Nirvana reunites with Paul McCartney in Kurt's role

[D-Man]

Because the lyrics are pure poetry, D-Man, pure poetry. Just check this out:

"Rape me
Rape me, my friend
Rape me
Rape me again"

How can you argue with such thought provoking, introspective and pure poetic lyrics?

Yeah. I must be some kind of fucking ignorant moron. That should be framed and hung next to the Mona Lisa.

 

[D-Man]

[Alice in Chains]Much better than Nirvana.

+1

+725636347

Man, Alice in Chains were fucking awesome. Layne Staley and Jerry Cantrell are seriously two of the most underrated songwriters in rock.

This is the point that I bring up every time people praise Nirvana. Alice in Chains was superior to Nirvana in every single way except for songwriting (they're about the same) and the order in which they were introduced to the world. I will always firmly believe that if Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" wasn't the first single to hit radios, catapulting the grunge era, then another band easily could've taken their place at the top of the pedestal. Especially a band like Alice in Chains who had amazing song writing, fantastic individual musicians, unforgettable harmonies, and a sound that pretty music captured every element of the grunge genre of music.

To me, saying Nirvana and Kurt Cobain are overrated is like saying Jimi Hendrix was overrated.

Except they're two completely different types of artists. Hendrix reinvented the way a guitar can be played. It was like reinventing the wheel.

Nirvana merely started a new genre of music because, out of their era of artists, they were the first ones to get radio play. Plus, "Smells Like Teen Spirit" was an incredible song. Hell, even I'll admit that... I still love the song to this day. It's catchy as hell and it really brought something different to the table since it was a polar opposite of the music ruling the pop-charts back then; Hair/Glam Metal.

But Nirvana was nothing more than a band that wrote dark lyrics and had extremely redundant riffs and music. Teen Spirit, as great as it was, just seems like nothing more than a modern version of Louie, Louie to me in its redundancy.

The reason why Hendrix doesn't get shit on by internet music snobs is because it's "cool" to love anything from the 1960's and 1970's and consider it the be-all-end-all of music. Since Nirvana is more recent, and since there hasn't been that "Change the industry forever" type of band or musician since them (Eminem maybe being the one exception), it's much easier to sit there and say Nirvana is "overrated."

But was it Nirvana who changed music forever or was it the movement of grunge music that they were a part of? That's what gets me every time. People blow them up so much for being the "messiah" of music during that genre when they were just a band who took advantage of their incredible timing when they entered the charts.

Nirvana is far from overrated. Even if you don't like their music, you cannot sit there and deny the fact that they shook-up and changed the music industry as people knew it. They did. Period.

Once again, they shook it up or the grunge music genre as a whole shook it up? I respect your opinion but I think it was the genre with Nirvana pulling the short straw and being at the helm of the movement.

Does Kurt Cobain's death contribute to their mystique? Sure, but so what? Just because Heath Ledger died after doing the Joker doesn't make his performance "overrated" because it added even more mystique to an already brilliant portrayal, just as Cobain's death doesn't mean the impact Nirvana had wasn't as big as people like to believe it was before his death. They were that big, and the impact they had was astronomical.

Huge difference between these two. One of these guys was an aspiring actor who was only scratching the surface of his acting career. Ledger had plenty more to give us. Although Nirvana was still on the rise, they clearly accomplished everything they set out to in their first two albums.

Plus, Heath Ledger's death was an accident. It was something that wasn't supposed to happen. Kurt put a shotgun to his head and pulled the trigger. That was his third attempt at suicide. The guy was itching to move on from this planet. And his fans make him out to be a martyr? Do they honestly think Kurt shot himself "for the music" or "for world peace?" No, he did it because he was a fucking psychopath. That's not the type of guy I'm going to praise or compared to a gifted, young actor whose life was cut short too quickly due to a mistake. Kurt's suicide was no mistake.

As far as lyrics and all that stuff... a lot of the most lauded rock bands lyrics aren't good to the naked eye. Regardless, you can't deny that Cobain's lyrics got to people and that's all that matters.

Read Sly's earlier post about "Rape Me." Those lyrics "got to you?" Did you misinterpret them the same way that Slash-LN did? I think that's the only way people could ever understand the crap Cobain wrote... by misinterpretation.

Also, people forget that Cobain was a TREMENDOUS guitar player, and that Dave Grohl is one of the greatest drummers of all time. Even if you don't like their lyrics or Cobain's voice, their band had this incredible sound to it and that more than anything is what blew them up. The guitar riff on Smells Like Teen Spirit for example is what made that song so popular over the lyrics.

