Stuff you think is overrated - top 3

Scrug said:
Oasis fans = 442. Union jacks. Full English on holiday. Carling only. Missionary. Nuts magazine. Bucket hats. Rollies. Lucy Pinder.

Absolutely ***** band. Lyrics are nonsense, only made it because they struck a nerve with the working class with their attitude.
Click to expand...
Clearly not read the OP. Stuff you don’t dislike but think is overrated. Not stuff you’re harbouring emotional scars from! 😁
 
Last edited:
1. Formula 1 seems to be the in thing for the younger generation over recent years yet when it was genuinely competitive it was seen as an old man’s watch.
2. Dance. Not dance per se, I love a good dance but more the obsession of watching other people dance.
3. Marks & Spencer. Living off a reputation from last century. Any food mass produced is going to taste bland and their male clothing range is for 60 year old Mercedes driving old school golf club guys
 
Scrug said:
Oasis fans = 442. Union jacks. Full English on holiday. Carling only. Missionary. Nuts magazine. Bucket hats. Rollies. Lucy Pinder.

Absolutely ***** band. Lyrics are nonsense, only made it because they struck a nerve with the working class with their attitude.
Click to expand...
I think Oasis fans are ok if they acknowledge the first two albums were good, but the rest were absolutely ****.

Totally agree on the rest.
 
Glover_elbow said:
Street food - hugely overated
Calamari - rubber onion rings
Shawarma - dirty food
Click to expand...
Most street food yes, people just thin becuase they're being overcharged that the food is somehow better. Lots of food places do this though.
Calamari :LOL: most places waay overcook it, so yup, most is like rubber. It's good when done right, on the rare occasion but not that easy to do, and bad guts if you get it wrong.
Shawarma is awesome, but needs to be from the right place and most places are just wrong, wrong, wrong
 
Andy_W said:
I think Oasis fans are ok if they acknowledge the first two albums were good, but the rest were absolutely ****.

Totally agree on the rest.
Click to expand...
The rest were not to the same standard but there were some good tracks on all of them.

I find a lot of people who got bored during the Be Here Now phase (and moved on to Radiohead cos it felt more 'high brow') say this, but didn't actually listen to any of the other albums.
 
atypical_boro said:
The rest were not to the same standard but there were some good tracks on all of them.

I find a lot of people who got bored during the Be Here Now phase (and moved on to Radiohead cos it felt more 'high brow') say this, but didn't actually listen to any of the other albums.
Click to expand...
DM was the best for me, but there was still the odd track which was good after WTSMG, like D'You know what I mean, Don't go away and Stop Crying your heart out etc, but a lot more filler around those, to me anyway. I thought be here now was largely poor though, but I tried with that album. I don't think I listened to the rest more than a few times, as they didn't seem to be worth it.

I started with WTSMG and worked back to DM, and did similar to Radiohead, started with Ok Computer and worked back to Pablo Honey.

Radiohead's first three albums were great, and I prefer those over Oasis two good albums. Ok Computer came out same year as Be Here Now, and was far, far superior.

Oasis were good, like Blur, but they effectively became their own downfall by bringing out loads of interest/ indie bands along for the ride, and loads of them had one or two really good albums which were better than what Oasis were putting out after WTSMG.
 
atypical_boro said:
Ignoring the Oasis nonsense, who overrates Budweiser? Just cos they put 'King of Beers' on the label doesn't mean everyone loves it. I don't know anyone who especially overrates it. Same with Nandos tbh, people go there but I don't hear anyone crowing about the food, its just a slightly better version of fast junk food.
Click to expand...
I know a few people who are borderline obsessed with nandos to be fair.

I've never had one.
 
festa5 said:
I know a few people who are borderline obsessed with nandos to be fair.

I've never had one.
Click to expand...
For chicken and chips it's really good, the bill always ends up quite expensive though.

