|
|
Post by skvorisdeadsorta on Nov 2, 2005 13:07:45 GMT -5
I don't get it. I really dont. Motley Crue is the furthest thing from a hair band in my opinion. Warrant, yes, seeing as how they are about as dangerous as a nerf football in a kiddy pool, or even shit like Tuff or Shotgun Messiah, but come on, Motley Crue?!!??!!!? Hair Band?!!?? BS!!
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Nov 2, 2005 13:19:03 GMT -5
I'm gonna say that glam rock turned into hair metal with Def Leppard and, subsequently, MTV.
MTV, a bunch of punk ass kids nation-wide found that they could move to L.A., tease their hair, put on spandex, play loud, flashy music, and subsequently garner shitloads of pussy, cash, and free drugs.
While Def Leppard hardly marketed themselves like Poison, they were the original image and basis for the sound that blew up through the 80s.
Guns 'N Roses can probably be equated more to Led Zeppelin or Aerosmith than they could Def Leppard. GNR was going to happen in the late 80s, and they were pretty much going to kick the shit out of whatever music scene was there. They happened almost in spite of the hair metal movement.
Then you have varying degrees of actual hair metal bands. You have the borderline metal guys (Skid Row), the Dream Theatre wannabe guys (all that artsy but useless stuff), the sissy boys (Poison, Bon Jovi, Winger and every single hair band remembered only for a ballad or two), and the glam rockers gone fucking crazy (Motley Crue and a bunch of other bands who self-destructed a whole lot sooner), the wannabe tough rocker guys (Twisted Sister, Billy Idol), and so on. What all of these bands shared was their varying factors of cheesy sound and the way they dressed.
And much like today's rap artists, they hit a trend of being manufactured by MTV and record companies by the truckload.
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Nov 2, 2005 13:23:25 GMT -5
Skvor, if they'd all OD'd or got into car wrecks or whatever after Shout at the Devil, everyone would still be worshipping those guys as underrated and overlooked rock gods who could have been one of the greatest bands ever.
But they didn't die, and went on to release Girls, Girls, Girls, Theatre of Pain, and Dr. Feelgood. By all accounts, a bunch of hair metal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kensterberg on Nov 2, 2005 13:24:21 GMT -5
If I were pressed to pick a "best hair band" it would probably be Ratt. But like Mary said, Motley Crue practically defines this term. Doesn't mean I have to like 'em, or even admit they were any good (b/c in my opinion they weren't), but when you're talking 'bout hair bands, they are the definitive article.
RocDoc -- I'll take the effective use of one to three chords over pointless dreck any day. Hell, I heard somewhere that Talking Heads just used one chord for Once in a Lifetime, and that beats the shit out of anything that these bands ever came up with.
|
|
|
|
Post by tuneschick on Nov 2, 2005 13:48:59 GMT -5
My vote is for Motley Crue, hands down... and Mary pretty much took the words out of my mouth as to the reason why. Nuff said.
Yes, Mick Mars is most definitely one of the freakiest weirdos ever. And yes, Shout at the Devil still rocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 2, 2005 14:03:50 GMT -5
If I were pressed to pick a "best hair band" it would probably be Ratt. But like Mary said, Motley Crue practically defines this term. Doesn't mean I have to like 'em, or even admit they were any good (b/c in my opinion they weren't), but when you're talking 'bout hair bands, they are the definitive article. RocDoc -- I'll take the effective use of one to three chords over pointless dreck any day. Hell, I heard somewhere that Talking Heads just used one chord for Once in a Lifetime, and that beats the shit out of anything that these bands ever came up with. Ratt were awesome. |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 2, 2005 14:05:58 GMT -5
I feel like I should have more to say on this whole thread since I own albums by all the artists listed, but I'm short on time and my wife won't let me re-grow my mullet so any rants just seem half hearted.
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Nov 2, 2005 14:18:49 GMT -5
I remember seeing footage of a Ratt concert on MTV in the mid-90s. At the time, I was going through this phase where I was extremely anti-hair band (hey, it was the mid-90s), so this story was all the funnier...
