Concept of covers

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to RogerTaylor's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    OK, unless you have a 16.5 year old teenage daughter this won't make any sense to you!

    My TA daughter watches GLEE every Tuesday night - every episode has a cover song or two or a mash up of several songs together.

    Each Wednesday I get a call..."Dad, do you have that song by?????"

    (Zilla - last week she asked for a Bob Dylan tune!)

    Each time a GLEE cover is released on iTunes it's an instant sell out! And a whole new generation gets exposed to an older (mostly) artist. Good, bad or ugly the show promotes a lot of artists and thier music.

     

    The funny part is when I play the original song in my car only to have my daughter tell me that she like's the original version too.

     

    Take a look...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_in_Glee_(season_1)

    [/QUOTE]

    I haven't watched Glee in a very long time (I'm surprised it's still limping along, but if lovely people like your daughter are watching, then I'm happy for them!).    Glee, however, is a good example of an avenue into great covers, so why not? 

    I never think of choral groups, glee clubs, choirs, etc., as "covering" material, because they don't write their own material, ever.   Acapella groups, same thing.   Of course it's covering the songs, but I have always considered it more "performing" the songs, which is perhaps a fine line of distinction, but it's there for me. 

    I glanced at the list you posted; it's astonishing they've included so many songs over the years.   I would have had to turn down the sound to have survived that many episodes.     Cool. Use left and right arrows to navigate.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I only know this b/c I did a band ID question on them a long time ago (and made it far too easy without realizing at the time) but closely related, Gov't Mule does a yearly cover tribute for Halloween as well.  

    I don't consider this sort of thing a gimmick, as much as a tradition that fans go wild over and look forward to annually.   It's basically a two-fer. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, not a gimmick, but also often not easy to pull off as musicians, esp. something like DSOTM - so studio-centric.  Some bands like Phish took it as a challenge to their collective chops; their live rendition of the Who's Quadrophenia was quite the task, but they nailed it....horns and all.

    Zilla mentioned Mule's cover of Cortez The Killer; they also kill it on War Pigs and Kashmir.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    Perhaps this should be the start of a new thread, but;

    Who would you say is the most covered artist of the latter 20th century into the 21st century besides Beatles and Bob Dylan? And on that note, I am surprised that Elvis Costello and Steely Dan songs don't get covered more than practically never, because let's face it , there are many that deserve to be introduced to new , younger audiences. Prime example: Steely Dan's 'With A Gun', which would have lots of relevance in today's society in light of shootings that have occurred by the bucketload since this song was recorded. Possibly the best song of it's kind except maybe Lynyrd Skynyrd's 'Saturday Night Special.'

    I would have to guess that Led Zeppelin gets many of their songs covered, but as I mentioned earlier , Deep Purple gets covered quite a bit.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from polar123. Show polar123's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

    Perhaps this should be the start of a new thread, but;

    Who would you say is the most covered artist of the latter 20th century into the 21st century besides Beatles and Bob Dylan?

    I would have to guess that Led Zeppelin gets many of their songs covered, but as I mentioned earlier , Deep Purple gets covered quite a bit. 

     

    Pink Floyd. Not counting all the tribute bands, their music has been covered by a lot of different artists, including the aforementioned Bowie's great version of See Emily Play. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjg5_0ztQI4

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Perhaps this should be the start of a new thread, but;

    Who would you say is the most covered artist of the latter 20th century into the 21st century besides Beatles and Bob Dylan? And on that note, I am surprised that Elvis Costello and Steely Dan songs don't get covered more than practically never, because let's face it , there are many that deserve to be introduced to new , younger audiences. Prime example: Steely Dan's 'With A Gun', which would have lots of relevance in today's society in light of shootings that have occurred by the bucketload since this song was recorded. Possibly the best song of it's kind except maybe Lynyrd Skynyrd's 'Saturday Night Special.'

    [/QUOTE]

    I would think Steely Dan would be very difficult to cover without coming off sounding like a pale imitation.  Their sound is close to being unique in the rock/pop genre.

     

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    Check out these covers....I dare ya!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2wvaWTTmz8

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_LAGMHb7B0

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_Xg_md46Sw

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B_UYYPb-Gk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCZT-PYo7XY

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXo54Z2Rgxg

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to yogafriend's comment:

    A few days ago, the silver medal figure skater, the enchanting Yuna Kim, skated to John Lennon's "Imagine" (flawlessly, I might add), in the relaxed, non-competitive gala skating event.   Yes, the music was John Lennon's, but the version that was piped into the rink was that of Avril Lavigne.   Lavinge recorded the cover a few years ago, so it's not 'new', but for many young listeners, who had never heard the song, it was an opportunity to hear and see it brought to life through the performance, which was very touching. 

