Should Bon Jovi be in the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame.... - Page 6 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-12-2004, 10:26 PM   #76
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 05:03 AM
To further prove your point about Def Leppard not being one of the hair bands, U2Kitten, the lead singer himself said in one of those 80s things that while it's true he and his bandmates had big hair, they didn't like being lumped in with the hair metal groups because that's not really what they were.

I also agree with you about them doing music that they weren't meant to do. Some bands can pull off the whole experimental thing, some can't (and personally, I wasn't too fond of what I heard off Def Leppard's last album...but that's just me. *Shrugs*).

Angela
__________________

__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 04-12-2004, 11:11 PM   #77
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Blue Room's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: MICHIGAN, GO BLUE!
Posts: 7,612
Local Time: 06:03 AM
OK, but wait, isnt "hair metal" a style and/or image??? Its certainly not any type of major different music as the music by the bands you describe isnt much if any different than the artists I listed. Also, have you seen pictures of Ratt and Motley Crue from 1983 and 1985??? Lets talk about big hair! Thats pre BJ being on the scene in any kind of major fashion for sure. But really I'am looking purely at things from a musical perspective, not style perspective. So I still dont agree. Lets say for arguments sake you are right. Being responsible or on the forefront of HAIR metal. Is that a good thing??? Debatable, but I dont think its anything that makes a band deserving of getting into the HOF. If style and image and being original with that are the criteria. Kiss should have been in already. They were pioneers on that level. Certainly more than BJ ever were. So I still dont think your argument holds any water. Sorry
__________________

__________________
Blue Room is offline  
Old 04-12-2004, 11:29 PM   #78
Blue Crack Supplier
 
IWasBored's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 36,504
Local Time: 07:03 AM
Quote:
POP METAL
i prefer pop industrial, but that's just me.

on a side note, i cannot believe i read this entire thread.
__________________
IWasBored is offline  
Old 04-12-2004, 11:53 PM   #79
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 06:03 AM

Reading some of U2Kitten's posts, I feel like I learned something.



There were two periods of metal that I remember reading about. I sort of experienced the mid-late eighties period of "metal" but U2Kitten is right about there being a period from the late 70s to early 80s alah Ozzy Osbourne/ Randy Rhodes, Motorhead, Quiet Riot, etc... which were distinct from each other and had carryover bands as well (alah Motley Crue).

The funny thing about Skid Row to me was that they had a pretty good rep in terms of critical acclaim but when they went mainstream, their singles were crap if I remember.... I could see how they would toe the line between "hair metal" and metal.

Quote:
Originally posted by Blue Room
OK, but wait, isnt "hair metal" a style and/or image??? Its certainly not any type of major different music as the music by the bands you describe isnt much if any different than the artists I listed. Also, have you seen pictures of Ratt and Motley Crue from 1983 and 1985??? Lets talk about big hair! Thats pre BJ being on the scene in any kind of major fashion for sure. But really I'am looking purely at things from a musical perspective, not style perspective. So I still dont agree. Lets say for arguments sake you are right. Being responsible or on the forefront of HAIR metal. Is that a good thing??? Debatable, but I dont think its anything that makes a band deserving of getting into the HOF. If style and image and being original with that are the criteria. Kiss should have been in already. They were pioneers on that level. Certainly more than BJ ever were. So I still dont think your argument holds any water. Sorry
I believe KISS will be in the RnR HOF if they aren't already... KISS is influential and definte innovators.

As for the whole "style and image and being original with that are the criteria...", IMO it does count for something and I'm sure it influences people who vote considering part of rock n roll is image as well as music. Just mentioning KISS, the Beatles, Bowie, Elvis, etc... one is bombarded with images and image is an influence.

Also just b/c KISS "MAY" have been better pioneers of image, doesn't mean a group can't still be decent pioneers. What, I mean is maybe Hendrix wrote the book on guitar playing for his time but that doesn't mean a lesser player/ peer such as Townsend didn't contribute something to the guitar movement...


