wired.com — As part of our series Geek The Beatles, which tracks the continuing influence of one of the most important and technologically innovative bands ever, Wired revisits the timeless relationship between Lennon and Chapman, which has gone viral in movies, TV, comics and music. Turn off your mind and float downstream into the heart of darkness.
Aug 9, 2010 View in Crawl 4
withearsAug 9, 2010
Paul is dead.
doctechnicalAug 9, 2010
Yet Yoko lives. Six bullets Chapman had... six frickin' bullets...
Closed AccountAug 9, 2010
It is safe to say that The Beatles will be in the history books 500 years from now.
curiousnightowlAug 9, 2010
As someone who really has limitless love for The Beatles, Is there really a need to dig deeper in the 'relationship' between John Lennon and his killer? I think not.
casspaAug 9, 2010
Miraculous how amazing he was without being able to read music.
theasshatterAug 9, 2010
The Beatles are so f**king over rated. You people are insane. It's just a bubblegum pop band from the 60s.
akairennAug 9, 2010
Sir, I salute you and your gluteal haberdashery.
You're so going to get buried though. Pointing out that the Beatles were mediocre pop is like simultaneously:
- Going into a Mac store and shouting, "f**k YEAH, ANDROID!"
- Getting gay married at the Republican National Convention
- Being Sarah Palin at the Democratic National Convention
- Talking about how awesome Halo is on voice chat while playing Call of Duty
- Talking about how much the XBox sucks while on voice chat on Halo
- And more.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
doublestopAug 9, 2010
Clearly you've never heard of the White Album, Rubber Soul, Revolver, and the Magical Mystery Tour albums, none of which could be considered "pop" albums. All of them are simultaneously entertaining, influential, and ... fun.
f**k you.
outontheporchAug 9, 2010
People who trash the Beatles are just going for shock value.
metaphidAug 9, 2010
Your moniker is apt.
isifunded911Aug 9, 2010
http://ciakilledlennon.blogspot.com/
johnnyloserAug 9, 2010
This is by far the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
doctechnicalAug 9, 2010
Stick around. The day is young.
isifunded911Aug 9, 2010
What a rebuttal! Thank you for showing me the light!
rudegarAug 9, 2010
did they kill elvis, mozart and kurt cobain too ?
isifunded911Aug 9, 2010
I do not think so.
Did the corporate media and the US government tell you the truth about the assassination of president John Fitzgerald Kennedy?
metaphidAug 9, 2010
It must get warm underneath that tin-foil hat, huh?
isifunded911Aug 9, 2010
A book investigating the assassination of John Lennon = tin-foil hat?
Next time you see a book, read it instead of putting it on your head, illiterate dumbass!
metaphidAug 9, 2010
Gosh, now you've gone and hurt my feelings.
vbullingerAug 9, 2010
The reason they're winning is because people like to just go along with what they already want to believe: they don't really want to know the truth.
I go along like this: whatever the truth is, I want to know it and believe it.
Most people are more like this: whatever I believe is what I want to see as the truth.
It's pretty sad, but I thumbed you up, buddy. I'll take a look at this link later, as I haven't looked into John Lennon's assassination much.
I know it's the Reagan assassination attempt and not the Lennon assassination, but I've always felt this to be fun:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_assassination_attempt#Hinckley_family_connections
isifunded911Aug 9, 2010
I know about the Bush connection.
It is even more interesting when you know that Reagan and Bush hated each other. Bush was sure to win the Republican primary against Reagan. But when Reagan won, the Bush team put Reagan under immense pressure to pick Bush as his running mate.
vbullingerAug 9, 2010
I heard somewhere that they actually pulled Reagan aside and said he had to make Bush his VP. Originally, Reagan had said something like "no member of a secret society will be my VP."
Ron Paul campaigned hard for Reagan because of this. The whole Trilateral Commission thing was huge back during the 1980 campaigns. Have you seen Jason Bermas' new film: Invisible Empire, a New World Order Defined?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NO24XmP1c5E
johnnyloserAug 15, 2010
Its still the stupidest thing I've ever heard. And don't be such a douche bag, ISlfunded911.
zurmatAug 9, 2010
oh so sad news i think :(
legalskepticAug 9, 2010
I think we should respect the wishes of Lennon's family and never mention the name of his killer or give said killer any attention.
wakkyweedAug 9, 2010
Do you know what John Lennon would be doing if he were alive today? He'd be scratching on his coffin lid, desperately trying to get out.
temsiAug 10, 2010
That joke is older than my socks.
bobbymAug 9, 2010
Really?
Closed AccountAug 9, 2010
(I DON'T SAY THEY SUCKED, I'M JUST DISCUSSING THEIR MERITS, WHY DON'T YOU TRY RESPONDING WITH A WELL THOUGHT OUT REFUTATION OF MY ASSERTION IF YOU DISAGREE BEFORE BURYING ME)
I'm inclined to agree, nobody has ever demonstrated to me how their super innovative songs have changed the world of music beyond being responsible for the Monkees. Don't bury me, I just think Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin are a little more important. And come on, they Beatles are a pop band and everyone knows it.
(I DIDN'T SAY THEY SUCKED, I JUST DISCUSSED THEIR MERITS, WHY DON'T YOU TRY RESPONDING WITH A WELL THOUGHT OUT REFUTATION OF MY ASSERTION IF YOU DISAGREE BEFORE BURYING ME)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
bloodwenisAug 9, 2010
There are any number of ways a lot of people can decimate your argument, but I'd encourage you to look at a few things:
- Song Catalog. Look at #1's, look how many artists cover each, put a price tag on each. A great deal of them are just pop songs, but how significant do they remain? Didn't Mike Jackson almost sell of the publishing rights for around a billion before he kicked?
- Commercial Success (Page and Plant couldn't fathom billion dollar personal net worths.)
- Constant reinvention of themselves throughout their career that actually resulted in more success. What percentage of bands achieve success, only to slightly alter the formula and fail into obsolescence? The Beatles did it time and time again, and were successful at it.
- Transcendance of their music beyond generations and included cultural significance as a result.
Look I love me some Zeppelin, Floyd etc. Did they right awesome songs, play their instruments in a more impressive fashion? Of course they did. To look at their overall existence to that of the Beatles Universe? They're not even in the same galaxy.
rudegarAug 9, 2010
well more people listened to them then and now then Floyd and Zeppelin
sure it mean it's pop as pop mean popular
so bigger audience bigger impact
heck Lennon sang give peace and chance, and we did and there have been peace since! ;)
firesphotonsAug 9, 2010
icemore, Many of the studio techniques used were completely new, before there was a floyd album that all flowed together, there was the white album. I can certainly understand some not ever listening to revolution number nine but the rest is an ass kicking masterpiece.
Closed AccountAug 9, 2010
If we're judging popular success, sure, Beatles are king forever and ever, but I think our standards should be a little better than that, arguably is just evidence of writing your songs to the lowest common denominator, but I'm not confident enough to make that claim (so don't bury me for it). I'd also argue that they lose cultural influence points since the generation that most loved them were responsible for Ronald Reagan. Again, I don't think they suck, I just don't think they deserve the ridiculous amounts or praise they get, BUT I AM OPEN TO BEING PERSUADED OTHERWISE.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.