Saturday Singles: Mötley Crüe-"All Bad Things"

Released: Jan 20, 2015 
℗ 2015 Masters 2008, LLC. Under exclusive license to Eleven Seven Music from Masters 2008, LLC.

All bad things must end. Whether it's awful T.V. shows, a politician's corrupt career, a horrific first/last date or even a rotten marriage there are just moments when it's time to pull the plug and walk away. And as far as bands go there are quite a few bands that have seemingly overstayed their welcome. Is Mötley Crüe such a band? I'm not so sure. I'd actually put Metallica up towards the top of that list before I'd put Mötley Crüe there. That's just me though. Honestly though when it comes to this Saturday's single choice it's more like we have a random song title as opposed to a general statement about Mötley Crüe's worth. Especially if we are going to judge the L.A. rockers on the strength of "All Bad Things" alone. While this single might not be prime Mötley Crüe it's still good enough to put you in a happy mood and if the band were able to surround a number like "All Bad Things" with equal or better songs then we would likely be talking about one of hard rock's better comeback albums! Of course that would be a big "if", but for a band that obviously still has some fuel left in the tank and a strong following it does seem odd that one last single is all that die hard fans get. Either way, Mötley Crüe is calling it a day and that means one last tour and one last song before they ride off into the sunset. Or rather a "reported" final tour and song as we all know how these things usually end up going! But, if this really is the end for every one's favorite (sleazy does it) hard rock/glam metal bands then at least they are going out with a bit of a bang and before they turn into an absolute joke!

You can check out the "clean" video version of "All Bad Things" here:

Best hair metal albums 5-1

Here they are.


5-Twisted Sister-Stay hungry-1984
Any of their first three albums would fit here but I think this one had the greatest influence on the genre.


4-Def Leppard-Pyromania-1983
These guys started out doing NWOBHM and eventually became an AOR band. In between they knocked out this really catchy album.

 
3-Motley Crue-Shout at the devil-1983
Wow, what a great album. A shame they never came close to this level after this album.


2-Motley Crue-Too fast for love-1981/1982
To me this was a an 80's hair metal album that had a slight nod to 70's glam.


1-Guns and Roses-Appetite for destruction-1987
If people try to turn up their nose at all hair metal this is the first I point out as the one showed how good this style could be. Unfortunately for every band like GnR or early Motley Crue you got five bands like London, Trixter or Warrant.

Clash of the album covers

Here you go. It is...


Motley Crue-Dr. Feelgood

vs.


Van Halen-5150

***Which cover do you prefer?

Top of the Heap-Motley Crue

Andy says-

If there is one album by Motley Crue that could best be called (or rather described) as traditional heavy metal it is Shout At The Devil. Released in 1983 the album showed a move away from the more punk rock leanings of Too Fast For Love towards the more popular style of eighties heavy metal. I'll argue the fact that Motley Crue were genre jumpers at another time. While there are moments on all of Motley Crue's album (up until Dr.Feelgood) that I really like I think Shout At The Devil is the strongest release by them. Get past the fact that the band were playing shock for shock values sake (it worked to their credit-negative press works wonders for albums sales) Shout offers some great metal moments. The almighty title track is a heavy metal classic. It starts the album off with a bang and goes off the richter scale of evil (or as evil as the early eighties metal scene would get). "Looks That Kill" might be one of the best songs that Motley Crue ever put down on vinyl. Mick Mars (who for whatever reason was always overshadowed by his three band mates) is just great on this track. His solo work is one of a kind and he is a criminally underrated guitarist. On "Bastard" his riffs are just a punch in the stomach. Sure Vince Neil has his own voice and made Motley Crue work it just amazes me that Mars never got the credit he deserves. Everyone knows "Helter Skelter" by now and the chance they took on covering a Beatles classic. How they got it too work so well I'll never know. It is a twisted take on the song, very distorted and ugly. Yet they pull it off. Their fastest song of all time, "Red Hot", showed a nod towards old school Judas Priest. Tommy Lee deserves a nod for his work on this killer track. I would have loved to have seen the band's sound go in that direction instead of the more glam and blues they opted for. "Too Young To Fall In Love" is another classic Motley Crue moment. It's touch of sleaze makes the song a real rocker. "Knock 'Em Dead, Kid" showcases Motley Crue at it's angriest. "Ten Seconds To Love" seems leftover from the group's debut. The chorus riff to "Danger" is timeless metal. The number shows off more of the anger and dark lifestyle Motley Crue was living in. The band sudden fame brought not only fast cars and women but drugs and alcohol. It was their lifestyle and all the debauchery that crafted these metal numbers. You can hear the nods to not only the punk movement and British glam movement but also heavy metal legends like AC/DC, Judas Priest and Black Sabbath. While the group would carry on releasing solid heavy metal albums it does make me wonder where the band would be at now if they would have stuck with mainstream metal instead of leading the glam metal movement. Either way Shout At The Devil maintains it's cult status and is still my favorite Motley Crue album.



