Log In
Register
7.31pm
8 August 2013
Offline
Ha! I happen to think cows have beautiful eyes anyway!
1.09pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline Not sure. I know I was rather upset to realise a few days ago that Paul is probably my favourite Beatle – I think it was residual dislike over the way he treated George in Let it Be, since George was my fave at the time.
Since I have been (finally) replacing my long-sold LPs with CDs I have discovered that there are a lot more Paul CDs on my ‘want’ list than there are by the others. I last bought a new Beatles CD in 1984 (Give My Regards To Broad Street ) and have a lot of catching up to do, and just bought McCartney and McCartney II for the first time ever.
Paul is also the only Beatle I have seen live – in Brisbane back in 1975 I think it was.
==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
5.20pm
9 July 2013
Offline Not sure Paul would appreciate the “cow eyes” thing…he’s a vegan!! But, cows and Paul both have awesome eyes, whatever you want to call them. Negative information as well as positive information have their places in biographies. I just do not believe that they belong in obits. You are supposed to be celebrating a person’s life, not revealing all the skeletons in their closets. Norman’s obit offended me. But, that’s just me.
"And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make."
9.58pm
8 November 2013
Offline i haven’t read all the answers to this thread, so maybe what i’m going to say has already been said… anyway…
in my opinion, many people think that you can only like lennon OR mccartney, never both. and “not disliking” mccartney would mean not honouring lennon… which i don’t really understand.
the second thing is, as some rock critic (i think) put it: “paul mccartney is an artist who doesn’t suffer for is art.” there is much truth in it, i suppose. mccartney loves what he does and he doesn’t try to make us believe otherwise. that’s probably confusing for most people. someone who doesn’t suffer for his art can’t be a real artist. … yeah, i don’t really understand this point of view either, but i think that’s really partly why people dislike mccartney. you don’t want successfull artists to be happy, right? 
12.28am
20 December 2010
Offline I think it depends on what you like in an artist. I have always felt the Lennon was a great lyricist and McCartney was great at writing music but both have written great music and lyrics so the debate just goes on. Some artists like to be in the limelight and some don’t. Each person makes their own decision on what path they choose. There is no wrong or right. Lennon was always considered a pessimist while McCartney a optimist. Together, they were great. Apart, in my opinion, there was always something missing for both of them in their solo work though each one has had some great tunes. I’m sure this topic will never end. Paul was the pop artist and Lennon was the underground artist.
The further one travels, the less one knows
3.02pm
15 November 2013
Offline Hannah said
SatanHimself said
Yeah, how dare a 71-year-old not be able to hit high notes he originally sang when he was 19…?Exactly! I’m just going to take it as people are jealous of his fame, money and incredible talent and love to find reasons to pull him off his pedestal. People are drags sometimes! You hit the nail on the HEAD…jealousy, they love to cut SUCCESSFUL people down…They started to turn on the fab after Magical Mystery Tour movie was released, why because they still kept cranking out the hits…
9.27pm
7 February 2014
Offline Hannah said
I’m getting very frustrated with some of the attitudes I’ve heard towards the gorgeous and brilliant Paul lately (not on the Beatles Bible I hasten to add!) When he performed Hey Jude at the Olympics my mum and I watched with tears in our eyes and shivers down our spines. He was AMAZING and had everyone on their feet and singing. I was so proud to be a Beatles fan that day. When it had finished I turned on the radio and there was a discussion going on about the ceremony. Everyone said how good it was, except for Paul’s perfomance which was apparantly “awful”. So many people called in to say that he had lost his singing voice and should retire gracefully. Needless to say I was furious! Why should he retire when he CAN still sing and is entertaining thousands of people all over the world? The next day, most of the people I spoke to agreed that he was crap! I actually had a row with my boyfriend about it on the train cos he was saying how bad he was and he should give up. I was furious and in the end had to bite my tongue with people as I didn’t want to fall out with them. My young nieces and nephew loved it however. It’s not just in relation to the Olympic ceremony, I seem to come across this viewpoint alot. Paul is a genius and should be respected as such. Even if you don’t like the Beatles, surely people should respect everything he’s done for the music business, all the people he’s influenced?
I don’t think its necessarily that people don’t respect what he has done. Actually, in some cases, it could be the opposite.
It’s like Muhammad Ali – a lot of people didn’t like seeing Ali’s last few fights, not because they didn’t respect everything Ali had done, but because they just felt he didn’t have it anymore and was a shadow of his former self and didn’t want to tarnish their memory of how great he used to be. I must stress I never saw Paul’s performance at the Olympics, so do not have an opinion of my own of the performance in question. I am just pointing out that criticism of one performance does not necessarily mean a lack of respect for everything an individual has done.
11.22pm
1 November 2012
Offline I couldn’t find a decent YouTube of that (I assume it was 2012 Olympics?). What I found sounded pretty good — nothing to write home about, but for this kind of thing, you definitely “had to be there” to get the full impact.
Faded flowers, wait in a jar, till the evening is complete... complete... complete... complete...
10.01pm
22 December 2013
Offline “Why is everyone suddenly bad mouthing Paul?” Well, I don’t see what’s so “suddenly” about it for Paul became a popular target for many since April 9th, 1970, even his ‘Beast Friends’. If it appears to be more noticeable on this site then perhaps some feel it appropriate to counter the excessive amount of Paul flanking (for lack of a better word) evidenced here as well. Everyone is entitled to an opinion at the end of the day, and I’ll freely admit that I’m not nearly as impressed by Sir Paul as some here are, the fact that he plays so many instruments is overstated here a lot when there are many others who can as well but would rather share the workload with others and trust their abilities instead. As sonically enjoyable as Paul’s solo on ‘Taxman ‘ is, to use it as some sort of evidence to make claim to Paul being the best lead guitarist in the band is laughable, in my opinion, and it’s no wonder that “bad mouthing” him is commonplace on some of these threads.
