• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
ChristopherReevesLegs

Gimme Muh Monthly Yzer-Trade

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, kipwinger said:

Queensryche is The Cult if The Cult A) sucked, and B) was an all chick band.

If you are referring to the abomination Geoff Tate rolled out after he was fired, I’d agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Not really into Queensryche at all really. Just the only band I recognized. I have no idea who juice world and DT are. And I don't really like Rush outside of Tom Sawyer

JuiceWRLD is some rapper who just died.  I only knew about him because one of the 7th graders is a huge fan.  DT is Dream Theater.  John Myung is a huge influence on me as a bassist, and Jordan Rudess is a god on the keys.  I didn’t get into Rush until Imstarted playing bass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, TheXym said:

JuiceWRLD is some rapper who just died.  I only knew about him because one of the 7th graders is a huge fan.  DT is Dream Theater.  John Myung is a huge influence on me as a bassist, and Jordan Rudess is a god on the keys.  I didn’t get into Rush until Imstarted playing bass.

Dream Theater is dope. I basically have no appreciation for progressive metal outside of Dream Theater.

You should be listening to Les Claypool and only Les Claypool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Dream Theater is dope. I basically have no appreciation for progressive metal outside of Dream Theater.

You should be listening to Les Claypool and only Les Claypool

Primus sucks! ;)

 

Edited by TheXym

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The distinctions between various types of [insert genre here] are completely arbitrary and totally absurd.  Ask any metalhead and they'll assure you that a band like the Butthole Surfers or Red Fang are hard rock, not metal.  But Tool is metal, but just a much softer more emotive form of it.  Motley Crue is hair metal, while AC/DC is hard rock.  Motorhead played "rock and roll" and made sure to say so at every single concert they played, and most resemble a punk rock band's sound, but metalheads won't let them go despite their obvious reluctance to embrace the term. 

All of it is idiotic, because all of it is rock and roll. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

The distinctions between various types of [insert genre here] are completely arbitrary and totally absurd.  Ask any metalhead and they'll assure you that a band like the Butthole Surfers or Red Fang are hard rock, not metal.  But Tool is metal, but just a much softer more emotive form of it.  Motley Crue is hair metal, while AC/DC is hard rock.  Motorhead played "rock and roll" and made sure to say so at every single concert they played, and most resemble a punk rock band's sound, but metalheads won't let them go despite their obvious reluctance to embrace the term. 

All of it is idiotic, because all of it is rock and roll. 

Band: "I hope everyone out there is ready to ROCK tonight!" = Rock n roll

Band: "OPEN THIS ******* PIT UP, YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO, I WANNA SEE DEAD BODIES ON THE ******* FLOOR" = Metal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Band: "I hope everyone out there is ready to ROCK tonight!" = Rock n roll

Band: "OPEN THIS ******* PIT UP, YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO, I WANNA SEE DEAD BODIES ON THE ******* FLOOR" = Metal

Yeah, but authenticity matters.  I've seen a ton of "metal" bands, particularly European ones that say all that s*** and have all the faux-metal theatrical crap, and who are all to a man, giant p*ssies.  Conversely Henry Rollins, who has never been considered "metal", exists, is hardcore as f***, and doesn't have to talk about dragons, or wear makeup, or whatever to make people think he's a hardcore motherf*cker.  He just is.  Dorks like Dio ruined metal. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Yeah, but authenticity matters.  I've seen a ton of "metal" bands, particularly European ones that say all that s*** and have all the faux-metal theatrical crap, and who are all to a man, giant p*ssies.  Conversely Henry Rollins, who has never been considered "metal", exists, is hardcore as f***, and doesn't have to talk about dragons, or wear makeup, or whatever to make people think he's a hardcore motherf*cker.  He just is.  Dorks like Dio ruined metal. 

 

My best mate is the guitar player in a local Seattle band, so I go to a lot of lil small venue shows where there's like 5 acts in one night cause I get in free with the band. It's usually ya kno, his band then 4 crummy wannabe death metal bands, with like 30 - 40 people in the crowd. All dudes in denim jackets covered in patches standing around drinkin beers. Pretty typical.

But one time they played with what I can only describe as a group of "Nerd-metal bands". Bands that sing about wizards and dragons and stuff. Dooddddd the line was around the block to get in to this crummy show. I could not believe it. Every neckbeard came out of the wood work. Place was packed. Full of fans with capes on and even faux armor and stuff. Not sure the bar even sold one beer that night lol.

I think these faux-metal theatrical bands low-key actually sell a lot of tickets, and there's a market there. Most casual metal fans don't seem to have much of an appetite for the hardcore stuff unless someone big like Meshuggah is in town or something.