The funny thing about Living on a Prayer, the accoustic version Sambora and Jon did for that song softened my opinions on Bon Jovi... it really is a fine song....
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 04-12-2004, 11:58 PM   #80
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 06:03 AM
I always thought the "hair metal" in the late eighties was more pop in its leaning especially and the power ballad was an aspect that differentiated the first period of metal and the "hair metal" we all know and love...
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 12:23 AM   #81
arw
Blue Crack Addict
 
arw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: walking around 10,000 lakes
Posts: 27,320
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
One more thing about Def Leppard, I think the demise of their career was more due to the fact that they shunned not only 'hair metal' but their roots and what they did best and ran from it when they saw it was going out and tried to become something they weren't. They tried Grunge with Slang, then whatever their later 90's record was supposed to be. They returned to their true selves and sound with their last album but it was too late to capture what was lost. Now, they can never dig themselves out because too many people blind and deafen themselves to them by labeling them as hair metal. Well, Joe, Rick, Rick, Phil and whoever they're using to try to replace the late Steve Clark I still like you and remember you fondly
I have to say that even though Def Leppard's last few attempts at albums have not been that great they still kick some mighty ass live. Even some of the newer songs that I didn't like on the albums are great live. I saw them last year in a packed arena. Not sold out, but definitely packed. They still have a huge following and when I went to the arena to buy tickets the day they went on sale I was sort of surprised in a way to see there was a gigantic line of people from all ages, including teenagers. I've seen them live at least 6 times (I lost count...) since the Hysteria tour and they are so amazing live. I'd go see them anytime.

By the way...Vivian Campbell is who replaced Steve Clark.
__________________
arw is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 11:09 AM   #82
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Blue Room's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: MICHIGAN, GO BLUE!
Posts: 7,612
Local Time: 06:03 AM
See, image is a PART of it. But it certainly shouldnt be the main criteria. The music is what is at the heart of getting in IMO. The artists you listed (especially the Beatles) are known for their music first, image second. This is where I think BJ is just kind of vanilla and havent really added much to rock. You disagree, and thats fine. But I just dont think they have really done a whole lot that is all that original musically. You based alot of your argument on starting hair metal, even if that is true (which I dont think it is), I dont think that should get them into the HOF. Anyway I hope you are not including BJ in with the likes of The Beatles or Elvis. That is just delusional. I have trouble sometimes even putting U2 at that level at this stage. I think U2 may be on their way to that level, but BJ isnt even close.

Regarding Kiss, they havent made it. They havent even been nominated. So what does that tell you about what the HOF thinks of being an innovator image wise means? The music is and should be the main criteria, not image.

Regarding Def Leppard, I also saw them last year and I have to say I was actually pretty impressed. Great show, they definately have a chemistry live that holds your attention. Both times I saw BJ it was just kind of bland to me. Just shows how subjective this is, what strikes one person, doesnt the other. Here is my bottom line. There is obviously something to BJ, they have a strong and loyal fanbase, so they are obviously doing something right. I just personally dont get why or like them all that much. Like I said before I certainly dont hate them and a few songs they do are OK. But based on my personal experience I just dont think they deserve to be in. I'am not on the committee obviously so dont worry about my opinion on them BJ fans!! LOL

Its been an interesting discussion anyway. It caused me to think back to the early 80's era, brings back alot of memories. My first concert was Van Halen in 1982, followed by Quiet Riot in early 83. My how times and my personal tastes have changed.
__________________
Blue Room is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 10:48 PM   #83
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 06:03 AM
I have no problem with other people's tastes, LOL, my lil cousins love them the mainstream hip hop and stuff. I should only say that KISS should be in the RnR HOF no doubt, especially if Aerosmith and Petty are.

Musically... Bon Jovi has done fairly enough to be in the RnR HOF IMO. I'm not associating them with the Beatles, Zeppelin, etc... heck I don't think they are above KISS, but that doesn't mean they should not be in the hall.
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 04-13-2004, 10:54 PM   #84
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Again, I believe they were one of THE bands of their genre... even if you don't think much of a genre, it doesn't mean it isn't legitimate or doesn't even exist.

I know several people who think of punk music as not even good/ real/ legitimate form of music b/c of its simplicity and lack of complexity but hey its a genre/ style.

LOL also... on www.allmusic.com they even list pop metal as a genre/style...

