Metacritic.com
Film Video/DVD Music Games Books TV
Metacritic    Metacritic Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Music  Hop To Forums  Music Critics & Publications    Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time
Page 1 2 3 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
-star Rating Rate It!  Login/Join 
"Forum Moderator"
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by paxsoprano:


And no, I dont think Vanilla Ice has had the cultural impact of Eminem.


I was mostly kidding, but I'll be a little honest here: white kids in the suburbs of Minnesota (like me) were not willing to take any rap on until Vanilla Ice. He made "pop rap" something that suburban white kids liked.

Personally, I'm not sure what lasting cultural impact Eminem will have. But I think the handful of "pop rap" acts (Hammer, Young MC) have had a huge impact on selling rap to the mainstream. I think Vanilla Ice, as wretched as he was, made white rappers safe for consumption. The Beasties paved the way, but they were never really as pop radio friendly as the Queen/Bowie riff from "Ice Ice Baby."

And yes, bob, the New Kids were influential. They were the template for N'Sync. But then again, the Beach Boys were the template for all boy bands.
 
Posts: 3875 | Location: ATL, GA | Registered: 25 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
The Beach Boys sung multiple melodies and harmonies at once, and they wrote their own stuff. If the current boy bands did that, they wouldn't be quite so objectionable.

I don't see Eminem so much a big innovator as a product of current trends.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Super Bad-Ass Jedi
Posted Hide Post
I have one question. WTF are "the current boy bands"? Beach Boys Rule. The White Rapper Thread Sucks. Don't take any of this personal.


"Naked Woman, Naked Man
Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
 
Posts: 12874 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bobthespirit:
The Beach Boys sung multiple melodies and harmonies at once, and they wrote their own stuff. If the current boy bands did that, they wouldn't be quite so objectionable.


The "current boy bands" certainly don't write their own music, but most of them can sing...it's just that they're not singing anything of a piece with "Help Me Rhonda." And most boy bands have another thing in common with the Beach Boys...a svengali manager-type. The main thing they have in common, though, is that they were products of a calculated appeal to the youth culture. The Beach Boys, in the beginning, were as much a package meant to appeal to a certain market as N*Sync or the New Kids. They grew into so much more (and they had considerably more talent), of course, but they started off in the same way as most of the popular boy bands.
 
Posts: 3875 | Location: ATL, GA | Registered: 25 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Guru
Posted Hide Post
Where did this "boy band" subject come up? Didn't boy bands die out a few years ago along with the tech bubble? There are no popular "boy bands" right now! As for the Beach Boys, the only similarity between them and N*SYNC, BSB is that they both have falsetto harmonies every once and a while...the similarities end there.
 
Posts: 778 | Registered: 19 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by paxsoprano:
Where did this "boy band" subject come up? Didn't boy bands die out a few years ago along with the tech bubble? There are no popular "boy bands" right now! As for the Beach Boys, the only similarity between them and N*SYNC, BSB is that they both have falsetto harmonies every once and a while...the similarities end there.


I own almost every book ever written on the Beach Boys and I always found the way they were "assembled" to be the most striking aspect of how the band began. To me, the beginning of the band don't sound very different from the way the New Kids, Backstreet Boys, and N*Sync began. Of course, the Beach Boys totally outgrew the tiny slice of pop culture they were targeting (surf culture) and became, in my estimation, one of the three greatest rock and roll/pop groups ever.

The genesis of the discussion, by the way, was bob's claim that my attempt to claim that Vanilla Ice should get credit for blazing a trail followed by Eminem meant that New Kids on the Block should be influential for opening the door for N*Sync, et al.

Technically, I think Menudo and The Jets beat New Kids to the punch, in terms of being some of the first "boy bands" but I think that The Jets had girls and boys in the group.
 
Posts: 3875 | Location: ATL, GA | Registered: 25 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
That phenomenon isn't particular to boy bands.

I saw this special on grunge once where they said that the idea behind Alice in Chains was to 'Find some guys and put them in flannel'.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Guru
Posted Hide Post
Weren't two of the Beach Boys brothers? or am I just imagining things...None of the members of N*SYNC or Backstreet Boys even knew each other before they were gathered together from their respected talent schools in Florida by some fat record company whore.
 
Posts: 778 | Registered: 19 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Super Bad-Ass Jedi
Posted Hide Post
Dennis, Carl and Brian Wilson were all brothers who were in the Beach Boys. It's a sad story which I can't get into now, but Dennis drowned in 1983, and Carl died from lung cancer in 1998. I guess we should be thankful that enough of Brian's brain has survived to give us SMiLE.


"Naked Woman, Naked Man
Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
 
Posts: 12874 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by paxsoprano:
So Bobthespirit, the mystery is finally revealed...all your animosity toward Rolling Stone is rooted in their blasphemous misplacement of the esteemed No Doubt catalogue.


'Example'. Say it with me. 'Example'.

They're random gushing of Eminem is also kind of annoying. And if you like I can go down the list and find a dozen other things wrong with it.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
Mike Love (who carries on at state fairs with a hideous abomination he calls "The Beach Boys' playing the godawful "Kokomo") was a first cousin, and Al Jardine was a school friend. They had been musically involved together before the band came into being, strongly encouraged and funded by Murray Wilson, father of Brian, Carl, and Dennis. Brian and Dennis had previously tried and failed to get recording contracts on their own.
 
