LOS ANGELES - The Beatles were singled out Friday as the most influential entertainers of the past 100 years, beating out the likes of Elvis Presley, Charlie Chaplin and Mickey Mouse, according to a survey conducted by show business newspaper Variety.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9700554/ Question Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Answer Questions | Question Comments | My Questions | Favorites | +Add Question
LATEST
POPULAR PRIORITY RANDOM

All | Games | Funny | Entertainment | Quizzes | Weird | Tech | People | Arts/Lit | News | Science | Sports | Places | Misc

1,130 hits Rate me! Share Favorite | Flag 16 years ago by KikiPeepers

Do you agree the Beatles are the `most influential entertainers of the past 100 years`?
LOS ANGELES - The Beatles were singled out Friday as the most influential entertainers of the past 100 years, beating out the likes of Elvis Presley, Charlie Chaplin and Mickey Mouse, according to a survey conducted by show business newspaper Variety.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9700554...


Put This Question on Your Page (MySpace, Livejournal, Blog, etc)
[Preview] EMBED CODE:


Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 34)

Bottom Last Post

16 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Sunday 10/16/05 - 2:25:39 AM EST (GMT-5)
Or Elvis. One of the two. No one had ever done what they did.
16 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Thursday 10/20/05 - 11:44:46 PM EST (GMT-5)
^I agree.
16 yrs ago, 7 mos ago - Tuesday 10/25/05 - 12:38:27 PM EST (GMT-5)
No, well, like surrysounds says, either them, Elvis, or Marilyn Monroe,(because she was sooo scand-a-lous!)
16 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 10/31/05 - 3:53:05 PM EST (GMT-5)
I voted yes, but if the question had been about Elvis, I probably would have said yes to that too.
16 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 10/31/05 - 4:09:42 PM EST (GMT-5)
oh one of the most influential definetly
16 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 11/7/05 - 9:07:20 AM EST (GMT-5)
I agree with Elvis. It'd be hard to pick between the two.
16 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 11/7/05 - 9:11:28 AM EST (GMT-5)
Hrm....I'd agree with Elvis either joint 1st or second.
16 yrs ago, 6 mos ago - Monday 11/14/05 - 2:52:48 PM EST (GMT-5)
Entertainers? No. Musicians? Yes.
16 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/10/05 - 1:37:04 AM EST (GMT-5)
No. Elvis.
16 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/10/05 - 2:38:40 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 10/16/2005 2:25:40 AM surrysounds wrote:
Or Elvis. One of the two. No one had ever done what they did.

Agree.

16 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/10/05 - 2:41:40 AM EST (GMT-5)
It may be true, but if it is, it's the most depressing thing I've heard all day.
16 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/10/05 - 3:14:10 AM EST (GMT-5)
I think so. There's not a day that goes by that I don't see or hear some reference to the Beatles.
16 yrs ago, 5 mos ago - Saturday 12/10/05 - 3:19:36 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 10/31/2005 3:53:05 PM otherpolly wrote:
I voted yes, but if the question had been about Elvis, I probably would have said yes to that too.

I'd vote yes for the Beatles and no for Elvis. But then, I like the Beatles. Elvis was not as talented. He could sing no problem, but his music was written by others.

16 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Monday 2/27/06 - 12:14:48 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 11/14/2005 2:52:49 PM immortal_1 wrote:
Entertainers? No. Musicians? Yes.
agreed
OzArcher - that's because that's the way things where done in the 50's ...according to my history of rock and roll teacher.
16 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Monday 2/27/06 - 12:18:42 AM EST (GMT-5)
I'm going with Bob Dylan.
16 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Monday 2/27/06 - 12:19:27 AM EST (GMT-5)
NO! Johnny Cash
16 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Monday 2/27/06 - 12:20:45 AM EST (GMT-5)
On 10/16/2005 2:25:40 AM surrysounds wrote:
Or Elvis. One of the two. No one had ever done what they did.

Yep... I can't think of any other bands/musicians that have come close, or stayed mainstream as long as both have...

16 yrs ago, 3 mos ago - Monday 2/27/06 - 12:22:08 AM EST (GMT-5)
yes, they were. did they deserve to be? probably not. i think bob marley, as overrated as he can be(especially by upper middle class white kids), is sort of underrated in his all-around awesomeness. the beatles had long hair, elvis swung his hips, bob marley encouraged drug use and outwardly condemned christianity.
16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/16/06 - 7:09:42 PM EST (GMT-5)
Yeah.
16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/16/06 - 7:14:05 PM EST (GMT-5)
On 2/27/2006 12:22:08 AM ihearcalling wrote:
elvis swung his hips, bob marley encouraged drug use and outwardly condemned christianity.

The Beatles were sex symbols, like Elvis. They were a huge part of the drug culture, and criticised Christianity on a few occasions. They changed and popularized an entire genre of music, and influenced many later musicians.

16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/16/06 - 7:31:14 PM EST (GMT-5)
The Beatles just came along at a time that we were ready for the change. If the Beatles appeared 5 years earlier or later, they would have withered on the vine and hardly nobody would remember them. They weren't successful based on their own talent, because they were pretty simple at the start.
16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Thursday 3/16/06 - 7:39:12 PM EST (GMT-5)
On 3/16/2006 7:31:15 PM LaVita_Bella wrote:
They weren't successful based on their own talent, because they were pretty simple at the start.

Don't try to tell me the Beatles weren't talented. Between the four of them, they could play somewhere around forty instruments. They used many instruments and recording techniques that had never been heard before.

Their early music was inferior to their later music, because they weren't given a lot of freedom in the beginning. They branched out after Rubber Soul, and produced better and more original music.

16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/17/06 - 3:29:52 PM EST (GMT-5)
On 2/27/2006 12:22:08 AM ihearcalling wrote:
yes, they were. did they deserve to be? probably not. i think bob marley, as overrated as he can be(especially by upper middle class white kids), is sort of underrated in his all-around awesomeness. the beatles had long hair, elvis swung his hips, bob marley encouraged drug use and outwardly condemned christianity.

I think it was the beatles who were the first to publicly disregard christianity, it was John who took heat for say "The beatles are bigger than Jesus" and it was all of them that followed the Hindu religion and often visited gurus.
16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/17/06 - 3:30:34 PM EST (GMT-5)
I'd also like to add that not one day goes by where I don't see or hear something that in one way or another would not have existed were it not for The Beatles.
16 yrs ago, 2 mos ago - Friday 3/17/06 - 3:44:45 PM EST (GMT-5)
If you consider that the biggest influence on the Beatles was Buddy Holly then it stands to reason that Buddy Holly was more influential.

Unlike Elvis, Buddy Holly wrote his own songs and retained a lot of artistic control over how it was recorded.
He pretty much created the mould of the singer songwriter that Lennon and McCartney excelled at.



Prev 1 2 Next (showing 1-25 of 34)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Top



10 Most Popular Questions Today
1 If you had a genetic disease, would you reproduce?

2 Do you live in a home that has been owned by your family for multiple generations?

3 You're proving my point?

4 What does your money do?

5 Have you ever seen an Aurora?

6 Do you consider Wikileaks to be a beneficial or harmful organisation?

7 Which activity do you find more relaxing: Playing video games, or drinking?

8 Should the clock have been shifted 6 hours when it was designed, so that dawn occurs at approximately 12:00 and each hour corresponds to an hour of daylight?

9 Would you volunteer to be hypnotized on TV?

10 Have you sent a postcard into PostSecret?

More Questions
 
Edit