WATCHMEN! THE MUSIC VIDEO!-Ugh...ok...more on the MCR story we heard about earlier...

[StorminNorman]

Totally emo. You see, being punk is not just posing as punk.

Sex Pistols? Ouch! Nope. Not even close.

And "Desolation Row" has a meaning connected with what was culturally important then.

The repetition of the same scheme throughout the song is tightly linked to the name of the song, that particular substantive "desolation".

The two most important modernist poets in English language, the parade of a symbolical ruin of culture are at the heart of the matter.

The video, the performance and the utter lack of any character of MCR are what any musical expert would call "failure", and "complete mistake", because it means that, to call MCR to do it, one MUST be downright incapable of understanding the song, and what it stands for.

...but Bob Dylan like MCR's rendition of the song. Does that make Dylan incapable of understanding the song and what it stands for?

 

[CaptainGenerica]

Totally emo. You see, being punk is not just posing as punk.

Sex Pistols? Ouch! Nope. Not even close.

And "Desolation Row" has a meaning connected with what was culturally important then.

The repetition of the same scheme throughout the song is tightly linked to the name of the song, that particular substantive "desolation".

The two most important modernist poets in English language, the parade of a symbolical ruin of culture are at the heart of the matter.

The video, the performance and the utter lack of any character of MCR are what any musical expert would call "failure", and "complete mistake", because it means that, to call MCR to do it, one MUST be downright incapable of understanding the song, and what it stands for.

No offense but you really do seem to drop the words "failure" and "mistake" a lot when talking about other people's opinions. I doubt that you mean to come off as rude.

It's not "not even close" to Sex Pistols. It's reasonably similar to Sex Pistols. How are loud distorted guitars, banging drums, simplistic yet raw playing style, and half-sung-half-snarled irreverent vocals not even close to Sex Pistols? Not that My Chemical Romance are as good or as genuine as them, but to deny the resemblance is a little asinine. Even a second-rate Pistols knockoff will still sound kinda like the Pistols, by definition.

Or let's put it this way. It was more like the Sex Pistols than like Dashboard Confessional. It wasn't that emo. It was fairly punk. Not that emo and punk are really all that different. For better or worse emo is punk's direct descendant. Maybe its bastard child but still a descendant. But this is just semantics; it's not that important.

Also, "nothing special" does not mean "failure". It just doesn't. That is not what those words mean. Did they forget the chords? No. Sing out of key? No. Change the lyrics? Trimmed a few verses but otherwise no. They just played the darn song. Not a failure. Gerard Way didn't deliver it all heartbroken and somber and introspective like Dylan, but at least he sang it with frustration and irreverence, which is okay with me. Could've been worse. At least they didn't try to copy Dylan, which would have been far worse in my opinion.

But then again, I understand that you're a hard person to please. Nothing wrong with that.

But also, on a lighter note:

The two most important modernist poets in English language, the parade of a symbolical ruin of culture are at the heart of the matter.

Bob Dylan was addressing the ruining of culture you say? My Chemical Romance is exactly that! This song is therefore very self-referential. Very meta. Very Watchmen. Snyder, you are a genius.

 

[The Guard]

Heh.

 

[Mercurius]

...but Bob Dylan like MCR's rendition of the song. Does that make Dylan incapable of understanding the song and what it stands for?

No, it makes him a thorough gentleman with the kids' efforts.

 

[Mercurius]

No offense but you really do seem to drop the words "failure" and "mistake" a lot when talking about other people's opinions. I doubt that you mean to come off as rude.

It's not "not even close" to Sex Pistols. It's reasonably similar to Sex Pistols. How are loud distorted guitars, banging drums, simplistic yet raw playing style, and half-sung-half-snarled irreverent vocals not even close to Sex Pistols? Not that My Chemical Romance are as good or as genuine as them, but to deny the resemblance is a little asinine. Even a second-rate Pistols knockoff will still sound kinda like the Pistols, by definition.

