Why Do People Hate Mr. Moonlight by the Beatles?

A poor song, performed lazily and sloppily produced.

 

because sometimes you can't make miracles! you can't turn a 2CV in a ferrari!

 

Yep. Not a new phenomenon of course but one that has, I suspect, been amplified by the Web.

 

Probably my least favourite Beatles track. Why? Not a great song and their execution of it is pretty cringe-worthy.

 

There may be some element of people following the "perceived wisdom" about the song and the album, but I can tell you for a fact that when I was getting into The Beatles, without reading any interviews or talking to people who could influence my opinion, I could tell that Beatles For Sale was a big drop off in quality from A Hard Day's Night, and while some of the songs were better than on Please Please Me and With The Beatles, the album overall lacked energy. Help! seemed like a big step up after BFS.

It's not a bad album--The Beatles never released an outright bad album--but it always has been and remains my least favorite album of theirs. It's just sort of...there.

 

The organ doesn't bother me at all.
The loud tom tom whack does however.

 

Partly because the songs pulls in so many directions it doesn’t satisfy on any level, but remains an interesting curiosity. It’s shrieks when it should console. It rocks out when it should soothe. It satirizes when it should play it straight. It’s basically hard to know how to read the song.

Actually, scrub all that. It would be quite nice if everyone wasn’t quite so over-exuberant and excitable.

 

the melody doesn't stick for me, an average song that john sings the hell out of.

 

The actual sung "Mr. Moonlight" part sounds flat, discordent.

 

I'm rather fond of it. It is a bit odd maybe for a Beatles number with the organ and drama.

 

For me, The Beatles as the leading force of music, and the direction pointers for EVERYONE else to follow, doesn't really kick in until the Help album anyway (arguably even Rubber Soul)... While EVERY album prior to this showed sprinklings of genius, they were still very dependent on covers (that's not to detract from them. I mean initially The Rolling Stones has no interest in playing anything BUT covers! It was just the era)! So in that context, NONE of their covers were anything more than a stepping stone of necessity, & generating a teenage following of their live performances. In the current times or recognition, where pretty much EVERYONE acknowledges that Beatle originals are what sowed the seeds for music as we know it today... There is actually minimal interest in the era of which most of their cover songs came from. Sure, it was the beginning of Rock n Roll, but in the general scheme of things , it sounds (& it is) too "old fashioned" to be considered "cool." The 60s was the catalyst for everything (maybe due to unconventional freedom of expression being exhibited more, or maybe due to rebellion being embraced). Either way, John Lennon will always be a more enduring hero and innovator than Elvis Presley and any of those "old guys" who's songs they peppered their earlier albums with. This is supported by the fact that The Beatles covers hold (in most cases) so much more interest than the originals (even if not complementary interest. I mean I doubt there's a single Internet discussion about the original Mr Moonlight). It's THE BEATLES that matter. So all that being said, their covers are relevant merely in how they sit next to their original compositions. As was stated, "Dizzy Miss Lizzy," following "Yesterday" doesn't work, but it might've fitted in neatly on one of their previous records if placed right. Mr Moonlight is just as relevant and worthy as ANY of their covers... I think the issue is how and where it's presented. On the first or second album, it would've been considered (for the vocal alone) a truly GREAT cover, but it's hard to appreciate that now, having heard it where it's placed for the last 50 years! All Beatle covers are album filler, and thus, all are equally worthy for the point they were intended for...

 

I grew up listening to The Beatles...my older brother had most of their Capitol albums, including Beatles '65. I don't recall hearing that song until 1987 when the CDs were issued. Maybe I didn't like it? Not sure...
...anyway...on a warm, full-moon August night in 1987, I was riding in my brother's car (I was 15, he was 23)...we were listening to the mono CD of Beatles For Sale...and I fell in love with the song. Cheesy lyrics, yes, but I love all of the other charms it has. Organ solo, rhythm guitar, bongos (or congas, whatever Ringo is beating on), vocals...none of it sounds like it belongs...but to my ears, it works.
Long live "Mr. Moonlight"!

 

Its a really stock song. Old school. Even for early Beatles. To be honest, its crap.

 

I don't know but I really like it.

 

The verses sung by John Lennon are very good, but the harmonies during the chorus are just terrible. Actually the chorus is weak no matter what.

 

I love "Mr Moonlight", and the original version by Dr Feelgood & the Interns (aka Piano Red).

 

It's boring and the lyrics are trite. And John's yelling at the beginning is really annoying.

 

The vocals on it are really annoying to me, primary the monotone harmonies. The lyrics sound really stupid to me, but that's not the Beatles' fault. I don't think it was a very good choice of a song to cover in the first place.

 

I like Mr. Moonlight a lot more than I like "Baby's in Black". That to me is a really dire song.

 

I don't dislike it as much as some, but it is just a cover and the organ is unbelievably cheesy.

 

It's a VERY poor song. Simple as that.

 

Everything from the opening scream to the cheesy organ is in my opinion iconic 60's! I love it. This is the only place I ever heard that it was disliked. To each his own or "it's all subjective ". Peace

 

I like it but the one thing that makes me cringe is the dull tom hit. I much prefer the star club version where it's a loud snare crack.

 

By Beatles standards, it's a terrible piece of songwriting. No more or less complicated than that.

 

It's on the same album as one of of the biggest pronoun cluster****s in the history of the English language, so the Beatles set the bar pretty low.