Dismiss Notice
We are making some updates and reconfigurations to our server. Apologies for any downtime or slow forum loading now or within the next week or so. Thanks!

Would Critics View KISS More Favorably If 'Phantom' Were A Blockbuster Hit Film?

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by S. P. Honeybunch, Nov 30, 2019.

  1. punkmusick

    punkmusick Formerly 4011021

    Location:
    Brazil
    Ok, but in this parallel universe Pete Best would had always been the Beatles' drummer and never died so the Beatles would sill be ranked above Kiss.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2019
  2. Veni Vidi Vici

    Veni Vidi Vici Forum Resident

    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    You guys should email him with this theory and see what he says: Xgau Sez .
     
    zphage likes this.
  3. Cool hand luke

    Cool hand luke You shoulda heard just what I seen

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    I am worried about him ... the Eric Carr obsession is unhealthy
     
  4. audiomixer

    audiomixer As Bald As The Beatles

    My opinion of Kiss has always been the same, with or without a movie. I just don’t care for their music.
     
    dalem5467 and mark winstanley like this.
  5. mbd40

    mbd40 Steely Dan Fan

    Location:
    Hope, Ar
    Also in this parallel universe Brian Jones would have never died and the Rolling Stones would have been ranked above the Beatles and KISS.
     
    punkmusick likes this.
  6. craymcla

    craymcla Forum Resident

    Location:
    Nashville, TN, USA
    Honeybunch, after reading all of these posts in this thread and your defenses of your original post, it seems that you have made the classic mistake of coming up with a conclusion first and then trying desperately to back into a proof of that conclusion. You've ignored the numerous replies that belie your theory and just keep repeating unsubstantiated "facts". You need to accept that you might be wrong.
     
    Comet01, JoeRockhead and Crawdad like this.
  7. S. P. Honeybunch

    S. P. Honeybunch Presidente de Kokomo Thread Starter

    Location:
    California, USA
    Someone might be projecting a conclusion onto the OP that isn't actually there.
     
  8. TwentySmallCigars

    TwentySmallCigars Forum Resident

    If Eric Carr had replaced Helen Wiggin in The Shaggs, they would have been bigger than the Beatles, and not just in Frank Zappa's opinion.

    However, if The Shaggs had then appeared in Phantom of the Park, it would have killed their career.
     
  9. mark winstanley

    mark winstanley 5.1 should be mandatory for my favourite albums

    Fair call
     
  10. mark winstanley

    mark winstanley 5.1 should be mandatory for my favourite albums

    If Helen Reddy had fronted a regrouped Beatles, with Oscar Peterson on Drums and Ringo on Xylophone. Paul and John playing Bouzouki's, George playing the string bass, and Grover Washington Jnr on the Kazoo it would have been bigger than the Wiggles.
     
    Cachiva and S. P. Honeybunch like this.
  11. johnod

    johnod Forum Resident

    Location:
    Canada
    I've always been perplexed why any grown person takes Kiss seriously.
     
    dalem5467 and pathosdrama like this.
  12. Cool hand luke

    Cool hand luke You shoulda heard just what I seen

    Location:
    Massachusetts
    You're about to be told why...:-popcorn:
     
    ARK and CoachD like this.
  13. carlwm

    carlwm Forum Resident

    Location:
    wales
    Not by me.

    I'd struggle to fill an EP with Beatles songs I like whereas I like the majority of KISS' work.

    Obviously, I'm not claiming that The Beatles are rubbish, just not for me.
     
  14. Celebrated Summer

    Celebrated Summer Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    I didn't take KISS seriously until I was grown. As a middle schooler, I was into the Beatles and my younger brother liked KISS. So I considered them KISS stuff.

    It was only when I realized bands like Poison and Motley Crue were influenced by them that I went back to their albums. I was surprised at how many great songs they'd come up with. Some of those LPs play almost like greatest hits albums.

    Lots of artists catch the public's attention with gimmicks, but deliver great music nonetheless. KISS' gimmick was more gaudy than the Beatles' hair or the Who's destructo act, but that doesn't the catchiness and power of their best work (some of which includes their mid-'80s stuff).
     
    905 and carlwm like this.
  15. stax o' wax

    stax o' wax Forum Resident

    Location:
    The West
    After a string of great hard rock albums the list of mistakes Kiss started making around this time is staggering.