IDK

Never was really into Rollins and Blackflag myself, but yeah he's hardcore. LGW should just have a music thread on the general discussion page.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

My best mate is the guitar player in a local Seattle band, so I go to a lot of lil small venue shows where there's like 5 acts in one night cause I get in free with the band. It's usually ya kno, his band then 4 crummy wannabe death metal bands, with like 30 - 40 people in the crowd. All dudes in denim jackets covered in patches standing around drinkin beers. Pretty typical.

But one time they played with what I can only describe as a group of "Nerd-metal bands". Bands that sing about wizards and dragons and stuff. Dooddddd the line was around the block to get in to this crummy show. I could not believe it. Every neckbeard came out of the wood work. Place was packed. Full of fans with capes on and even faux armor and stuff. Not sure the bar even sold one beer that night lol.

I think these faux-metal theatrical bands low-key actually sell a lot of tickets, and there's a market there. Most casual metal fans don't seem to have much of an appetite for the hardcore stuff unless someone big like Meshuggah is in town or something.

IDK

Never was really into Rollins and Blackflag myself, but yeah he's hardcore. LGW should just have a music thread on the general discussion page.

 

 

It's not even that I'm into guys like Rollins, it's just that the charade of "metal" kills me.  Originally, when all of Rock and Roll was dominated by drugged-up hippies and British lady boys, bands like The Stooges, and Black Sabbath, and Hawkwind/Motorhead were genuinely more hardcore.  The represented a more aggressive approach to rock music...and that became metal.  But somehow, some way, that began to change.  I think the lyrical content of bands like Iron Maiden is probably the cause.  It appealed to pantywaists for whatever reason, and then they started liking metal, to the point where A) they started making it, and B) it started reflecting their values even more.  So the aggression of it, which was the whole point originally, diminished while the appearance of hardcore remained.  Which is not to say that there haven't been some genuinely hardcore metal bands over the hears.  But rather that IMO your average metal band/audience would get demolished by your average redneck sh*tkicker country band/audience.  Genuinely tough guys just don't listen to metal anymore because it's no longer for/about them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

It's not even that I'm into guys like Rollins, it's just that the charade of "metal" kills me.  Originally, when all of Rock and Roll was dominated by drugged-up hippies and British lady boys, bands like The Stooges, and Black Sabbath, and Hawkwind/Motorhead were genuinely more hardcore.  The represented a more aggressive approach to rock music...and that became metal.  But somehow, some way, that began to change.  I think the lyrical content of bands like Iron Maiden is probably the cause.  It appealed to pantywaists for whatever reason, and then they started liking metal, to the point where A) they started making it, and B) it started reflecting their values even more.  So the aggression of it, which was the whole point originally, diminished while the appearance of hardcore remained.  Which is not to say that there haven't been some genuinely hardcore metal bands over the hears.  But rather that IMO your average metal band/audience would get demolished by your average redneck sh*tkicker country band/audience.  Genuinely tough guys just don't listen to metal anymore because it's no longer for/about them.

No, you're spot on 100%.

I used to go to metal shows back in the day in Detroit, and I remember being in crowds full of alphas who I was genuinely afraid of. Guys who looked like they did serious time in prison and would stab you after the show. They probably thought I was the limp wrist lol.

Now it's A LOT of limp wrists in general.

And yeah, last time I went to a country show I remember a buncha good ol boys getting into fights over budlights or something in the parking lot during the tailgate. Those guys woulda run over a modern metal crowd.

IDK if Iron Maiden is the original source there, could be. But I sorta blame a mix of hair-metal, grunge, and emo/goth culture.

Hair-metal feminized rock/metal a bit.

Grunge added a depressing blues element

Then goth/emo crap resulted in a lot 100 lb whiny lead singers singing gutterals like they think they're the 7ft viking darklord of the underworld.

I'll always be a thrash metal guy. That was peak aggro metal in my mind. Fast and aggressive. Death/black metal is probably the modern alternative to that if you find the right band. I just don't like a lot of gutterals personally.

Edited by ChristopherReevesLegs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this thread is already derailed, and we've been discussing the Mandalorian here, and no one has clicked on the water cooler in years, I wanted to post this fan theory about the show. I think it could end up being a very accurate theory very soon. WARNING POSSIBLE SPOILERS

TLDR: Werner Herzog's character "The Client" is actually long lost jedi Sifo-Dyas, and Baby Yoda is a clone of Jedi Master Yoda.