Quote:
genre: Rock

The least metallic variation of heavy metal, pop-metal became the most popular form of hard rock during the '80s. Some pop-metal bands emphasized metal's most important building block the guitar riff more than others, but pop-metal's main attraction were the huge, catchy hooks that owed a great deal to the fist-pumping choruses of arena rock. Most of the Los Angeles-based bands (where the scene was heavily concentrated) also drew on the elaborate visual stylings of British glam rock, which resulted in the much-maligned "hair metal" boom of the late '80s. While pop-metal sounded loud and aggressive on the surface, it nearly always had a slick studio sheen that kept it radio-friendly. '70s artists like Aerosmith and Alice Cooper had an undeniable influence on pop-metal, but the band that sparked the true genesis of the style was Kiss. Kiss' music was catchy and utterly simple, and their wildly theatrical visuals were an essential part of their appeal. Next came Van Halen, whose wild party-rock and virtuoso lead guitarist set the style for much of the pop-metal that followed. The first wave of pop-metal bands like Motley Crue (who would later become superstars), Quiet Riot, Dokken, Ratt, and Twisted Sister wasn't quite as poppy as it would later become, save for Def Leppard's 1983 landmark Pyromania, perhaps the most melodic metal album up to that point. Bon Jovi's 1986 smash Slippery When Wet ushered in the age of hair metal, where photogenic looks (and, yes, teased-up hair) became just as important in selling a band as the music itself. The following year, Def Leppard's Hysteria set new standards for smoothed-out production as well as blockbuster sales. Not all subsequent pop-metal fell into the slick, image-conscious hair-metal camp; Guns N' Roses, Tesla, and Skid Row often had a grittier edge, and Extreme was unpredictably eclectic, while veteran rockers Kiss, Aerosmith, and Alice Cooper all staged pop-friendly comebacks. But by and large, the hair bands reigned supreme, playing lots of sleazy Aerosmith boogie and big AOR-style power ballads with bits of Van Halen flash; Poison embodied the glammed-up, party-hearty excess of hair metal perhaps better than any. Pop-metal and hair metal (and the excess and formula that had come to be associated with both) were effectively wiped off the musical map by grunge in 1991; some pop-metal bands continued to record for smaller labels and cult audiences, but the music's reputation had suffered too much to restore its former glamour.
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 04-14-2004, 12:38 PM   #85
Acrobat
 
Vampira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: POP Chop shop
Posts: 338
Local Time: 06:03 AM
I classify the Crue as a KISS influenced band, not a hair metal band. Motley Crue are the perfect age to have been into KISS as teenagers. It is very possible that a lot of the hair metal guys such as Brett Michaels were no doubt influenced by David Lee Roth in their teenage years and that is how they manifested it on stage. But Van Halen is not hair metal.
__________________
Vampira is offline  
Old 04-14-2004, 03:34 PM   #86
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Blue Room's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: MICHIGAN, GO BLUE!
Posts: 7,612
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Vampira
I classify the Crue as a KISS influenced band, not a hair metal band. Motley Crue are the perfect age to have been into KISS as teenagers. It is very possible that a lot of the hair metal guys such as Brett Michaels were no doubt influenced by David Lee Roth in their teenage years and that is how they manifested it on stage. But Van Halen is not hair metal.
All acts are influenced by someone at some point. Sure MC were influenced by Kiss, they toured with them in 1982 as well. But why does that automatically mean they were not at the forefront or start of this term of "hair metal" being thrown around? Lets look at the facts. Theatre Of Pain, released in 1985, first power ballad released that is a hit (something that is part of the hair metal forumula). Also, lets examine what MC looked like in 1982/83. Their hair was huge!! Also their first album was pop/metal, another criteria. Shout At the Devil was a bit harder sounding but not alot. So I dont really get your point. Its possible BJ could have been influenced by MC under this criteria? So then would MC be responsible for starting the hair metal trend? Are you saying that you DO think BJ started the hair metal trend then? I dont know how you can and that is my point. BJ didnt start anything. They became popular after it started and managed to survive where alot of others did not. Thats it.