    The Phantom TV special
    Kiss - Dynasty (I Was Made For Boring you)
    Kiss - The Elder
    Kiss - Unmasked

    Even as a teenager I remember thinking "do these guys have any clue at all?"
     
  16. nodeerforamonth

    nodeerforamonth Forum Resident

    Location:
    San Diego,CA USA
    KISS writing only "good" songs would be quite a step down for them.
     
  17. nosticker

    nosticker Forum Guy

    Location:
    Ringwood, NJ
    I remember hopping on the KISS bandwagon as a kid around 1977 or so, right before Love Gun. Bought Destroyer and Alive and then Alive II and Double Platinum. Even endured the solo albums.

    But that movie, Oy.

    Friend: "Hey! Kiss is making a movie!"
    Me: "Wow!"
    Friend: "It's gonna be on NBC in September!"
    Me: "What???" :(

    It was an entirely different TV landscape. TV movies weren't generally good. I avoided them like the plague. I remember being very let down and found it surreal to hear an NBC announcer's voice cut in over "God of Thunder" during the credits. It was a head scratcher for me. Their time as that band was coming to a close, and it wouldn't fully recover, IMO, till Lick It Up in 1983. I think they were SO popular that they had to be hated for a while in order to make a comeback. And America loves a comeback.



    Dan
     
    S. P. Honeybunch and carlwm like this.
  18. carlwm

    carlwm Forum Resident

    Location:
    wales
    One crap film, three great albums! :righton:
     
  19. mark winstanley

    mark winstanley 5.1 should be mandatory for my favourite albums

    I'm perplexed why any grown adult takes music so seriously, it is supposed to be a pleasure...
    It also perplexes me why folks always come to any of these threads with immature, slightly veiled personal insults... but it's fairly consistent
     
    scott palmiter, ARK, CoachD and 6 others like this.
  20. craymcla

    craymcla Forum Resident

    Location:
    Nashville, TN, USA
    Fair enough, but you made these statements (in bold) as fact:
    You haven't present any evidence that these statements are in fact true. They only had "one true albatros"? Christgua is so all-knowing that nobody else's opinion is relevant? Did either band have trouble promoting subsequent albums (as opposed to actually selling albums)? And a number of critics in the 70s despised KISS from day one, along with Led Zeppelin, AC/DC etc. So what?
     
  21. Terrapin Station

    Terrapin Station Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC Man
    Well, you'd still not be lusting after the very same thing you dislike, but sure, you could have a negative attitude towards women aside from sexual aspects. But yeah, focusing on sex certainly isn't that.
     
  22. Terrapin Station

    Terrapin Station Forum Resident

    Location:
    NYC Man
    I'm not sure just what is entailed in "taking a band seriously," but KISS fans tend to think that they have a lot of great music and that stage show-wise, image-wise, etc., the band is fun/entertaining.
     
    ARK, mark winstanley and carlwm like this.
  23. mbd40

    mbd40 Steely Dan Fan

    Location:
    Hope, Ar
    In a parallel universe KISS saves Santa rather than meeting the phantom of the park.

    [​IMG]
     
  24. Wigru

    Wigru Forum Resident

    Location:
    Belgium
    True. Both lovers and haters take it too seriously. Kiss is what it is: a sketchy superficial but fun band.

    All music has a purpose: some is made to dance to, some is made to listen to. Kiss' music is there to entertain the audience and to make money for Gene & co. They're not dishonest about that :)

    Like ANY musical artist, it's an act. A musical act. They act as if they're happy. They act to it, to emulate that feeling with their audience. Just like Eels is an act. Or do you think they're 'deep' all the time?

    What they do is very difficult: comedy is one of the most difficult genres to do right. And they have written some tunes some other bands would give an arm for.

    I love them when I'm in a happy mood, but I wouldn't play them on a funeral.

    Variety is the spice of life.
     
    mark winstanley likes this.
  25. carrick doone

    carrick doone Whhhuuuutttt????

    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    What the he** does any of this mean? And where is the continuity between artists? You have a Jack Kirby Head chasing the Scooby Doo group done in a different style, then Kiss are shown in a cheap Ralph Bakshi rotoscoped style. Bad, bad and bad. I guess things don't change from Phantom.
     

Share This Page

molar-endocrine