Is he as talented as John Lennon,or was Lennon the real star?
2006-10-24 22:27:27 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
In the beatles days I would say they were equal, but mccartney lost the way far sooner than lennon.
Mccartney went too "middle of the road"
I've a feeling lennon would still be producing great music, whereas mccartney only has the occasional rush of inspiration.
2006-10-24 22:37:23 · answer #1 · answered by Michael H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way, Lennon is not the star. McCartney is seriously talented. He kept his senses and wrote some flipping brilliant music. He has an amazing voice which is still going. He does a wonderful solo, but can also work with others. He's a genius.
Lennon kind of went a bit loopy.
OK, he was talented - but what's the point if you go all strange with it?
So, I figure they both had a little genius in them, but it got the better of John - making Paul the star in my opinion.
2006-10-24 22:45:54 · answer #2 · answered by plush 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Sir Paul is very talented. I also think John Lennon was very talented as well. You can't compare apples to oranges. But when they were together, The Beatles, they were awesome. Way better than the Beach Boys.........John and Paul complimented each other very well. What one didn't think of, the other did. They were and will always be one of the original ROCK STARS!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-10-24 22:35:57 · answer #3 · answered by alexgirl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Macca is talented and so was Lennon,but its only when they die they become big again like Lennon/Elvis
Macca has recorded both pop and classical and has Ecce Cor Meum at the Royal Albert Hall 3 nov which my cousin will be singing in. So it goes without saying Macca is a genius
2006-10-24 23:10:39 · answer #4 · answered by carshalton70 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would have to say McCartney is more talented as a writer and performer. When Lennon was alive, after the Beatles split, I remember hearing more McCartney music and seeing him more on the TV.
2006-10-24 22:37:01 · answer #5 · answered by Howard 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It takes one to know one. I am not, so,I can't really say but if they were together for so long I bet they both acknowledged each others talent & genious. Comparing them is not fare. John Lennon is dead, and this adds up to his fame. Who knows how he'd be if he was still alive?
However, regardless each ones' talent I prefer Lennon as Macantry seemed too down to earth & too sensible to my liking.
2006-10-24 22:54:29 · answer #6 · answered by marissa 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Get real. The Beatles we in their prime 40 years ago. Between them they wrote some great pop songs, but that was then.
Sorry to say this, but Lennon's pop-god status is due to his being shot. If he was still alive he'd be a has-been like Macca.
Personally I think Ringo's the real star!
2006-10-24 22:42:22 · answer #7 · answered by Mad Professor 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Paul McCartney is a legend in his own time. If you have never heard him in concert, you should. He can play many instruments and a virtuoso at each. Not only does he work hard at it, but he has a gift.
I feel he is more talented than John. John almost faded into obscurity after the Beetle breakup, but Paul, like the energizer bunny, keeps going and going, and going.......
2006-10-24 22:39:04 · answer #8 · answered by Mr Cellophane 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Macca was and is the real star. Most of the tracks on Sgt Pepper are Pauls. All the melodies are Pauls. Mind you Lennon was brilliant. I've had this argument in pubs many times. Here There and Everywhere is pure Macca. As its my favourite track for me its Macca. Then there's George...........Genius all of them!
2006-10-24 22:40:10 · answer #9 · answered by bootycreord 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All of the group were special,Paul is still putting good stuff out,John
was the Daddy though,he had a glow about him,
The guy who did the dirty on John has an appeal to get out of prison,let the scum rot
2006-10-24 22:42:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