Hardcore Mel

I think its easy to knock the bigger bands like Queen and Zeppelin but they themselves have influenced so many other bands that the face of modern music wouldn't be the same without them. I don't think you can overstate the power of these bands in the history of music' date=' without bands like Queen and Zeppelin you wouldn't have had any of the 80's big rock in the way it was, or much of the other more modern indie bands. Zeppelin changed the whole face of blues rock and helped create bands like Def Leppard, Maiden, Diamond Head etc, who in their own ways influenced bands like Metallica and many others, I can understand people not liking them but i don't think you can underestimate the effect they had on modern music, same as the Smiths, the Beatles, New York Dolls, the Clash, Genesis, King Crimson, the Sex Pistols and to a lesser degree Nirvana.

Cheers

Stuart[/quote']

Genesis?

what time are the ghoulies on? i have a birthday party to go to, so no one mind if i show up dressed as paul stanley.

Was it not the Leningrad Cowboys COVERING Sweet Home Alabama' date=' with the Red Army Choir (I particularly remember the drumkit being on a tractor)

If you haven't seen "Leningrad Cowboys Go America", then you've missed an exceptionally funny and surreal film - more info at

[url']http://www.leninimports.com/leningradc1.html

Afraid I haven't seen the other two films they're advertising, but the first one is a classic.

Regards

Flossie

maybe it was. i was quite young at the time but i remember it being awesome!

hmmm' date=' i thought it was the band "shudder to think" that did the music for high art, at least thats what i thought...[/quote']

yeah they did some of it and red house painters did a few songs too.

best ever vma performance was lynrd skynard performing sweet home alabama with the moscow military choir. closely followed by the smashing pumpkins one from like 1996 or something.

i really liked the stuff they did for the film High Art, particularly the song during the credits. beautiful stuff.

bought it today. c'est magnifique! the vocal harmonies are perfection.

Le Reno Amps (album is fucking excellent.)

AKA the Fox are great too. really entertaining and a bit different.

Hey dont get me wrong i do inderstand where your coming from i just feel to much emphisis(sp) is made on image these days. But im not trying to put down your views on it although i do seem to have come across that way.

fair enough. i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

i have actually heard of devo' date=' but you're right i don't remember them. i don't know anything about them it was just devin townsend was what came into my head when you posted devo.

so devo are a band you like but you'd never sit at home and listen to?[/quote']

no i don't like devo, i think they're crap, but i was just using them as an example of a band who are remembered because they had an image.

your argument is definitely a valid one and i think in a way this argument is pointless because we are all arguing the same point..

Metallica have an image and it changes like all good bands do...

I mean if one of weapon showed up to a jam/photoshoot or gig in a catsuit or whatever then there would obviously be words. Thats NOT the image of a band. I just feel in this day and age an understated image is better. SO weapon might all agree on black tee shirts...thats pretty much as far as we go...

All bands have to have images and I hate those that dont...

exactly! just like if during the making of the 'one' video the rest of the band may have gotten pissy if kirk hammett showed up in a houndstooth suit and a fez. now there's a thought. i hope milner reads this and finally understands what i've been trying to say all along.

You must be joking Elvis was huge because of the style of music he did at the time not because of some silly jump suit he used to wear on stage.

once again, you're not reading what i'm saying. his image wasn't why he was huge but more people these days will think of what he looked like first and his songs second. the visuals is what people remember.

So then you dont go to see bands just for the music then??

You need a stage show of costumes or make up till your happy with the performance?

no i don't. i go for a combination of the music and the image. it doesn't have to be a costume, like justin hawkins wears, but fuck it, bands need to look fucking rock. there's not enough of that left anymore. it's just lucky for me that the bands i do like make that effort. it's not the reason i like them, but r n r bands still see image as important and i'm glad of that.

youre right to a certain extent but ive only worn eyeliner once and nail varnish three times...ive decided to drop it...dont feel the need for the gimmick...dan decided to wear eyeliner and nail varnish at the last show as him and jamesy had dared each other so jamesy did as well...no big deal! Alex will NEVER wear it and Nick would rather just get up and play...!

We all wear onstage what we normally wear actually.

The thing is Mel has a VERY valid point about the true ROCKSTARS ya know? The thing is less and less kids are relating to that now and just are more about the music...Thats why theres a section of kids that love the darkness and a section that hate them. Well its one of the reasons ya know? The thing is...you think of every member of Metallica as a rockstar dont ya? They dont dress up...

Its just different views and takes on it isnt it?

i must have only seen you those three times then. metallica didn't necessarily dress up, but they certainly had an image, especially in the 80s. and that's my argument.

But you dont remember the Beatles or Elvis because of what they wear do you? Theyre music was far more important and would still of been if they had been on stage wear "ordinary" clothes' date=' surely.[/quote']

maybe not the beatles but certainly elvis. i'd be willing to bet that if you said the word 'elvis' to a group of 30 people, the first thing that would come to mind in the majority's heads would be a fairly fat man with a quiff in a tight white catsuit and cape and would think of the songs afterwards.

i would of thought people who went to see aerosmith would be there for the songs they know' date=' not just to see him in a cat suit or whatever. sure thats a bonus on top but its about the MUSIC not the clothes!![/quote']

one of the reasons people go and see aerosmith is for their visually elaborate stageshows. it's about the whole package. i'd feel ripped off if i went to see them and steven tyler was wearing his normal day to day clothes. you can wear jeans and a t-shirt anytime. you should put in an effort when you're onstage. you want to give people more reasons to retain you in their minds. looking fucking kickass is one of those reasons.

my dad got me listening to people like the rolling stones and david bowie and theyre the kinda artists that i would LOVE to see live' date=' but not because they have some sort of stage image thing, just because they make awesome music!!

david bowie certainly has had some weird imagey things in his time, but thats not why i like him as a musician[/quote']

gaaah i never said that image was the reason to like a band. just that it's important to include image as well as music because it's part of what makes you memorable.

This is ridiculas!!

So what if a band wears the new "in" fashion it doesnt improve their music does it??

Surley its about the music and not what they wear!!!

For me bands who have to dress up to be remembered arent rock stars theyre trying to hide the fact that they cant play as well as everyone else so they need something to take the attention away from the music.

Its a sad day when people remember a band because of what they wear on stage and not on the music.

bullshit. even the beatles had an image. jerry lee lewis had an image. elvis had a number of images. doesn't mean they didn't have the music too, but they're the ones from those eras who we remember. and once again, i'm not saying bands should wear what's in fashion, but they should make an effort.

no not at all!! i hate arguments' date=' and im not arguing, just discussing, its constructive see!

cant a band stimulate visually with good presence and banter rather than just wearing pretty clothes?

MMw tend to put on a good show with all their prancing/jumping/mic swinging malarky, is entertaining visually, nothing particularly special about their clothes! (thats not meant to sound as bad as it does)[/quote']

mmw even make an effort with their image. i can bet you any amount of money that at least ben takes time presiding over what he's gonna wear on stage, plus him and jamesy don eyeliner and black nail varnish for gigs which they don't normally wear on a day to day basis. okay, they're not so clothing oriented but they still go that little bit extra for gigs.

but i'm talking mostly in terms of bands that have or have had musical longevity. big bands. when you think of the word 'rockstar' i bet there's any one specific person that springs to mind, and it'll be different from person to person but i bet every person that people think of has a specific image. and it's image that separates the rock stars from the blokes in bands. i bet you'd feel really dejected if you went to see aerosmith and steven tyler wasn't wearing a hot pink velvet catsuit but was just in jeans and trainers. it's all part of the spectacle.

ah you kids are just too young to remember devo. they did that song, 'whip it.' dr evil parodies it with 'zip it, zip it good.' but that was just an example of a band that got somewhere because they looked stupid, despite not being very good. but i never said i wanted bands to look stupid. i just want them to make an effort to stand out from every other bloke in jeans and a t-shirt. if i go see a show i want to be visually as well as aurally stimulated. it's important. i think you're just arguing for arguments sake now.

no i'm talking about devo, the band, not devin townsend, prime example of a not great band who achieved longevity most likely through stupid outfits.

and i'm not saying that generally bands need to wear stupid outfits. they need to look good though, like they have made an effort before going onstage, rather than just throwing on jeans and a t-shirt. i don't dislike bands who don't do that, but i also don't consider them rockstars. but the music i listen to tends to involve people who make that effort, like the backyard babies and motley crue.

hey look at devo.