    I read that the performance brought quite a bit of activity to the song, both the original and Lavigne's.    It should go without saying that Lennon cannot be topped, but for the performance of this young skater, the cover version worked and was suitable.   It's hard to fathom, but Lavigne did what you may think is unimaginable: she succeeded with this recording (it's on a tribute album with other various artists).    Of course, there are going to be younger listeners that will say they 'prefer' Avril's version, because they relate to her -- here and now.  

    Here's the question:

    What's your take on cover songs that draw attention to a great song, to a younger audience?   Do you feel it's a good thing, or are you of the mind that it's a shame that the audience didn't hear the original, at least first?

    Does it matter -- as long as the song is covered well, and the original is acknowledged?  

    Now if the cover is an abomination, and new listeners hear it for the first time, that's another story.  Hearing a cover, of a great song gone wrong.   Any examples?   



    Hi Yoga!  Great question.  I'm a well-know original composition snob, but I happily make two exceptions:

    • On stage if a band plays a cover or two, esp. in an (extended) encore, I love it.  They probably dig the original as much as I do...it's fun, exciting, and a link to our collective love of rock'n'roll.
    • A cover so unlike the original and/or so brilliant it borders on original to me (Stranglers "Walk On By", Sonics "Have Love, Will Travel", Talking Heads "Take Me To The River", DEVO "Satisfaction", etc.)

    But slavish covers?  Boring, lazy ripoffs.  Write your own songs you pathetic, greedy, fame-chasing haircuts!  I read something the other day about the plethora of YouTube "stars" many of whom (all cute and young, of course) release covers of hit songs WEEKS after the originals are released.  Sickening to me.

    There's a teenage Irish band called "The Strypes".  Young, cute, great PR, signed to EMI....going for an r&b/pub rock/beat sound, which I love.  I think it's great when young musicians choose to play "off-beat" music....people like that are the finger-in-the-dike holding back the vanilla hoard.  But they just aren't very good (yet?) IMO.  Been playing r&b covers for years....exuberantly but without great skill (not poor, just ok), got signed based IMO on their appearance, and have recently started writing some ok songs.  

    I don't mean to sound mean.  They're nice lads, I hope they do well, it's great IMO that they are doing what they are doing...teenagers that know who Willie Dixon, Bo Diddley, et al are should be cherished and encouraged!  But IMO there are many bands doing the same/similar much better.

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]



    Hi Yoga!  Great question.  I'm a well-know original composition snob, but I happily make two exceptions:

     

    • On stage if a band plays a cover or two, esp. in an (extended) encore, I love it.  They probably dig the original as much as I do...it's fun, exciting, and a link to our collective love of rock'n'roll.
    • A cover so unlike the original and/or so brilliant it borders on original to me (Stranglers "Walk On By", Sonics "Have Love, Will Travel", Talking Heads "Take Me To The River", DEVO "Satisfaction", etc.)

    But slavish covers?  Boring, lazy ripoffs.  Write your own songs you pathetic, greedy, fame-chasing haircuts!  I read something the other day about the plethora of YouTube "stars" many of whom (all cute and young, of course) release covers of hit songs WEEKS after the originals are released.  Sickening to me.

    There's a teenage Irish band called "The Strypes".  Young, cute, great PR, signed to EMI....going for an r&b/pub rock/beat sound, which I love.  I think it's great when young musicians choose to play "off-beat" music....people like that are the finger-in-the-dike holding back the vanilla hoard.  But they just aren't very good (yet?) IMO.  Been playing r&b covers for years....exuberantly but without great skill (not poor, just ok), got signed based IMO on their appearance, and have recently started writing some ok songs.  

    I don't mean to sound mean.  They're nice lads, I hope they do well, it's great IMO that they are doing what they are doing...teenagers that know who Willie Dixon, Bo Diddley, et al are should be cherished and encouraged!  But IMO there are many bands doing the same/similar much better.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm a well known I don't care if it's original or who wrote it if the performance is great anti-snob. Many of my favorite songs are by great artists who did not write their own material. It's of absolutely no significance to me. Integrity? Who cares? Originality? Big deal. Can't write or play a muiscal instrument? Couldn't care less. The performance is all to me, not the background on how the song came to be.