Or let's put it this way. It was more like the Sex Pistols than like Dashboard Confessional. It wasn't that emo. It was fairly punk. Not that emo and punk are really all that different. For better or worse emo is punk's direct descendant. Maybe its bastard child but still a descendant. But this is just semantics; it's not that important.

Also, "nothing special" does not mean "failure". It just doesn't. That is not what those words mean. Did they forget the chords? No. Sing out of key? No. Change the lyrics? Trimmed a few verses but otherwise no. They just played the darn song. Not a failure. Gerard Way didn't deliver it all heartbroken and somber and introspective like Dylan, but at least he sang it with frustration and irreverence, which is okay with me. Could've been worse. At least they didn't try to copy Dylan, which would have been far worse in my opinion.

But then again, I understand that you're a hard person to please. Nothing wrong with that.

But also, on a lighter note:

Bob Dylan was addressing the ruining of culture you say? My Chemical Romance is exactly that! This song is therefore very self-referential. Very meta. Very Watchmen. Snyder, you are a genius.

About the Pistols. You left a perfect word in a middle of other peripherical qualities: genuine.

MCR has absolutely NO ability for the outrageous style that comes preaching anarchy and saying the queen isn't a human being.

That's raw power. Pistols were dirty, straight forward agressive, punk.

MCR, as I said, are some dolls out of a fashion show, tryin' to look and sound tough. Mere posers.

And thank you for the next kind example of yours, Cap.

Look how you got it backwards:

If they had wronged the chords, sang out of tune and left the song in the middle of it they would have been much more punk.

Doing the set exactly as expected is proof enough they don't even know how to imitate it.

I see no resemblance at all. I see an effort of sounding alike, and that's not the same.

Pure failure. Sorry for the cruel but exact word.

In the end, you got a nice piece of argument: yes, MCR is the image of the ruined culture. Bravo! t:

But there is a little catchy thing, even here: the ruin cannot be experienced by those who are part of it.

Only people like Dylan and others understood it. These half-wits are just happy to make their money.

On other words, History happens the first time; at the second time, it is repeated as farce.

PS: do not worry, I wouldn't be rude. I wouldn't, for instance, say "asinine" of anything you said. I might believe you are wrong and say so, but I wouldn't call you names.

 

[CaptainGenerica]

I kind of feel like we miss each other's points a lot, Merc. Because you brought up some great ones, to be sure. But I don't think they addressed what I was saying.

When I mention that this MCR version of Dylan was kind of Sex-Pistols-esque, I'm not talking about their attitudes or place in the cultural spectrum or any of that. Nobody can really be the Sex Pistols except the Sex Pistols. But speaking purely from a musician's perspective, the playing style was reminiscent of the Pistols. It might be "not even close" to Sex Pistols if you're thinking of the Sex Pistols as more than just musicians with a certain style and a certain guitar tone. They are definitely more than that, but as it happens, that's not what I was talking about. Basically, MCR's Desolation Row kind of reminded me of Holiday in the Sun. I wasn't going for some deep cultural insight there.


It's true, it's just pale imitation. It isn't really punk. Probably just generic pop at best. But also, it wasn't emo, if only because he didn't sing with his usual whiny voice. I think what I'm going for is that this song is more punk-flavored pop than it is emo-flavored pop.

I agree completely that they failed at being punk. But I still don't think they failed at playing the song, more generally. They weren't really going for full-on Sex Pistols, anarchy and warts and all. They're honestly not that clever; their sights aren't set that high. They just played it. They did their thing. Here is the product, it is what it is. Some people will like it. Many won't. It's a fairly listenable track from an otherwise bland band. I don't think I'm stretching anything when I say that that isn't really failing.

Maybe to you it is failure, because MCR, being posers and whatnot, are inherently failures. But we might just be defining failure differently.

 

[The Guard]

Who the hell's to say what "punk" is in the world of WATCHMEN?

That's raw power. Pistols were dirty, straight forward agressive, punk.

That's an opinion. Stated loudly, through music. I don't know that "raw power" enters into it.

