The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
[URL]http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1490229/20040816/limp_bizkit.jhtml?headlines=true[/URL]
Never thought I'd ever see this happen. I feel cheated, as when I saw Limp, they had Mike Smith, and he didn't know half of the songs.
Glad to see Wes back, and lets hope their next album is as good as Chocolate Starfish and Hot Dog Flavoured Water.
Never thought I'd ever see this happen. I feel cheated, as when I saw Limp, they had Mike Smith, and he didn't know half of the songs.
Glad to see Wes back, and lets hope their next album is as good as Chocolate Starfish and Hot Dog Flavoured Water.
Page:
Results May Vary is nothing like Starfish.
It's like someone else said, guitarists (especialy) are leaving and re-joining bands all the time. Always have done, always will do.
Yet, despite all that's 'made' of him, Wes Borland is no John Frusciante! He's not as artistic. He only really wants to be 'angry' and 'cool' like Fred. He couldn't cut it as a solo artist (and so, he comes back to the one-place where people 'loved' him). :I
I must admit, I did used to like Limpbizkit. I haven't heard their latest album, but Chocolate Starfish? That's almost equally as crap!
If you want a decent album from them, get Significant Other. That one seems to have much of everything. 3 Dollar Bill, Yall$ isn't all that bad either. Quite 'raw', as some might say. If only they could've stayed headed in that direction...
Yet, despite all that's 'made' of him, Wes Borland is no John Frusciante! He's not as artistic. He only really wants to be 'angry' and 'cool' like Fred. He couldn't cut it as a solo artist (and so, he comes back to the one-place where people 'loved' him). :I
I must admit, I did used to like Limpbizkit. I haven't heard their latest album, but Chocolate Starfish? That's almost equally as crap!
If you want a decent album from them, get Significant Other. That one seems to have much of everything. 3 Dollar Bill, Yall$ isn't all that bad either. Quite 'raw', as some might say. If only they could've stayed headed in that direction...
Dringo wrote:
> Cyclone wrote:
>
> Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing
> out on rock music.
>
> Oh yeah I forgot completley, obviously I only listen to Limpbizkit, I
> never listen to "real" rock music.
>
> Limpbizkit's music is angry and fun, and more recently reflective and
> downbeat.
>
> I'm not going to persuade you other wise but my musical taste ranges
> over many bands, Limpbizkit is the one most people criticise. But I'm
> not going to change my opinion.
I know Dringo - I'm not a purist by saying they're not 'real rock', etc, and I know it's your taste and that's fine.
But they're so sh*t
> Cyclone wrote:
>
> Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing
> out on rock music.
>
> Oh yeah I forgot completley, obviously I only listen to Limpbizkit, I
> never listen to "real" rock music.
>
> Limpbizkit's music is angry and fun, and more recently reflective and
> downbeat.
>
> I'm not going to persuade you other wise but my musical taste ranges
> over many bands, Limpbizkit is the one most people criticise. But I'm
> not going to change my opinion.
I know Dringo - I'm not a purist by saying they're not 'real rock', etc, and I know it's your taste and that's fine.
But they're so sh*t
Der Nazi wrote:
> Just because a band sells a lot doesn't mean they're great
I know... It shows that they are NOT a bad band though. Well, in my eyes at least. If a band can sell enough albums to stay signed by a record label for another album, then they are good. They must be.
> - There are some fantastic bands who never really made it commercially, > if at all, such as Tank, Diamond Head, White Spirit, Budgie and many
> others.
I'm not saying that every band who don't get signed are rubbish. I know that there's loads of great bands about. :)
> Just because a band sells a lot doesn't mean they're great
I know... It shows that they are NOT a bad band though. Well, in my eyes at least. If a band can sell enough albums to stay signed by a record label for another album, then they are good. They must be.
> - There are some fantastic bands who never really made it commercially, > if at all, such as Tank, Diamond Head, White Spirit, Budgie and many
> others.
I'm not saying that every band who don't get signed are rubbish. I know that there's loads of great bands about. :)
Jericho18 wrote:
> Errr... No. If Limp Bizkit were so bad then they wouldn't have 4
> studio albums out in the shops and be working on the next. You have
> no idea what you're saying.
Just because a band sells a lot doesn't mean they're great- There are some fantastic bands who never really made it commercially, if at all, such as Tank, Diamond Head, White Spirit, Budgie and many others.
> Errr... No. If Limp Bizkit were so bad then they wouldn't have 4
> studio albums out in the shops and be working on the next. You have
> no idea what you're saying.
Just because a band sells a lot doesn't mean they're great- There are some fantastic bands who never really made it commercially, if at all, such as Tank, Diamond Head, White Spirit, Budgie and many others.
Cyclone wrote:
> Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing
> out on rock music.
Oh yeah I forgot completley, obviously I only listen to Limpbizkit, I never listen to "real" rock music.
Limpbizkit's music is angry and fun, and more recently reflective and downbeat.
I'm not going to persuade you other wise but my musical taste ranges over many bands, Limpbizkit is the one most people criticise. But I'm not going to change my opinion.
> Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing
> out on rock music.
Oh yeah I forgot completley, obviously I only listen to Limpbizkit, I never listen to "real" rock music.
Limpbizkit's music is angry and fun, and more recently reflective and downbeat.
I'm not going to persuade you other wise but my musical taste ranges over many bands, Limpbizkit is the one most people criticise. But I'm not going to change my opinion.
Jericho18 wrote:
> Errr... No. If Limp Bizkit were so bad then they wouldn't have 4
> studio albums out in the shops and be working on the next. You have
> no idea what you're saying.
So the Sun is a valuable and key example of the newspaper as a medium because it sells well?
(and don't go all clever and say 'well yes, because it is an example of the newspaper, no matter how rubbish it is)
> Errr... No. If Limp Bizkit were so bad then they wouldn't have 4
> studio albums out in the shops and be working on the next. You have
> no idea what you're saying.
So the Sun is a valuable and key example of the newspaper as a medium because it sells well?
(and don't go all clever and say 'well yes, because it is an example of the newspaper, no matter how rubbish it is)
Jericho18 wrote:
> You have no idea what you're saying.
And clearly, from the way you're saying they can't be bad because they have a bunch of albums, you do.
> You have no idea what you're saying.
And clearly, from the way you're saying they can't be bad because they have a bunch of albums, you do.
Errr... No. If Limp Bizkit were so bad then they wouldn't have 4 studio albums out in the shops and be working on the next. You have no idea what you're saying.
Look, Dringo, point is is that it's not just about personal tastes - Limp Bizkit are actually bad at what they do.
Their songs might sound well made and done, but they're not, they're insignificant rubbish compared to so many other bands who actually make music worth listening to.
Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing out on rock music.
Their songs might sound well made and done, but they're not, they're insignificant rubbish compared to so many other bands who actually make music worth listening to.
Listen to bloody Chocolate Starfish if you want, but you're missing out on rock music.
Page: