'member The Beatles!

I thought it was to brainwash people into being rednecks so they vote for Trump, so it is making fun of conservatives.

i don't get why they're berries?

i think it's meant to have the effect of making something alienating, like when they use a celebrities actual face

Idunno. If it is, it's out-of-character for Matt and Trey. They tend to save the real vitriol for liberalism.

Mostly they only tease specific brands of conservatism they view as extremely ignorant.

they look like grapes

Yeah, I pointed out in my post that at the end of the episode it's playing on Trump's platform of being like "Oh let's make America great again", anti immigrant stances, etc.

Dunno. Maybe that'll become clear later. I think the idea is that the nostalgia bait is gonna be a plant used to brainwash people, so it has to come in the form of something innocuous like berries, where people don't know how or why they make them feel good but they take them anyway.

Well it works, cuz they are strange as fuck looking.

It does seem kinda on the nose, but then again, the last two season have been on the nose too, so.

Mr Garrison is Donald Trump and he's being portrayed as he doesn't actually mean what he says or know what he's doing.

you're a legitimate retard if you don't understand the cultural and musical significance that The Beatles made. my guess is you're too young to know whom they influenced, leading you to think they're stale as you've only listened to people who took what The Beatles were doing and switched it up some.

The Beatles influenced a few shit pop bands, a few shit art rock bands, and I guess you can argue that they popularized overproduction.

Great influence.

The Velvet Underground was better and more important in literally every way.

literally influenced two different types of music, that's like saying ll cool j is more important than The Beatles because he influenced all of modern rap

I like how both these posts are the results of idiots taking the Scruffles pasta too seriously, just in different ways.

What about Elliott Smith? And The Beatles influenced almost every band at least in turns of motivation, because they were so popular and great.

Yeah I member.
Oh, member the Rolling Stones?

>literally influenced two different types of music
You're a retard if you think that.

The Velvets preceded everything important that happened in music. Indie wouldn't exist without the Velvets being the first band to be both unsuccessful and critically acclaimed. Punk wouldn't exist without their attitude. Their noisy rock and roll was the basis for all non-progressive experimental rock and the entire direction of the genre would be completely different without them.

The Beatles were a pop group.

>The Beatles were a pop group
explain Tomorrow Never Knows, Within You Without You, Blue Jay Way, and She's So Heavy. Not to mention all the boundary pushing songs on the White Album

All are pop songs. Behind the aural sensationalism they're not all that special.

I don't want to get too involved in y'all dumb argument, but this is a very simplistic view of musical history and cultural trends. There's actually a lot of crossover between Beatles and TVU influence when it comes to underground/independent artists. If anything an argument could be made that The Beatles did more to legitimize experimentation in popular music (and guess what, TVU made pop music as well).

But anyways it's completely ridiculous to argue about these kind of things because they're wholly unquantifiable. They both respected each other as musicians and did a lot within their relative spheres. Grow up and realize that downplaying the importance of The Beatles is no longer subversive, it's just obnoxious.

>all are pop songs
oh okay, so you are mentally challenged. why is your caretaker letting you on the internet? If you genuinely think that Wild Honey Pie, Helter Skelter, and Revolution 9 are pop songs I suggest you take a good long look at pop music that was being circulated around the time of their release.

>They both respected each other as musicians
Lou Reed constantly shat on the Beatles.

>There's actually a lot of crossover between Beatles and TVU influence when it comes to underground/independent artists.
I never said that the Beatles had no influence, I said that their influence was overestimated. You'd recognize that if you weren't such a fanboy.

The Velvet Underground had more impact than the Beatles. Why does this statement trigger you?

All are pop, except maybe Revolution 9. Revolution 9 is an anomaly and they only did it after Zappa did sound collage. Revolution 9 is still melodic and poppy, even if it's not pop per se.

