I'm sorry, ma'am. .
Home Funny Pictures YouTube Funny Videos Funny GIFs Text/Links Channels Search

I'm sorry, ma'am

Views: 33896
Favorited: 47
Submitted: 01/26/2013
Share On Facebook
Add to favorites E-mail to friend submit to reddit
Share image on facebook Share on StumbleUpon Share on Tumblr Share on Pinterest Share on Google Plus E-mail to friend


Show:   Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest Per page:

Show All Replies Show Shortcuts
Anonymous commenting is allowed
User avatar #45 - impaledsandwich (01/27/2013) [-]
Since this entire page is filled with anti-Beatles stuff, let me offer a differing opinion.

John Lennon and Paul McCartney were/are great writers, both with lyrics and music. Yes, some of their earlier stuff is just simple rock, but so was a lot of music then, and dammit it's fun. They were all really cool guys (most of the time), and John and Paul had/have great voices. Not the best, but still very good. One thing I will say, though, is that Ringo was a really ****** drummer, and his only good song was "Octopus's Garden".
#47 to #45 - anonymous (01/27/2013) [-]
Actually Lennon was a pretty nasty guy, even to the other band members.

User avatar #50 to #47 - impaledsandwich (01/27/2013) [-]
Only a couple of those are even vaguely believable, and even then I demand citations.
#51 to #50 - anonymous (01/27/2013) [-]
Its pretty well known he beat his wife, especially his first and favoured his second son more. Plus, yeah, listen to the lyrics of his older work - they're not actually that creative, but rather generic.
User avatar #52 to #51 - impaledsandwich (01/27/2013) [-]
But it's good, fun music, and he got more creative as he got more experience in writing. That's like saying Beethoven was a ****** composer because his early work was him screwing around with a violin when he was six (don't know if he actually did that, but you see my point).
#53 to #52 - anonymous (01/27/2013) [-]
If you're saying that "good, fun music" that isnt the slightest bit creative, you damn well better not criticize other boy bands, because that's exactly what the Beatles were for at least half their career.
User avatar #55 to #53 - impaledsandwich (01/27/2013) [-]
Hmm. You've made a pretty good point, anon. Shall we end this argument before it inevitably devolves into a shouting match?
#43 - nasesse (01/27/2013) [-]
**nasesse rolled a random image posted in comment #83 at My biggest fear ever **
it would be terrible if you had to pass that road daily
#40 - gongthehawkeye (01/27/2013) [-]
Gonna be honest, I don't like the Beatles
Can't stand their music
Feel free to hate me
User avatar #57 to #40 - keiishiyama (01/27/2013) [-]
I can't either, but they have some good songs, and I love the Sgt. Pepper song and its Reprise.
#49 to #40 - boredomavenger (01/27/2013) [-]
congratulations on having a different opinion than the majority of people, what the **** do you want, a medal?

stop fishing for attention, you twit.
User avatar #42 to #40 - dementedllama (01/27/2013) [-]
#39 - anonymous (01/27/2013) [-]
mfw my name is Abbey.
#36 - whenuleastxpect (01/27/2013) [-]
Related. Just Peter Jackson, Howard Shore and a couple of other guys who produced lotr walking across abbey road
User avatar #58 to #36 - keiishiyama (01/27/2013) [-]
At least it's not Mordor.
#35 - slipperycheese (01/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #32 - steviemo (01/27/2013) [-]
God damn, I just can't stand listening to the Beatles...
#30 - anonymous (01/27/2013) [-]
history? are serious guise? what did they do that changed the world? they were just singing a bunch of ****** songs nothing more than that.
#29 - enderknight (01/27/2013) [-]
My family and I went to England a few years back, and my dad is a huge Beatles fan, so he had to get a picture at Abbey Road. These two old ladies were yelling at us, saying, "What's so great about this road that people try to get pictures here!?"
#26 - cysco ONLINE (01/27/2013) [-]
This image has expired
my sister is a big "one direction" fan and had this picture as her wallpaper .. i changed it with the picture of the beatles.. she was confused, she didnt know the picture from the beatles, even that we hav the LP from the abbey road in the living room for many decades... i couldnt be more disappointed by my own sister..
#41 to #26 - jrtojrto (01/27/2013) [-]
How old was she?
User avatar #31 to #26 - nigman (01/27/2013) [-]
If age < 11 yrs old, let off. Else disappoint.jpg
User avatar #25 - tkfourtwoone (01/27/2013) [-]
Why oh why do I only like their early work, like "Love Me Do", "Hard Day's Night", "I Saw Her Standing There" and all the other rock'n'roll stuff?!
Honestly, I've been trying to listen to their post '60s stuff, when the LSD and India trip started to have a major influence... I CAN'T!
I'd much rather listen to Floyd for psychedelic stuff.
User avatar #27 to #25 - kernelstack (01/27/2013) [-]
Couldn't agree more.
#22 - sulaco (01/27/2013) [-]
The fact that so many books still name the Beatles “the greatest or most significant or most influential” rock band ever only tells you how far rock music still is from becoming a serious art. Jazz critics have long recognized that the greatest jazz musicians of all times are Duke Ellington and John Coltrane, who were not the most famous or richest or best sellers of their times, let alone of all times. Classical critics rank the highly controversial Beethoven over classical musicians who were highly popular in courts around Europe. Rock critics are still blinded by commercial success: the Beatles sold more than anyone else (not true, by the way), therefore they must have been the greatest. Jazz critics grow up listening to a lot of jazz music of the past, classical critics grow up listening to a lot of classical music of the past. Rock critics are often totally ignorant of the rock music of the past, they barely know the best sellers. No wonder they will think that the Beatles did anything worth of being saved.
User avatar #59 to #22 - keiishiyama (01/27/2013) [-]
Going along with muzikmafia, the Beatles crafted an album that is physically impossible to play live (in its entirety). Rock critics can name them the best band of all time, and I'll disagree because I think Journey, Def Leppard, and the Rolling Stones are better.