    Speaking of Bo Diddley, he was known on rare occasion to cover a song or record a song he didn't write. Good for him. Here's a few examples:

    Pretty Thing - Written by Willie Dixon

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUJgll0RiHE

    Sixteen Tons - Written by Merle Travis, most well known as a hit for Tennessee Ernie Ford

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W35hr2Laitk

    Cops and Robbers - Written by Kent Harris

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C805c5BxURw

    You Can't Judge a Book by the Cover - Written by Willie Dixon

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lch0o4wwGyw

    Sonics, ya just had to know I'd respond to this. Wink

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]



    Hi Yoga!  Great question.  I'm a well-know original composition snob, but I happily make two exceptions:

     

    • On stage if a band plays a cover or two, esp. in an (extended) encore, I love it.  They probably dig the original as much as I do...it's fun, exciting, and a link to our collective love of rock'n'roll.
    • A cover so unlike the original and/or so brilliant it borders on original to me (Stranglers "Walk On By", Sonics "Have Love, Will Travel", Talking Heads "Take Me To The River", DEVO "Satisfaction", etc.)

    But slavish covers?  Boring, lazy ripoffs.  Write your own songs you pathetic, greedy, fame-chasing haircuts!  I read something the other day about the plethora of YouTube "stars" many of whom (all cute and young, of course) release covers of hit songs WEEKS after the originals are released.  Sickening to me.

    There's a teenage Irish band called "The Strypes".  Young, cute, great PR, signed to EMI....going for an r&b/pub rock/beat sound, which I love.  I think it's great when young musicians choose to play "off-beat" music....people like that are the finger-in-the-dike holding back the vanilla hoard.  But they just aren't very good (yet?) IMO.  Been playing r&b covers for years....exuberantly but without great skill (not poor, just ok), got signed based IMO on their appearance, and have recently started writing some ok songs.  

    I don't mean to sound mean.  They're nice lads, I hope they do well, it's great IMO that they are doing what they are doing...teenagers that know who Willie Dixon, Bo Diddley, et al are should be cherished and encouraged!  But IMO there are many bands doing the same/similar much better.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm a well known I don't care if it's original or who wrote it if the performance is great anti-snob. Many of my favorite songs are by great artists who did not write their own material. It's of absolutely no significance to me. Integrity? Who cares? Originality? Big deal. Can't write or play a muiscal instrument? Couldn't care less. The performance is all to me, not the background on how the song came to be.

    Speaking of Bo Diddley, he was known on rare occasion to cover a song or record a song he didn't write. Good for him. Here's a few examples:

    Pretty Thing - Written by Willie Dixon

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUJgll0RiHE

    Sixteen Tons - Written by Merle Travis, most well known as a hit for Tennessee Ernie Ford

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W35hr2Laitk

    Cops and Robbers - Written by Kent Harris

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C805c5BxURw

    You Can't Judge a Book by the Cover - Written by Willie Dixon

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lch0o4wwGyw

    Sonics, ya just had to know I'd respond to this. Wink

    [/QUOTE]

    Ahahahaha.  I'd expect no less and couldn't expect more.

    I wrote earlier that there are many covers I personally deem worthy and gave four (of many) examples.  You added four more.  I think it's really flattering that you know how much I love St. Bo Diddley, and really chagrining/interesting that I thought Bo wrote "Book".  Does it change my opinion of Bo's version?  Yes, slightly.  

    In my earlier comment I thought about adding a couple of qualifiers re Blues/r&b and the early days of "rock/pop" but didn't.  When the proto-Beatles, -Stones, -Kinks, -Animals etc. learned their chops playing Blues/r&b songs it was great...teenagers discovering great, under-the-radar music then turning it into modern rock'n'roll.  But a cheap cover for money/fame?  Pass.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]



    Ahahahaha.  I'd expect no less and couldn't expect more.

    I wrote earlier that there are many covers I personally deem worthy and gave four (of many) examples.  You added four more.  I think it's really flattering that you know how much I love St. Bo Diddley, and really chagrining/interesting that I thought Bo wrote "Book".  Does it change my opinion of Bo's version?  Yes, slightly.  

    In my earlier comment I thought about adding a couple of qualifiers re Blues/r&b and the early days of "rock/pop" but didn't.  When the proto-Beatles, -Stones, -Kinks, -Animals etc. learned their chops playing Blues/r&b songs it was great...teenagers discovering great, under-the-radar music then turning it into modern rock'n'roll.  But a cheap cover for money/fame?  Pass.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, since we're both such big Bo Diddley fans I should cut you some slack. But nahhh, I just can't walk away from a good debate. This one will be ongoing and never resolved between us, but we'll let Bo be our common ground of reconcilaition.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]



    Ahahahaha.  I'd expect no less and couldn't expect more.

