Discussion in '80's Music' started by METALPRIEST, Jan 20, 2010.
Pretty much. That song was pretty bad.
Watched the movie last night. I really liked it. It made me laugh, it made me cry.
There are a handful of historical or timeline inaccuracies that do make me scratch my head, just a little bit ... mostly because the band was so heavily involved with nearly every aspect of the movie. It didn't detract from the movie, but knowing as much of their history as I do, it just made me wonder why.
Unfortunately, I have never read the book (yet), but have wanted to for years. I'll have to pick it up now for sure. I loved how they showed both sides of the band and the members of the band, both the good and the bad. They didn't just show the glamour, the fame, the sex/drugs/RnR aspect, but also the inner demons, the fights and some of the problems. I'll admit, it felt short. They could have easily made this a two-part film or even a mini series. Some stuff felt missing, other moments in the timeline felt very rushed through.
Still, I give it a very solid two thumbs-up and would recommend to anyone.
(sidenote: I'd also me more than happy to talk about it more in depth with anyone if they would like to)
This movie kicked some serious ass! As a longtime fan from the beginning the actors portraying the Crue were spot on PERFECT! The Ozzy look alike even better In the short amount of time allotted this movie hit ALL the serious high's & lows of Motley's tumultuous career. It was fun,funny,sad & truly heartbreaking at times. The bottom line is that through it all they persevered & have stood the test of time. In the end it's all about the music. Their songs are still relevant even today. Who doesn't bang their head & play air guitar when they hear "Shout at the Devil", Girls,girls,girls or "Wild side"? The power ballad of arena rock "Home sweet home" before there were cell phones when the entire audience was fully engaged with the band through their eyes & ears instead of a tiny screen on their phone.
Critics will hate it.. But who cares..
Since I've been in a Crue mood for the past few days, I'm going to try to muscle through the three albums that I almost never listen to, in order. Hopefully without skipping and songs. Will comment later on (or tomorrow) after I get through these.
1994 - S/T 6th album.
1997 - Gen Swine this one will be the toughest to get through
2000 - New Tattoo
Well... here's my uneducated opinion on these three albums:
1994 - S/T
The only Motley Crue album without Vince on vocals. This is a pretty decent album. In fact, I'd say it's a pretty damn solid album with the exception of the first couple of ballad-ish/slower songs. The music is good. Corabi's vocals and lyrical delivery is good. The whole album is far better than I remember. BUT... it sounds nothing like Motley Crue. If they had just called the band S.L.M.C. or something like that, it would have been perfect. I will be slipping this one onto my phone and a drive to use in the car and get it back into the normal rotation. While I'm sure I won't listen to it as much as the first 5 albums, but I will definitely be getting into it more and more.
1997 - Generation Swine
I don't know what really happened between Vince and the band in the early 90's (I'm not sure anyone knows at this point), whether he quit or was fired and/or why. I have seen him say in interviews that he has never listened to the 1994 album because it doesn't interest him (or something like that) and that the direction the band was going at the time was nothing he wanted a part of (again, I'm paraphrasing). Then he came back to the band in '96 and the band put out this absolute turd of an album the following year. While I could understand him saying he didn't listen to '94 S/T at the time, I'd understand it. But 25 years later, if he still hasn't listened to '94, he's a fool. If he (or anyone else in the band) thinks that Generation Swine was even DECENT, they should have been drug tested, repeatedly. There are a couple of moments on this album that i thought "this isn't as bad", then the band just shits all over the song a minute (or less) later. G.S. is easily the worst thing the band ever did, it's not even close. The music/songs/lyrics are lame. From start to finish. The only decent track was the weird, sped-up mix/remix/rerecording of Shout at the Devil.
I haven't listened to GW in years. It's going to be several years before I listen to it again, guaranteed!
2000 - New Tattoo
The first/only album without Tommy on drums as he had left the band a year earlier. Right from the opening track, this album sounds like what SHOULD have been the band's natural progression and follow-up to Dr Feelgood. Not saying that it's as good as Feelgood, it's not even close, but the songwriting style, the musical style, it's much more like classic Motley. Overall, I'd say that I'm indifferent to this album. I could listen to it every once in a while and not be bothered by it, but I probably wouldn't seek it out very often (as I already haven't done much in the past 18-19 yrs).
What came first? Nikki Sixx or Nicolas Sixx?
I'm gonna stop posting for fear of posting 2 much.
1 more post.
Watched part of The Dirt again tonight. The scene with Skylar in the hospital, GD that is hard to watch. I can't imagine what it would have been like to go through that for Vince (or anyone who has been a parent to a kid with cancer). Rips at my heart strings every time those scenes come up.
32 years ago (May 15, 1987), GGG was released
Separate names with a comma.