Regarding Van Halen. I dont think they are hair metal but I do think they helped to start it. Look DLR in 1984, spandex and big hair (even though it was partially a hair piece!! LOL). What are two mainstays with bands consider hair metal bands??!! VH was innovative simply because of the man that was playing guitar for them. But then again, VH is not metal music, nor are they pop music. I would consider them more of Pop hard rock, which is really close to what alot of you are throwing around as the criteria for the "hair metal" sound.
__________________
Blue Room is offline  
Old 04-18-2004, 10:58 AM   #87
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 06:03 AM
I've been w/o a computer for days and this thing drops this far, maybe I should let it die.

A few comments- thanks Flying Fu, Angela and Arw!

Blue Room, I didn't 'incorrectly' state Ratt started after BJ, I'm sure they were playing before but nobody really heard of them before. I watched all this happen, I didn't get my info from a VH1 documentary.

For further proof that Motley Crue were in with the 'bring back rock' after new wave thing, I remember a quote by Mick Mars once. He said, 'we saw everybody cutting their hair and wearing skinny ties and we said, fuck that, we're gonna grow our hair down to our ass and play the loudest, rudest rock ever!'

Think about what rock was, real rock, classic rock in the late 60's and 70's. Long hair tight pants hard playing hard living. That is what some of these bands were shooting for and it's unfair to lump them with the hair metal guys. Most hair metal bands were influenced by the glam rock of the mid 70's, and even U2 admits to that, T Rex and Bowie specifically. But I stand by my statement and I'm glad to see some can see this- hair metal did not really become what it was until the very late 80's and into the early 90's and not all long haired 80's rock bands or songs by them should be labeled that way.
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 04-18-2004, 10:59 AM   #88
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Oh, and the Talking Heads are already in the Hall of Fame. They got inducted in 2002. David Byrne had snow white hair and scared me he looked so old.
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 04-18-2004, 11:01 AM   #89
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 10:03 PM
Talking Heads

let us all bow in their radiant light






/useless contribution to thread
__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 04-18-2004, 01:12 PM   #90
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Blue Room's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: MICHIGAN, GO BLUE!
Posts: 7,612
Local Time: 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
I've been w/o a computer for days and this thing drops this far, maybe I should let it die.

A few comments- thanks Flying Fu, Angela and Arw!

Blue Room, I didn't 'incorrectly' state Ratt started after BJ, I'm sure they were playing before but nobody really heard of them before. I watched all this happen, I didn't get my info from a VH1 documentary.

For further proof that Motley Crue were in with the 'bring back rock' after new wave thing, I remember a quote by Mick Mars once. He said, 'we saw everybody cutting their hair and wearing skinny ties and we said, fuck that, we're gonna grow our hair down to our ass and play the loudest, rudest rock ever!'

Think about what rock was, real rock, classic rock in the late 60's and 70's. Long hair tight pants hard playing hard living. That is what some of these bands were shooting for and it's unfair to lump them with the hair metal guys. Most hair metal bands were influenced by the glam rock of the mid 70's, and even U2 admits to that, T Rex and Bowie specifically. But I stand by my statement and I'm glad to see some can see this- hair metal did not really become what it was until the very late 80's and into the early 90's and not all long haired 80's rock bands or songs by them should be labeled that way.
Actually I really agree with you on everything except about Ratt. Your still flat out wrong. Ratt broke big with Out Of The Cellar. Round and Round was having heavy rotation on MTV at the time. What year did this happen? 1984 So they were big WAY before Bon Jovi. Also, go back to my statement about Motley Crue. Then listen to Theatre of Pain. To me, its rather poppy and Home Sweet Home is about as hair metal as you get. So I guess what you are saying is that T Rexx and the glam movement started hair metal? Thats fine, I can see that, but then that means BJ certainly didnt.

Here is the thing, honestly, I dont really care. What if Bon Jovi did start hair metal? Like I said before, is that a good thing? VERY debatable. Even if they did, it doesnt make them worthy of getting into the HOF IMO. But I still say, they didnt start anything. They rode a wave that had already begun and became one of the bigger bands in that genre at the time. They were just one of the few bands that were in that genre that survived the grunge movement. So I guess that does say something about them. But R n R HOF? I just dont think so. They will make it at some point most likely though. I just dont think they really deserve it. I'am sure alot of people dont think U2 does either. But we all KNOW here that they do!! LOL

Also, did I miss something? When did Talking Heads come into this? Just curious.
__________________

__________________
Blue Room is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com