Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
1) They look crap, and have always done
2) Isn't their debut album grunge or something?
You can;t really have 2 sole reasons. Can you?
I'd add in that they are not The Beatles.
i agree. i concur. you cant beat the beatles.
saying the only thing holding Radiohead back from being up there with the best of the best is their image and their early shitness?
I'm pretty sure I just absolutely complimented one of the most-loved DiS bands ever.
Is the fun watching others respond? :o)
and they generally look really shit. :(
just to prove he's down with the kids?
here is why:
“Haah, ‘Nice.’ What a damning word in the wrong hands, though — like a girl’s hands, you know — the moment a she says a guy’s nice, you know you’re fucked — you’re not fucked. Anyway, sorry.”
Have you even listened to Life in A Glass House?!?!
But my musically informed contemporaries saw them play in Manchester and said they were appalling.
and have put on the most perfect shows I've ever seen
but come on, let's be serious for a minute.
Then again, it's anyone's prerogative if they want to be deliberately contrary, controversial or incorrect!
and who cares, ever heard of music? you dont need to look like Brad Pitt to make it, and usually if you do its shit anyway (see Enrique Inglasiwtf, Peter Andre etc.)
And yeah, Pablo Honey sucked but fucking hell if you've released the best 6 album run in history since the Beatles i'd let you off.
radiohead looked pretty fly on the cover of OMM a while back, minus Phil 'OMFG how can you look THAT much like a fucking egg' Selway.
they're a bit boring quite a lot of the time.
I hate being unable to edit my post.