Image isn't everything though' date=' and it's even led to being a decaptive tool. Look at Busted, McFly and even Girls aloud, their managers/whatever are deliberately making them wear punk and rock clothes to show off some rebellion and use the rock and roll image to sell records. (i.e. Rock and roll's cool, i want to be a rock chick) Anyone that thinks it's not lame... should be shot.

Since hard core's taking heavy music and making it as noisy and over the top as possible whilst still (usually) still maintining melody - i would have thought that fashion-core would be the same but with respect to fashion? Pushing the fashion boundaries in order to try and create new trends/images? no? the 44's call themselves big-band-core, and there's nothing hardcore about them....[/quote']

agreed it's not everything, but it is important for rockstars to make the effort. and i agree with what you're saying about fashion-core. that's why i'd like to see fashion-core bands in haute couture, because that's where all the high concept, boundary pushing clothing is. lost prophets are just topman-core.

surely we can just wear clothes because we feel comfortable in them and like them' date=' not because theyre making some big statement or so we'll be remembered or because "all the cool bands in the states are doing it"??[/quote']

i'm not talking about 'us' i'm talking about bands. it goes back to the effort thing again, and plays a huge part in why some of the most successful bands were remembered. but on a side note, as a girl you should know that sometimes we do wear things we're not comfortable in just because they look great, like corsets and stilettos.

err I think people are not realising what fashioncore is...

first of all its more like an injoke between alot of the hardCORE bands around. Eighteen visions pretty much started it as a couple of the members worked in Banana Republic when the band started out and decided to take that look into their band...

Note that calling a band fashionCORE has the word core in it which means they are hardCORE yes?

We are all victims of some kind of fashion...and dont say that aint the truth...and the whole band and image thing is very important...but image cant make up for a bad band.

yes, but the lost prophets are about as hardcore as a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. but you referred to them as fashioncore. and just cos it has a 'core' suffix doesn't mean it has to be hardcore. it could be grindcore, munkycore or post-good shit-core.

and we're not all fashion victims ben. you can follow fashion and not be a victim of it, or you can, like ryan and myself, take inspiration from fashion and push your own swing to it with the help of a sewing machine and plenty of fake fur.

i agree with ryan (but i have to since we decided to move to paris and make haute couture out of plastic vegetables on strings.) the memorable musicians with the most staying power are the ones who have an image that ingrains itsself into your mind. from the many looks of elvis, to madonna's chameleon ways, image is as important to longevity as the music is. it gives the hardcore obsessives a means of 'connecting' with a band, like with all the glam rock manics fans in their smeared lipstick and leopard print coats, or the gwennabes of the mid 90's (of which i was one) in sequinned bra straps and bhindis. man, KISS aren't the greatest band in the world but they've had a career spanning almost 5 decades because everyone knows what KISS look like and it's fun to dress up like them. they definately wouldn't have had an ARMY without the image. and they've always been a better band when they wore the make-up than when they decided to reveal themselves and everyone realised they were just a bunch of fat, unattractive blokes. 15 years from now, the bands i'm going to remember are the ones who looked like rockstars. i'd also agree with ryan on the point that if a band are gonna be labelled 'fashioncore' they should actually be wearing a particular staple of the fashion industry. the scissor sisters are the most 'fashioncore' band around just now, because jake shears is totally sporting the fake fur gilet.

as for tight jeans, they only look good on people who look like they're on heroin, like scott weiland.