Red Mosquito http://archive.theskyiscrape.com/ |
|
The 2003 tour would have been better if Eddie had long hair http://archive.theskyiscrape.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=62027 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | Farmer John [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:58 am ] |
Post subject: | The 2003 tour would have been better if Eddie had long hair |
That's right...you know you agree with me. |
Author: | Monkey_Driven [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:22 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The 2003 tour would have been better if Eddie had long h |
Farmer John wrote: :lol:
That's right...you know you agree with me. It always takes me a while to get used to it when I watch DVD's of the '03 tour. I guess I'm a nerd. |
Author: | tommyphillips [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:29 am ] |
Post subject: | |
your probably right |
Author: | whoby#s [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 5:40 am ] |
Post subject: | |
grow up |
Author: | pjnothingman [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:57 am ] |
Post subject: | |
long hair...and maybe some better guitar tones w/distortion |
Author: | corduroy_blazer [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:00 am ] |
Post subject: | |
pjnothingman wrote: maybe some better guitar tones w/distortion
|
Author: | spenno [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:42 am ] |
Post subject: | |
corduroy_blazer wrote: pjnothingman wrote: maybe some better guitar tones w/distortion + long hair. I don't know why it's true, it's just true. 2003: Ed has short hair. Pearl Jam are pretty good. 2005-6: Ed has long hair. Pearl Jam are the best rock band in the universe. I have short hair. I guess I just don't rock. |
Author: | Farmer John [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:23 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
pjnothingman wrote: long hair...and maybe some better guitar tones w/distortion
I agree. Both Ed and the guitars were too 'clean-cut'. |
Author: | stip [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:56 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Farmer John wrote: pjnothingman wrote: long hair...and maybe some better guitar tones w/distortion I agree. Both Ed and the guitars were too 'clean-cut'. Stay in school and stay away from drugs kids |
Author: | Sunny [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:36 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
hell no. i'm glad he had short hair. it gave the band more of a "mature" image. eddie really seemed more visually entertaining than 2000...at least you could see his face this time. it's good that he's experimenting with different images...but for God's sake Eddie.....SHAVE! |
Author: | conoalias [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 6:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
Author: | regalo [ Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:52 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
long hair = Good. I agree. Eddie is better with long hair. |
Author: | pjcowgirl [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:05 am ] |
Post subject: | This thread would have been better if it was at synergy |
But the frat boy look did accentuate his chipmunk cheeks beautifully |
Author: | Sunny [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:24 am ] |
Post subject: | |
*plugs ears with fingers* LALALALALALALALALALALALA!! |
Author: | TW [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:16 am ] |
Post subject: | |
a. gheyest thread ever b. OP is dead wrong. Short hair is much better. Makes him look younger. This thinning hair is not a cool look. The short hair is a much more dignified look. |
Author: | kerrang [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:21 am ] |
Post subject: | |
you all are a bunch of nerds just like Stone. |
Author: | corduroy_blazer [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:00 am ] |
Post subject: | |
incorrect. |
Author: | conoalias [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
actually it wouldn't be, because they'd still be touring in support of Riot Act no matter what. |
Author: | spenno [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 10:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
conoalias wrote: actually it wouldn't be, because they'd still be touring in support of Riot Act no matter what.
I guess that really nails it. |
Author: | tommyphillips [ Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | |
2003 tour was still good |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |