>Ew, you like The Monkees? You know they don't write their own songs? They don't even play their own instruments.
Kids can be so cruel
>>131052163Still better than the Beatles
>>131052163how come it was bad when the monkees didn't play the instruments or write the songs on their albums, but it was ok when elvis or frank sinatra did it?
>>131052560A lot of people didn't seem to understand that the monkees were a fake band from a TV show and that the records were just promoting the show. Nothing like that had really been done before. I think the backlash had more to do with the fact that they were a completely manufactured group, not just a "real" band that happened to sing other peoples songs or use session musicians to sweeten their sound, which itself was already starting to fall out of fashion in some circles. The monkees had the misfortune of coming along at a time when notions of popular music as "show business" and popular music as self-expression were starting to polarize.
>>131052163the joke is that none of that is true and kids are stupid.
>>131052660The joke is that a preteen girl would've even cared
>>131052560Frank Sinatra didn't pretend to play instruments and mime along on television
>>131052711Also that this is the traumatizing bullying that she tells her psychiatrist
>>131053385It serves as a set up. Marge discovers the monkees didn't play their instruments, and then that her father works a gay job as a steward when she thought he was a pilot
>>131052163none of the legendary 60's self-contained bands (Beatles, Stones, kinks, who) produced as timeless a set of quality pop/rock singles in as short of a time frame as the Monkees did in 15 months in 65/66 (I'm a Believer, Pleasant Valley Sunday, Daydream Believer, Last Train to Clarkville).They proved that the old division of labor system (professional musicians playing the songs of pro songwriters, sung by photogenic 20 year olds) still produced better singles than the new self-contained band model.
>>131053419rolling stones absolutely had better singles in that time frame
>>131053436name them.the only stretch I think that could challenge would be maybe from Paint it Black thru Jumping Jack Flash. but that's only two, three if you include Ruby Tuesday released between those two.Meanwhile, I'm a Believer was such a stellar song that an almost note for note remake by Smash Mouth was one of the top singles of 2001.
>>131052163this happened to me with gorillaz man I really thought they looked like that like in real life
>>131053628>name them.they have a compilation of their singles from 65 to 67, look it up fag.
>>131054324>tfw Noodle isn't actually a qt loliLife sucks man...
>>131054324Same but with Milli Vanilli in 1989
>>131054324This makes me laugh more than it should.Like, really, do you think the characters are a representation of real life people that are in the band, or that cartoons exist IRL?
>>131055601yes
>>131053419>They proved that the old division of labor system (professional musicians playing the songs of pro songwriters, sung by photogenic 20 year olds) still produced better singles than the new self-contained band model.A band has usually 1-2 principle songwriters and they have a finite set of ideas, they're not Frank Sinatra who could be fed unlimited songs from hundreds of songwriters.
>>131055601Cute bunny
>>131053419The Beatles were an exception because they stopped touring after August 66 so they had unlimited free time to perfect songs. Most bands couldn't do that.
>>131055601i was pissed off that the cartoons didn't actually exist. just some stupid bloke. WHERE THE FUCK IS 2D, WHERE IS MURDOC.
The other problem is that after a while a band has nothing to sing about except the road and the rock star lifestyle.
>>131053419The Eagles also cheated because they had extensive help from John David Souther and Jackson Browne with their songwriting.
>>131056390>song is about the bands success worst song topic
>>131056351having multiple vocalists helps bands stay fresher, when you only have one vocalist they're more limited in what they can do.>>131056401the Eagles had two vocalists, KISS had two, etc.
>>131056390yeah see Cuckgau's reviews of ZZ Top. he said that in Tejas they had gotten to the point of having nothing but rock star cliches for songs and that they took a break after that and came back three years later with Deguello and sounded fresh again.
>>131056351the other thing with a guy like Sinatra is that he could sound very different depending on what backing guys/arrangers he had. many Sinatra fans say the Nelson Riddle songs were the best ones. the same 4-5 guys can only produce a limited amount of music.
>>131056351Granted, although pop stars have the problem that after they're considered passe they usually don't get the good songs anymore. In the 60s the sign of being washed up was like late stage Patti Page or something where she was mostly just doing covers instead of getting original songs.
>>131053419also all the 90s-00s boybands aged like old milk and none of their songs were anywhere close to as good as those Monkees hits were
>>131056541bye bye bye>any monkees song
>>131056390now "musicians" start there before they've even got to touring or the lifestylezamn...
>>131052509We can?! Thanks anon!
>>131056665>bye bye bye>any monkees songt. Chris Kirkpatrick
>>131052163Sneed