First off, to this day, Teen Spirit is one of my favorite songs. But that doesn't make me love Nirvana as a whole. All of the elements of Teen Spirit were in the right place at the right time. Hell, if that song came out today it would still be a multi-platinum hit. That's how good that ONE song was. The rest of Nirvana's music is pure, garbled, confusing, noisy shit.

I'll agree with your assessment of Cobain's music prowess, though. The guy really was a great lefty guitar player. Grohl was a good drummer but I think you went a little too far with how good he was. He's a much better frontman and singer than he was a drummer.

 

[D-Man]

I mean all the other bands at the time were better musically gifted. Alice In Chains, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam etc. Heck I'd throw Stone Temple Pilots in there as well. Don't get me wrong I love Nirvana but from a technical stand point they weren't the best and while I do think Cobain was a great songwriter, again he wasn't the best. I feel Jerry Cantrell and Chris Cornell were far better. And as a singer, again Cornell was better, Layne Staley was superior and Eddie Vedder was better and so was Scott Weiland

I couldn't echo this post enough.

 

[Danger Burger]

He took his vorpal sword in hand;
Long time the manxome foe he sought—
So rested he by the Tumtum tree,
And stood awhile in thought.

Semolina pilchard, climbing up the Eiffel Tower.
Elementary penguin singing Hari Krishna.
Man, you should have seen them kicking Edgar Allan Poe.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen.
I am the walrus, goo goo g'joob g'goo goo g'joob

Yes I eat cow - I am not proud
Is he in an easychair?
Oversized rock
I don't like you anyway

someones married their everyones
laughed their cryings and did their dance
(sleep wake hope and then)they
said their nevers they slept their dream

Poetry, Lyrics... Theyre never going to be everyones cup of tea. Two of those are famous poems, one beatles and one Nirvana. Each are arguably shit.

The idea of bashing a guy because lyrics that didnt get to you the same way they did to him are stupid. And its very easy to find the worst of any artist. Feeling is feeling, meaning often trancends the authors intentions. Most of literary theory is based on that premise. And the mona lisa is just some womans face. It can fuck right off too.

 

[Барбоса]

Poetry is a load of bollocks anyway

 

[D-Man]

Poetry is a load of bollocks anyway

Honestly, a lot of times it is. People use words like "poetry" and "art" to glorify they're ******ed way of expressing themselves. They're overused cop-out words.

 

[Alex]

Honestly, a lot of times it is. People use words like "poetry" and "art" to glorify they're ******ed way of expressing themselves. They're overused cop-out words.

As much as it seems ironic coming from an art student, it is.

 

[jmt225]

Read Sly's earlier post about "Rape Me." Those lyrics "got to you?" Did you misinterpret them the same way that Slash-LN did? I think that's the only way people could ever understand the crap Cobain wrote... by misinterpretation.

I didn't like Rape Me either, but that's one song out of dozens. You can't judge any musician's worth just based off of one song.

 

[D-Man]

I didn't like Rape Me either, but that's one song out of dozens. You can't judge any musician's worth just based off of one song.

Agreed but it was the first (and most convenient) example I could make towards my argument.

 

[JGlass]

First of all, I love when people use someone's liking for Nickelback as an insult. Considering they're one of the biggest bands on the planet, your jibe doesn't bother me much... probably in the same way that my comments about Nirvana don't bother you much.

Justin Bieber is also one of the biggest musical acts on the planet, do you like him too?

By the way, were you even BORN when Nirvana was out?

Yes.

Not really.

Clever retort. I assume you just couldn't think of anything better because of how right I am.

Here's an article that pretty much backs up everything I said: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/4652653#.UMnqUbZpYuc

And this is a special bit for you...

A cynic might charge that the heroin-addicted Cobain’s best career move was to die young and violently — and in a sense his self-annihilation did confirm an unwillingness to “compromise,” to reconcile his self-loathing with his newfound fame and fortune — but this would ignore the brilliance and significance of his best work, in particular the mega-platinum 1991 album “Nevermind” (more than 14 million copies sold), that established not just “grunge” (the Seattle-based hybrid of punk and big-riff metal), but also the cultural and commercial viability of alternative rock in general.

This comment explains a lot of my opinion on Nirvana.

Yeah, because they kicked glam and hair in the nads and made music meaningful again, we get it.

On that note: Who else is happy to see Rush go into the Hall?

This explains a lot about you...

