gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
664516 Posts in 26634 Topics by 3819 Members - Latest Member: Occasional grilled cheese November 30, 2020, 02:46:21 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Poll
Question: Rate The Beach Boys
5 - 8 (6.7%)
4 - 20 (16.8%)
3 - 41 (34.5%)
2 - 30 (25.2%)
1 - 15 (12.6%)
0 - 5 (4.2%)
Total Voters: 109

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The Beach Boys  (Read 65179 times)
Charles LePage @ ComicList
Chairman Of The Board
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 977


Hit me with your pet shark.


View Profile WWW
« on: December 26, 2005, 02:52:07 PM »

Discuss, review and rate The Beach Boys, released May 1985.

« Last Edit: December 30, 2005, 03:05:06 PM by Charles LePage » Logged

"quiet here, no one got crap to say?" - bringahorseinhere
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2005, 02:56:10 PM »

It deserves some fraction that is less than .5, but I'm rounding down. In my judgment, the band should have just quit.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2005, 03:57:01 PM »

Dennis is sorely missed, and this isn't the Beach Boys to me. The remainder of the band try reasonably, with slightly distressing results. Carl's contributions are great, Brian's awful.
Logged
I. Spaceman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2271

Revolution Never Again


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2005, 03:57:41 PM »

I really don't dig it. 1.
Logged

Nobody gives a sh*t about the Record Room
monkee knutz
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 296


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 27, 2005, 09:09:39 AM »

It suffers not from content, but from production. These tunes might have been salvaged had they not used, drum machines & crappy synth programming. Not their worst, but real close.
Logged
donald
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2485



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 27, 2005, 09:54:46 AM »

I don't listen to it often these days.  But in the 80's, and even into 90's I listened to it occasionally.  I like about half of it.  The Carl stuff was good.  I do believe one could make a not great, but decent album, combining 85 with KTSA.

Or take those good CW songs and put them with the best stuff from CW and Youngblood for a very nice Carl in the 80's LP.  I think THAT is the way to go. 

And I agree that the production could have been improved significantly.  Even the much maligned MIU album sounded better in that respect.
Logged
Smilin Ed H
Guest
« Reply #6 on: December 27, 2005, 12:49:44 PM »

Two - for Where I Belong, Getcha Back (at last a pastiche that isn't half bad), It's Gettin' Late (dumb lyrics) and Male Ego, BW's best contribution.
Logged
SurferGirl7
Guest
« Reply #7 on: December 27, 2005, 08:19:54 PM »

2. This is what made BW88 and Sweet Insanity suck for me: TOO MANY SYNTHS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It makes it really suck. I do confess though I do like Getcha Back, I'm So Lonely, and Crack At Your Love (one they are funny and two it works especially ISL).
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 27, 2005, 08:35:08 PM »

I listened again today.

I punched myself in the face. Jesus, what trash...
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
I. Spaceman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2271

Revolution Never Again


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 27, 2005, 08:36:25 PM »

It's powered by Satan. Especially Passing Friend.
Logged

Nobody gives a sh*t about the Record Room
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2005, 08:38:35 PM »

It's powered by Satan. Especially Passing Friend.

I like to think Satan would power music that has more balls. Or at least some balls. Or some soul, good, evil or otherwise. Just something a little less...pasteurized?
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
I. Spaceman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2271

Revolution Never Again


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2005, 08:41:10 PM »

No way, man. Satan comes with a soprano sax and a perm, playing mellow sounds for the masses. God powers the heaviness, from Little Richard to Black Sabbath. And there's none of that on this album.
Logged

Nobody gives a sh*t about the Record Room
Jeff Mason
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 259


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 28, 2005, 05:50:05 AM »

I truly don't get the hatred for this album.  True it is largely uninspired.  But it isn't bad (and for the BB, that is saying something.  When they were bad, it was like a train wreck).  There are some majestic moments.  Where I Belong is a great track, and I also like It's Getting Late.  California Calling is fun because of Ringo.  Plus, it was nice to see Brian as a BB again as well.

3 for me -- no masterpiece, but a step up from much of the late 70's work.
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 28, 2005, 11:53:04 AM »

I just think there is nothing even moderately artistic about it. The entire thing is a series of reworkings of earlier, superior material set to timely production values for a blatantly commercial intent. No real problem with that-people are in it to make money. But it's awful, and thus deserves no money. In fact, I hope they send me my $13 back. (Or whatever the twofer cost for that and KTSA.)
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #14 on: December 29, 2005, 07:01:56 AM »

I just think there is nothing even moderately artistic about it. The entire thing is a series of reworkings of earlier, superior material set to timely production values for a blatantly commercial intent. No real problem with that-people are in it to make money. But it's awful, and thus deserves no money. In fact, I hope they send me my $13 back. (Or whatever the twofer cost for that and KTSA.)

Reworkings of earlier, superior material? What album are you talking about? This is The Beach Boys (the album). Keepin' The Summer Alive would fit the bill of being a series of reworkings of earlier, superior material, but there's nothing trunk about The Beach Boys.
Logged
HighOnLife
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 212


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 29, 2005, 11:45:33 AM »

I really don't dig it. 1.

I'm shocked.

 Shocked
Logged

"I don't do drugs. I am drugs."
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 29, 2005, 04:46:53 PM »



Reworkings of earlier, superior material? What album are you talking about? This is The Beach Boys (the album). Keepin' The Summer Alive would fit the bill of being a series of reworkings of earlier, superior material, but there's nothing trunk about The Beach Boys.

How about California Calling?
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #17 on: December 29, 2005, 04:49:11 PM »

New song trading on an old formula. So was Kona Coast. Hell, so was almost all of the new material on 15 Big Ones!
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 29, 2005, 04:55:26 PM »

New song trading on an old formula. So was Kona Coast. Hell, so was almost all of the new material on 15 Big Ones!

And the best of it was mediocre; most of it, worse. I hate 15 Big Ones...but not as much as I hate The Beach Boys (85) or KTSA.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #19 on: December 29, 2005, 04:57:54 PM »


And the best of it was mediocre; most of it, worse. I hate 15 Big Ones...but not as much as I hate The Beach Boys (85) or KTSA.

15 Big Ones is Pet Sounds compared to KTSA and The Beach Boys. Hell, even MIU is Pet Sounds compared to those two.
Logged
I. Spaceman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 2271

Revolution Never Again


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 29, 2005, 04:58:19 PM »

Preach it, Luther.
Logged

Nobody gives a sh*t about the Record Room
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 29, 2005, 05:03:19 PM »

Preach it, Luther.

Um..okay.

Dominus vobiscum et spiritu tuo.

And, ah...

Requiem aeternam dona eis domine et lux perpetua luceat eis. Te decent hymnus deus in sion et tibi reddetur votem in jerusalem.

How was that?
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #22 on: December 29, 2005, 05:03:49 PM »

In nomine Satanas!
Logged
the captain
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7255


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: December 29, 2005, 05:05:22 PM »

I think you'd need to figure out what ablative case of Satan is. Um...no idea what Satan is in Latin, but one would assume (if you use the word satan itself) something like Satanis or Satane.
Logged

Demon-Fighting Genius; Patronizing Twaddler; Argumentative, Sanctimonious Prick; Sensationalist Dullard; and Douche who (occasionally to rarely) puts songs here.

No interest in your assorted grudges and nonsense.
Jason
Guest
« Reply #24 on: December 29, 2005, 05:06:37 PM »

Wouldn't it be possessive? In the name of Satan? Maybe it should be Satani.
Logged
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.864 seconds with 24 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!