Some guy in the audience chunked a bottle at Ratt. Pissed, the lead singer jumped off the stage to handle some business. Only, instead of handling some business, the dude who threw the bottle beat the SHIT out of the lead singer. I mean, he was really smashing this guy's face in. Security finally made their way through, but had difficulty because everyone in the area had formed a circle around the incident and were rooting on the dude beating the shit out of the guy whose band they had paid to see.
It remains one of my four or five favorite moments in the history of rock 'n roll. Or, as the case may be, Ratt 'n Roll.
|
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on Nov 2, 2005 14:44:04 GMT -5
Definitely a "kodak moment" Luke.
I voted for Bon Jovi although I think the best "band" for great hair during the 80's was Billy Idol. A band with a solo artist's name. Billy Idol and Steve Stephens had great locks in their day...
|
|
|
|
Post by RocDoc on Nov 2, 2005 15:01:47 GMT -5
...that beats the shit out of anything that these bands ever came up with.
'Anything', yeah.
Care to state it any more broadly?
'Pointless dreck'?
We-e-ell, ditto.
And obviously we're seeing that lots of people have some liking for a few of 'these bands' (and their work)who you're flaying, Ken. Yes, you were the mohawked high school punk fan, principled to the nth, betrothed to punk and loyal to no other heathen gods. But geez, isn't this is a bit much.
'Once In A Lifetime' for one, great tune yeah. To me it's also of a particular time. 'Cool' but I've heard it enough times. Sated.
Byrne's solo output is of more interest now.
Take Dr Feelgood as one which hasn't worn out its 'use-by' date like OIAL has for me.
~
Actually I think luke's hit it pretty acurately as the distinction being made with videos and MTV painting a particular kind of pouty snotty image for these 'rockers with hair' and then when the backlash began, 'glam' got dropped from the job description and they just became in someone's terms 'nuthin but that damned hair'...a version of the 'there's no there there' - putdown for anyone with a problem with what they wished to pan universally as lightweight and useless.
There sure as hell was lightweight useless crap that 'they' put out, but some of it was truly inspired and approached with the abandon that 'rock' is supposed to have...at least for someone with an open mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by JesusLooksLikeMe on Nov 2, 2005 15:36:27 GMT -5
Slave to the Grind fucking rocks. I don't have to construct any better sentence than that, cos I've just done 9 hours at work.
|
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 2, 2005 18:55:55 GMT -5
using "rox" or "rawks" would make it better, but I worked 10 and a half hours so I'm not really in a position to offer grammatical advice, especially since i'm still forfeiting capital letters, albeit Inconsistently
|
|
|
|
Post by koolkat on Nov 2, 2005 20:22:33 GMT -5
I feel like I should have more to say on this whole thread since I own albums by all the artists listed, but I'm short on time and my wife won't let me re-grow my mullet so any rants just seem half hearted. OK, fess up, which Bon fuckin' Jovi album do you own? Is it Have A Nice Day?  btw, I have to agree that Slave To The Grind indeed RAWKS! Unfortunately it was released only a couple of years before the whole grunge thing, so they didn't stand a chance at surviving as a band after that. Yet, for some odd reason, Bon Jovi survived it. I'll never understand how those guys are still selling... |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 2, 2005 20:27:33 GMT -5
I'm proud to say that I own not even one Bon Jovi album. They're also not hair metal. They're just plain shit. A genre unto itself. Hair metal is endearing in some weird way. Bon Jovi is, was and always will be the worst fucking band of all time, in any genre. Did Doc Drum put you up to getting me wound up about Bon Jovi? |
|
|
|
Post by riley on Nov 2, 2005 20:31:15 GMT -5
If Jon had approached music like most of the other bands listed, they could be afforded some props. To listen to him speak, his songwroting is on par with Dylan or Springsteen. Dick.
I don't even like Bob Dylan, but I know well enough that he could pass gas with artistic merit than a song like "Bed Of Roses". Fucking terrible terrible fucking song.
Hey Jon, how about a song that doesn't have "whoa oh" somewhere in the mix, with the standard 3/4 way mid octave stadium designed pitch change. Dick. I hate them.
|
|
