KISS and no makeup?

Post by **Genebaby** » Sun Feb 26, 2012 4:05 pm

Kiss took off the makeup to revive their career and be more current in the 80's.

They put it back on to revive their flagging career again.

I've been thinking it would be cool if they took it off again. The magic and mystery is gone, which made them oh so special the first time around.

I think it would be cool of they unmasked with the current line up and rocked out with their faces out!

What do you think?

PinkWiz · Post by **PinkWiz** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:16 am

Yes I say take it off only because Ive seen it so much... but KISS is trying to please the fair weather fan which means the makeup stays. I often watch recent soundcheck footage and think how cool that would be. Gene and Paul should at least retire the flying stunts onstage before they kill themselves... two overweight guys in spandex hovering above the stage? The mystery has been gone as far as that goes... but the fair weather fans want the spectacle and could care less about the music.

ankh · Post by **ankh** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:52 am

as long as there is demand for classic kiss, they will play.Forget about music, about integrity, about being pathetic.....the nostalgia act will stay.

I think your question would be right if we were talking about music.Rush,for example, has proven that they can still record new music,play every night and still mantain integrity.

Kiss are interested simply in what sells.Their latest album was an attempt to recapture the past.They have locked themselves ina golden cage and they have no intention, nor hope, to get free .

jesternjeff · Post by **jesternjeff** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:23 pm

ankh wrote:as long as there is demand for classic kiss, they will play.Forget about music, about integrity, about being pathetic.....the nostalgia act will stay.

I think your question would be right if we were talking about music.Rush,for example, has proven that they can still record new music,play every night and still mantain integrity.

Kiss are interested simply in what sells.Their latest album was an attempt to recapture the past.They have locked themselves ina golden cage and they have no intention, nor hope, to get free .

Wait a second , we havent heard MONSTER yet ! lol

Post by **Genebaby** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 3:53 pm

Monster will be interesting. It's a shame they wont let the current band grow and develop and play/write what they want too. To be a modern Kiss.

PinkWiz · Post by **PinkWiz** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 5:27 pm

Gene is trying to inCORPORATE the title of the new album in with Monster enegry drink. Think that says it alll...

Post by **Genebaby** » Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:37 pm

Serious? That's crap if truly why its going to be called that.

1031 · Post by **1031** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 12:54 am

Hmm dont know ...conflicted

erg2 · Post by **erg2** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:34 am

KISS has fully embraced the novelty/nostalgia aspect of their current existence. It takes little effort, little marketing and they make millions. SONIC BOOM and now MONSTER is a spoonful of sugar to help that medicine go down, but it's disappointing that my childhood "heroes" do not look at their enterprise as an art but simply as a product.

I'm disappointed in the title. Gene has been saying for years that he was releasing a box-set of 100 unreleased demos called MONSTER. I think that would be a perfect title for THAT project and merely an adequate title for a KISS album.

jesternjeff · Post by **jesternjeff** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 7:33 am

Genebaby wrote:Monster will be interesting. It's a shame they wont let the current band grow and develop and play/write what they want too. To be a modern Kiss.

What are you saying ???????? They are writing all together, no outside help. Your contradicting something you haven't heard yet !!!!

erg2 · Post by **erg2** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:31 pm

I don't want to speak for Genebaby, but I think the points being made were these:

- on SONIC BOOM they were specifically trying to write songs and sounds that were reminiscent of old KISS albums.

- Paul and Gene are writing the songs...with a little help from Tommy.

- if they allowed true input from ALL the band members and didn't put the "restriction" on the songwriting that it sound like their old music limits their options and prevents them from potentially writing a great song and thereby growing as an artist.

Post by **Genebaby** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 3:16 pm

Yes, that and the fact Tommy and Eric can't play like themselves, rather they need to simulate the styles of Ace and Peter.

That kind of restraint, on the songwriting and playing is not great.

poserboy71 · Post by **poserboy71** » Tue Feb 28, 2012 4:59 pm

Gene already copyrighted the name Monster for a music release,realized that he wasn't going to release his box set because it wouldn't be lucrative, and decided to use the title for a Kiss album instead. SIMPLE.

1031 · Post by **1031** » Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:26 am

Genebaby wrote:Yes, that and the fact Tommy and Eric can't play like themselves, rather they need to simulate the styles of Ace and Peter.

That kind of restraint, on the songwriting and playing is not great.

Agreed I have been in situations where I have been asked to play like "who ever" . You just kinda shut down and go to robot mode. I would never be able to do it long term, it would just be suffocating. Even when I do the cover band thing I make sure the signature lick are in the song on solos but then its all me.

Post by **Genebaby** » Wed Feb 29, 2012 1:35 am

Exactly.

erg2 · Post by **erg2** » Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:15 am

However, I like Singer when he is more restrained. I think he played too much during KISS songs.

I know. I know. Heavy metal drummers are supposed to play a lot...but my point is that KISS is not a heavy metal band. KISS is a hard rock band...at times a pop rock band.

I think Singer's playing in Badlands and other groups sounded great, but it was noisy for the meat and potatoes of KISS.