Metal Mark says-

Motley Crue knocked out two great albums and yes it's the first two. After "Too fast for love" and "Shout at the devil" they never quite came close to the level of those two albums. However that might be enough because both are fantastic, but I have always prefered the debut. "Live Wire" is a killer opener and sets the mood for a hard and raw ride. "Come on and Dance" has a fantastic groove and is just a fun song.
"Public Enemy #1" has Vince Neil doing some of his best work. Even though I have always felt that other than Tommy Lee the rest of the band are very average musicians, but on occasion they had some great ideas. Having "Merry-Go-Round" take a flow like being on a merry go round was a fine idea and it works. "Take Me to the Top" is simple, but a real bouncy almost upbeat track. "Piece of Your Action" has the Crue in fine form and sounding confeident. "Starry Eyes" is a haunting track and one of my favorites on the album. The title track sports a fantastic chorus and a gritty main riff. "On with the Show" again has the band showing some solid songwriting and controlling the pace. This album has a fantastic raw edge and shows where hard rock in America could have gone, but soon the Crue and others would choose slicker more radio friendly sounds to latch onto. "Too fast for love" stands as a magnificent effort that pulls upon 70's glam, hard rock, punk and other sounds. A wonderful album for sure.

***What is your favorite Motley Crue album?

Heavy Metal Thunderdome

Welcome to the first post of a new monthly feature. Once a month I will two highly regarded hard rock or metal albums and pit them against each other. You the reader get to chime in as to which album you prefer. So let's get at this month's main event.

Hailing from Los Angeles, California. Released in 1987 an album that took a few months to catch, but once it did the hard rock scene was never the same. We have...


Guns -n- Roses-Appetite for destruction

Their opponent also hail from LA. We have one of the biggest names to emerge from the Sunset Strip. Released in 1983 and the album that put this band on the map. It is...


Motley Crue-Shout at the devil

***So pull no punches, don't wuss out and say "tie" and comment with which album you prefer.

Battle of the bands

Here you go.



Motley Crue


vs.



Van Halen

**Which band do you prefer?

More look a like album covers

More look a likes for you.



Not the most creative cover, but I think they were trying to be respectful to their idols. 1977 set out to create an album of originals that sounds like KISS during their prime and they succeeded.



Billy Milano's M.O.D. "borrowed" MSG's logo for this one. Frankly I don't think anyone whose name is not Schenker should be allowed to put a flying V on their album cover.



Guns and Roses were a definite target during that long, long time when it looked like "Chineese Democracy" would never be released. Treephort were not very subtle in their take on the Use your illusion covers.


Dirty Skirty do a variation on Motley Crue's "Too fast for love".



Here is a link to the first part on this top in case you missed it the other week.
http://metalmark.blogspot.com/2010/09/album-cover-look-alikes.html

Battle of the bands

There were plenty of glam bands pouring out of America in the 1980's and many of them were lame, talentless or unoriginal. However there were a few leaders of sorts. Here are two of the top ones.


Guns -n- Roses

vs.


Motley Crue

***Which band do you prefer? Why?

The year 1987 wasn't the best year for hard rock and metal. There were definite standouts and the releases from Guns -n- Roses, Anthrax, King Diamond, Kreator and Celtic Frost are some of the top ones that come to mind. However there were some highly overrated albums that came out that year as well. Two in particular as they came from artists who had bot given some of the best hard rock releases in the first half of the decade. Only this time around both bands had lost their edge and they were more gloss than rock. Both of these albums still bother me to this day because they both should have been much better. Let's toss these sewage bombs out there and see which one stinks less. It is...

Def Leppard-Hysteria

vs.


Motley Crue-Girls, girls, girls

***When I do veteran bands I replace the originality/production category with the disappointment factor.

Vocals

Vince Neil against Joe Elliot in one turned out to be the tightest of the five categories. Neither guy is giving their best performance on these albums nor are they giving bad performances. Vince Neil actually sounds slightly better than he did on Theater of pain as a whole. Joe Elliot is decent too, but all the choruses lead much of the vocals to just sound the same from song to song. Neither guys was giving their all, but by the end of the albums I think Vince was slightly better.
Point to Motley Crue

Guitars

It's Mick Mars versus Steve Clark and Phil Collen. