You keep trolling with off-topic putdowns of my contributions, I'll keep pointing it out. The comments are unnecessary and unwelcome.MikeFromHolland wrote:I know you realize ...
The ball is in your court.
Moderators: FECC-Moderator, Moderator5, Moderator3, Site Mechanic
You keep trolling with off-topic putdowns of my contributions, I'll keep pointing it out. The comments are unnecessary and unwelcome.MikeFromHolland wrote:I know you realize ...
Fixed. The ball is in your court, quack.drjohncarpenter wrote:
I keep trolling with off-topic putdowns of anyones contributions, and you keep pointing it out to me. That's irritating. I like yes-men surrounding me much much more. My comments are unnecessary and unwelcome, I know, but when you point that out to me, I don't reconsider or appologise, I will just hit the "keep on trolling" button. Unfortunately you can't avoid my posts because I post on each and every thread on this board. I'm everywhere. Some of my followers say some are stalking me around on this board, but it's not true we all know that. You'll just find my (mostly unnecessary) posts everywhere. I will stay the Albert Goldman on this board. So I will keep on hammering that the movie years were no good, that the later years were no good, that Elvis himself most of the time was no good, except for nine years out of the 24, and that I know best. That's why I call myself a Doc. Which I'm clearly not.
jetblack wrote:Please define these handful of OK tunes from 'Loving You', 'Jailhouse Rock' and 'King Creole'.drjohncarpenter wrote:Most of the 20th Century Fox "Love Me Tender" soundtrack is so-so, but Elvis' delivers everything with energy and style, so "dud" seems harsh. They are still better than what came out ten years later. Even the soundtrack work in 1957 and 1958 for Paramount and MGM had a handful of just OK tunes, but Presley is on fire with each master, so they remain listenable. This would not be the case later on.TheKingisthething wrote:from 1954 to August 1956 he was at his greatest and most consistent in the studio... From the Seotember 1956 more dud recordings were made and released... among these: the Love Me Tender soundtrack, and some of the selections recorded for his second lp ...jeanno wrote:Another 1956 classic. Elvis was at the top of his game as he recorded a classic over an already timeless recording.
It was also the perfect way to close that first album.
The 1956 TV performance oozes awesomeness too.
Andy
Thank you, sir!Hard Rocker wrote:A fantastic thread yet again, Mike. Clearly this piece took a lot of time and energy to put together and I thank you for your effort.
You ought to stop being stupid and childish Mike, you're getting very irritating and annoying to read you re childish posts.MikeFromHolland wrote:Fixed. The ball is in your court, quack.drjohncarpenter wrote:
I keep trolling with off-topic putdowns of anyones contributions, and you keep pointing it out to me. That's irritating. I like yes-men surrounding me much much more. My comments are unnecessary and unwelcome, I know, but when you point that out to me, I don't reconsider or appologise, I will just hit the "keep on trolling" button. Unfortunately you can't avoid my posts because I post on each and every thread on this board. I'm everywhere. Some of my followers say some are stalking me around on this board, but it's not true we all know that. You'll just find my (mostly unnecessary) posts everywhere. I will stay the Albert Goldman on this board. So I will keep on hammering that the movie years were no good, that the later years were no good, that Elvis himself most of the time was no good, except for nine years out of the 24, and that I know best. That's why I call myself a Doc. Which I'm clearly not.
.
jetblack wrote:Please define these handful of OK tunes from 'Loving You', 'Jailhouse Rock' and 'King Creole'.drjohncarpenter wrote:Most of the 20th Century Fox "Love Me Tender" soundtrack is so-so, but Elvis' delivers everything with energy and style, so "dud" seems harsh. They are still better than what came out ten years later. Even the soundtrack work in 1957 and 1958 for Paramount and MGM had a handful of just OK tunes, but Presley is on fire with each master, so they remain listenable. This would not be the case later on.TheKingisthething wrote:from 1954 to August 1956 he was at his greatest and most consistent in the studio... From the Seotember 1956 more dud recordings were made and released... among these: the Love Me Tender soundtrack, and some of the selections recorded for his second lp ...jeanno wrote:Another 1956 classic. Elvis was at the top of his game as he recorded a classic over an already timeless recording.
It was also the perfect way to close that first album.
The 1956 TV performance oozes awesomeness too.
Andy
MikeFromHolland wrote:Fixed. The ball is in your court, quack.
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.Davelee wrote:You ought to stop being stupid and childish Mike, you're getting very irritating and annoying to read you re childish posts.
You've got a good thing going on this forum with your own section, you don't want to spoil it over idiotic behaviour.
You've proven many times you're not interested in my opinion, except to launch another series of put-downs. Good luck with that.jetblack wrote:I thought so. Brushed aside like a true politician.
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.drjohncarpenter wrote:MikeFromHolland wrote:Fixed. The ball is in your court, quack.
Davelee wrote:You ought to stop being stupid and childish Mike, you're getting very irritating and annoying to read you re childish posts.
