The Beatles vs. The Monkees

Steve_o

Seems like an unusual thread i know but it all stems from an arguement i had with a guy recently, i would've never considered them in the same league but since that arguement i'm intrigued to see which band people prefer!

kinaldo

That's like comparing Led Zeppelin with Spinal Tap.

No contest really - Beatles all the way.

J.R.HARTLEY

the monkees have merit undoubtedly, BUT they were a manufactured pop band which had hits(2 or 3) written for them, tell your friend to look up their origins, they were created for a tv show to cash in on the beatles success, the talent while good was limited and not within the same dimension, never mind league as the Beatles, and this is from a Stones Fan

mobby

Your taking the piss here right?

kinaldo

The Beatles vs The Beach Boys would be a lot more realistic.

Heisenberg.

This post has been deleted.

J.R.HARTLEY

elvis would win that, the beatles couldn't kung fu kick like the king
Takin Care o'Business baby tcb

bottlerocket

There are a lot of people out there who see no difference between the monkees and the beatles. Reminds me of something Nicky Wire said before about people in Wales seeing Elvis and Shakin Stevens as being on a par. But then again most people like sh1t music

mike65

Hey its all catchy pop!

What next - James Blunt v Scott Walker?

Mike.

Simon201

Maybe Beatles vs God!

hey didn't Lennon some similar suggestion?


and it should be Monkees vs monkeys!

loyatemu

the monkees made a lot of great music, and an amazingly weird movie (Head).

Also Mike Nesmith's mum invented Tipp-Ex!

Boo-yah

There is no contest here, The Beatles.

The Beatles vs. Beach Boys would be a closer contest alright but The Beatles would win for me.

Bodhidharma

First off, Beatles obviously are better. That goes without saying, but.......

I like The Monkees. The TV show was a good laugh and they did make some pretty catchy pop songs. The only reason why the two are compared is because little american girls in the sixties fancied them both. Music critics never mentioned them.

As far as the Zeppelin/Tap debate.....tough one. Both good but Spinal Tap are England's loudest band. In terms of music - zeppelin. In terms of ludicrousness we have Nigel Tufnell and the unbendable bread, or Zeppelin going to dinner with Stevie Wonder dressed as women. Zep all the way!

Sofaspud

kinaldo wrote:

That's like comparing Led Zeppelin with Spinal Tap.

Yeah, Tap wins hands down! No contest at all

Kingsize

Beatles win hands down but I wouldn't dismiss the monkees just cos the were "Manufactured" they had some great songs (albeit )written for them but they were still good pop tunes.
I hate the way the monkees are used as a scapegoat for all the manufactured westlife type Dross that's released today.
The monkees were set up to make cash but they were "new" & "different" at the time .(even though they were a rip off)
Nowadays manufactured "bands" are set up with the purpose of just keeping things the same

zAbbo

kinaldo wrote:

That's like comparing Led Zeppelin with Spinal Tap.

No contest really - Beatles all the way.

Or Elvis to Big Tom

J.R.HARTLEY

Kingsize wrote:

Beatles win hands down but I wouldn't dismiss the monkees just cos the were "Manufactured" they had some great songs (albeit )written for them but they were still good pop tunes.
I hate the way the monkees are used as a scapegoat for all the manufactured westlife type Dross that's released today.
The monkees were set up to make cash but they were "new" & "different" at the time .(even though they were a rip off)
Nowadays manufactured "bands" are set up with the purpose of just keeping things the same

not to mention the fact that they could play their own instruments.

GreeBo

Most people who dismiss the Monkees cant name 5 of their songs, so I just ignore them.

mobby

GreeBo wrote:

Most people who dismiss the Monkees cant name 5 of their songs, so I just ignore them.

What, they Had 5 songs!

The Freeman

monkees = parody

beatles = arguably the best band of all time!

Mr. Presentable

What aspects are we comparing?

The Beatles wrote most of their own stuff, the Monkees didn't. Is that it?

Both bands could play, despite earlier remarks.

The Beatles sold sheds more records.

The Beatles existed for longer - or did they? Didn't the Monkees tour in the 90s?

The Beatles are probably better, but the Monkees had the better songs - they had the greatest song writers in the USA at their disposal, so no surprise there. Songs like Last train to Clarkesville, and Pleasant Valley Sunday are without equal in the Beatles catalogue.

