phlashphire
Golden Member
- Jun 6, 2000
- 1,055
- 0
- 0
Yeah they're no Judy Garland or Andrew Loyd Weber:roll:Originally posted by: aidanjm
they are technically competent, but have no depth, meaning, whatever, they just seem a bit pointless.
Toatally different styles of Music. Nirvana was all about angst and not much more while the Foo Fighters are more about the Celebration of life. I also feel that the Foo Fighters are more verstile musically than Nirvana was. I wonder if Cobain had lived if they would have feature more of Grohl's music? As morbid as it might sound the demise of Cobain probably was the best thing to happen for Dave's Music Career.it's impossible not to compare them to nirvana, and they don't fare well in the comparison
And this has something to do with their music?also, I don't like that guy's cheesy grin and huge teeth
Originally posted by: Scarpozzi
Haven't heard the new single, but after seeing them with the Red Hot Chili Peppers, I came to the conclusion that David Grohl is a God. Even though they were the openers for the RHCP, I think they upstaged them.
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Yeah they're no Judy Garland or Andrew Loyd Weber:roll:Originally posted by: aidanjm
they are technically competent, but have no depth, meaning, whatever, they just seem a bit pointless.
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: NTB
Originally posted by: Brutuskend
On a somewhat related note, do you know what a foo fighter was?
WWII UFO, right?
Nate
Foo Fighters