MCR is as talented as many other bands. What they do, like it or not, takes immense talent. Hating them for the sake of hating them seems counterproductive.

 

[Mercurius]

That's an opinion. Stated loudly, through music. I don't know that "raw power" enters into it.

MCR is as talented as many other bands. What they do, like it or not, takes immense talent. Hating them for the sake of hating them seems counterproductive.

1) You're wrong, but as you know you are, and doing it out of spite, I won't take another week discussing it, will I?

2) Well, IF you really think they're talented , that's a good deal of problem with your ears, Guard, and what could I do about it?

And I don't hate: maybe you think so because your criticism is usually made in a state of personal irritation, but I myself think hate is bad for your health (including the ears). t:

 

[Hellrider]

Who the hell's to say what "punk" is in the world of WATCHMEN?



That's an opinion. Stated loudly, through music. I don't know that "raw power" enters into it.

MCR is as talented as many other bands. What they do, like it or not, takes immense talent. Hating them for the sake of hating them seems counterproductive.

Immense talent??? i don't know about that. I'm sure their decent players, but immesely talented they are most certainly are not. Theres nothing talent about doing a bob dylan cover with 3 chords and making it 3 mins.

This is immesse talent http://youtube.com/watch?v=vEu0Yj9-sM4http://youtube.com/watch?v=pD0lVABmBkI

MCR is a typical pop band who do nothing to impress or set themselves apart. But that just my oppinion. I feel the mainstream industry does not offer anything substantial in music, you really have to look for it these days.

 

[Mercurius]

I kind of feel like we miss each other's points a lot, Merc. Because you brought up some great ones, to be sure. But I don't think they addressed what I was saying.

When I mention that this MCR version of Dylan was kind of Sex-Pistols-esque, I'm not talking about their attitudes or place in the cultural spectrum or any of that. Nobody can really be the Sex Pistols except the Sex Pistols. But speaking purely from a musician's perspective, the playing style was reminiscent of the Pistols. It might be "not even close" to Sex Pistols if you're thinking of the Sex Pistols as more than just musicians with a certain style and a certain guitar tone. They are definitely more than that, but as it happens, that's not what I was talking about. Basically, MCR's Desolation Row kind of reminded me of Holiday in the Sun. I wasn't going for some deep cultural insight there.


It's true, it's just pale imitation. It isn't really punk. Probably just generic pop at best. But also, it wasn't emo, if only because he didn't sing with his usual whiny voice. I think what I'm going for is that this song is more punk-flavored pop than it is emo-flavored pop.

I agree completely that they failed at being punk. But I still don't think they failed at playing the song, more generally. They weren't really going for full-on Sex Pistols, anarchy and warts and all. They're honestly not that clever; their sights aren't set that high. They just played it. They did their thing. Here is the product, it is what it is. Some people will like it. Many won't. It's a fairly listenable track from an otherwise bland band. I don't think I'm stretching anything when I say that that isn't really failing.

Maybe to you it is failure, because MCR, being posers and whatnot, are inherently failures. But we might just be defining failure differently.

That's neat and thoroughly reasonable, Cap.

But, yes, that's failure to me. When a little band knows how to play, it's their basics.

For me, it's like saying to a mathematician: "Man, you're pretty good with numbers, now aren't you?"

Why is Dylan so impressive, for instance? His lyrics are indeed intelligent, interpretative of his age, and they're quite piercing in their meaning. It takes a different level to do that.

He doesn't take things for granted. He tries to look inside of every little thing, its mechanisms, he's smart, experienced in life since quite young.

His songs are accomplished feats, and each one stands on its own definite character as songs.

Well, Moore wasn't just letting any little band in. He chose very carefully. That's my point.

But what you said is really neat, I understand and respect.

 

[LifeisNoCheese]

Quite revealing this kind of opinion, huh?

With Watchmen, either it is perfect, or it is simply out of focus. The "not the worst" doesn't cut it.

I'm not entirely sure we share the same perspective of my thoughts. Let me explain.