Back story on Sifo-Dyas for you casuals: The character Sifo-Dyas is never actually seen in the movies, but he is discussed. When Obi-Wan visits the cloners on the planet Kamino in the prequels and discovers that their has been a clone army commissioned for The Republic (to no one's knowledge), he is told that Jedi Master Sifo-Dyas commissioned the army. However, to no knowledge of the cloners, Sifo-Dyas had commissioned this army under false pretenses, because Dyas had abandoned the Jedi council just like Count Dooku had years prior.

It is reasonable to assume that Dyas had become a Sith in the employ of Darth Sidious, just like Dooku, because it fit right into Sidious's grand plan to raise a Republican army and use it to usurp the Jedi and the Republic. We've just never seen Dyas on screen, but he's been there serving the Empire behind the scenes, and he has survived the fall of the Empire as well.

One blatant but overlooked clue to this:

r1xzGuA.jpg

Dr. Pershing, the doctor accompanying the client (Sifo-Dyas) in the Mandalorian, literally had a Kamino Clone emblem on his uniform.

Dyas would be a powerful Imperial with obvious ties to the Kamino clones and cloners just like this.

Why do they want this baby Yoda so bad? Because IT IS Yoda. A clone of Yoda to be a exact. After all we know baby Yoda is force sensitive just like real Yoda. Sifo-Dyas would have had close access to Yoda to obtain his DNA and could have accomplished making a clone with his connections. But lost control of the clone when the Empire fell.

Why does Sifo-Dyas need a Yoda clone? The most logical would be to bring back Darth Sidious. We all know Darth Sidious is back somehow in the movie coming out next week. It's painfully obvious in the last movie and in the trailers. They likely want to extract Yoda clones mitochlorians to use to bring Darth Sidious back to full power. And the time line makes sense. Disney has been hiding the true plot of the Mandalorian from us and just sending us on side quests. When you go see the movie next week this whole theory will all be reveled and the Manadalorian as basically a masterful set up story and lead in for the finale movie in this trilogy.

BTW this last episode of the Manalorian was BY FAR the best so far. I thought. Bill Burr pulled it off too!

Edited by ChristopherReevesLegs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ahhh the days of "real" metal is kinda like the days of "real" country. I would argue a lot of the folks at an Aldean, Georgia FL line, Chesney etc per Kip's point would be hard pressed to take on the current metalheads.

Take the fans that listen to Aaron Lewis, Willie, Charlie Daniels, Johnny Cash then yeah those folks would whup arse. Trouble is it would take them too long to warm up to fight. 

Love to see the makeup of a crowd to see Rollins and Aaron Lewis in a co headliner show.  Two angry guys who don't give a rat's ass if you like what they say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

Since this thread is already derailed, and we've been discussing the Mandalorian here, and no one has clicked on the water cooler in years, I wanted to post this fan theory about the show. I think it could end up being a very accurate theory very soon. WARNING POSSIBLE SPOILERS

TLDR: Werner Herzog's character "The Client" is actually long lost jedi Sifo-Dyas, and Baby Yoda is a clone of Jedi Master Yoda.

Back story on Sifo-Dyas for you casuals: The character Sifo-Dyas is never actually seen in the movies, but he is discussed. When Obi-Wan visits the cloners on the planet Kamino in the prequels and discovers that their has been a clone army commissioned for The Republic (to no one's knowledge), he is told that Jedi Master Sifo-Dyas commissioned the army. However, to no knowledge of the cloners, Sifo-Dyas had commissioned this army under false pretenses, because Dyas had abandoned the Jedi council just like Count Dooku had years prior.

It is reasonable to assume that Dyas had become a Sith in the employ of Darth Sidious, just like Dooku, because it fit right into Sidious's grand plan to raise a Republican army and use it to usurp the Jedi and the Republic. We've just never seen Dyas on screen, but he's been there serving the Empire behind the scenes, and he has survived the fall of the Empire as well.

One blatant but overlooked clue to this:

r1xzGuA.jpg

Dr. Pershing, the doctor accompanying the client (Sifo-Dyas) in the Mandalorian, literally had a Kamino Clone emblem on his uniform.

Dyas would be a powerful Imperial with obvious ties to the Kamino clones and cloners just like this.

Why do they want this baby Yoda so bad? Because IT IS Yoda. A clone of Yoda to be a exact. After all we know baby Yoda is force sensitive just like real Yoda. Sifo-Dyas would have had close access to Yoda to obtain his DNA and could have accomplished making a clone with his connections. But lost control of the clone when the Empire fell.

Why does Sifo-Dyas need a Yoda clone? The most logical would be to bring back Darth Sidious. We all know Darth Sidious is back somehow in the movie coming out next week. It's painfully obvious in the last movie and in the trailers. They likely want to extract Yoda clones mitochlorians to use to bring Darth Sidious back to full power. And the time line makes sense. Disney has been hiding the true plot of the Mandalorian from us and just sending us on side quests. When you go see the movie next week this whole theory will all be reveled and the Manadalorian as basically a masterful set up story and lead in for the finale movie in this trilogy.

