I can't believe they allowed actual music...

paul is talented, but also a sellout
john was talented, but he was IMO conceited and outspoken
Ringo wasnt that talented, but a cool guy nonetheless

George, the silent, humble beatle was incredibly talented and gets all my praise

 

woah........ paul has done alot of charitable work, had a stint with the peta while linda was still alive, and he does alot of charitable work with his new woman.

john didnt do much but go around and protest the war...

 

By Jove, I think you GOT IT!! thanks

All the Beatles were very talented and very individual. It's what made them great. I'm very surprised at all the dissension in this thread, but hey, I guess everyone's entitled to their opinions.

edit: and as far as the halftime show, it ranks right up there with U2 in 2002. Both were stellar IMO. Better than Janet's breast, anyway.

 

"Ya, you're right. This is a kind of silly argument. Maybe i am being too harsh on the guy. But I have to say, I do like John's style alot more."

Well, I think they jumped all over you right? I kinda like John's songs a lil better too, all I'm saying is it's not like you have to like one and hate the other. And this idea that these people have to volunteer every second of the day because of who they are is a little beyond me. I mean does anyone sit around and decide whether or not they like Snoop dog based on his charity work? If he does any at all? Are we going to not watch any movies but Sandra bullock movies now because she was the only actor who donated her own money to the tsunami victims? It just has nothing to do with the work they produce. Why do we even care about these people's private life?

 

it was the only part of the super bowl i watched... Paul was a great choice

 

Yea, I mean I hope we can all agree that Paul was better than the type of performers they usually have, am I right? LOL

 

Sir Paul is 105 years old. Luckily he died back in '66, so he stopped aging.

I hear he likes to hump his wife's artificial leg.

 

Superbowl XXXI was probally the best, ZZtop, Dan Akroyd, John Goodman and James Beulushi, and fianally James Brown. Sweet

 

McCartney is greedy, I know someone who has worked with him and he doesn't carry money around with him, others had to buy him his coffee etc.

John Lennon and Paul McCartney are the two greatest songwriters that have ever lived. Paul is the most gifted pop writer ever and his songs are incredibly diverse, Lennon is the composer of pops most original songs and they often owe nothing to anyone.

I disagree about the asassination quip, McCartneys solo album 'McCartney II' recieved terrible reviews before Johns death as did the Wings stuff. Nothing is revered now that wasn't at the time.

Harrison was a genius too, his solo work is equally as patchy as both John and Pauls with some embarassing tunes from the Eighties.

Ringo is extremely likeable, this is not to be confused with talent despite the fact he is pops greatest drummer. People only say he isn't because they can't concieve of a group being that perfect. But they were.

 

Good job dude...

 

The newspaper today reported that the fcc only recieved 2 complaints about his performance, both saying it was 'boring'-this compared to how many thousands last year for JJ's tit? oh well, I dont watch sports for the entertainment value, i watch them to see millionaires whine and pout

 

Yes, any reviewer that calls a Beatle performing Beatle songs boring and says that Timberlake and Jackson (both staggering in their talentlessnes) anything other than, should not be considered an authority on anything and infact should be banned from breathing.

 

dedhead and the other person that was slamming mcartney(the persons name ahd something to do with paul and spirits) are fools. He isnt a sell out, hes a FUCKING beatle. I can not believe some of the thigns u guys have said. Not liking his music is one thing, but saying hes a bad person and all that other stuff is idiotic. you dont know him, you dont know where hes from, and you dont know what he does with his money/time/life, but for some reason you think that you should tell him what to do with his money, how much time he should spend volunteering and all that other good stuff. That is ridiculous! I bet you guys havnt done shit for anyone but urselves, so stop slamming the poor guy. I bet you guys have never donated a fucking paycheck to charity, and I bet you guys have bummed a cup of fucking coffee off ppl before too. Paul is a normal guy like me and you, so dont think that he should be rightous and better than all of us. Hes a musician, his job is too play music, and thats it. So all you Paul haters can go fuck off.

One more thing that one person that kept on asking for all the facts and shit seems to be the most annoying person ever who knows nothing about nothing. If you like John than be chill and at least respect his counterpart.


P.S. this is a small thing, but some1 said these 2 bealtes are the 2 greatest song writers ever, but Dylan is just as good as them 2 combined.

 

Dylan is a great songwriter, true, his lyrics are great and they deal with issues etc but he is not Lennon or McCartney's league. Harrison at his best is as good as Dylan. The varitey in the Beatles music and the styles they incorporated and the barriers they smashed down are immeasurable. Dylan really stays within his chosen genres, folk, country and sometimes a little rockier.

Also Lennon and McCartney can share their status with Cole Porter etc Dylan really can't.