    I wrote earlier that there are many covers I personally deem worthy and gave four (of many) examples.  You added four more.  I think it's really flattering that you know how much I love St. Bo Diddley, and really chagrining/interesting that I thought Bo wrote "Book".  Does it change my opinion of Bo's version?  Yes, slightly.  

    In my earlier comment I thought about adding a couple of qualifiers re Blues/r&b and the early days of "rock/pop" but didn't.  When the proto-Beatles, -Stones, -Kinks, -Animals etc. learned their chops playing Blues/r&b songs it was great...teenagers discovering great, under-the-radar music then turning it into modern rock'n'roll.  But a cheap cover for money/fame?  Pass.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey, since we're both such big Bo Diddley fans I should cut you some slack. But nahhh, I just can't walk away from a good debate. This one will be ongoing and never resolved between us, but we'll let Bo be our common ground of reconcilaition.

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd prefer to agree that we seem to agree on music outside the margins, seem to like each other....so will give each other a raft of sh11t for fun as needed.  ;-)

    Oh, and mock people that don't/can't understand how great this is/was:  "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeZHB3ozglQ"

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]



    I'd prefer to agree that we seem to agree on music outside the margins, seem to like each other....so will give each other a raft of sh11t for fun as needed.  ;-)

    Oh, and mock people that don't/can't understand how great this is/was:  "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeZHB3ozglQ"

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't really want to mock those people. I think that some people just don't dig it because it's like a foreign language to them. For me, inexplicably in some ways, it just comes naturally to groove to such sounds. There is no way to explain to someone why they should like it or to teach them to. It has to come naturally, from within. That's one of the great mysteries of music.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Not sure what the "concept" is other than sharing the music.  That should be the concept, which is turning people on to what you're listening to or feeling as an artist.    

    There is nothing better than being at a show and hearing a song that you really dig, not sure what it is, race home and then discover what it is, or even a brand new artist or band.

    It's also great when you know the tune and hear the opening notes as well, obviously.

    Some classic cover moments for me were hearing Don't Do It covered by the Crowes in 2005 as an opener on their reunion tour which was a wild run, Widespread Panic back in April 2001 I think doing the Talking Heads' City of Dreams for an encore, or catching Tedeschi and Trucks doing Anyday (Clapton/Dominos).

    I've found so many new bands and artists through the years simply by realizing some bands/artists like to play covers during their sets, especially earlier in my life.  

    The best is when the artist or band plays one off the cuff on a whim. That's when you know they're feeling it that night.  

    Personally, I think it's great that an artist or band can shuffle seamlessly from their own material into a cover or two during a set and the vibe all feels uninterrupted.  

    [/QUOTE]

    You answered my question, regardless.   The "concept" is giving a song visibility, exposure, possibly reviving it, and introducing it to people who may have never heard the original.  So we agree, when done well, covers are fun, and in many cases, pleasant surprises.  

     

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to SonicsMonksLyresVicars' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Here's the question:

    What's your take on cover songs that draw attention to a great song, to a younger audience?   Do you feel it's a good thing, or are you of the mind that it's a shame that the audience didn't hear the original, at least first?

    Does it matter -- as long as the song is covered well, and the original is acknowledged?  

    Now if the cover is an abomination, and new listeners hear it for the first time, that's another story.  Hearing a cover, of a great song gone wrong.   Any examples?   

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hi Yoga!  Great question.  I'm a well-know original composition snob, but I happily make two exceptions:

     

    • On stage if a band plays a cover or two, esp. in an (extended) encore, I love it.  They probably dig the original as much as I do...it's fun, exciting, and a link to our collective love of rock'n'roll.

     

    • A cover so unlike the original and/or so brilliant it borders on original to me (Stranglers "Walk On By", Sonics "Have Love, Will Travel", Talking Heads "Take Me To The River", DEVO "Satisfaction", etc.)

    But slavish covers?  Boring, lazy ripoffs.  Write your own songs you pathetic, greedy, fame-chasing haircuts!  I read something the other day about the plethora of YouTube "stars" many of whom (all cute and young, of course) release covers of hit songs WEEKS after the originals are released.  Sickening to me.

    There's a teenage Irish band called "The Strypes".  Young, cute, great PR, signed to EMI....going for an r&b/pub rock/beat sound, which I love.  I think it's great when young musicians choose to play "off-beat" music....people like that are the finger-in-the-dike holding back the vanilla hoard.  But they just aren't very good (yet?) IMO.  Been playing r&b covers for years....exuberantly but without great skill (not poor, just ok), got signed based IMO on their appearance, and have recently started writing some ok songs.  

