b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Famous people I hate » Post 630791 | Search
This is a question Famous people I hate

Michael McIntyre, says our glorious leader. Everyone loves Michael McIntyre. Even the Daily Mail loves Michael McIntyre. Therefore, he must be a git. Who gets on your nerves?

Hint: A list of names, possibly including the words 'Katie Price' and 'Nuff said' does not an interesting answer make

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 12:21)
Pages: Latest, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, ... 1

« Go Back

A new low: a repost from just last week
..but fuck it, there'll be plenty more from me this week so this is merely an opening gambit.

DAVID BOWIE.

Here are just a very few reasons why:

1. He was a bandwaggoner who never 'meant it'.
Mid 60's r'n'b is 'in' - great, I'll give that a go no problem. Now I'm a solo pop artist. Oops, that isn't selling, now I'm a wacky mime artist. Now I'm a fucking junglist'...for fuck's sake. No integrity whatsoever.

Look at AC/DC or Motorhead - they didn't ditch their style when it fell out of favour, it's a fucking pathetic thing to do. Look at the history of popular music and name a couple of others famous for 'reinventing themselves' - how about Kylie Minogue and Madonna? It's what you do when the style you have doesn't have enough quality to sustain an entire career. The Ramones didn't 'reinvent themselves' because they didn't need to. You can develop your style (like The Who did), but that's wholly different from ditching your previous work because it didn't sell - that's shallow and reveals you to be a fashion-chasing charlatan. The Who still were still opening with their first ever single a decade and more after it was released.

2. The music isn't groundbreaking or original - the only original thing he did was to introduce 'dressing up like a fucking twat so no-one notices how mediocre the music is'. Brilliant. He deliberately courted controversy and headlines by bendering around with Mick Ronson - that's rather sad, isn't it? The sort of thing you'd resort to if your middle of the road pop-rock wasn't selling on its own merits.

3. His shit mix fucked up 'Raw Power' by The Stooges. Now THERE was a band that meant it - they didn't trot out 'The Laughing fucking Gnome' to cash in on Barrett style psychedelia. He also produced 'Transformer' by Lou Reed which is shit, and Lou Reed is a cunt.

4. He called his son 'Zowie'. What a helmet.

5. 'Plastic Soul?' Spastic fucking soul. By naming your limpid, tinny attempt at one of the most emotionally-charged musical forms of the 20th Century a 'plastic' version of it, you are effectively admitting you are trotting out a pale imitation of the real thing. You can at least admire his honesty.

6. 'Dancing in the Streets' with Mick Jagger. Christ on a fucking bike how dreadful.

7. I've heard a (reasonably cogent) argument that by inventing the practice of selling shares in his future earnings in the 70s he effectively invented futures trading. DAVID BOWIE CAUSED THE RECESSION. And the Haiti disaster as well, I'll be bound. AND he killed those Chinese cocklers.

I really don't have the time to go on, but I could at length and in great detail as to why that weedy knob-end does not deserve the simpering adulation that he has garnered over the years, heaped upon him by idiots and people who should know better.

I saw a documentary on 'Bowie at 50' or some shit the other day and his endless fake laughing made me want to drive nails into my eyes.


Hi Che! x
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:04, 41 replies)
It's time for me to say something I never thought I'd say
But I actually agree.

I won't say I hate him, because I don't. But every point made here rings true for me.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:09, closed)
I quite like him personally
I think he writes some decent tunes and the lyrics are pretty good too. Also, he was in 'Labyrinth', so therefore he is cool.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:40, closed)
1. No, he doesn't
2. No, they aren't
3. Yes, he was
4. No, he isn't
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:43, closed)
But basically you agree?

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:02, closed)
In essence, yes, completely

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:26, closed)
It's called the Music INDUSTRY
The aim of all artists is to sell records.

They do what they think people will buy. Otherwise they wouldn't sell their records, they'd give them away.

Punk rock was just another fashion phase. Nothing more. They sold the idea of anarchy, using capitalism.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:41, closed)
Utter bollocks
Not all artists work with record sales as their primary objective - what an insult.

I suggest you read 'Keep it Together' by Rich Deakin. There are plenty of musicians who write and perform music because they love it, and they're not prepared to whore themselves to the vagaries of fashion simply to get money.

Also 'they wouldn't sell their records, they'd give them away'. For a start, there have been bands who have indeed encouraged people to nick their records - Gong, for example, and plenty of acts who encouraged bootlegging (The Grateful Dead being a famous example) just to get their music out there.

But even if this were not the case, you can sell records and be successful without compromising artistic integrity. Your point, if you can call it that, is entirely specious.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:46, closed)
Erm ... so the musicians who write and perform ... for money ... don't do it ... for money.
OK - ego then. And the money's just a nice perk.

I see.

And, yes - punk was just a fashion. Sex was a shop, the Pistols a gimmick, the Clash hippies and Strummer a merchant.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 13:50, closed)
Well done! Money is necessary and indeed very nice,
...but completely changing your sound and ditching your back catalogue in an attempt to be popular makes you a cunt.

You really are trying to claim that there have never been bands who just did it for the love of it all - they've ALL been commercially-driven cynics just like Bowie - aren't you?

