Guest Tzar Lysergic Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 I chose Saliva because their latest single is so stupid that it doesn't have verses. It's just that one fat fuck rambling into a megaphone effect for a little while, then the SAME CHORUS to every other horrible song they've done. Look at that cunt. My god.
vivalaultra Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 Shit, he ain't got nothing on the Wink Man... Now THAT is a cunt. A cunt named Austin Winkler.
Hawk 34 Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 Isn't the Saliva guy a actor as well? Stick with that Saliva guy. Drowning Pool and Nickeback can handle the crummy arena rock genre for now.
Guest Tzar Lysergic Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 Josey Scott. That's a gayass name too. Hinder appeals to the lowest common denomonator of musical opinion. Saliva goes for something below that.
snuffbox Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 That's a very important music-buying demographic in America.
Red Baron Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 Panic! at the Disco 30 Second to Mars Alexisonfire
KanadianKrusty Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 All band artists mentionned in the thread are shitty but The Killers win this thread by a thousand billion miles.
vivalaultra Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 No they don't. The Killers aren't a great band, but they're certainly not a terrible band. Easily not the worst band on the planet. Their first CD was decently good, all of the singles were extremely catchy and somewhat enjoyable and the new album, while not anything great, is certainly not as bad as anything released by Saliva, Hinder, Nickelback, Creed, Good Charlotte, or others mentioned.
Annabelle Posted March 24, 2007 Report Posted March 24, 2007 All band artists mentionned in the thread are shitty but The Killers win this thread by a thousand billion miles. i can't believe how lazy you people are. use your brains. the killers may be unoriginal but they aren't the worst band on the planet.
foleyfanforever88 Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 All of you who say bands are shitty because their songs are overplayed are fuckin stupid. It's the worst logic I've ever heard. I had a friend in highschool who thought every single band on the radio was bad because they were too "mainstream". Well did you ever think that the reason they are all over the radio is because they are GOOD and people like them? There's a reason certain music like some of the shit I hear where all the singers do is scream random shit isn't on the radio..because it sucks. That being said, my vote goes to Fall Out Boy.
vivalaultra Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Well, Hinder and Nickelback are vastly overplayed, but they're still terrible. Dan Brown's vastly overread and he's one of the worst authors in the world. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's good.
foleyfanforever88 Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Well, Hinder and Nickelback are vastly overplayed, but they're still terrible. Dan Brown's vastly overread and he's one of the worst authors in the world. Just because it's popular doesn't mean it's good. Explain why they are popular then. If they are so bad, people wouldn't request their songs or buy their albums, would they? I guess I can think of one example of when popular does not mean good though...Dane Cook.
Giuseppe Zangara Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Your argument didn't hold much water to begin with, but you lost any ground you may've had by admitting that something or someone—Dane Cook, in your case—can be terrible. I have no problem saying the public-at-large has abominable taste.
foleyfanforever88 Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Whatever, I don't really see the point of this thread to begin with. Obviously, everyone has different tastes. Most people here seem to have tastes that are against what most people like, so I'm not gonna get anywhere trying to make my points. I guess I can see the argument that popular doesn't mean good, but it seems like a lot of people seem to think that popular automatically means not good, which is a ridiculous idea. That was my initial point.
King Kamala Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Winger. Yeah but they don't really count since we're talking current bands. Unless you consider being on a hair metal package tour and VH1 Metal Mania Stripped compilation as being current
Red Baron Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 The Rolling Stones Their stock fell off in the last decade or so. Well make that two decades. I just don't see the hate on why Nickelback is labelled the worst band on the planet. Simple generic rock music that put on a good show and aren't gimmicky like the rest of the bands.
luke-o Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 Panic! at the Disco 30 Second to Mars Alexisonfire Seconded. Dont get me wrong, i belive in having your own opioions and not taking the piss out of people just because they like a certain music type and all that gay stuff. But seriously? What is good about this band? I mean really?! I can't undertstand for the life of me why ANYONE would want to listen to this tripe. Fall out boy suck as well. There latest single "thnks fr th mmmrs" is fucking stupid. Taking the vowels out of your song title is not big and not clever. Grow up.
snuffbox Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 just plain lazy. stop. catchey dancey dance dance songy song. you grow up. seriously. at least its not the boring fuck.
2GOLD Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 How can people hate Fall Out Boy? The lead singer looks like Gavin from Kids in the Hall all grown up. That's enough for me to not want to see them destroyed. Plus they really aren't too bad of a live performance band compared to such bands as Thrice, Yellowcard and The Ataris.
RHR Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 How can people hate Fall Out Boy? The lead singer looks like Gavin from Kids in the Hall all grown up. That's enough for me to not want to see them destroyed. Plus they really aren't too bad of a live performance band compared to such bands as Thrice, Yellowcard and The Ataris. Hey...Hitler wasn't too bad of a murdering prick compared to Stalin.
luke-o Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 just plain lazy. stop. catchey dancey dance dance songy song. you grow up. seriously. at least its not the boring fuck. Catchy songs that appeal to 14 year old emo myspace wankers does not make a good band my friend. In fact, it makes them stupid emo myspace wankers.
Steviekick Posted March 25, 2007 Report Posted March 25, 2007 In Buckcerry's defense I would like to mention that they're good people. New cd, however, is quite awful. They do go all out during their live performances. Very energetic, great stage presence.
King Kamala Posted March 26, 2007 Report Posted March 26, 2007 What is happening here? Can we really count them? How do we know it's the same dudes(dudettes?) on all of the String Quartet Tributes! There's too many of them for it to just be handled by four people!
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now