But you'd have to really hate the Beatles or be extremely uninformed to not realize how significant the Beatles were in the music industry.
User avatar #48 to #22 - muzikmafia (01/27/2013) [-]
Guess what
Before Sgt. Peppers, bands had UK and US releases of their albums with different songs.
The Beatles wanted a universal version of their magnum opus.
They got it because they're the ******* Beatles.
EVERYONE has since followed them- Pink Floyd, The Rolling Stones... because that's how influential the Beatles are. And after the fact, 'Greatest' can be defined as 'game-changing'... and the Beatles changed the game.
#44 to #22 - funnjyunk **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #24 to #22 - masdercheef (01/27/2013) [-]
This looks like the sort of comment that either everybody agrees with, or everyone hates. Judging from the rest of the comments here, I'm leaning towards it being the latter. However, though I don't agree with your opinion, I certainly can respect it. Probably because I have no idea with what I'm talking about when it comes to music and just go with whatever I think sounds good, but that's not the point here. In fact, the only thing I can possibly take issue with here is the last sentence. Rock may not be seen as a serious art by everybody, and there will certainly be many that hate the Beatles, but I've always been a firm believer that all history that caused any sort of significant impact should be preserved, in some way. It only helps if there's actually somebody who finds some form of value in it, and I'm sure that there are plenty of people who still value the Beatles.
#21 - juha (01/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#18 - pyra (01/27/2013) [-]
#16 - dexas (01/27/2013) [-]
To go along with this
User avatar #13 - timothybarnes (01/27/2013) [-]
I dated a girl once whose mom claimed to have been in a cafe that the members of the Beatles visited after this photo session. She claimed that after they entered, their security team prevented other people from coming in, but since she was already on the inside she managed to score Lennon's autograph. While I question the authenticity of this story, I still think it's an interesting tale.
User avatar #37 to #13 - kayen (01/27/2013) [-]
John Lennon's autograph?... That must be very valueable nowadays.
#15 to #13 - geofffiftyfive (01/27/2013) [-]
I have a similar story. If you look in the background of the photo you see a man getting out of his car, that's my junior high gym teacher's uncle.
#12 - buildaburg (01/27/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#11 - cupotruth (01/27/2013) [-]
I respect other peoples ideals that they do not like The Beatles but even if you don't enjoy the sound you should respect it because it formed modern music. I mean Homo-Erectus wouldn't be stimulating conversation but with out that poop smeared dude we wouldn't be here.
User avatar #7 - howunexpected (01/27/2013) [-]
The Beatles are very much like the Monet of music. They did something drastic, something some people liked, and some people didn't. Then, the music world when completely different directions than where it would have gone without them. Some people like the outcome, some people don't.
Bottom line, is that the Beatles were incredibly influential in the flow of music evolution.
User avatar #4 - digits (01/27/2013) [-]
The Beatles suck.
User avatar #23 to #4 - sprok **User deleted account** (01/27/2013) [-]
You suck.
#17 to #4 - pyra (01/27/2013) [-]
That is your opinion, and it is wrong
#38 to #17 - swiftykidd **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #9 to #4 - kinglobster (01/27/2013) [-]
whoa man, you cant put your unpopular opinion on here.
#6 to #4 - jimmyneubtron (01/27/2013) [-]
I'm glad some one agrees with me, and I have a short story to tell. I was discussing with one of my friends before a play we had to go to for our school how much I did not like the beatles, mostly for being a over-glorified boy-band, and a hipster couple overheard me and my friend flipped the **** out and I tried to reason with the retards, but proved to be unsucsessful, and the moral of the story is Beatles are an over glorified boy band.
#10 to #6 - zenethe (01/27/2013) [-]
I'll have to disagree on the over glorified (not boy band) statement. Actually liking their music is a preferential thing, but they were really influential and a lot of what comment #7 is saying, shaping the history of music and whatnot. I believe they kinda earned the glory they receive...
User avatar #5 to #4 - TwistedBamboozler (01/27/2013) [-]
I'm not a fan of the beatles . . . but I think it's a little unfair to say they suck. Musically they aren't the best, but they played people and worked the industry in a way no one had ever seen before.
User avatar #20 to #5 - daentraya (01/27/2013) [-]
Indeed. While i dont overly enjoy their music, i still appreciate what they did to music. For that, i love the Beatles
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)