I respect MCR's attempt, and I think it is a good cover. If I were to pick a band to cover it, it would probably sound completely different than MCR, and might not fit in well with the movie. But that's still not the point.

My words were "It was never going to be perfect, unless WB wanted to take a loss at the box office." Now think about that. Whether the cover existed or not, this movie will not be perfect. Perfection is a concept that doesn't actually exist. The novel doesn't appeal to all audiences, so WB and Snyder would have to make changes to the movie in order to make some kinda profit. To name a few, they already took out the squid and changed the ending.

I've never seen a perfect movie adaption of a book, never will, and this won't be different. Don't get me wrong, I think it'll be a big hit in the box office like TDK, which was based on the comics, but not a page-by-page rendition like I think Watchmen should be. I have no doubt that it'll be a great movie, but it'll only be as close to the comic as WB can profitably get.

 

[Motown Marvel]

for those saying dylan enjoyed MCR's cover, i understand thats what gerard said, but i'd be willing to bet dylan hardly even knows it exists. first off, in his early days dylan originally found his fame and fortune from people covering his songs, making them more popular than his original rendition. now a days, many people are recording dylan covers every single day. it's gotten to the point where it seems he probably doesnt turn down many offers, and gives each one very little (if any) thought. i wouldnt even be surprised if he's not the one that gives permission for them anymore, im sure he just has people do it for him. and to think that he actually sits down and wastes his time listening to any of them, seems very very unlikely. so to think he granted permission for the song to be covered, then sat down and listened to it, and then responded to the band with his thoughts on it, just doesnt make sense. i mean, s#!t, he doesnt even talk to his backing band when traveling with them on tour.

 

[luke1234]

for those saying dylan enjoyed MCR's cover, i understand thats what gerard said, but i'd be willing to bet dylan hardly even knows it exists. first off, in his early days dylan originally found his fame and fortune from people covering his songs, making them more popular than his original rendition. now a days, many people are recording dylan covers every single day. it's gotten to the point where it seems he probably doesnt turn down many offers, and gives each one very little (if any) thought. i wouldnt even be surprised if he's not the one that gives permission for them anymore, im sure he just has people do it for him. and to think that he actually sits down and wastes his time listening to any of them, seems very very unlikely. so to think he granted permission for the song to be covered, then sat down and listened to it, and then responded to the band with his thoughts on it, just doesnt make sense. i mean, s#!t, he doesnt even talk to his backing band when traveling with them on tour.

i totally agree, i bet he listened to the song like once, and he was probably having a conversation over it. Then somebody ask "Bob did you like that" and he replys" oh uh ... yeah sure". Its not like hes driving around his new Cadillac blaring the song

 

[CrimsonMist]

Muse is another mistake: Moore would have hypothetically gone for the source, i.e., Radiohead, and not some second hand band.

That's really bad because what Moore thought for Watchmen as to songs was really really great smart stuff, like the references to Devo and Dylan, for instance.

To make it Muse + MCR is almost offensive (to the ears t in comparison. That can be good marketing, but is bad music.

Eh, Muse, again, is kind of a marketing strategy. The lyrics are relevant to the themes in the book though. So it works. Snyder could have put any song in the trailer, just to drive it along. But he chose an appropriately thematic song.

Second hand? Alot of bands are second hand to the sources. I think Muse is actually more exciting than Radiohead. I listen to Radiohead to fall asleep. Sure, they're innovative, but as far as i can tell, there's no rule saying you don't have to be boring like Radiohead and Coldplay to be innovative(and why the hell do they all have to sing like Bono!? I hate U2 man. I HATE THEM! lol), though it may seem like it. Muse is an exciting listen and alot of what i've heard from them are exciting songs. Radiohead, at times, is an interesting listen. I own Kid A(and i still hold this album very highly, if not just for nostalgic reasons as it was the first Radiohead, and one of the first cds, i ever bought) and OK Computer(which i thought was meh), but for the most part, i can't really listen to them on a daily basis. I can't for Muse either, but i enjoy Muse more when i do listen to them.