*cowers in corner ready for rebuttal*

J.R.HARTLEY

nipplenuts wrote:

The Beatles are probably better, but the Monkees had the better songs - they had the greatest song writers in the USA at their disposal, so no surprise there. Songs like Last train to Clarkesville, and Pleasant Valley Sunday are without equal in the Beatles catalogue.

i'm not a beatles fan but even i can see that paragraph is opinion and not fact.
noone is knocking the monkees they just aren't as good as the beatles, it's a fact that Stones Fans, Doors Fans and Queen Fans have had to get used to. and all three of those bands are better than than Monkees

a loyal stones fan like myself can name you ten Beatles songs that i would consider better than those two from a neutral standpoint, i cant state that they are better but i'd say i won't be short on support if you took a poll. (and yes i have most of the beatles catalogue and the monkees too)
1 Can't Buy Me Love
2 Hello GoodBye
3 Revolution
4 Here Comes The Sun
5 Come Together
6 We Can Work it Out
7 A Hard Days Night
8 Penny Lane
9 Hey Jude
10 Let it Be

Mr. Presentable

J.R.HARTLEY wrote:

i'm not a beatles fan but even i can see that paragraph is opinion and not fact.

Opinion is all any one can voice here

sceptre

GreeBo wrote:

Most people who dismiss the Monkees cant name 5 of their songs, so I just ignore them.

Heh, you didn't pick the number '5' by accident I'll warrant. Pretty much everyone can name the usual four. Plenty of underrated stuff after you get those four out of the way.

davyjose

GreeBo wrote:

Most people who dismiss the Monkees cant name 5 of their songs, so I just ignore them.

There's avery distinct reason for that.

davyjose

nipplenuts wrote:

What aspects are we comparing?

The Beatles wrote most of their own stuff, the Monkees didn't. Is that it?

Both bands could play, despite earlier remarks.

The Beatles sold sheds more records.

The Beatles existed for longer - or did they? Didn't the Monkees tour in the 90s?

The Beatles are probably better, but the Monkees had the better songs - they had the greatest song writers in the USA at their disposal, so no surprise there. Songs like Last train to Clarkesville, and Pleasant Valley Sunday are without equal in the Beatles catalogue.

*cowers in corner ready for rebuttal*

What a stupid statement. Does that mean that Britney Spears has better songs than the Beatles too? Last Train to Clarksville is a simple, catchy mid-tempo song the style of which invented and then thrown-away by Lennon and McCartney.
The simple fact is that Catchy DOES NOT directly mean good, else three blind mice is the greatest song ever. I really think you need to buy more albums and listen to more music if you belive that.
BUT just to drop to that level for a moment: She's a Woman (A B-Side), Can't buy me Love, Help. Off the top of my head far superior versions of what you deign to be a good song.

rubadub

Beatles of course but the monkees are class, singalong chorus in daydream believer is amazing. Also they won me a prize for who missed out on a part in the monkees, Stephen Stills (i.e. Crosby Stills & Nash).

The comparison is often a joke on TV, "yeah the beatles were just a rip-off of the monkees"

some interesting bits here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkees

As for the naming of 5 songs. It is true most can't. Plenty of elvis fans cannot name a single elvis album either. I would find it hard to name 5 doors songs, and thanks to mp3s I know the names of feck all recent music, even stuff I love that does have correct tagging.

rubadub

davyjose wrote:

Does that mean that Britney Spears has better songs than the Beatles too?.

NO! beatles had more no.1's, now westlife, thats a different story wayyyy more no.1's so have to be better;)

seand333

Even though i think the beatles are definetely overrated, i still think theres no comparison betwee them and the monkees, monkees were like a good karaoke band.

GreeBo

rubadub wrote:

As for the naming of 5 songs. It is true most can't. Plenty of elvis fans cannot name a single elvis album either. I would find it hard to name 5 doors songs, and thanks to mp3s I know the names of feck all recent music, even stuff I love that does have correct tagging.

My point was not that they didnt know they names, its that the wouldnt have heard 5 Monkees songs.

I find that the Monkees are dismissed without being given a chance.
"Oh sure they were a manufactured band, did you know they didnt even play any instruments?"

- Randy Scouse Git
- Porpoise Song
- She
- The Kind of Girl I Could Love
- You Just May Be the One
- Words
- What Am I Doing Hangin' 'Round?
- Pleasant Valley Sunday
- Kicks

All songs that you should give a listen to if you have not before.
<edit>

rubadub wrote:

Plenty of elvis fans cannot name a single elvis album either.

Aloha From Hawaii is all you really need

J.R.HARTLEY

rubadub wrote:

NO! beatles had more no.1's, now westlife, thats a different story wayyyy more no.1's so have to be better;)

thats incorrect Westlife have had more singles debut at number one than the beatles, however the beatles had 17 uk no 1's to westlife 14 so the beatles are still ahead of them but Elvis has the most with 21