For every Bowie there's a Pink Fairies. If you're really that staggeringly ignorant of this subject you really would do well to minimise the humiliation and stop digging yourself in deeper.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:00, closed)
Well I would have thought anyone employed as a professional musician is doing as their
profession.

So yes.

I don't really see what the problem is with trying to be popular as a musician.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:16, closed)
People are in the music industry for one of two reasons..
1. To help them create their 'art'.
2. To make money.

I have no problem with those in either camp but the real hypocrisy belongs to those who claim to be of the former but are patently obvious in their quest to achieve the latter.

Bowie is a fine example, as are U2.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:42, closed)

... and anyone who points to one band doing it and not the other.

All "artists" want to create their art, and to make money.

Just as one doesn't say to someone one fancies "I find you physically attractive, and am not interested in your mind", you say "You have beautiful eyes", a musician says "I'm all about the music" not "Give me your money."

All artists. To what degree you buy into this is up to you, but to slate one over the other is simply ridiculous.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:12, closed)
The Clash did some pretty fucking stupid things though
Like the disappearing act the drummer did for a few days? Didn't really earn them many friends or fans, did it?

/Edit

I quite like Bowie too, but it's just a matter of personal taste.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:04, closed)
The Clash were shit
and a bunch of cunts.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:05, closed)
They sold quite well though.
And have done very well for themselves. I see no problem in that, and their tunes are quite catchy, even if they're a bunch of shitcunts.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:32, closed)
By not stating that you hate The Labrynth,
you have admitted it's your best film ever, and that you wish you was Pheobe Kates so you could be a Princess and Bowie your Prince.

True story.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:07, closed)
Monders, dear boy,
I love you like my own son, but for that slur upon my good name I shall hunt you down and slay you.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:10, closed)
It is shite,
But it still doesn't change anything.

Monty and Bowie, sitting in a tree...

Just trying to lighten things up. People talking about the old days is a yawwwwn fest, it's well square daddyo
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:30, closed)
but I only like the old days.
The new days are awful.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:49, closed)
I know what you mean
Apart from Kasabian, I haven't bought a bands album since about 2005 as everything modern is just generally dross. But I love progressive house so what would I know?
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:56, closed)
Prog House you say?
May I be so bold as to recommend Global Underground 37 - James Lavelle
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:58, closed)
I do
And you may. Cheers, I'll pillage Fopp tomorrow lunchtime.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:17, closed)
Check out DeepDish as well
Also one of the Global series - not exactly prog but still damn fine.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:30, closed)
The Wild Swans have reformed and there's some new vinyl
if that means anything to you?
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:20, closed)
You mean Jennifer Connelly surely!!!

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:26, closed)
Do I? Oh right.
And don't call me Shirley.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:31, closed)
Phoebe Cates was in Drop Dead Fred and Gremlins...
...and was hotter than a rattlesnakes ass.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 14:58, closed)
Ah yeah, I see the error of my ways now.
Labrynth would have been top if she was in it, and got her fanny and that out.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:19, closed)
The only fanny in Labyrinth was old 'mis-matched eyes'.

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 17:01, closed)
*rapturous applause*

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 17:08, closed)
Norks out in Fast Times at Ridgemont High

(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 18:02, closed)
that film
is the only reason i'd do him. i don't know what it is, but he butters my parsnips in that one.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 18:49, closed)
A wonderful turn of phrase
and fuck me, grats on losing half of yourself.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 19:10, closed)
thanks :)

(, Mon 8 Feb 2010, 16:37, closed)
In Bowie's defense
Hunky Dory is genius. Just to wind you up even more, it feels like I've played that album and Transformer every week since I was 15. There's a triumvirate of classic records from 1971 made by adding Iggy's Lust for life, with Bowie on it of course..

Don't care for any of his other stuff, apart from a bit of Ziggy, and I agree that nowadays he has a very punchable grin and can't be in it for more than the money.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:17, closed)
Doesn't wind me up at all.
Each to their own.

My post above merely outlines my own personal objections to the bonk-eyed old tranny.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:29, closed)
Fair enough, was only jesting
I can see a lot of your points and by all accounts Lou Reed was/is a nasty piece of work, but I love his music.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 15:35, closed)
Hi Monty!
I'm afraid I said it all earlier. Haven't the energy to fight your red-hot hatred.

However, if you awake one morning with an Aladdin Sane lightening flash on your face, you'll know I snuck into your house with my face-paints.
(, Thu 4 Feb 2010, 17:22, closed)
Better that than your tattooing kit, I suppose

(, Fri 5 Feb 2010, 10:29, closed)
David Bowie..
I thought he was brill in 'The Labyrinth'*






*chuckles*
(, Fri 5 Feb 2010, 18:44, closed)
I know almost no one on this board believes in God
but I would like to express my thanks to Him for revealing to me that I'm not the only one who thinks Bowie is over-rated and shallow.

Those cunts at Time Out magazine do believe in God, except they think fucking David Bowie is God (they named him as the most influential cultural figure of the last forty years - Bowie, that is, not God).
(, Mon 8 Feb 2010, 15:20, closed)

« Go Back

Pages: Latest, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, ... 1