As for Moore's choices, i still think he could have chosen something better by John Cale. Now, i'm a huge John Cale/Lou Reed/Velvet Underground fan and i think "Sanities" kinda sucks. With the exception of that one line, it really doesn't fit anything else.

Moving on, i really think people MIGHT be misinterpreting what Mercurius is saying about punk and MCR.

ANY band can play 3 chords really fast. Any band. Doesn't really, in a sense, make them a PUNK band. Punk is more than three chords. and MCR is not a punk band. They're some major label joke of a band, making millions of dollars "trying to sound like the Sex Pistols". They lack the attitude, the true aggression. They're just a band playing three chords without any true meaning behind what they're doing. It's not punk, in the truest sense of the word. They lack the attitude that comes with being a punk band, the whole "**** YOU!" mindset.

I think that's what he's getting at. And i agree with him.

 

[CaptainGenerica]

Immense talent??? i don't know about that. I'm sure their decent players, but immesely talented they are most certainly are not. Theres nothing talent about doing a bob dylan cover with 3 chords and making it 3 mins.

This is immesse talent http://youtube.com/watch?v=vEu0Yj9-sM4

MCR is a typical pop band who do nothing to impress or set themselves apart. But that just my oppinion. I feel the mainstream industry does not offer anything substantial in music, you really have to look for it these days.

Compared to other bands, they're certainly not especially talented. But I think The Guard was just giving props to the fact that they play and write music at all. That's something that most people don't and can't do.

 

[Motown Marvel]

Immense talent??? i don't know about that. I'm sure their decent players, but immesely talented they are most certainly are not. Theres nothing talent about doing a bob dylan cover with 3 chords and making it 3 mins.

i agree the band is not immensely talented. they're horrible. but there is indeed a talent in banging out a 3 minute 3 chord song. theres a great beauty and brilliance that can be found in its simplicity when done well, i.e. joey ramone of the ramones and ron asheton of the stooges.

 

[CaptainGenerica]

That's neat and thoroughly reasonable, Cap.

But, yes, that's failure to me. When a little band knows how to play, it's their basics.

For me, it's like saying to a mathematician: "Man, you're pretty good with numbers, now aren't you?"

Heh. Yeah, I see what you're saying.

You know Merc, you're a thoroughly intelligent person. But you and I definitely seem to approach subjects from opposite ends sometimes. That's what makes this fun.

 

[inflames]

MCR sucks along with the majority of mainstream 'music' especially modern mainstream

 

[the_tortel]

MCR sucks along with the majority of mainstream 'music' especially modern mainstream

2nd that.

 

[-Arya-]

2nd that.

Count me in as #3

 

[TheBatman072]

How someone could spend so much time talking about something they apparently hate a lot is...astounding to me.


Get the **** over it already. Nobody gives a **** that you don't like this cover.

 

[titan101]

they should've used the bob dylan version IMO .

 

[magicangel1989]

the song wasn't that bad. video was pretty good too.

 

[The Guard]

1) You're wrong, but as you know you are, and doing it out of spite, I won't take another week discussing it, will I?

Fair enough, you don't like my opinion, you are free to refute it. Show me this "pure power" you speak of from the Sex Pistols. Maybe I'll change my mind. Post me a link. I actually rather like the Sex Pistols, but they were not great singers. They weren't even particularly strong singers much of the time (which actually sort of helped their songs sound better oddly enough). They are, in many respects, on a similar level of physical talent as say, Gerard Way, who has a much clearer voice and better tonal quality.

2) Well, IF you really think they're talented , that's a good deal of problem with your ears, Guard, and what could I do about it?

I didn't say I like their music. I said they have immense talent. They do. I don't know that they always apply that talent properly, but they still have it. Gerard Way in particular has a beautiful voice, a unique voice, and a very strong and clear one. Not very many people can do what he do. This guy hits notes at ridiculous levels and speeds that many musicians simply cannot do. Can some others in the entertainment industry or even amateurs do the same? Absolutely. Those people are also immensely talented.

