Jump to content

NME Greatest Frontmen and Women


initialdylan

Recommended Posts

it's what you call footage my dear. you don't always have to be there to know how good/bad it is.

 

i recall they had to hire someone to whip their hair back and forth to engage with the crowd because kurt couldn't?

 

Yes, footage is the same as being there.

 

Ok, they weren't the most dynamic on stage, but 'terrible' is going a bit far. they were far from terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, footage is the same as being there.

 

Ok, they weren't the most dynamic on stage, but 'terrible' is going a bit far. they were far from terrible.

 

people say the resistance tour was average, comparing nirvana live to the resistance tour, it was really bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite sure what you mean here :erm:

 

Do you not see that you can't judge a band's live performance by what you've seen on a screen?

 

i'd argue differently. most bands i didn't like the look of on screen were rubbish irl, and most good bands were good irl.

 

anyway, it is said by many nirvana were not known for their live performances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'd argue differently. most bands i didn't like the look of on screen were rubbish irl, and most good bands were good irl.

 

anyway, it is said by many nirvana were not known for their live performances.

 

Ok, well I'll respect your opinion on the first point but I still don't accept that the blanket statement that Nirvana were terrible live can be made by someone who's nver been to one of their gigs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, well I'll respect your opinion on the first point but I still don't accept that the blanket statement that Nirvana were terrible live can be made by someone who's nver been to one of their gigs.

 

I'll definitely agree with that... you can't say a band is bad live until you've been there. You can say that they don't look good, but you can't confirm that they're shit. HOWEVER, there is the obvious exception that if they can't sing well, or are using a back track and other such antics... if that's recognized through a video, then of course they're bad live :p But past the basics (actually being able to produce the songs properly live), you can't make such a strong statement truly based on a video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is Homme and Tom from Kasabian on that top 20 list? Ok ok, I haven't seen either live, but man those two individuals alone are motivation enough for me to want to see 'em! And they sure look like they love what they're doing in every video I've seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, it's just a poll.

 

Obviously there are differing opinions as to who is the best frontman; so just GO VOTE FOR WHO YOU WANT TO WIN. I'm pretty sure the majority of people here will not agree with you when you say that (insert non-Matt Bellamy name here) is a better frontman than Matt Bellamy.

 

Expressing your disagreement in a Muse forum saying that Matt isn't the most electrifying frontman is analogous to going to the streets of Egypt two weeks ago shouting "All hail Mubarak!"

 

Do remember that a lot of us have not seen other frontmen in action live, especially dead frontmen. Again, remember that you're in a Muse forum. So take it easy :D

 

 

OP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NME should quit crushing over Bellamy already. Freddie Mercury, Robert Smith, Mick Jagger, and Robert Plant should all be converging at the top of this list. Iggy Pop near the bottom of this list too? Really?

 

Not to say Matt isn't a great frontman, he is indeed, but he isn't the best. He has his own advantages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where is Homme and Tom from Kasabian on that top 20 list? Ok ok, I haven't seen either live, but man those two individuals alone are motivation enough for me to want to see 'em! And they sure look like they love what they're doing in every video I've seen.

 

Having seen Kasabian several times I can say that Tom in a great frontman imo... so much energy on stage and great at feeding from the energy from the crowd as well and interacting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? That makes a great frontman for you?

 

Yes, they just have to do a dancey shuffle and that's it, I automatically think they're the best :p

 

I really don't get the appeal of Freddie Mercury though. He was good but he never held that much appeal for me and I don't like his music anywhere near as much as I like Muse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NME should quit crushing over Bellamy already. Freddie Mercury, Robert Smith, Mick Jagger, and Robert Plant should all be converging at the top of this list. Iggy Pop near the bottom of this list too? Really?

 

Not to say Matt isn't a great frontman, he is indeed, but he isn't the best. He has his own advantages.

 

+1 not that he will never be. I just don't think they've been around long enough for Matt to beat the legends. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm watching "101" right now and sexy doesn't even describe what Dave Gahan is. If I could go back in time and touch that holy ass squashed into those tight white jeans, I would. and never let go.

 

+1000000

I know!! :stongue:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's what you call footage my dear. you don't always have to be there to know how good/bad it is.

 

i recall they had to hire someone to whip their hair back and forth to engage with the crowd because kurt couldn't?

 

Footage doesn't make a difference, especially these days where live footage is often edited so fast, any band could just stand still and look exciting.

 

And have you never heard of shoegaze? It was all the rage in the early 90's.

 

 

 

Dave Gahan is incredible, so is Morrisey, I'll think of more later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...