    I don't mean to sound mean.  They're nice lads, I hope they do well, it's great IMO that they are doing what they are doing...teenagers that know who Willie Dixon, Bo Diddley, et al are should be cherished and encouraged!  But IMO there are many bands doing the same/similar much better.

    [/QUOTE]
    Hi Sonics, and let me say again, you don't sound "mean" -- you have an opinion; it's what I call 'clarity' on an issue.  It's not life or death.  :P 

    Either way, I agree whole-heartedly with your first two bullets.   Prime examples of when covers can unite and solidify the love of a song.   

    This harkens back to a previous thread (or threads) where you've stated your strong feelings re: original music.   That was in the case of "sampling",  and I agreed with you there, too --- 'artists' that make a practice of sampling -- frequently -- are ripoffs.  

    Most local cover (bar) bands make no pretense of the fact that they don't write their own material, but are there to entertain.  

    When a band is very young, and they choose to cover an old classic, they're going to run the risk of not having the experience (life experience) of doing it well, even though their intentions are in the right place, they're just can't carry it off.  

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm a well known I don't care if it's original or who wrote it if the performance is great anti-snob. Many of my favorite songs are by great artists who did not write their own material. It's of absolutely no significance to me. Integrity? Who cares? Originality? Big deal. Can't write or play a muiscal instrument? Couldn't care less. The performance is all to me, not the background on how the song came to be.

    [/QUOTE]

    With music, I'm of a similar mind.  (Note: I'm surprised you said "who cares" re: integrity, since we all know how you feel about Led Zeppelin ... unless you mean 'how honest' the interpretation is?) 

    This could be another thread topic, but I can't help but mention on a tangential note, re: film, movie remakes are a waste of time as far as I am concerned.  I feel the same way that Sonics feels re: covering songs in terms of originality, greed ... write your own screenplay, you lazy ripoff!   And they are rarely any better; if the film was that good to begin with, you're not going to improve on it (modernize it?  ugh).  

    While I fully embrace historical fiction, and have no issues re: films that tell a story from the past, I'm picky.   For example, if I want to see what it was like in the 70's, I'd watch a bunch of movies made in the 70's: AUTHENTIC.   With due respect to anyone that saw and liked "American Hustle" -- nothing could interest me less.     Why watch that when you could be watching, "The Godfather" ..?  :)     In any event, I'll consider lifting this issue into another thread.  

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Concept of covers

    In response to yogafriend's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to devildavid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm a well known I don't care if it's original or who wrote it if the performance is great anti-snob. Many of my favorite songs are by great artists who did not write their own material. It's of absolutely no significance to me. Integrity? Who cares? Originality? Big deal. Can't write or play a muiscal instrument? Couldn't care less. The performance is all to me, not the background on how the song came to be.

    [/QUOTE]

    With music, I'm of a similar mind.  (Note: I'm surprised you said "who cares" re: integrity, since we all know how you feel about Led Zeppelin ... unless you mean 'how honest' the interpretation is?) 

    This could be another thread topic, but I can't help but mention on a tangential note, re: film, movie remakes are a waste of time as far as I am concerned.  I feel the same way that Sonics feels re: covering songs in terms of originality, greed ... write your own screenplay, you lazy ripoff!   And they are rarely any better; if the film was that good to begin with, you're not going to improve on it (modernize it?  ugh).  

    While I fully embrace historical fiction, and have no issues re: films that tell a story from the past, I'm picky.   For example, if I want to see what it was like in the 70's, I'd watch a bunch of movies made in the 70's: AUTHENTIC.   With due respect to anyone that saw and liked "American Hustle" -- nothing could interest me less.     Why watch that when you could be watching, "The Godfather" ..?  :)     In any event, I'll consider lifting this issue into another thread.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    My only problem with Led Zeppelin is their not crediting the original artist. If they want to "cover" songs, that's fine. They add their own unique take. But give credit where it is due, please. Don't pretend the song is yours alone.

    Re: movie remakes, I'm mostly in agreement, especially if you are remaking a great classic movie. However, there are always exceptions. The Coen Brothers remake of 'True Grit' was outstanding, and took nothing away from the John Wayne original. I enjoy both films very much. But they also remade 'The Ladykillers', (which admittedly I have never seen) but I have seen the original. The original is so special that it didn't make sense to me why they would want to remake it. Sure, remaking movies seems lazy, but it doesn't mean it can't work. Like everything, it's a mixed bag.

     

Share