|
Moderator: Mike


Awesoman wrote:Wings has been my least-favorite period in McCartney's career. Sure, some nice albums and music came out of it like Band On The Run. And they were fine musicians and live performers. But the sticking point for me is the way McCartney flaunted the band. Ultimately Wings was McCartney's backing band, despite the way McCartney attempted to market them. By no means were any of these jokers on par with McCartney; few really gave a crap about the instantly forgettable tunes the "other bandmembers" had to offer (can anyone name any hits the other members sang?). And Linda had no business being there; she had little to no musical talent. She was only thrusted into the spotlight because Paul wanted the attention John & Yoko were getting. But Linda was hardly a Yoko Ono.
Finally, there was a commercial for the Wingspan compilation that sited Wings as "one of the greatest bands of all time". WTF?? Really? Other than maybe McCartney himself, who the hell would actually agree with that crap?
As far as I'm concerned, Wings greatest achievement was that they were a backing band to Paul McCartney. Had it been left at that I think they would have been taken more seriously. Nyah.

Awesoman wrote:Wings has been my least-favorite period in McCartney's career. Sure, some nice albums and music came out of it like Band On The Run. And they were fine musicians and live performers. But the sticking point for me is the way McCartney flaunted the band. Ultimately Wings was McCartney's backing band, despite the way McCartney attempted to market them. By no means were any of these jokers on par with McCartney; few really gave a crap about the instantly forgettable tunes the "other bandmembers" had to offer (can anyone name any hits the other members sang?). And Linda had no business being there; she had little to no musical talent. She was only thrusted into the spotlight because Paul wanted the attention John & Yoko were getting. But Linda was hardly a Yoko Ono.
Finally, there was a commercial for the Wingspan compilation that sited Wings as "one of the greatest bands of all time". WTF?? Really? Other than maybe McCartney himself, who the hell would actually agree with that crap?
As far as I'm concerned, Wings greatest achievement was that they were a backing band to Paul McCartney. Had it been left at that I think they would have been taken more seriously. Nyah.

Awesoman wrote:Wings has been my least-favorite period in McCartney's career. Sure, some nice albums and music came out of it like Band On The Run. And they were fine musicians and live performers. But the sticking point for me is the way McCartney flaunted the band. Ultimately Wings was McCartney's backing band, despite the way McCartney attempted to market them. By no means were any of these jokers on par with McCartney; few really gave a crap about the instantly forgettable tunes the "other bandmembers" had to offer (can anyone name any hits the other members sang?). And Linda had no business being there; she had little to no musical talent. She was only thrusted into the spotlight because Paul wanted the attention John & Yoko were getting. But Linda was hardly a Yoko Ono.
Finally, there was a commercial for the Wingspan compilation that sited Wings as "one of the greatest bands of all time". WTF?? Really? Other than maybe McCartney himself, who the hell would actually agree with that crap?
As far as I'm concerned, Wings greatest achievement was that they were a backing band to Paul McCartney. Had it been left at that I think they would have been taken more seriously. Nyah.


Mike wrote:Guess you never played any sports. There is no "i" in team. Sure, I'm a big fan of Paul playing mult-instruments in the studio, even loved what he did to perform Flaming Pie. I remember seeing him play live where he had 3 video screens behind him, him on drums, him on guitar, him on bass, all sequenced to his live performance on piano. That was great for Flaming Pie and Beautiful Night and I would go see him in an arena doing that but I'm a big fan. To go on tour proper either in the 70's or now, Paul needs a band. Paul McCartney & Wings is a band any way you look at it. Yes, Paul does get and deserves a lot of credit of course. The Beatles were a band but McCartney and Lennon are often praised more than Ringo and George but we all agree they all were great players and were the right mix at the right time. You can't compare Ringo's song writing abilities to Paul, John or George but he was the staple of the band. Keyword is band. If there were no Beatles would John, George, Ringo or Paul have been anywhere successful by themselves?. A band is a band, is a band. History man. Paul McCartney & Wings was a band and whether you like it or not, they were a good band. Not just my opinion. When record sales actually meant something, the sold lots, and tickets to their gigs were in high demand, sold out. So live and on-record they had some spectacular achievements. You can not discount or dispute that. Now criticizing their success, well, after the fact, that's a matter of taste I suppose just like those who like John's success more than Paul's, it's a matter of opinion. I never got to see John Lennon live cuz he didn't tour like Paul. We can only speculate what if John toured madly like Paul, what if?


mr h atom wrote:
as a fan of wings...i had no problem w/ linda, denny, jimmy and the rest...they definatively helped create a band that had a distinctive, hit making, chart topping, ticket selling, top ranked band that ruled the airwaves then and left a huge impression on millions.
mr h atom wrote:as for the contention that yoko was far more accomplished: personal taste, i suppose...but, i can't stand yokos singing, songwriting or personality...linda, on the other hand, never hit a sour note for me...
and if her prescence is what paul needed to get past his ever present past at that time, that decision, for me, at least, had a far more significant affect than anything yoko or john did.

Awesoman wrote:mr h atom wrote:
as a fan of wings...i had no problem w/ linda, denny, jimmy and the rest...they definatively helped create a band that had a distinctive, hit making, chart topping, ticket selling, top ranked band that ruled the airwaves then and left a huge impression on millions.
And 90% of the credit goes to Paul McCartney for making them successful. Because it sure as hell wasn't "Medicine Jar" that was putting them on the map.mr h atom wrote:as for the contention that yoko was far more accomplished: personal taste, i suppose...but, i can't stand yokos singing, songwriting or personality...linda, on the other hand, never hit a sour note for me...
and if her prescence is what paul needed to get past his ever present past at that time, that decision, for me, at least, had a far more significant affect than anything yoko or john did.
It really has nothing to do with who is more "accomplished" between Yoko and Linda. The point I was making is that Paul was flaunting Linda the same way John was with Yoko. I believe Paul was somewhat envious of the attention that John & Yoko were receiving; and to be frank, some of the stunts the latter couple two pulled were quite ridiculous (the "bed-in for peace" campaign as an example). So Paul attempted to mold Linda into his own personal Yoko Ono to get the same attention. But Linda and Yoko are entirely different people of different backgrounds. And where Yoko seemed comfortable in the spotlight with John, it always appeared that Linda was in the spotlight solely because Paul wanted her there.


Return to MACCA-Concerts & Tours
Users browsing this forum: mr h atom and 0 guests