Indeed. They already have a "far better than what they were maligned for" reputation now that time has passed. As do the later 70's-early 80's albums too, for that matter. But you're right that had the band stopped, they'd likely be heralded as some sort of brilliant, influential, underground cult band that should have kept going.
KISS is one of my favourite bands. Love them. Great rock music, catchy songs, cool basslines and awesome guitar parts. Saw them live 6 times and all six shows were brilliant. It really is something else. I met the band at a Meet & Greet in 2015 and Gene Simmons during the Vault Experience last July. All members were so nice and - yes! - down to earth. Gene was so friendly, really listening to what you were saying and making sure you had a great time.
Indeed. Glam and power pop being my two favorite sub-genres of rock and roll, Kiss has always stood as the most definitive example of both (for me). Alice Cooper was the groundbreaker, and the ground work, but Kiss was like the ultimate full-bore fantasy of both genres. Somewhat similar to the "Revolver to Pepper" thing.
You're dead right about that. Kiss became uncool almost overnight in 1978 - and for that, various factors were to blame. Partly it was the inter-band conflict that led to the year off' recording as a band and the decision to concentrate on solo albums. These were released in the wake of the ill-advised television film (if you saw it at the time, what did you think of it - then?) which was generally panned by (adult) critics. The albums underperformed against expectations. More serious, perhaps, was a management strategy that seemed intent on turning the band into an act for all the family. I think this undermined their 'outsider appeal' and when under-10s started turning up at their concerts, it made the teenagers feel uneasy about being there. Another factor was Gene's romantic relationship with a 'mainstream' celebrity: I think this did its little bit to 'de-fang the Demon' and lost him a lot of his mystique (there's a them in rock - when a band member starts a relationship with an A-list actress, their credibility crashes through the floorboards. Witness: Chris Martin and Matt Bellamy).
I still like Kiss old or new material. I guess they never left my childhood and teen years. I liked Sonic Boom and Monster. The 70' of course I liked Kiss as well. I do enjoy Lick It Up, Kiss with no make-up made a kick you below the belt album. Love spinning that original 1983 LIU vinyl or remastered 1997 cd.
But I don't think the 'musical deficits' were covered up. The meat and potatoes playing was a big part of their appeal. In 1974, Gene proudly stated: 'Our musicianship is average, maybe less than average...but by this time next year, we'll be the biggest band in America.'
I love'em but I'll be the first to admit, they've got almost as many bad albums as they do good ones.
Exactly. The mistake most critics made was apparently assuming that Kiss' aim was to make sure everybody thought they were "great musicians". Which often is irrelevant to hooks, influence, impact, showmanship, or memorable songs.
Kiss made the most of their talent with good solid production Kiss was even better. They Kiss had a dream and drive that's why they Kiss were successful. IMHO
I saw the movie at the time and was confused and indeed embarrassed by it. I was very aware that fall of 1978 that something had gone adrift. I remember eagerly awaiting Dynasty’s release to set things right. Upon hearing it I wasn’t very impressed and knew it wasn’t as good as the earlier stuff. As 79 ground on I was put off by the Vegas costumes and the kiddie show. I missed the edgy KISS and soon went on to other bands.
I love Kiss!i dont think they are a band band at all.Maybe the song lyrics on the early albums but the playing by them isn not bad.Nothing spectacular but no worse then a lot of other bands.i have all their albums and solo ones.
I think they are actually better than the give themselves credit for. Gene doesn't like to hear his bass-playing praised (OK, so it's not 'always' him, especially in the 80s) but he came up with some great lines in the glory days.
Lots of praise for them on the board made me worried about myself. After reading some posts in this thread, I feel fine again. Rubbish. YMMV.
Yes, the members always downplayed the technical knacks they had. Musically that is. Which just makes you appreciate them even more. At least most fans certainly do. They always remain "undervalued" as a result.
when I was a pup i thought Gene was great, the older I got, the less I thought that lol ... he was an underrated bass player though
Love how Ace like stayed in the background of Gene and Paul. When you noticed Ace it was his guitar that did the talking.
I think most people who hate on KISS generally haven't listened through to their discography, because I think if they did, most would find something to like. They judge them on their image, the personalities in the band (Gene), and the few hit songs everyone has heard 100 times.
