Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from chazz508. Show chazz508's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No : just out of curiosity, how many cats do you have? those commercials make me so sad.  but really, when does a kitty's face NOT look sad? it's not like they smile...
    Posted by phsmith8

    god, I do sound like a crazy cat lady with that statement......I've had quite a few over the years.....now just two.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    Here is the thing - you can tug on my heart strings without showing me pix of the abused animals. It is like those anti-smoking commercials they were showing; woman with amputated fingers and man with the microphone to the hole on his throat. It turns me off and I go outside and smoke. Some of these ads do more harm than good.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    Way off track here.   Make a thread about marketing and advertising.   Just not the point anymore.     Sorry, darling. 
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from AGUY1. Show AGUY1's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    But don't do something for charity and benefit from it more than charity.
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover


    Like it or not, agree with or not, many bands on the way up will play at charity events for the exposure and publicity.  In fact, I once had a book about making it in a band and that was one of the suggestions it made.

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

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    To get back on track (sort of), I once went to a Joe Jackson concert where the audience gave him a standing ovation on his entrance or after the first song (can't remember exactly which). His reaction was to scold us that "it's a bit too early for that." I found that refreshing, but would some of you be annoyed by that?

    Also, Matty, last summer I saw James Taylor and Carole King in concert and was very impressed with Taylor's generous nature toward his co-star and his self-deprecating sense of humor. So you see, perceptions can be skewed by our initial exposure and sometimes we only see what we want to see, rather than the whole picture. 

    To get back on topic, I can't stand David Lee Roth. I think he is one of those showoffs who assumes everyone loves him and is loving his act.  I just think the guy is a clown. He may be the reason I'm not a fan of Van Halen.
     
    So maybe I'm not really all that fair minded after all. Wink
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from yogafriend. Show yogafriend's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    To get back on topic, I can't stand David Lee Roth. I think he is one of those showoffs who assumes everyone loves him and is loving his act.  I just think the guy is a clown. He may be the reason I'm not a fan of Van Halen.
     
    So maybe I'm not really all that fair minded after all.
    ============================================================
    Glad the thread made you think.  Now we're getting somewhere. 

    But back to basics, the reason Bono came up in the first place was not because he's a social activist, it's not because he lends his name to and sponsors programs that raise money, etc., etc. -- his name came up (and I was first) because of the perceived attitude which is sanctimonious and holier than thou.   

    So to criticize a rock musician or any celebrity who is out there promoting a good cause is definitely not a deal breaker, but if an attitude begins to form, and it's IN YOUR FACE to the extent that you are distracted by it, and you see dignified people sucking up to that person because of it, then that's a different story entirely.   And a possible dealbreaker, again.   It's hard to criticize someone for raising money and caring about the world,  and it's interesting how it happens, but it can end up backfiring.
      
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    Keith Richards - he was all about that Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll thing.

    Oh wait - I kind of liked that part. Nevermind.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    Keith Richards - he was all about that Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll thing. Oh wait - I kind of liked that part. Nevermind.
    Posted by jesseyeric


    That's a good opening for my of favorite lines from Spinal Tap.  Toward the end of the movie there are little clips of Rob Reiner talking to each band member about philosophical stuff.  The drummer says for him life in Spinal Tap has always been about Sex and Drugs and Rock and Roll.  So Rob asks him if Spinal Tap breaks up, what would his life be like then.  The drummer thinks about it and says something like, 'Well, as long as there was still the Sex and Drugs, I think it would be alright.'
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jesseyeric. Show jesseyeric's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    Now at my age, it is Hugs, Geritol and Henri Mancini!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    To get back on track (sort of), I once went to a Joe Jackson concert where the audience gave him a standing ovation on his entrance or after the first song (can't remember exactly which). His reaction was to scold us that "it's a bit too early for that." I found that refreshing, but would some of you be annoyed by that? Also, Matty, last summer I saw James Taylor and Carole King in concert and was very impressed with Taylor's generous nature toward his co-star and his self-deprecating sense of humor. So you see, perceptions can be skewed by our initial exposure and sometimes we only see what we want to see, rather than the whole picture.  To get back on topic, I can't stand David Lee Roth. I think he is one of those showoffs who assumes everyone loves him and is loving his act.  I just think the guy is a clown. He may be the reason I'm not a fan of Van Halen.   So maybe I'm not really all that fair minded after all.
    Posted by devildavid


    Who knows why, but that's just the way JT was when I saw him, but either way it has no bearing on his music for me.

    Speaking of bands people like to hate, I saw Oasis one time, and Liam was so sloppy drunk, he couldn't sing and walked off the stage swearing a blue streak after barely one song.  Noel stepped up and sang all the leads from there on, and they finished the show.  Then, I saw them two years later (with diminished expectations), and Liam absolutely brought the house down...the whole place singing the refrain from 'champagne supernova' for like ten minutes without stopping.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    Now at my age, it is Hugs, Geritol and Henri Mancini!
    Posted by jesseyeric


    ...please say it ain't so....
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Yoshimi25. Show Yoshimi25's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    Hmmm....non-musical dealbreakers.....

    I've never bothered much with the morality - or lack thereof - of my musical interests.  I've never supported a cause just because SuperSinger said it was a good idea (for example, I refuse refuse refuse to donate to the Red Cross - even if the Red Sox were the ones asking me to)...

    I think, for me, I don't really have any non-musical deal breakers (or, I just haven't given it much thought)...unless Pop counts...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SlimPickensII. Show SlimPickensII's posts

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    That tool Steven Tallarico continues to test the limits of how much one can take.  Ratting out his bandmate for drug use, so he can sell more copies of his upcoming book?  How low can one stoop?  

    I suppose he's done worse.  Deflowering underage girls, for example.

    This guy is scum.  The worst of the worst.  Next time "Make it" comes on I swear I'm changing the station.  Next time!

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

    Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No

    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No:
    In Response to Re: Non-Musical Dealbreakers: Yes or No : Like it or not, agree with or not, many bands on the way up will play at charity events for the exposure and publicity.   In fact, I once had a book about making it in a band and that was one of the suggestions it made.
    Posted by AGUY1


    As I said in another posts, I applaud bands that do benefit concerts. 

    And I can understand bands on the way up doing things for publicity.

    But Bono has all the fame and money and notiriety that he can ever have.  So when he hawks Louis Vuitton handbags for charity, who really benefits or gets the most benefit - Bono, Louis Vuitton or the charity?

    "The New York Post this year reported that his ONE awareness campaign for Africa raised $15 million in donations, but distributed only $185,000 to three charities while spending more than $8 million on executive and employee salaries."
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share