"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

Subby's mother should know that headline gets a +1. =D

cambie:Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

Somebody hasn't seen Airheads.

RevMercutio

Somebody hasn't seen Airheads.


"Basically what we want to say is that we want to be heard."


(or something)

RevMercutio:cambie:Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

Somebody hasn't seen Airheads.

underwater drug solo. go!

cambie

If your opinion of people is based solely on how they perceive one band that was popular forty years ago, they're probably better off when you walk away.

I give a shiat about the farking Beatles.

/weehoo!

cambie:Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

And you win today's smarmy douchebag comment, good work you fantastic pecker head. We al know led zeppelin was a better band any way. Hella ll the good guitar solos that the beatless have are played by Clapton.

"Okay! Super-duper! We're... making... records."


Judd Nelson was funny in that role. It was as if John Bender had grown up and gotten a job.

drum*

i feel like a real dick cheese burger..

Interview is historically important as the Fab Four discuss the recording of the now famous "lost album" consisting of twelve covers of Besame Mucho, long a concert staple.

So cambie hasn't seen the movie. He didn't get the reference. Fair enough.

I kind of agree with him. I won't automatically dispatch someone if they don't "get" The Beatles. Enough time has passed that they may not have been exposed to all their tunes, or they have no conecpt of their entire trip, of what the hell was going on back then and how they changed music forever. So I will give a pass for ignorance. I will even give a pass if The Beatles type of music is not someone's cup of tea.

But if someone has listened, has given them a chance and refers to them as overrated, talentless, a boy band or some other ignorant farking opinion, then yeah, they can just kiss my ass from that point forward.

The ranking:

The Beatles

anything else

Besides quoting the very underrated Airheads, I really don't give a shiat about the farking Beatles.

Chaz: "If you're really a record exec then whose side were on in the David Lee Roth-Van Halen fued?"

Cop: "Uh, David Lee Roth?"

Hostage: "He's a cop."

Mugato:Besides quoting the very underrated Airheads, I really don't give a shiat about the farking Beatles.

Chaz: "If you're really a record exec then whose side were on in the David Lee Roth-Van Halen fued?"

Cop: "Uh, David Lee Roth?"

Hostage: "He's a cop."

shiat, I farked that up. The cop said "Van Halen".

cambie:Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

I use a litmus test as a litmus test. If they're too acidic, I immediately walk away.

Is this the interview where they discuss how they got rid of Clarence and stole all his good ideas?

""She Loves You", was originally titled "She Loves You, Man." And "Help", was originally titled "Help Me, Man!" And "She's Got A Ticket To Ride", was originally "She's Got A Ticket To Ride And The biatch Don't Care, Man"!"

CarnySaur:I use a litmus test as a litmus test. If they're too acidic, I immediately walk away.

Well, that's just basic common sense.


/got nuthin'
//touchin' base

hip_replacement:drum*

i feel like a real dick cheese burger..

Paging Dr. Freud.

cambie:Mugato:"You think I give a shiat about the farking Beatles?"

If you don't, then I think you are a tasteless ass clown, and would never talk to you in real life.

I use people's opinions about the Beatles as a litmus test....if I hear "I never understood why the Beatles were popular" or similar, I immediately walk away.

Hooray! Another person who, like Dave Matthews fans, puts the Beatles on such a pedestal that it all but makes me hate the band because of their pretentiousness.

/Can't stand Beatles freaks who think they are the end-all be-all of music
//Same for DMB fans
///Thinks the Beatles were okay, prefers the Beach Boys when it comes to '60s pop.

A much better litmus test is to ask what they think of Nickelback. If they projectile vomit, they're OK.

But seriously, why not link the BBC in the first place?
More info than CNN (new window)

or even a clip of the file?
Link (new window)

Don Piano:or even a clip of the file?
Link (new window)

Nice clip, thanks. I headed over to BBC4 to listen to the entire clip only to find they have it in RealMedia.

Geebus. I didn't think anyone used that crap any longer.

And, no, I'm not going to load RealAlternative. I'll wait until it turns up on YouTube or similar.

I like the Beatles. I'm not old enough to really "get" them or what they did for music as I'm only 26, but they are fun.

And Like that one guy pointed out earlier, I like DMB too, well from Before These Crowded Streets and earlier.

My band that I put on such a pedestal that it annoys other people is Widespread Panic.

How long until Yoko protests that interview and demands a billion dollars for it?

I have yet to meet a beatles fan that could give me a real reason why they feel that beatles should be held in such high reguard. All I ever get is wanton felating and sucking off of a band, who needed eric clapton for a good guitar solo. Please give me one reason that they were a better band, as in artist, then say Led Zeppelin.

Social influence does not equal musical ability

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:Social influence does not equal musical ability

Wow- might want to rethink that one. Musical ability does not equal social influence.
I know what you're trying to say, but your first question has nothing to do with ability.

The question "How did the Beatles get to be your favorite?" does not have to be answered on merit of ability alone.

That said, WTF is up with Zep lovers?

/can't stand 'em, myself.
//lawn, off, etc.

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:Please give me one reason that they were a better band, as in artist, then say Led Zeppelin.