I think the “bad mouthing” would decrease incrementally should the “flanking” be toned down, but is it really “bad mouthing” when someone doesn’t put Paul on as high a pedestal as some do and wish to counter it? Why so sensitive when it comes to Paul? Maybe that’s the question that should be asked instead. Certain people feel that Paul has a right to “set the record straight” to those who felt that Lennon was The Beatles, so why can’t those who disagree with the notion that Paul did everything have a voice in dispelling that myth? Many of them aren’t “bad mouthing” Paul so much as they are backing up an opinion on his role with supporting evidence. Some fans are beginning to adopt some of Paul’s habits I’m afraid, including feeling insecure about the Paul McCartney “legacy”…:-)
7.21pm
8 April 2014
Offline I also get really angry when someone criticizes The Beatles. As I say “An insult to The Beatles is like an insult to me”
Paul McCartney was great at the London Olympics, although if I’m really honest (very hard to admit) I preferred him (a lot) more in the 60’s. But that is probably because the other Beatles weren’t there and lets be honest, he is getting old (still very good musician!!!!!!!)
I definitely don’t think Paul McCartney should stop singing, come on, the Rolling Stones are still performing, aren’t they? You can see it his passion, it is what he does best and he enjoys it, otherwise he would have stopped a long time ago.
Paul McCartney 4ever!!!!!!!!!!! 
8.27pm
29 August 2013
Offline I hate it when people say Paul McCartney can’t sing as well as he used to.
I challenge them to sing as a career since they were 19 and continue touring at 71!
"White Album - My joint-fave Beatles album along with Revolver. They show the two sides of Beatles. Revolver's very controlled - even though it's also very innovative. The White Album's playful and almost ramshackle. It's like a scrapbook kept by a genius. Fantastic stuff."
9.42am
5 February 2014
Offline
I just challenge them to do better. Right here. Right now. Do it, or shut up.
3.09pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline
LikeASir said
I hate it when people say Paul McCartney can’t sing as well as he used to.I challenge them to sing as a career since they were 19 and continue touring at 71!
19? He joined the Quarrymen when he was barely 15!
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
5.29pm
20 December 2010
Offline Billy Rhythm said
“Why is everyone suddenly bad mouthing Paul?” Well, I don’t see what’s so “suddenly” about it for Paul became a popular target for many since April 9th, 1970, even his ‘Beast Friends’. If it appears to be more noticeable on this site then perhaps some feel it appropriate to counter the excessive amount of Paul flanking (for lack of a better word) evidenced here as well. Everyone is entitled to an opinion at the end of the day, and I’ll freely admit that I’m not nearly as impressed by Sir Paul as some here are, the fact that he plays so many instruments is overstated here a lot when there are many others who can as well but would rather share the workload with others and trust their abilities instead. As sonically enjoyable as Paul’s solo on ‘Taxman ‘ is, to use it as some sort of evidence to make claim to Paul being the best lead guitarist in the band is laughable, in my opinion, and it’s no wonder that “bad mouthing” him is commonplace on some of these threads.
I think the “bad mouthing” would decrease incrementally should the “flanking” be toned down, but is it really “bad mouthing” when someone doesn’t put Paul on as high a pedestal as some do and wish to counter it? Why so sensitive when it comes to Paul? Maybe that’s the question that should be asked instead. Certain people feel that Paul has a right to “set the record straight” to those who felt that Lennon was The Beatles, so why can’t those who disagree with the notion that Paul did everything have a voice in dispelling that myth? Many of them aren’t “bad mouthing” Paul so much as they are backing up an opinion on his role with supporting evidence. Some fans are beginning to adopt some of Paul’s habits I’m afraid, including feeling insecure about the Paul McCartney “legacy”…:-)
I think McCartney gets a lot of flack due to a few issues. I remember when he was planning on changing the credit to certain Beatle songs to ‘McCartney/Lennon’. My biggest issue is those fans who come across that it was Paul McCartney and The Beatles like he was the main musician in the band and the other three were his back up band. He also writes a lot of fluff songs with very little substance lyrically speaking. I know he has written some great lyrics but not in the majority of the songs. He has a huge ego and it comes across sometimes. The bottom line is McCartney if very talented and was a must for the Beatles to be as successful as they were. What he brought to the table was his showman ship and energy and of course his fantastic vocals. He was the only one of the four that I feel could sing a rocker and also a soft ballad. I highlighted the line above about the ‘Taxman ‘ solo because I agree. He did a really nice solo for George in that song and fans say he was the best guitar player in the band which is pointless. Most of this is only going to be opinions and we all have our own but we need to stay focused on what’s important and that is the sum of the four parts equals the whole.
The following people thank Inner Light for this post:
LindeThe further one travels, the less one knows
6.38pm
14 December 2009
Offline 
cra said
I just challenge them to do better. Right here. Right now. Do it, or shut up.
Eh, I don’t think this is a legitimate rebuttal to criticism. If Paul releases a really bad album, should we not be allowed to call him on it unless we ourselves have recorded an album worthy of Paul’s best? That’s crazy: NONE of us have! The point would be that the artist produced a piece of art that compares unfavourably with their own best work, not ours.
The following people thank Von Bontee for this post:
Starr Shine?, acmacPaul: Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.
