He’s objectively the most talented member. He IS the Beatles. Without him they’re just a band. But without any other member, they could still be the Beatles.
Paul McFlopney has never made a good record, Ringos is better
Fuck Granny Shit
Ayden Ortiz
Juan Jones
That is Paul fucking McCartney. Say what you will about him. Make fun of the way he looks - make fun of everything about him. Doesn't change the fact that he's Paul fucking McCartney and he was in the fucking Beatles. Without him, no Sergeant Pepper. Yeah John Lennon bla bla bla. I always liked Paul the least - he was just too...Paul. But goddamn it he's Paul fucking McCartney. He wrote "Here There and Everywhere" before John was even out of fucking bed. He wrote it waiting for John to wake up. It's easy to dismiss him now but in popular music (and by association popular culture) he's responsible - however indirectly in some cases - for EVERYTHING. Outside of mechanized music (I dunno - disco? Techno? Hippity hop?) The Beatles invented everything (except of course the music that influenced them...duh) - everything that came after them. And Paul - let's face it - was the prime mover and shaker in that group. After '66 the others would have called it a day or SLOWED WAY DOWN. Paul kept the fire burning after John backed down - and after John - thanks to Yoko - started asserting himself again Paul did his best to channel that into the group. PAUL EFFING MCCARTNEY!!!
Henry Brooks
>try hard impersonator
>talented
Thomas Turner
George and Ringo are the only likable Beatles. Paul was a sellout (mostly because Paul McCartney died in 1968 but that's another story) and John was an insufferable tryhard.
Justin Gray
Hunter Cook
>plays 2 chords and says contradictory hippie shit
>beats his wife
Aiden Murphy
Do you think he beat Yoko when she couldn't get the heroin ready fast enough?
Yes, I know he beat his first wife, too
Jeremiah Cox
Everyone knows John is the littleral Heart, and Soul of the beatles... Paul Polished it off. The others were just there lol
Isaiah Morris
>he’s not one of the greatest musicians of all time because…. Well….. well he just beat his wife, okay!!!
And?
Luis Taylor
nah the dynamism is what made the beatles interesting. all their solo careers are missing something. they needed each other to make something greater than the sum of its parts.
Leo Cook
>one of the greatest musicians of all time
Oh I am laughing
Gavin Jones
Years ago I saw a copy of a cd from a canadian group of musicins that were playing like mideval arrangements of old TREX songs. (discogs says it's Catherine Lambert, The Lore Liege Ensemble) , so on the back cover there's this mid-90s pic of MacCa with these bowl-haircut chamber music nerds giving a thumbs up and a smile. That's kinda how I think of Sir Paul now. He's just happy to have had the life he had. Like, he's kinda stoned and happy to work with anyone. And when he had to crank out songs with John, he did.
Logan King
>granny shit
John called it "pizza and fairy tales."
Carson King
BASED
Dylan Watson
Go to bed Julian you nonce
Bentley Campbell
While Paul is undeniably the better musician, John’s personality and attitude are a significant part of what makes the band so great. Without John’s acidity, Paul’s talent is wasted on schmaltz. Without Paul’s musical genius, Lennon’s music devolves into insecure bitterness and lazy arrangements.
Brandon Morgan
Paul was much better overall. He was a true musician and musical genius.
Lennon was great too, but in a more hippie intuitive way.
Eli Gray
Lmao please don’t tell me you made this
Nicholas Perry
holy reddit...
Luis Cruz
John couldn't do shit without Paul but Paul was fine without John
Paul brought songs together out of John's otherwise disjointed and repetitive ideas
Gavin Baker
Isn't that the faggot who spent his middle age crying about his mommy and daddy not loving him enough?