It has nothing to do with "social influence." It has everything to do with reinventing the entire rock/pop genre. The Beatles farking invented the musical styles and studio techniques that allowed Led Zeppelin to exist in the first place. They stopped touring and went into the studio full-time because the kind of music they wanted to make couldn't be performed on stage due to technological limitations.

They started off as an above-average, but nothing special, pop group. By the time they broke up, they had turned the entire genre on its ear. They paved the way for every farking act that followed.

Except Page created many off the the effects, sounds and recording techniques used on the zeppelin albums...

I still don't see anything special about the music they created. I give them props as a social influence, and they did alot to shape and change the status of pop music in the world (be it for good or bad), but when it came down to the music, it just doesn't seem that special.

BKITU Led Zeppelin was not a pop group, so I do not think that the beatles played that much of an influence on them. Now if the beatles were a bunch of old black blues muscians, then you would have a case, but as it stands, not so much.

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:Except Page created many off the the effects, sounds and recording techniques used on the zeppelin albums...

I still don't see anything special about the music they created. I give them props as a social influence, and they did alot to shape and change the status of pop music in the world (be it for good or bad), but when it came down to the music, it just doesn't seem that special.

BKITU Led Zeppelin was not a pop group, so I do not think that the beatles played that much of an influence on them. Now if the beatles were a bunch of old black blues muscians, then you would have a case, but as it stands, not so much.

Missed the /rock part of that, did you sport? Missed the part where I said it wasn't about "social influence?" I know... reading is hard.

Hint: if you're not being deliberately obtuse, you're just an idiot.

Hint hint: if you're being deliberately obtuse, you're also an idiot.

Hint hint hint: if you're naturally obtuse, you're REALLY an idiot.

It's OK not to like the Beatles. Being blind to their influence on music is just stupid.

The Beatles do also have the advantage of not having stolen half their catalogue from the old black blues musicians the way Zeppelin did.

I love Zeppelin, but let's face facts:

Jimmy Page is a brilliant arranger and a fumble-fingered guitarist. The way he and his band stole songs from blues Gods and didn't give them credit is disgusting. He does have a balls-out style that people love though.

Robert Plant was an influential vocalist and an innovator, but he wasn't what you would call a good singer. An impassioned screamer whose voice is now garbage.

John Paul Jones is an entirely underappreciated bassist and musician. Maybe the best musician in the band.

John Bonham was like Page. Meaty, ballsy and drunk. But he could do wonders with a simple set while jerkoffs like Neil Peart need 75 pieces of hardware to create overly-technical complicated for complicated's sake endless fills.

Ask the members of Led Zeppelin, or Pink Floyd or The Who or Black Sabbath or Scorpions or Judas Priest or Electirc Light Orchestra or XTC or The Kinks or just about anyone whose career started just after The Beatles who their favorite band was.

80% or more of them will say The Beatles.

I just don't think that there greatest influence is in music. As muscians they don't do much for me. None were really virtuostic muscians, harrison was the closest. While some songs are good, a point not to be overlooked, for the most part the music isn't that special. It was pop music, that was made important through social influence.

/to overlook the social influence of the beatles is obtuse
//to call someone obtuse makes you a big ol' fagtard
///good work fagtard

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:I have yet to meet a beatles fan that could give me a real reason why they feel that beatles should be held in such high reguard. All I ever get is wanton felating and sucking off of a band, who needed eric clapton for a good guitar solo. Please give me one reason that they were a better band, as in artist, then say Led Zeppelin.

Social influence does not equal musical ability

The filler songs on a Beatles album are equivalent in quality of songwriting and production to the greatest hits of most very good bands.

Led Zeppelin was a great band, but not as consistently as the Beatles.

Also, "than" is used for comparison; "then" means "at that time".

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:I just don't think that there greatest influence is in music. As muscians they don't do much for me. None were really virtuostic muscians, harrison was the closest. While some songs are good, a point not to be overlooked, for the most part the music isn't that special. It was pop music, that was made important through social influence.

/to overlook the social influence of the beatles is obtuse
//to call someone obtuse makes you a big ol' fagtard
///good work fagtard

Fagtard?

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:I just don't think that there greatest influence is in music. As muscians they don't do much for me. None were really virtuostic muscians, harrison was the closest. While some songs are good, a point not to be overlooked, for the most part the music isn't that special. It was pop music, that was made important through social influence.

/to overlook the social influence of the beatles is obtuse
//to call someone obtuse makes you a big ol' fagtard
///good work fagtard

McCartney was by far the most talented and versatile musician in the group. He was/is brilliant. You won't get any argument from knowledgeable folks on that point.

And I think you should preface many of your statements with 'in my opinion.' Saying 'for the most part, the music isn't that special,' is very myopic and quite ignorant. It may not be your taste, and that is fine. You like what you like. But it sounds to me like you have never really "listened" to some of the songs. I would request that you invest in a good pair of headphones and spend some time "listening" to the music. The Beatles created nearly perfectly crafted songs. It isn't big, bombastic shake-your-ass music...but is is as close to art as pop/rock can be.