You've got a good thing going on this forum with your own section, you don't want to spoil it over idiotic behaviour.
When it comes to name-calling and put-downs, a very close look in the mirror is required in your case. Never a day goes past when you're not on here squabbling with someone.drjohncarpenter wrote:MikeFromHolland wrote:Fixed. The ball is in your court, quack.
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.Davelee wrote:You ought to stop being stupid and childish Mike, you're getting very irritating and annoying to read you re childish posts.
You've got a good thing going on this forum with your own section, you don't want to spoil it over idiotic behaviour.
You've proven many times you're not interested in my opinion, except to launch another series of put-downs. Good luck with that.jetblack wrote:I thought so. Brushed aside like a true politician.
You both are right imo.Hard Rocker wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.
When it comes to name-calling and put-downs, a very close look in the mirror is required in your case. Never a day goes past when you're not on here squabbling with someone.
Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=quackTOP DEFINITION
quack
A doctor of questionable ablitiy and reputation.
Hard Rocker wrote:A fantastic thread yet again, Mike. Clearly this piece took a lot of time and energy to put together and I thank you for your effort.
The only person doing any trolling here is you. Slide on.drjohncarpenter wrote:It's amazing, you even troll your OWN topics. Carry on ...
The Doc made a comment about the mediocre songs on the "Love Me Tender" soundtrack and that they were stillMikeFromHolland wrote:You both are right imo.Hard Rocker wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.
When it comes to name-calling and put-downs, a very close look in the mirror is required in your case. Never a day goes past when you're not on here squabbling with someone.
Hard Rocker because drjohncarpenter can indeed use a look in the mirror when it comes to name-calling and put-downs.
And drjohncarpenter because name-calling is about right for a ten year-old.
To clarify: I wasn't name-calling. I was sharing a well informed and accurate characterization of the person in question.
Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=quackTOP DEFINITION
quack
A doctor of questionable ablitiy and reputation.
.
First: learn some French. Second: read about systems thinking. Third: deepen yourself in the meaning of highlighted text (bold text f.i.). Fourth: don't meddle and do stay on topic please. Thank you.Davelee wrote:The Doc made a comment about the mediocre songs on the "Love Me Tender" soundtrack and that they were stillMikeFromHolland wrote:You both are right imo.Hard Rocker wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.
When it comes to name-calling and put-downs, a very close look in the mirror is required in your case. Never a day goes past when you're not on here squabbling with someone.
Hard Rocker because drjohncarpenter can indeed use a look in the mirror when it comes to name-calling and put-downs.
And drjohncarpenter because name-calling is about right for a ten year-old.
To clarify: I wasn't name-calling. I was sharing a well informed and accurate characterization of the person in question.
Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=quackTOP DEFINITION
quack
A doctor of questionable ablitiy and reputation.
.
performed well purely because Elvis was at his best, but he said the same couldn't be said for Presley 10 yrs later because by that time Elvis had lost a lot of interest in recording so much mediocre work and the boredom can be clearly heard on the recordings, plus, the film's showed Elvis virtually sleepwalking through them - the evidence is all there to see and hear. Then you MikeFromHollabd came along and said that what the Doc said was totally unnecessary and accusing him of hammering on and being raison d' etre.
So, could you please tell us what was so unnecessary about the Doc's post? considering what he said is true
You started the off-topic comment so you face the consequences. So please stay on-topic in the future instead of making derogatory comments on other people's information. Thank you.MikeFromHolland wrote:First: learn some French. Second: read about systems thinking. Third: deepen yourself in the meaning of highlighted text (bold text f.i.). Fourth: don't meddle and do stay on topic please. Thank you.Davelee wrote:The Doc made a comment about the mediocre songs on the "Love Me Tender" soundtrack and that they were stillMikeFromHolland wrote:You both are right imo.Hard Rocker wrote:drjohncarpenter wrote:
Now he's name-calling. That's about right for a ten year-old.
When it comes to name-calling and put-downs, a very close look in the mirror is required in your case. Never a day goes past when you're not on here squabbling with someone.
Hard Rocker because drjohncarpenter can indeed use a look in the mirror when it comes to name-calling and put-downs.
And drjohncarpenter because name-calling is about right for a ten year-old.
To clarify: I wasn't name-calling. I was sharing a well informed and accurate characterization of the person in question.
Source: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=quackTOP DEFINITION
quack
A doctor of questionable ablitiy and reputation.
.
performed well purely because Elvis was at his best, but he said the same couldn't be said for Presley 10 yrs later because by that time Elvis had lost a lot of interest in recording so much mediocre work and the boredom can be clearly heard on the recordings, plus, the film's showed Elvis virtually sleepwalking through them - the evidence is all there to see and hear. Then you MikeFromHollabd came along and said that what the Doc said was totally unnecessary and accusing him of hammering on and being raison d' etre.
So, could you please tell us what was so unnecessary about the Doc's post? considering what he said is true
.
Done my homework - do yours.MikeFromHolland wrote:.
Again: don't meddle and do some homework. Thank you.
.