All In the Name Of....Get It? (It's a Motley Crue Song!)

In the past I've written about how up his own ass Nikki Sixx is; however this particular entry relates to Motley Crue as a recording entity.

Now, I own most of the albums that are in this little photo montage, and on them there are some really stellar songs. And there are also some colossal turds. Each (studio) album has anywhere from 1-4 excellent songs. But when you go back and look at their albums there isn't one single complete front to back album that is packed with great songs AND no filler. Hell, even their Greatest Hits album has that stupid shit ass song Glitter on it!
I love to go on to Wikipedia and read the reviews and behind the scene tidbits of bands and their discography's; on Motley Crue's page it says that Dr. Feelgood is considered both their "strongest" album and most "consistent". I beg to differ on both counts. Parts of it sound flawless and timeless (Dr. Feelgood, Kickstart My Heart), while in other parts it is soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo dated (Time For Change, TNT, Slice of Your Pie). Recently I watched a documentary on the Crue, and on it Vince Neil states that Theatre of Pain is their "worst album" and outside of Home Sweet Home and Smokin' In the Boys Room, he doesn't know a single song on that album. Clearly he has never hear Girls, Girls, Girls, New Tattoo, or Saints of Los Angeles. There are some real sink ass songs on those albums.
Besides the albums, a whole other argument/debate can be made that all of the those guys at one point or another becomes a liability in a live setting. Now, I saw them live in 2005; it was a great show, BUT they all fucked up a lot. No one was more guilty than Vince Neil. He did his infamous every 3rd word "singing" AND what was even more incredible was the fact that he "played" guitar on a few songs, and he broke his low E string and didn't even realize it. I often wonder when he busts out a guitar if it's even plugged in....

Anyways I just wanted to write about this. I do love these guys warts and all. The concert I saw them in was one of the best overall shows I've seen. My favorite albums of theirs would have to be Motley Crue, and Shout At the Devil. In that order.

The End

Case in Point

The other day, I was reading some user comments on a favorite blog/website of mine. It is written by one my favorite musicians, who happens to be extremely knowledgeable and articulate. He is also generous enough to take time out of his busy schedule to respond to most, if not all comments. Although, to me some of the user comments come across as totally off base, uninformed, or just stupid. Case in point: "...the 90s' were a terrible decade for rock and metal period."

Seriously? Period? Here is a brief list of rock/metal bands that formed in the 90s', released some great albums in the 90s', or made it "big" in the 90s':

White Zombie

Alice in Chains

Pearl Jam

Soundgarden

Prong

System of a Down

Pantera

Metallica (granted they were "big" in the 80s' but they really broke in the 90s')

Red Hot Chili Peppers

Tool

Faith No More

etc....*

Yeah, the way that rock/metal sounded and looked changed; BUT to say that the 90s' was "terrible" is just a silly thing to say. These bands wrote good songs and albums, had great tones, pioneered new tunings, and song structures. Saying something like that is very short sighted. If one just looks through their CD collection, iPod, Zune, or even just Wikipedia you can find out that the 90s' did produce some good rock/metal. Now this is not to say that it was with out it's low points, but it did produce very well.

* I know I left off a ton of groups/musicians. This was just a quick off hand list, I know that dozens of groups qualify for this, as well as the albums that they produced. So this was not a slam against any group or musician.