Starr's Time Takes Time and I had the most amazing listening experience ever! That album is great, every single song! I felt like I was listening to Revolver, SPLHCB or Abbey Road it was that fantastic! I had not played it in several years and it was a sonic treat all the way through!
Ringo worked hard on that album and it shows. What a great solo album. I think it has aged better as a complete album than even RINGO. It may not have a song as great as "Photograph" but there are a couple clunkers on RINGO but none on TTT! I do think "Don't Go Where The Road Don't Go" is among the very best solo Beatles songs ever and it rocks! I can even forgive the namecheck to "It Don't Come Easy" in it because it was the first time Ringo did that and it fits so well in the lyric about the tough times Ringo had getting sober.
I urge all Board Members to stop what they are doing and play Ringo's Time Takes Time very loud! It was a crime that this album did not chart well and only us diehards know about it.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 17, 2014 14:12:31 GMT -5
Sure we enjoy Paul and Ringo no matter what but the writer of the article says we only enjoy even their new music because we are trapped in yesterday! And rightly proud of it, at least I am! Oh I believe in Yesterday ... it's a better place to be from where I'm sitting. You didn't have do deal with Miley Cyrus' tongue in your face, or Nicki Minaj or cRap "music" .... with news reports of schools/theaters/malls getting shot up by children weaned on violent video games every other day... and walking around a planet of young and old citizens with dumb phones glued to their hands!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 17, 2014 15:47:12 GMT -5
Sure we enjoy Paul and Ringo no matter what but the writer of the article says we only enjoy even their new music because we are trapped in yesterday! And rightly proud of it, at least I am! Oh I believe in Yesterday ... it's a better place to be from where I'm sitting. You didn't have do deal with Miley Cyrus' tongue in your face, or Nicki Minaj or cRap "music" .... with news reports of schools/theaters/malls getting shot up by children weaned on violent video games every other day... and walking around a planet of young and old citizens with dumb phones glued to their hands! All true Joe. Now take out Time Takes Time and play it loud!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jan 17, 2014 15:57:49 GMT -5
Now take out Time Takes Time and play it loud! Indeed I do! (Well, minus "Runaways" and "What Goes Around" ) . But I also play Y NOT and RINGO 2012 pretty loud, too. Nothing like hearing from a blast from our past.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 17, 2014 17:22:37 GMT -5
Now take out Time Takes Time and play it loud! Indeed I do! (Well, minus "Runaways" and "What Goes Around" ) . But I also play Y NOT and RINGO 2012 pretty loud, too. Nothing like hearing from a blast from our past. You know, I always thought "What Goes Around" was filler but I heard it last night proper for the first time ever! I thought it a wonderfully cosmic song.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Jan 17, 2014 18:38:51 GMT -5
I now rank Time Takes Time as Ringo's best album. All the songs on it really flow well together.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jan 19, 2014 21:18:17 GMT -5
I now rank Time Takes Time as Ringo's best album. All the songs on it really flow well together. I do too KC! RINGO has more great songs but then some real duds. TMT has fewer "great" songs but the whole album is strong. I just wish more than us Beatles nerds knew about it!
|
|
|
Post by anyoneanyhow on Jan 19, 2014 21:25:21 GMT -5
Ringo is a nostalgia piece. His hits are in the past, and while he releases excellent new music, people go to see him for his history as a Beatle and his hits from four decades ago. He goes on talk shows, but let's face it, he would no longer be invited if he wasn't n ex-Beatle with Beatles stories to share. He tours, but only performs a couple of his recent songs along with songs from the sixties and seventies. So as much as I love his recent works, there's no denying his relevance is in the past; he's not going to make a ton of fans with his new music, it's for the old fans. Feel free to substitute "Paul" for Ringo, it works just as well. Or fill in just about any star if the sixties or seventies. So what's the point? Like you've said, we can easily substitute Paul (or other older artists) as well -- people mainly go to Paul's shows because he was once a Beatle, and he hasn't had a #1 single in over 30 years. The crowd mainly wants "Beatles Moldy oldies" in the set list. Paul would not be selling out like he does if he wasn;t one of the main Beatles members. So I'm asking, what is the point of this observation? As long as we can enjoy our favorite people, and they're still out there making us happy, so what?
|
|
|
Post by anyoneanyhow on Jan 19, 2014 21:36:14 GMT -5
So what's the point? Like you've said, we can easily substitute Paul (or other older artists) as well -- people mainly go to Paul's shows because he was once a Beatle, and he hasn't had a #1 single in over 30 years. The crowd mainly wants "Beatles Moldy oldies" in the set list. Paul would not be selling out like he does if he wasn;t one of the main Beatles members. So I'm asking, what is the point of this observation? As long as we can enjoy our favorite people, and they're still out there making us happy, so what? My point exactly- nothing's wrong with that! Everyone should enjoy their favorite sixties artists, I sure do! And for those of us into the artists, even Ringo is not a nostalgia act ..some of us really look forward to seeing what he does next, I'm glad to hear he should be releasing a new album this year because I do enjoy his new music so much. But I know for the public at large he is that guy from the sixties and seventies. But it's fair to says bout almost every sixties artist, so Ringo doesn't has to be singled out. What I'm saying us, lookit, Paul just put out his best album in many years. When he tours next, is the set list going to be about New? Or like his last 5 or so tours is it going to be 1 or 2 newish songs, 5 songs from pre-WOA wings, and 20 or so Beatles songs? Because those are nostalgia act set lists. Maybe next time we can give Ringo a break and use Paul as the example of a nostalgia act, because there really isn't any difference between those two. Neither is getting played on Top 40 radio.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2014 21:10:05 GMT -5
And Sayne can only be played by: And I have given some thought to JoeK. Who would be a tough, in-yer-face kind of NYC guy. Why: Andrew Dice Clay Andrew Dice Clay was and is a total horrible sicl woman-hater and made this seem normal,''funny'' and acceptable!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 17, 2014 22:11:00 GMT -5
Yeah, Joe's got better hair anyway than Andrew Dice Clay, bad choice by me all the way around.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2014 0:38:58 GMT -5
[Sigh....] Actually, it is kind of a dumb name. Most band names are. One of the worst? No, but I get their point.[/quote Well, John Lennon who was brilliant,named them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2014 0:42:20 GMT -5
Actually, it is kind of a dumb name. Most band names are. One of the worst? No, but I get their point. Amazing how it's okay for you, sayne. to speak "factually" here, but you get so irate when others do that! Anyway -- I disagree with the article. I think "Beatles" is a very cool name, and far from "dumb" or "stupid". To me it's a rather clever idea, emphasizing the "beat" and changing it from 'beetles'. To me, their only "point" would be the one atop their heads. They're also probably part of the current "let's tear down the Beatles Classic Legend" brigade that's sometimes in vogue these days. No,they did at least sensibly say that the Beatles are the greatest group in history.They just don't like their name.
|
|