Am I the only one offended by

Fred Durst singing behind blue eyes. Fucking weak ass version of a Who classic

 

i forget what he sang back during the 9-11 tribute but it also sucked.

 

i'm offended by just about everything fred durst does.

i generally can't stand when a band covers a song that's already popular. it would be different if he did some obscure b side or something. but behind blue eyes is a classic. at least to me it is.

personally, i think he's just marketing himself. he's trying to revamp his image, i suspect. what better way than with such an introspective song. no way in hell he'd be able to write one himself, so i guess he'd have to vent somebody else's feelings and pretend they're his.

i feel a lot better when i realize he's a vanilla ice wannabe.

 

funny how that's the only thing you hear of from their new album. If his own shit was good enough, it would be the stuff getting airtime..not a cover. most bands don't usually release covers as singles from their newest album.

 

you can tell a band that's going nowhere when they become popular by doing a cover.

 

Durst's never raised a welt on my ass. I can brush him off pretty quick. I don't think I've heard a full song of his/theirs, ever.

Of course, I never really got into the Who that much, either.


Getting Halle Berry is very last-gaspish too. The whole "my career's about over so I'm gonna hire a hot black chick to attempt controversy" thing.

 

A
I
M
E

SAY IT

 

The Who is Rock and Roll to me. Their hey day was in my 20's and Won't get Fooled again is and always will be my favorite song. For a no talent singer like Durst to sing a Who classic, it makes my skin crawl