[DLeeWebb]

Paul did a repectable job. He was a Beatle with a long solo career for heaven's sake. I wish that Ringo or Bono or Sting or Mick Jagger had made a guest appearence though. It was safe and appropriate considering the audience and last year's wardrobe malfunction. [I mean are Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake more significant to music than Paul McCartney?] I think U2 was a great halftime show a few years back. I hate halftime at football games anyway...let's just bring back the marching band!

 

[erikzen]

Yeah, I have to say that I thought it was pretty good. At least it's music that I like. It was certainly better than the pregame show, although I do admire Gretchen Wilson. She seems pretty real. Charlie Daniels is fairly washed up and I don't get Black Eyed Peas. And it was certainly better than "Ms. Jackson, if you're nasty".

 

[elrod-tom]

I liked Hey Jude...I've always liked that song. I'll have to go see him if he comes around again.

 

[lextek]

Actually I enjoyed the show. The large panel screens/stage were very, cool.

 

[eyeteeth]

I liked 'Live and Let Die' particularly the 1st chorus with pyrotechnics.

Original? No but who cares, it's the Superbowl not the Cannes film festival.

 

[Kirosia]

Crap, guess I was wrong. I was so sure that he was gonna get up on the piano during hey jude and flash the masses. =)

 

[Todd R]

Hey,
He's an actual musician, that CAN play an instrument and DOES write his own songs and CAN sing.

I'll take that any-day over some no talent boy band or female "artist" who's only real talent is looking good. The man is a legend, show some respect!

 

[Todd R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by john_jcb Watch his right hand he has not moved it once. If anyone is actually playing it is the artists on the side.

He was playing, I saw it clearly.
Small movements, and he was using a pick.

 

[rickcr42]

I totally enjoyed the half time show and as usual it was better than the game really.

not playing or singing ?

c'mon guys.if you are old enough to know the songs you will have heard enough differences and spontanous vocals never on any disc i know of to realise he was singing his own songs.

as for the bass playing,this also is a McCartney trademark sound which came about because the Beatles had all lead guitar players and since he was the youngest and the smallest he was it.But being a guitar player first he always played the bass like a six string and far more melodic than any bass player of his time and even now far better than the new crop of two note bass players who got into the band because they bought the beers during practise as bribes.

I enjoyed the show more than some recent farces called "live' entertainment

 

[EyeAmEye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 I totally enjoyed the half time show and as usual it was better than the game really. not playing or singing ? c'mon guys.if you are old enough to know the songs you will have heard enough differences and spontanous vocals never on any disc i know of to realise he was singing his own songs. as for the bass playing,this also is a McCartney trademark sound which came about because the Beatles had all lead guitar players and since he was the youngest and the smallest he was it.But being a guitar player first he always played the bass like a six string and far more melodic than any bass player of his time and even now far better than the new crop of two note bass players who got into the band because they bought the beers during practise as bribes. I enjoyed the show more than some recent farces called "live' entertainment

I don't know how they used to "lip-synch", but these days, they don't use the actual recordings on commercially released cd's. The performers will record "live" versions of their songs they plan to play during their tours in the studio, fix the vocals, and enhance the songs using software to sound "live". That is the neat little trick Mr. (oops, sorry, I meant Sir

) McCartney used to fool people into thinking the performance was live. It was canned, and you can see it very easily at one point when he was playing the piano and moved his mouth wide from the mic, but the vocals played clear through anyhow. If it was live, the last part of the note would have been muffled at best. Awesome live halftime show!!!

 

[redshifter]

it was good to hear some real songs this year, not the preening and posing that passes for performance these days. also, the stage production was stellar.

i noticed the synth player screwed up the first bridge in "live and let die" slightly, which makes me think it was not pre-recorded. it is a tricky song with unexpected changes. also paul's voice did sound live; if it was a produced studio track there is no way he would have sounded so strained. still, his voice sounded better than it has in years.

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally Posted by john_jcb I thought last years show with Janet Jackson was not that entertaining and her wardrobe malfunction so brief that it had no chance of improving it. What I found far more distasteful were the adds for Viagra and similar drugs. If I had small kids watching I would have more trouble explaining those ads than I would Janet Jackson. But like everything else when millions are being spent those who condemned her seemed to look the other way. It is interesting though that I have not seen a single add for male sexual dysfunction drugs in this Superbowl

exactly the view I have. To be honest, I'm not a parent yet, but I've always been most uncomfortable watching commercials for feminine hygiene products, condomns and viagra with my parents than watching nudity. Janet Jackson? Much ado about nothing.

 

[Head Creep]

Paul McCartney's great and all, but Beatles covers aren't fit for the Super Bowl. This is supposed to be an adrenaline-pumping game of kill the other team, pound the ball down their throats and conquer the other men on the field. And it's broken up by "Hey Jude"? They should seriously consider AC/DC or some other hard rock/metal band to play next year. It's much more fitting.

 

[RYCeT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Head Creep Paul McCartney's great and all, but Beatles covers aren't fit for the Super Bowl. This is supposed to be an adrenaline-pumping game of kill the other team, pound the ball down their throats and conquer the other men on the field. And it's broken up by "Hey Jude"? They should seriously consider AC/DC or some other hard rock/metal band to play next year. It's much more fitting.

Seconded

 

[erikzen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EyeAmEye I don't know how they used to "lip-synch", but these days, they don't use the actual recordings on commercially released cd's.

Yeah, that would be a bit too obvious, especially considering everyone has heard these songs ad infinitum. I think he was singing but I think there was a bit of air guitar and air piano going on.

In any event, I have mixed feelings about Paul McCartney as Super Bowl halftime entertainer. I have always liked the Beatles and McCartney. Certainly, some of my first albums were Beatles albums. The songs he played were songs I have enjoyed for many years. I certainly have no problem listening to them and enjoyed the performance. But I have to agree with some of the folks here that something a bit more relavent seems appropriate. However, it's a sad state of affairs in the music business that Paul McCartney was the best they could do. It would be nice if there was some new music coming out with quality close to the hit songs of the 60s and 70s.