Is "your" Macca all good or all bad?
-
I don't find much "good" these days. In the last five years his standing in my eyes has diminished severely (both musically and personally). I can't bear to look at him (with his annoying mannerisms) or hear him talk (same old drivel or more revisionism). I still love his music pre-2008 but after 45 years of being a fan the tipping has come. I no longer find him interesting or his new music enjoyable. His last two albums weren't very good and he's become a human karaoke machine on stage. I wouldn't mind it if he retired and disappeared from public view. His legacy is some classic music that will always be great.
-
graystoke:
I don't find much "good" these days. In the last five years his standing in my eyes has diminished severely (both musically and personally). I can't bear to look at him (with his annoying mannerisms) or hear him talk (same old drivel or more revisionism). I still love his music pre-2008 but after 45 years of being a fan the tipping has come. I no longer find him interesting or his new music enjoyable. His last two albums weren't very good and he's become a human karaoke machine on stage. I wouldn't mind it if he retired and disappeared from public view. His legacy is some classic music that will always be great.
I have to disagree about the last two albums, especially NEW, which was, in my opinion, superb. And, I love to hear him talk. The lit'ul way he says things, the inflections are nice.
-
I tend to agree with folks that his latest music just does not keep my interest. He is very talented, so it will never be terrible, it just does not stick with me. And the collaborations don't help. If he collaborated with people I liked, maybe it would keep my interest more (David Bowie, Neil Finn, etc.). Mainly his concerts are what keep him in the spotlight, and those are Beatle events, firmly planted in the past. If not for tours, we would not hear much about him, anymore than, say, David Bowie. To be fair, it's the same for the Stones, Bowie, The Who, and all the old rockers whose best work is behind them.
-
graystoke:
I don't find much "good" these days. In the last five years his standing in my eyes has diminished severely (both musically and personally). I can't bear to look at him (with his annoying mannerisms) or hear him talk (same old drivel or more revisionism). I still love his music pre-2008 but after 45 years of being a fan the tipping has come. I no longer find him interesting or his new music enjoyable. His last two albums weren't very good and he's become a human karaoke machine on stage. I wouldn't mind it if he retired and disappeared from public view. His legacy is some classic music that will always be great.
I feel totally the opposite. Surprise! I'm glad he's still touring and rocking around the planet. I guess he'll retire when he's good and ready, not when someone tells him too.
-
beatlesfanrandy:
graystoke:
I don't find much "good" these days. In the last five years his standing in my eyes has diminished severely (both musically and personally). I can't bear to look at him (with his annoying mannerisms) or hear him talk (same old drivel or more revisionism). I still love his music pre-2008 but after 45 years of being a fan the tipping has come. I no longer find him interesting or his new music enjoyable. His last two albums weren't very good and he's become a human karaoke machine on stage. I wouldn't mind it if he retired and disappeared from public view. His legacy is some classic music that will always be great.
I feel totally the opposite. Surprise! I'm glad he's still touring and rocking around the planet. I guess he'll retire when he's good and ready, not when someone tells him too.
These are just opinions. No one is telling him to do anything. He will do it until the end, which is cool. That is a positive, I suppose. That will be part of his legacy, that he performed on stage until he could not longer do it. Which will be for a very long time, I hope!
-
I don't think McCartney is like a washed up no talent who live off his lucky past. There are pop, rock made of youthful bravado to be found, perhaps even most, one does not need to be Mozart to become a pop star, but exceptions exist from time to time, and Paul McCartney...
-
graystoke:
I don't find much "good" these days. In the last five years his standing in my eyes has diminished severely (both musically and personally). I can't bear to look at him (with his annoying mannerisms) or hear him talk (same old drivel or more revisionism). I still love his music pre-2008 but after 45 years of being a fan the tipping has come. I no longer find him interesting or his new music enjoyable. His last two albums weren't very good and he's become a human karaoke machine on stage. I wouldn't mind it if he retired and disappeared from public view. His legacy is some classic music that will always be great.
Wow...maybe time for you to join an anti- Paul message board instead
-
No one is all good or all bad. There is good and bad in everyone. I think I heard that somewhere.
-
As others have said, there are several things that Paul is doing these days that I wish he would be doing the opposite...totally short changing his Solo catalog in his Live Shows, constantly touring in favor of spending more time in the studio etc. That being said I will always be a very loyal fan even if he annoys me from time to time. I think his talent for making beautiful and diverse music is still #1 in my book. Like always, I can't wait for his next album. The only time I can remember getting angry with Paul was when he made his "Bush" comment after accepting his Presidential Award in the White House. It had nothing to do with President Bush specifically. I just thought that it was totally out of place. When someone is accepting an award from a different country (i.e. Paul receiving an award from the US) it was not his place to criticize a former President (either Democrat or Republican) especially when he did it right in the White House. It just came off as a "smart ass" comment at a time when "humbleness" was the operative norm of behavior. I realize that Paul made it after his formal acceptance speech to President Obama but it still wasn't the right thing to do. I also realize that Paul was just trying to be funny but it just made him look bad. I normally really dislike actors, musicians etc. trying to push their political agendas and trying to come off as experts. In most cases, their ignorance is exposed. I always liked that Paul normally stayed away from politics. Don't know what prompted him to make the comment but I think the venue was hardly the place.
