Jump to content

12 posts in this topic

Posted

[font=georgia,serif][size=5][b]Sir Paul McCartney to replace Kurt Cobain in Nirvana reunion[/b][/size][/font]
[font=georgia,serif][b]Sir Paul McCartney will replace Kurt Cobain in a reunion of band Nirvana tonight.[/b][/font]

[font=georgia, serif]McCartney will be supported by drummer Dave Grohl, bassist Krist Novoselic and unofficial fourth member Pat Smear for the 12.12.12 concert for victims of Hurricane Sandy.[/font]

[font=georgia,serif]It will be the first time the surviving members of the grunge band have played together in 20 years.[/font]

[font=georgia,serif]The outfit will not see Paul McCartney try his hand at classics Smells Like Teen Spirit or Lithium, however.[/font]

[font=georgia,serif]Instead, the four will play a new song at the New York charity concert.[/font]

[font=georgia,serif]The founding members have been secretly working on the track with Paul McCartney in a studio session after Sir Paul said he rang drummer Grohl, 43, who asked him to come along to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's a bit of a misleading headline, isn't it? They're not playing Nirvana's music, they're playing something that the four of them put together. It's Nirvana's surviving members with Paul McCartney, it isn't McCartney replacing Kurt Cobain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[img]http://i.filmot.com/GAqO7.gif[/img]

This makes no sense. [spoiler]lulzmonieslulz[/spoiler]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

As long as they're not calling themselves Nirvana or playing Nirvana's music, I don't see a problem; however, I would probably have a bit of a problem with Paul McCartney being hired as the vocalist for an actual Nirvana reunion :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Calum' timestamp='1355315543' post='595386064']
As long as they're not calling themselves Nirvana or playing Nirvana's music, I don't see a problem; however, I would probably have a bit of a problem with Paul McCartney being hired as the vocalist for an actual Nirvana reunion :p
[/quote]

I have a problem with Paul McCartney being hired as a vocalist at all these days.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='Majesticmerc' timestamp='1355317480' post='595386120']
I have a problem with Paul McCartney being hired as a vocalist at all these days.
[/quote]

Totally agree, the guy is turning up to anything these days.
He's no where near as good as he used to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It's almost like an April Fool joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='mps69' timestamp='1355317885' post='595386132']
He's no where near as good as he used to be.
[/quote]

When was that again? I can't seem to remember.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='mps69' timestamp='1355317885' post='595386132']
Totally agree, the guy is turning up to anything these days.
He's no where near as good as he used to be.
[/quote]

He was ever good? John Lennon and George Harrison wrote amazing stuff. 'Sir' Paul, not so much.
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Paul was arguably the most talented member of the Beatles and wrote the best songs. Lennon's stuff was more artsy, unique most of the time. George's stuff was more straightforward in my opinion.

Paul fronting surviving Nirvana members, it's a Rage against the machine vs Audioslave sort of thing. Could be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ummm... Dave, Krist and Pat have "reunited" several times over the years. They've even performed Marigold which is technically a Nirvana song.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote name='DarkyDan' timestamp='1355359147' post='595387682']
Paul was arguably the most talented member of the Beatles and wrote the best songs. Lennon's stuff was more artsy, unique most of the time. George's stuff was more straightforward in my opinion.
[/quote]

Paul's songs were more pop oriented, and I didn't like them as well myself.But to say he was untalented as some have is probably untrue.

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  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.