|
Post by Tin on Aug 27, 2014 22:15:48 GMT -5
cccnews.info/2014/08/27/five-underrated-rock-bands-that-couldve-benefitted-from-a-name-change/
"1. Duran Duran. Quality-wise, this band is just as talented, prolific and tight as, say, The Who. Get the 1982 “Rio” album — a rare treat that works as both a full LP but also has several real hits that all flow together well; the Beatles could claim the same duality with their albums. But Duran Duran, a Second British Invasion band named after a character in the stupid sci-fi movie “Barbarella,” just isn’t mentioned as a major band on either the classic rock or 80s alternative rock channels. It has to be the name. Other bands from that era — think of the overrated Sex Pistols or the Dead Kennedys — seemed to get a boost from their bold names. Perhaps Duran Duran should have looked to punk rock for inspiration when picking a moniker."
|
|
|
Post by pollo194 on Aug 28, 2014 7:18:01 GMT -5
Maybe the should've kept the "Krush Brothers" name.
|
|
|
Post by mynick7 on Aug 28, 2014 10:58:23 GMT -5
Stupid people. I think their name was a good choice and still is. However no matter what their name, I still would have been a fan. Shows more creativity than U2 or UB40. "Duran Duran" makes for cooler imaging concepts, too, as we've seen through the years. A name wasn't going to change how the world viewed them so what's the point of this?
|
|
|
Post by More Play Time on Aug 29, 2014 16:42:53 GMT -5
I think their name is/was pure genius personally. The name of a band must be durable, and something which will imply the band will run a long time. DUrable, and has already (past tense) RAN a long time; and doubly so! = DUran DuRAN. The name was always destined to be... The Greatest. (sorry )
|
|