I mean all the other bands at the time were better musically gifted. Alice In Chains, Soundgarden, Pearl Jam etc. Heck I'd throw Stone Temple Pilots in there as well. Don't get me wrong I love Nirvana but from a technical stand point they weren't the best and while I do think Cobain was a great songwriter, again he wasn't the best. I feel Jerry Cantrell and Chris Cornell were far better. And as a singer, again Cornell was better, Layne Staley was superior and Eddie Vedder was better and so was Scott Weiland

More musically gifted is one thing, but that hardly makes them a better rock and roll band. Have you ever heard Mick Jagger sing? Hell, The Ramones are considered legendary, and they could hardly play their instruments! Sure, there are more great acts in rock and roll history with musicians that were immensely talented, but that's only part of the appeal. The main appeal of rock and roll is its rebellious nature, which is why guys like Mick Jagger or The Ramones are rock and roll legends. Mick Jagger oozed sexuality when he performed and had the personality of a rocker, and The Ramones came out and showed the world that you don't need to be classically trained musicians to rock.

That's why Nirvana is better than any of the bands you mentioned. Nevermind especially just feels like a giant middle finger to the conventional rock and roll at the time. It said, "We can rock twice as hard as anyone else, and all we need is three guys, a guitar, a bass, and some drums, and no gimmicks." Try as they might, Alice in Chains, STP, and Pearl Jam can never recreate the feeling that Nevermind produced, and rock music is about feeling above all else.

 

[D-Man]

Clever retort. I assume you just couldn't think of anything better because of how right I am.

Here's an article that pretty much backs up everything I said: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/4652653#.UMnqUbZpYuc

And this is a special bit for you...





Yeah, because they kicked glam and hair in the nads and made music meaningful again, we get it.



This explains a lot about you...

I love how your debating style is always going from zero to hostile in no time flat.

Anyway, I could care less about a random article that you quoted. For every article that praises Cobain, I can find three that downgrade him. This is a matter of opinion and my opinion is of the fact that Cobain and Nirvana sucked and benefited from circumstance and timing.

Granted, their rise certainly did put a nail in the coffin of hair metal. That is a fact and I can never argue that. But I stand by my opinion that if Alice in Chains got the first grunge single to hit the airwaves, they would be praised the same way that Nirvana was and Layne Staley's death would've been a bigger tragedy than Cobain's. At least Staley's death was accidental.

 

[JGlass]

I love how your debating style is always going from zero to hostile in no time flat.

I fail to see how my response was any more hostile than the "Were you even BORN when Nirvana was out?" bit.

Anyway, I could care less about a random article that you quoted. For every article that praises Cobain, I can find three that downgrade him. This is a matter of opinion and my opinion is of the fact that Cobain and Nirvana sucked and benefited from circumstance and timing.

Considering that most rock critics hold Cobain in extremely high regard, I sincerely doubt that's true.

As for your opinion... it's still wrong. Nirvana was at the helm of the grunge movement, they were the ones that brought it into the mainstream. Sure, Pearl Jam probably could have done it, but they didn't. This especially rings true when you consider that Ten came out just a month after Nevermind, and it never passed Nevermind on the Billboard 200. Ten got as high as two, but it never passed Nevermind.

Granted, their rise certainly did put a nail in the coffin of hair metal. That is a fact and I can never argue that. But I stand by my opinion that if Alice in Chains got the first grunge single to hit the airwaves, they would be praised the same way that Nirvana was and Layne Staley's death would've been a bigger tragedy than Cobain's. At least Staley's death was accidental.

Considering Pearl Jam couldn't do it and Pearl Jam is a much bigger act than Alice in Chains ever was, I doubt that's true.

And I refuse to engage on the "Whose death was more tragic" front, because that's kind of... twisted.

 

[justinsayne]

Nirvana was just in the right place at the right time when the stupid grunge movement started. If it wasn't them it would have been one of the other hundreds of bands releasing the same kind of music at the time.

I find the fact that people want to look up to & praise a guy who was a selfish drug abusive pile of shit, that killed himself, & left his only child in the care of an even bigger worthless pile of shit, a bit fucked up. I seriously have to question what the fuck is wrong with you people?

 

[D-Man]

I fail to see how my response was any more hostile than the "Were you even BORN when Nirvana was out?" bit.

Fair enough.

Considering that most rock critics hold Cobain in extremely high regard, I sincerely doubt that's true.

Here's one by Virgin Media which is a pretty reputable source:

http://www.virginmedia.com/music/features/why-nevermind-by-nirvana-is-overrated.php

That took me all of 5 seconds to find. I'm sure I can find many more.

As for your opinion... it's still wrong.

I fail to comprehend how an opinion can be wrong. Opinions are, well, opinionated.

Nirvana was at the helm of the grunge movement, they were the ones that brought it into the mainstream. Sure, Pearl Jam probably could have done it, but they didn't.

Wow... I mean, that's a really solid statement. They could've have done it but they didn't. Brilliant.

This especially rings true when you consider that Ten came out just a month after Nevermind, and it never passed Nevermind on the Billboard 200. Ten got as high as two, but it never passed Nevermind.