Just go, get a half chicken spiced up, or chicken thighs with some fries. garlic bread and perinaise. Don't think I've ever known anyone go who's not thought it was a really good version of what it does.
 
atypical_boro said:
I find a lot of people who got bored during the Be Here Now phase (and moved on to Radiohead cos it felt more 'high brow') say this, but didn't actually listen to any of the other albums.
Click to expand...
Radiohead is more high brow. No way could any member of oasis have been capable of writing any of the parts of Airbag let alone some of the more complicated pieces they wrote later like Videotape, Sail To The Moon or Pyramid Song. Regardless if you like them or not, the musicality of what they do is phenomenal which is why loads of other artists name check their work.

Oasis (certainly earlier) were good at what they did, but musically it wasn’t complex, 5-chords that any guitarist already knew, a simple riff from the pentatonic scale and off you go. They didn’t play with time signatures or jazz chords or a funk groove, or complex guitars that create dissonance and then interweave to resolve. Oasis just aren’t knowledgeable enough or probably motivated enough to experiment and write something like that. Their early stuff is still enjoyable and yeah the later albums have a banger or two on it amongst some cocaine fuelled drivel but compared to Radiohead and some other artists it’s a bit ‘basic’, enjoyable enough but they didn’t challenge themselves.

If you look at the people Noel aspires to, people like Johnny Marr and Paul Weller, they have a far broader musical taste, like to work in other genres learn, experiment and listen and aren’t concerned that someone would think it pretentious. This is where oasis and Noel in particular fail, they became obsessed with doing the same things but better, rather than learn and grow and experiment.
 
Last edited:
BoroMart said:
Radiohead is more high brow. No way could any member of oasis have been capable of writing any of the parts of Airbag let alone some of the more complicated pieces they wrote later like Videotape, Sail To The Moon or Pyramid Song. Regardless if you like them or not, the musicality of what they do is phenomenal which is why loads of other artists name check their work.

Oasis (certainly earlier) were good at what they did, but musically it wasn’t complex, 5-chords that any guitarist already knew, a simple riff from the pentatonic scale and off you go. They didn’t play with time signatures or jazz chords or a funk groove, or complex guitars that create dissonance and then interweave to resolve. Oasis just aren’t knowledgeable enough or probably motivated enough to experiment and write something like that. Their early stuff is still enjoyable and yeah the later albums have a banger or two on it amongst some cocaine fuelled drivel but compared to Radiohead and some other artists it’s a bit ‘basic’, enjoyable enough but they didn’t challenge themselves.

If you look at the people Noel aspires to, people like Johnny Marr and Paul Weller, they have a far broader musical taste, like to work in other genres learn, experiment and listen and aren’t concerned that someone would think it pretentious. This is where oasis and Noel in particular fail, they became obsessed with doing the same things but better, rather than learn and grow and experiment.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I mean its highly subjective what is 'good', but I wouldn't question Radiohead being more 'high brow'. Complex doesn't mean 'good' however. I've listened to almost all their albums as I was a fan of The Bends and, to a much lesser extent, OK Computer, and I've found absolutely nothing that stirs the same sort of emotions that Definitely Maybe did (certainly not since the Bends). Just my opinion. Music doesn't have to always be about using complex chords and singing in falsetto about historical figures no one has heard of.

Put it this way, if someone asks me to put a track on at a party I'm not going for Paranoid Android or Jigsaw Falling Into Place. It depends what you actually want to get from music, or life in general. And for me, Radiohead is not it.
 
Last edited:
Andy_W said:
DM was the best for me, but there was still the odd track which was good after WTSMG, like D'You know what I mean, Don't go away and Stop Crying your heart out etc, but a lot more filler around those, to me anyway. I thought be here now was largely poor though, but I tried with that album. I don't think I listened to the rest more than a few times, as they didn't seem to be worth it.

I started with WTSMG and worked back to DM, and did similar to Radiohead, started with Ok Computer and worked back to Pablo Honey.

Radiohead's first three albums were great, and I prefer those over Oasis two good albums. Ok Computer came out same year as Be Here Now, and was far, far superior.

Oasis were good, like Blur, but they effectively became their own downfall by bringing out loads of interest/ indie bands along for the ride, and loads of them had one or two really good albums which were better than what Oasis were putting out after WTSMG.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with any/much of this, but I would still argue that the noughties Oasis albums, whilst not the same level, were as good as a lot of the dross that was being released in the charts at the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top