While not everyone famous is immensely talented, you don't generally get to be super famous and super popular unless you something very well.

MCR isn't popular simply because of their "image". Many bands have had a similar one. They are popular because of their music, which is relatively unique, or was, until every other pop/punk/emo band started copying them.

This is immesse talent
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vEu0Yj9-sM4

Link doesn't work. What was I supposed to be looking at.

MCR is a typical pop band who do nothing to impress or set themselves apart.

There's nothing "typical" about MCR as a pop band. They were, along with a few other bands, almost singlehandedly responsible for redefining mainstream music.

Let's be honest with ourselves. There's a not a TON most bands can do to "set themselves apart" in this industry. That said, they do and have done, quite a bit to set themselves apart from most bands in the past.

As for Moore's choices, i still think he could have chosen something better by John Cale. Now, i'm a huge John Cale/Lou Reed/Velvet Underground fan and i think "Sanities" kinda sucks. With the exception of that one line, it really doesn't fit anything else.

Yeah. It's more or less apparent Moore clearly chose those songs for the single lines that best illustrate his themes and points. He didn't choose them based on the meaning of the songs themselves.

ANY band can play 3 chords really fast. Any band. Doesn't really, in a sense, make them a PUNK band. Punk is more than three chords. and MCR is not a punk band. They're some major label joke of a band, making millions of dollars "trying to sound like the Sex Pistols". They lack the attitude, the true aggression. They're just a band playing three chords without any true meaning behind what they're doing. It's not punk, in the truest sense of the word. They lack the attitude that comes with being a punk band, the whole "**** YOU!" mindset.

Maybe they lack the attitude of the Sex Pistols...because they're NOT trying to emulate the Sex Pistols. They're being themselves.

"**** you" from a band isn't exactly clever anymore.

 

[CrimsonMist]

Fair enough, you don't like my opinion, you are free to refute it. Show me this "pure power" you speak of from the Sex Pistols. Maybe I'll change my mind. Post me a link. I actually rather like the Sex Pistols, but they were not great singers. They weren't even particularly strong singers much of the time (which actually sort of helped their songs sound better oddly enough). They are, in many respects, on a similar level of physical talent as say, Gerard Way, who has a much clearer voice and better tonal quality.

Maybe they lack the attitude of the Sex Pistols...because they're NOT trying to emulate the Sex Pistols. They're being themselves.

"**** you" from a band isn't exactly clever anymore.

But that's exactly the point. The whole idea of punk music, in some aspects came about because teenagers were fed-up with overproduced, complicated music that kind of dominated the mid to late 70's. Punk, pure rock n roll, was something anyone could play, but weren't. It was music that these people wanted to hear, and you didn't have to have "immense talent". Johnny Rotten couldn't sing, neither could Joey Ramone, or Joe Strummer or Darby Crash or Ian MacKaye or Henry Rollins. You didn't need talent. You just needed to play. The response to something like "Well, Johnny Rotton doesn't have the tonal qualities and a clearer voice like Gerard Way does" is "Who cares?"

The attitude of the Sex Pistols is the universal attitude of the punk genre. MCR has stated that they were trying to get that sound like The Sex Pistols had. They may have achieved that sound, but there's nothing to back it up. There's no attitude or aggression behind it. It's just..bland.

"**** you" from a band was never "clever". It was never supposed to be "clever". It was a simple mindset, to do things their way, outside of the mainstream. They can't sing? Big deal. They can't play? who cares? What punk was, was never mainstream like MCR. It wasn't friendly. It wasn't overproduced and it didn't try to be anything it wasn't. (Unless it's some crap band like The Casualties, who try too hard. That's when it stops being "clever" if you want to call it that. It becomes silly. But that can be said of almost anything.)

Listen to the first album by The Who "...Sings My Generation" and listen to some early punk albums. It's sloppy and aggressive and raw. It's full of power and energy. It's something pure and knows what it is, and doesn't try to be anything different.