I would also recommend some reading. IMHO, it helps to appreciate art (whether it be music, painting, or literature) if you know something about the artists, their world, and context in which the music was created.

kungfu jesus with a side of lime

Led Zeppelin was not a pop group, so I do not think that the beatles played that much of an influence on them. Now if the beatles were a bunch of old black blues muscians, then you would have a case, but as it stands, not so much.

Do you know who one of the biggest influences on Ozzy Osbourne was? The Beatles. Being influenced by and sounding like your influences are completely unrelated.

A long, long time ago

In a galaxy far, far away?

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:
I have yet to meet a beatles fan that could give me a real reason why they feel that beatles should be held in such high reguard. All I ever get is wanton felating and sucking off of a band, who needed eric clapton for a good guitar solo. Please give me one reason that they were a better band, as in artist, then say Led Zeppelin.

Really? Nobody could give you a hard, fast, objective reason why the Beatles are worthy of admiration? Wow!

Well maybe, just maybe, that's because art appreciation is about opinion and not fact. If you ever feel that an art criticism is a "reason" and not merely an "opinion", that only means that YOU are the recipient of the aforementioned activities instead of the Beatles.

/Legitimize all that agrees with you; denigrate all others.

for the record, the only song Clapton played on was "While my Guitar Gently Weeps."

CarnySaur:kungfu jesus with a side of lime:I just don't think that there greatest influence is in music. As muscians they don't do much for me. None were really virtuostic muscians, harrison was the closest. While some songs are good, a point not to be overlooked, for the most part the music isn't that special. It was pop music, that was made important through social influence.

/to overlook the social influence of the beatles is obtuse
//to call someone obtuse makes you a big ol' fagtard
///good work fagtard

Fagtard?

fagtard, or maybe a more pc way to say it is homosexual with a cognitive impairment.

buenohead I understand art, but when looking at the value of music I feel some of the merit comes from an individuals ability to play and write music at a level that is artistic. Bohnam played drums in a way that was different and creative if not virtuostic. This made the drumming on zeppelin albums interesting and created good music. I do not get that from beatles music.

So while it is about art, good art comes from an ability to play ones instrument. It is not the only factor, but it is a factor.

/All I am trying to say is that Zeppelin could simply outplay the beatles.

cranberry sauce?

Came for the OMG TEH BEATLES R TEH BESTEST!!!! U R TEH FAGGOR IF U DOAN LEIK THEM!!!!ELVENTY!!!!

/was not disappointed

I'm listening to Hard Days Night right now, so I'm getting a kick out of these replies.

/All I am trying to say is that Zeppelin could simply outplay the beatles.

Though it's obviously not possible now, if The Beatles and Led Zeppelin were playing in the same town, Zeppelin's audience would be empty--mainly because Zep's band members would be first in line to see the Beatles.

You don't have to like them, you don't have to listen to them, but the Beatles are the most influential and important pop/rock band in history. What they accomplished in about 7 years time has--so far--never been equalled. Not even close.

Doesn't mean someone can't or won't come along to challenge them--and I would love that to happen, it'd be great to have a new musical force around--but it hasn't happened yet (40 years and counting), and Zep certainly ain't even in contention.

kungfu jesus with a side of lime:All I am trying to say is that Zeppelin could simply outplay the beatles.

That's not what the Beatles were about. They shunned extensive guitar/drum solos in their songs because they're self-indulgent and don't help a band connect with their audience.

One of the reasons Ringo was drafted into the band was his distaste for drum solos, so comparing him to Bonham is apples to oranges - Ringo never aspired to be that type of drummer. He's always been a support guy content to back up his pals, and they loved him for it.

And yes, Harrison was pretty good on the guitar, and Lennon was decent, but McCartney was and is one of the greatest bass players EVER.

Anyway, you can't really compare a band to everything that came after them. It's like comparing the Apple ][ to the Mac. Sure the Mac does lots of stuff the Apple ][ didn't do, but you'd have no Mac without the Apple ][.

No less than Richard Thompson himself, greates farking non-blues guitarist evar, when asked who would have made a great extra guitarist in the Beatles, picked Maca himself!

I do recall John, when asked if Ringo was the best drummer in the world said "he's not even the best drummer in The Beatles!" THis was in reference to Paul.

That being said, Ringo was perfect for the group. You also have to remember the antiquated studio equipment they recorded their masterpieces on. And one cannot understate the importance of Sir George Martin as producer. Truly, the fifth Beatle.

Invented the "concept" album? Check.

Invented the music video? Check.

Invented feedback? Check.

Invented backwards masking? Check.

Invented automatic double-tracking? Check.

Invented running vocals and instruments through a Leslie organ speaker? Check.

First rock band to use tape loops? Check.

First rock band to use electric twelve-string? Check.

First rock band to use Indian instruments? Check.

First rock band to play in a stadium? Check.

First rock band to smoke a joint in Buckingham Palace? Check.

First rock band to sing about walruses? Check.

Cranberry sauce? Check.

EXCUSE ME??

Jeff farking Beck invented feedback!
every Yardbirds fan knows that!