Lou Reed is a talent-less hack, he banged some sheet metal together and called it avant-garde. Despite all of TVU's achievements, him "shitting on The Beatles" has literally no bearing because he'll never have half of the creative genius held by a single Beatle.

my take: the velvets had more overall impact, the beatles had more impact on their contemporaries and the direction of pop music that pervaded the 60s until they broke up

like, who cites the beatles as an influence post 1970 that isn't just a mediocre power pop group or some shit? the velvets held a much wider influence both in terms of music style and attitude

imagine spurdo saying 'memories'

You are wrong. those songs mentioned were rock songs, or at least some kind of Alternative Rock/Early Pop-Rock, but still Rock songs.

>Helter Skelter
>pop
can you stop this? you know you're wrong and you're just being an annoying twat.

>Why does this statement trigger you?

Because it's not true, and you fucking know it too.

Lou Reed said a lot of dumb shit, and from a musical perspective was a complete hack. Here's a direct quote from John Cale

>'They were a driving force in the velvets, and made us work harder and got us on our bikes. Rubber soul was where you were forced to deal with them as something other than a flash in the pan. It was rich in ideas and i loved the way george managed to find a way to include all those indian instruments. Lou and i had tried to work with the sarinda. We were only playing it just to get a noise but i realised you could play melody on the sitar as good as Norwegian wood. Norwegian woond had this atmosphere of being very acid. I don't think anybody has ever got that sound or that feeling as well at the Beatles.'

Again, grow up, this is the same opinion every edgy teenager has when they first discover "underground" music. TVU are great and did a lot for specific types of music, but you don't need to express that by downplaying another artists importance.

Lou Reed was a legitimate genius. The Beatles were talented but never reached the heights of the Velvet Underground.

Metal Machine Music is a masterpiece but I think Lou Reed is more of a poet than a musician, like Lennon.
Melodic, catchy, fun. It's not the edgy heavy-metal dirge Beatles fans make it out to be.

Explain some of the musical innovations that TVU made that were somehow more genius than the production innovations brought to the table by the Beatles.

I'm not downplaying the Beatles' importance. I'm just saying that the Velvets were more influential. Of course the Beatles had influence, that comes with being the number one best selling group of all time. But I think they're overrated and don't deserve to be discussed all the time.

what an original opinion.

Helter Skelter was one of the heaviest rock songs to hit the scene at the time it was released, however I think it's a stretch to call it catchy fun. I'm not saying it's proto-grindcore or anything but it's far from "pop"

still waiting on this to be answered

The Velvet Underground were pop too.

>The Velvet Underground was better and more important in literally every way.
>The Velvets preceded everything important that happened in music. Indie wouldn't exist without the Velvets being the first band to be both unsuccessful and critically acclaimed. Punk wouldn't exist without their attitude. Their noisy rock and roll was the basis for all non-progressive experimental rock and the entire direction of the genre would be completely different without them.
>The Beatles were a pop group.
just about everything you VU kiddies are saying is completely wrong and baseless.

The fact is TVU is not more influential than the Beatles and the Beatles are important because of their innovative use of art music production techniques (like tape manipulation experiments) and immaculate mixing. >aural sensationalism
that's literally what makes them important. they did historic things for popular music in that realm. The only arguable procurer to their innovation in popular music is Frank Zappa.

TVU is so fucking overrated. Saying they invented indie or punk rock is stupid as hell. you could say the same shit about the Stooges if you wanted to or countless other bands.

>teenagers who hate The Beatles are also huge fans of cartoons for manbabies
Shocker

They're grapes. "Heard it through the grapevine"

>I'm just saying that the Velvets were more influential.
that's literally wrong. Even in within your dumb fuck internet hipster music bubble bands like NMH that jerk themselves at the beatles alter are way more commonplace

Gentle reminder that John Lennon pioneered the deliberate use of feedback in rock music on 1965's I Feel Fine, ergo The Velvet Underground owe their entire career and false claims of originality to John Lennon

Gentle reminder that Lou Reed was making novelty records for housewives while Paul McCartney was popping amphetamines and perfecting his technical skill in Hamburg

Gentle reminder that The Beatles were more innovative, skilled, and intelligent musicians in every possible way