-
McCartney is all bad, I balance it by being all good.
-
What if it's the other way around?
-
Well, from jokes to seriousness (ha-ha), music can be difficult to evaluate as good or bad because of taste also. McCartney as a person, I don't know... he seems to me like a reasoanble guy, he is in a position of primadonna behaviour but I'm not sure if he use it much...
-
HaileyMcComet:
What if it's the other way around?
I don't think so, just ask any of my fans.... fans?...
-
B J Conlee:
As others have said, there are several things that Paul is doing these days that I wish he would be doing the opposite...totally short changing his Solo catalog in his Live Shows, constantly touring in favor of spending more time in the studio etc. That being said I will always be a very loyal fan even if he annoys me from time to time. I think his talent for making beautiful and diverse music is still #1 in my book. Like always, I can't wait for his next album. The only time I can remember getting angry with Paul was when he made his "Bush" comment after accepting his Presidential Award in the White House. It had nothing to do with President Bush specifically. I just thought that it was totally out of place. When someone is accepting an award from a different country (i.e. Paul receiving an award from the US) it was not his place to criticize a former President (either Democrat or Republican) especially when he did it right in the White House. It just came off as a "smart ass" comment at a time when "humbleness" was the operative norm of behavior. I realize that Paul made it after his formal acceptance speech to President Obama but it still wasn't the right thing to do. I also realize that Paul was just trying to be funny but it just made him look bad. I normally really dislike actors, musicians etc. trying to push their political agendas and trying to come off as experts. In most cases, their ignorance is exposed. I always liked that Paul normally stayed away from politics. Don't know what prompted him to make the comment but I think the venue was hardly the place.
Right. From his comment, it was clear he knows exactly the same amt. about American politics as I do about British.
-
I like what he sings and the way he sings it's really that simple
-
nowords:
I like what he sings and the way he sings it's really that simple
Seconded.
-
RMartinez:
...Nothing wrong with money. But I don't feel bad for him or any musician who may have to live on $300 million to be an artist who plays their more obscure material than to be a billionaire who plays it safe...
-
Fan4-45years:
B J Conlee:
As others have said, there are several things that Paul is doing these days that I wish he would be doing the opposite...totally short changing his Solo catalog in his Live Shows, constantly touring in favor of spending more time in the studio etc. That being said I will always be a very loyal fan even if he annoys me from time to time. I think his talent for making beautiful and diverse music is still #1 in my book. Like always, I can't wait for his next album. The only time I can remember getting angry with Paul was when he made his "Bush" comment after accepting his Presidential Award in the White House. It had nothing to do with President Bush specifically. I just thought that it was totally out of place. When someone is accepting an award from a different country (i.e. Paul receiving an award from the US) it was not his place to criticize a former President (either Democrat or Republican) especially when he did it right in the White House. It just came off as a "smart ass" comment at a time when "humbleness" was the operative norm of behavior. I realize that Paul made it after his formal acceptance speech to President Obama but it still wasn't the right thing to do. I also realize that Paul was just trying to be funny but it just made him look bad. I normally really dislike actors, musicians etc. trying to push their political agendas and trying to come off as experts. In most cases, their ignorance is exposed. I always liked that Paul normally stayed away from politics. Don't know what prompted him to make the comment but I think the venue was hardly the place.
Right. From his comment, it was clear he knows exactly the same amt. about American politics as I do about British.
Yes. Paul missed the mark with that line about Bush: George W. Bush is a highly articulate scholar, whose C-average collegiate G.P.A. was a mere trifle that prepared him for a spectacular Presidency that obliterated his predecessor's budget surplus.
-
audi:
Fan4-45years:
B J Conlee:
As others have said, there are several things that Paul is doing these days that I wish he would be doing the opposite...totally short changing his Solo catalog in his Live Shows, constantly touring in favor of spending more time in the studio etc. That being said I will always be a very loyal fan even if he annoys me from time to time. I think his talent for making beautiful and diverse music is still #1 in my book. Like always, I can't wait for his next album. The only time I can remember getting angry with Paul was when he made his "Bush" comment after accepting his Presidential Award in the White House. It had nothing to do with President Bush specifically. I just thought that it was totally out of place. When someone is accepting an award from a different country (i.e. Paul receiving an award from the US) it was not his place to criticize a former President (either Democrat or Republican) especially when he did it right in the White House. It just came off as a "smart ass" comment at a time when "humbleness" was the operative norm of behavior. I realize that Paul made it after his formal acceptance speech to President Obama but it still wasn't the right thing to do. I also realize that Paul was just trying to be funny but it just made him look bad. I normally really dislike actors, musicians etc. trying to push their political agendas and trying to come off as experts. In most cases, their ignorance is exposed. I always liked that Paul normally stayed away from politics. Don't know what prompted him to make the comment but I think the venue was hardly the place.
Right. From his comment, it was clear he knows exactly the same amt. about American politics as I do about British.
Yes. Paul missed the mark with that line about Bush: George W. Bush is a highly articulate scholar, whose C-average collegiate G.P.A. was a mere trifle that prepared him for a spectacular Presidency that obliterated his predecessor's budget surplus.
-