Mostly awful. Still, they had a huge impact on popular culture in the 70s, which, in turn, made an impact on me. Still, mostly awful IMO.
My opinion about Kiss is that they were a whole lot of fun back in the day. They really came to the fore with Kiss Alive, which really blew the doors off. They followed that with Destroyer which has a great chunky sound, and that iconic cover. Everything was great back then - as fans we didn't know about the internal strife. I saw them on the Destroyer tour, and it was truly some great rock theater. As a spectacle it was something to behold, like watching a fair ground go up in flames. Of course, times changed. As Punk was ushered in, Kiss felt all at sea. Kiss has a great ear for melody and a sense of pantomime, but it all looked too bombastic in 77. We got a couple more great albums: Rock and Roll Over (my favorite), Love Gun, and when Punk itself had worn thin, Dynasty and Unmasked - both of which I liked. The end for me was The Elder. I bought that on release, and enjoyed it, but there was no doubt something had changed. By the mid-80's, rock took a nose dive. Now, the hair bands often had some cool hooks, and even some blistering riffs and solo's, but suddenly rock wasn't cool any more. Van Halen had given us Jump for goodness sakes. I recall seeing the video for that the first time, and that was the moment they were kicked to the curb. What a fall after seeing them live on the Women and Children First tour, which was a monster. Along with rock went Kiss. Members began to change, the songs were poor, and I stopped at that point. Today they are perhaps the most cynical of bands. It's a corporation, essentially. Two stand in actors in lead roles, the same shtick. The sight of mid to late 60's guys teetering in platform boots singing about "Christine 16". It's just not interesting at all. For me they lost their way, and continued after their sell by date. That said, they continue to sell tickets. They're going to Vegas soon, which is precisely where they belong. Vegas is the rock and roll graveyard. They should have gone there in the 90's, imo.
Most definitely. I almost know this to be universally true because I've known some who did explore a "Hard Luck Woman" or a "Sure Know Something" or a solo album etc, and came away surprised that it was as good as it was. Then again, I understand those who dislike the band either being hesitant or uninterested in exploring more of a band that they are 98% sure they are never going to enjoy. I'm guilty as well with someone like Bowie. Everything I have ever heard or seen of him just leaves me bored and cold. Yet I haven't heard every album he has released. As a result, I would never call him "garbage" or deny his influence. I simply put the burden on myself and just accept that it is likely something that I'm not getting. And not the other way around.
Over-exposed, overworked, and the lifestyle took its toll on Ace and Peter most notably. People have a tendency to forget that during the initial years of the band, they were putting out and touring on an album every 6 months. Then "Alive" saved Casablanca Records, and propelled the band to stardom. Now they scaled back to a new lp every year, yet, the tours were now longer, worldwide, and they were the headliners carrying the pressure. Kiss Meets The Phantom of the Park. An enormous pos tv movie, which shows you how big the band had become. It was hard to believe a rock band like Kiss was actually getting 90 mins on 1 of the 3 commercial networks. Anyway, just terrible, the bands' voices were altered, songs were played with different lyrics to fit in with the movie. The band was given little spoken dialogue, they constantly appeared together as a group in scenes thus there was little to nothing for Ace or Peter to do or say, just stand there. Peter and Ace it were said too often appeared late, loaded, and pretty much marginalized. And then there were 4 solo albums suddenly on the scene, and to make it more difficult for all concerned, it was Ace's solo album that ended up yielding the biggest single. For a band at the top of the heap, it was not good times at that point.
Yet, for this guy here, that year was like a rock and roll candy store. And still is when I look back on it all and time passes, and the "inner turmoil" issues fade away from any importance. Ultimately, you are just left with the good memories and the music. And the bubble gum cards. I'm so bad that I even put the 1978 movie in around this time of year and let it run repeatedly, cast commentaries and all. Great memories! And camp at its finest. And worst. Yes, my sense of quality entertainment has been out the window for decades. What can I say.
For me Strutter ‘78 and indeed all the remixing on Double Platinum released in the spring of 1978 was the canary in the coal mine that 1978 was going to be a strange year for KISS and things were about to go off the rails.