BTW this last episode of the Manalorian was BY FAR the best so far. I thought. Bill Burr pulled it off too!

No.

1: The Client looks nothing like the Sifo-Dyas of Stars Wars Canon. The illustrations that exist of Sifo-Dyas show him to have Mongolian-like features, resembling Genghis Khan. Cannot be the same person.

2. The baby Yoda cannot actually be The Jedi Master Yoda as Jedi cannot be cloned and still maintain their force sensitivity, (midichlorians cannot be transferred to clones).

3. The baby Yoda's force sensitivity is no indication of his identity, as the only other member of Yoda's species to appear in Star Wars, Yaddle (seen on the Jedi Council in Episode 1, but killed before Episode 2, I believe) was also very strong in the Force. It's likely that that particular species just has a high sensitivity to the Force.

4. I swear I am not a Star Wars Nerd.

Edited by Neomaxizoomdweebie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

No.

1: The Client looks nothing like the Sifo-Dyas of Stars Wars Canon. The illustrations that exist of Sifo-Dyas show him to have Mongolian-like features, resembling Genghis Khan. Cannot be the same person.

2. The baby Yoda cannot actually be The Jedi Master Yoda as Jedi cannot be cloned and still maintain their force sensitivity, (midichlorians cannot be transferred to clones).

3. The baby Yoda's force sensitivity is no indication of his identity, as the only other member of Yoda's species to appear in Star Wars, Yaddle (seen on the Jedi Council in Episode 1, but killed before Episode 2, I believe) was also very strong in the Force. It's likely that that particular species just has a high sensitivity to the Force.

4. I swear I am not a Star Wars Nerd.

1. Disney pays little heed to canon. If it's not in the movies/shows, it's fair game for them. Regardless, here is the one appearance Sifo-Dyas has ever actually made. From the animated series The Clone Wars:

Not only do they appear similar (white haired white guy) they have a noticeably similar accent and raspy voice.

2. I'd make the same argument as before. Get ready for them to break with canon. Even I didn't know this about clones, and I consider myself fairly well versed in the star wars universe. The general public won't even notice or care. And they could easily just insert "Kaminos developed new technology X that allows them to clone and extract midochlorians". Wouldn't be hard.

3. Ok, this could be true, maybe that species is just a rare and force powerful one, and Sifo-Dyas wants one for his own designs. Rest of the theory remains true. Could even be Yoda's offspring or something...

4. Star Wars is cool man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

1. Disney pays little heed to canon. If it's not in the movies/shows, it's fair game for them. Regardless, here is the one appearance Sifo-Dyas has ever actually made. From the animated series The Clone Wars:

Not only do they appear similar (white haired white guy) they have a noticeably similar accent and raspy voice.

2. I'd make the same argument as before. Get ready for them to break with canon. Even I didn't know this about clones, and I consider myself fairly well versed in the star wars universe. The general public won't even notice or care. And they could easily just insert "Kaminos developed new technology X that allows them to clone and extract midochlorians". Wouldn't be hard.

3. Ok, this could be true, maybe that species is just a rare and force powerful one, and Sifo-Dyas wants one for his own designs. Rest of the theory remains true. Could even be Yoda's offspring or something...

4. Star Wars is cool man

Disagree. I've seen the same theory posed other places on the interwebs,  but the problem with the whole clone issue is that the timeline doesn't fit. Mando was told in the first episode that the asset was 50 years old. That means that the baby yoda actually predates the clone army program and was even born before Syfo-Dias even went to Kamino. It took the Kaminoans years to even perfect the cloning of Jengo Fett. The likelihood that they were able to perfectly clone a Force powerful Jedi Master before that is highly, highly unlikely.

The most telling detail about the age of the asset is that it was born at the same time as Anakin Skywalker. Coincidence? I dont think so. Anyone familiar with his backstory knows that he had no father, as was mentioned by his mother in Phantom Menace. It wasnt mentioned in the movies, but the explanation was that Darths Plagueis and Sidious were so obsessed with immortality, that they began manipulating the force to create life, and Anakin was the result of that.

My theory as to the Baby Yoda is that he was the Force's response to what the Sith Lords did. A child born to a flesh and blood mother without a flesh and blood father, just like Anakin was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

We lost that trade. Regula is tearing it up. Meanwhile Perlini is a big fat stinker who won't get re-signed.

Perlini and AA should start an "our linemates suck" line. They both suck. They are linemates. Recursion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this