Blur's bassist slams Led Zep & Rolling Bones-this is funny!

Nothing wrong with an old guy dancing to music he created. The Stones have every right to continue performing, especially since they are still performing well and people are still clearly buying what they are selling.

 

I never said they didn't have the right to perform.

I just said that he dances like a demented chicken on acid.

 

Listen, I know you're a huge Freddie Mercury fan...and if he were still alive, who knows what his performances would be like at the age of 72.

 

They'd be incredible. He's Freddie Mercury.

 

Yeah I got that. It was actually just a general statement about some of the comments made throughout...and people giving them "likes".

 

I'm just having a giggle. I like The Stones (well, their albums from the late 60s to the mid 70s).

 

Well, personally I think that's less about age than it seems.

Speaking for myself, I don't have a problem with Robert Plant going out and performing – but if he were up on stage bare chested and pretending it was the 1970s, that would be a little sad. I think the new Roger Daltrey album is probably the best solo record he's ever made – truly shocked how much I like it – but when I see pictures of him with his shirt off or completely unbuttoned during Who shows, it seems a bit silly. Roger's in great shape, mind, but it's still unnecessary. (Meanwhile, I like that Pete seem completely at ease with who he is and how he looks.)

I don't think anyone has a problem with older artists continuing to perform – it's the way it's done. Comparing Mick Jagger to BB King doesn't work, because BB King wore his age comfortably. And Jagger may well do so offstage, but onstage, he definitely looks like he's trying to present the image of a much, much younger man.

 

Plant didn't age very well. His face became more prune-like as the years went by.

 

So, it’s all about attacking the physical looks of 70 year olds?

 

Some musicians just need to keep their mouths shut.

 

Physical appearance aside, he’s still alive and that’s all that matters or are you going to say something about how he should be dead by now?

 

Classy.

 

No. Plus, I don't see it as an attack. And even if he did find that offensive, it's not like he'd bother with this forum.

Anyway, his face became prune-like long before 70.

Pruney.

Why should he be dead? That's just weird.

 

Bottom of the barrel stuff now.

 

I'm not sure if you're being ironic or not.

 

I'm not, having to resort to criticisms of a 70 year old man's looks is pretty pathetic. I mean, have you seen Brian May recently? (That last bit was ironic).

 

Some people don't age as well as others. That's just how it is.
I didn't say he was an actual prune, I said his face became more prune-like as the years went by (and I've already pointed out that happened long before 70).

I would describe myself as looking like a prune (as opposed to "prune-like") first thing in the morning. You might see that as "pathetic", but I see it as amusing.

I think you're being a tad over-sensitive.

 

Why would I be over-sensitive? I'm not related to Robert Plant, I don't know the guy, I'm not even much of a fan of his. I don't think commenting on how a 70 year old man's looks have changed as he's gotten older is interesting or useful or relevant, maybe it is to readers of Heat magazine. Maybe he should have had some surgery done?

 

Alex James is known as a bit of a goof, here in the UK. I wouldn't worry about his opinion. I noticed he worked in the obligatory mention of his cheeses... Says it all!

 

You're protesting too much. It's really no big deal.

 

I'm not the only one, am I? Of course it's no big deal, but it's a silly thing to say.

 

I agree that Plant hasn't aged well. If the comment had of been, 'Plant has aged well,' no one would have said anything about it. Both are simply observations on aging.

 

One positive and one negative. So not really the same thing going on there, is it?

 

I don't see it as negative. I see it as a realistic observation.

 

It is negative in comparison to "He has aged well". Which was the context of my reply. "He has aged" would be a neutral statement. I'll leave discussion of "realistic" to some of the objective/subjective experts on here!