Of course it didn't pass Nevermind. The grunge era posterchild was chosen the day that Teen Spirit his the radio. Once that was shoven down our throats, it was hard for us to turn in a different direction. As much as I dislike Nirvana, they didn't "suck." They were an ok band... just very overrated. So people are obviously going to continue to like them both because they're a decent band and they were the first band to shuffle in a new era.

Considering Pearl Jam couldn't do it and Pearl Jam is a much bigger act than Alice in Chains ever was, I doubt that's true.

You kind of contradicted yourself here, unless I'm reading it wrong. A minute ago, you mentioned how Pearl Jam could have done it if they were chosen first. So it's not a matter of can or can't... it was what happened versus what didn't happen. Once again, pure speculation and opinion on my part but I think it's a fair assessment, nonetheless.

And I refuse to engage on the "Whose death was more tragic" front, because that's kind of... twisted.

Agreed 100%. I'll drop that.

 

[The_Reptile_]

Nirvana was just in the right place at the right time when the stupid grunge movement started. If it wasn't them it would have been one of the other hundreds of bands releasing the same kind of music at the time.

This is pretty much it. If Nirvana weren't the ones to become the smash superstars then it would have been AiC, Soundgarden, or (most likely) Pearl Jam. If Nirvana didn't have that one song with Smells Like Teen Spirit at the right time one of the other 3 giants of the time would have taken their place as the face of the grunge movement, and we'd be discussing the supreme greatness of them and their effects on rock music FOREVAR!!!

 

[JGlass]

Nirvana was just in the right place at the right time when the stupid grunge movement started. If it wasn't them it would have been one of the other hundreds of bands releasing the same kind of music at the time.

I just proved that this type of thinking isn't true, or at the very least irrelevant.

I find the fact that people want to look up to & praise a guy who was a selfish drug abusive pile of shit, that killed himself, & left his only child in the care of an even bigger worthless pile of shit, a bit fucked up. I seriously have to question what the fuck is wrong with you people?

I don't know if anyone in this thread is looking up to Kurt Cobain, but there is no denying that he was extraordinarily talented.

 

[D-Man]

Nirvana was just in the right place at the right time when the stupid grunge movement started. If it wasn't them it would have been one of the other hundreds of bands releasing the same kind of music at the time.

I find the fact that people want to look up to & praise a guy who was a selfish drug abusive pile of shit, that killed himself, & left his only child in the care of an even bigger worthless pile of shit, a bit fucked up. I seriously have to question what the fuck is wrong with you people?

This is why justinsayne is one of my favorite posters.

 

[Alex]

Nirvana wouldn't have been shit if Mother Love Bone hadn't disbanded because their singer Andrew Wood died. Nirvana were just in the right place at the right time to capitalise.

Mother Love Bone were being touted as the next big thing before they'd even released their debut. And if Wood hadn't died they would have been. Wood was a better frontman than Cobain and wrote better lyrics as well.

Nirvana's like John Cena, able to capitalise on the absence on someone.

[YOUTUBE]lH0gnwtSEGI[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]k7CPIXnaeeQ[/YOUTUBE]

And the reason Pearl Jam, Alice In Chains etc couldn't knock Nirvana off their perch was the public wouldn't let them. Using the Cena analogy, Nirvana were great at what they do no denying that, but there are overall better workers (CM Punk, Daniel Bryan etc) who the public like and all, but they won't let them take Cena's place.

 

[D-Man]

Mudhoney was a major force in grunge, too. They just never caught onto mainstream but they were legends in their own genre.

 

[The_Reptile_]

I'm actually not that big of a Mother Love Bone guy, but that's probably because I'm a diehard Eddie Vedder fan.

 

[Alex]

Mudhoney was a major force in grunge, too. They just never caught onto mainstream but they were legends in their own genre.

They pretty much started the genre (as well as Mark Arm's previous band Green River)

 

[Барбоса]

Out of all the bands mentioned in this thread, there have only been maybe four that I like.

 

[justinsayne]

I love how the people who were running around in there poopy filled diapers when the grunge movement was in full effect think they know more about then the people were old enough to live, & experience it first hand.

 

[D-Man]

I love how the people who were running around in there poopy filled diapers when the grunge movement was in full effect think they know more about then the people were old enough to live, & experience it first hand.

Uh oh... it's on now.

Be careful when you make statements like this... some posters on this site actually think that reading the internet, watching YouTube, and listening to 20-year old hearsay gives them the right to know just as much about shit that happened before their time as we do. It's basically impossible, but they think it anyway.

 

[Барбоса]

Just to let everyone know, Pearl Jam and Alice in Chains are not in my four.