Posts: 3875 | Location: ATL, GA | Registered: 25 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
"Forum Moderator"
Super Bad-Ass Jedi
Posted Hide Post
It seems like a lot of people are up in arms about Eminem's appearance just because they don't like rap. I'm not a huge rap fan, but I do realize that Eminem is a talented guy, and he's had a pretty big impact on the genre in past 5 years or so.

I'm not a fan of pop r&b either, but I'm not gonna say Michael Jackson doesn't belong on the list.


-----
I’ll be Ben Gazzara, you’ll be Gena Rowlands.

 
Posts: 5176 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
I didn't see any mention of "I don't like rap," there are plenty here who listen to it often or like some of it. This is who they thought Eminem was better than:

  • Tupac Shakur
  • Black Sabbath
  • Carlos Santana
  • Guns N' Roses

I don't think that anyone can agree with that. See the list for yourself
 
Posts: 3502 | Location: Strange Days | Registered: 18 October 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
There are plenty of legitimately talented rappers. Eminem may be okay at putting beats together, but his catalogue is 100% image-oriented.

Then again, Rolling Stone is an image-oriented magazine.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Enthusiast
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bobthespirit:
Eminem may be okay at putting beats together, but his catalogue is 100% image-oriented.

Actually, Eminem sucks to the highest of Heavens at putting beats together. Dre's the production genius. Eminem's production attempts are all the same... bad.

Don't believe me? Listen to Jay-Z's "Moment of Clarity" and Nas' "The Cross"

ericg75
Silly generalization, man. I'm a major Hip-Hop fan, and if I had any Em CD after "The Marshal Mathers LP," I'd use it as a coaster.
 
Posts: 105 | Location: New York | Registered: 12 April 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
exactly em is easily more well known for his creative word play and unique delivery as an mc.he basically got his name battling, as it was shown in his movie.

I totally agree with merq, there are a few songs that dont wea ron my nerves but most of his production is terrible.
 
Posts: 1103 | Location: Seattle | Registered: 25 May 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Guru
Posted Hide Post
Arsefaces & Their Place On The List:
22. U2
23. Bruse Springsteen
35. Michael Jackson
36. Madonna
70. The Police
75. The Eagles (not really assholes but shouldn't be on the list)
82. Eminem
86. 2pac
90. Carlos Santana
92. Guns & Roses (obviously taking the terms "artist' lightly)

(Why is both Eric Clapton and Cream on the list?)


________________________________________________________
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." - Hunter S. Thompson
tinymixtapes.com / The Skinny / PopMatters
 
Posts: 996 | Location: Vansterdam, Canada | Registered: 28 November 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
Hmm....I would think Santana deserves to be there based on his early stuff such as Abraxis.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Filmore Holmes:
Arsefaces & Their Place On The List:
22. U2
-Agreed, 22 is far too high and I'm not even sure if I would put them on
35. Michael Jackson -I am sure that you can appreciate the effect that Michael had on pop many other genres, I think that he should be on the list and I think that 35 is a bit too high, but not too much.
36. Madonna -I will certainly agree with you here, it looks like they just needed someone to follow Jackson and decided to take his female version. She has no place on the list.
70. The Police-
75. The Eagles (not really assholes but shouldn't be on the list) -You were on a roll, but what? I have a soft spot for The Eagles, and I just think that they created far to many hits for them not to be on the list. I would put them in the 50s, so they actually underrated them.
82. Eminem -Agreed
86. 2pac-Agree
90. Carlos Santana- It is probably because of his older stuff. Most of his music now is pointless, but he had a decent run before then. 90 seems like a good spot for him.
92. Guns & Roses (obviously taking the terms "artist' lightly)- Huh? I guess they are a bit overrated in general, but what don't you like about them being that close to the last on the list? Seems like a decent spot, you just have to consider the hits.

(Why is both Eric Clapton and Cream on the list?)
 
Posts: 3502 | Location: Strange Days | Registered: 18 October 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Jedi
Posted Hide Post
Well, just for politic reasons, if a band has a lot of rock hits, Rolling Stone's going to include them.

But there are plenty of bands with lots of hits which have little or no artistic merit. Eminem, for instance, is an example of Dr Dre doing intensive focus group research to find out what would sell, recruiting some guy off the street who can rap in decent rythym, donating some great beats and telling him what sort of stuff to produce. (And by telling him that ego self gratification is a wonderful thing.)

It's easy to misjudge Santana because of Supernatural, but looking at Abraxis you see why he belongs on the list.

U2 and Eagles are bands I would group together as infusing a certain kind of charisma into already existing trends in rock, then taking credit for those trends.
 
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community Page 1 2 3  
 

Metacritic    Metacritic Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Music  Hop To Forums  Music Critics & Publications    Rolling Stone's 100 Greatest Artists of All Time

©2006 CNET Networks Inc. All rights reserved.
 
Home | FILM | DVD/VIDEO | MUSIC | GAMES | BOOKS | TV | About Metacritic metacritic.com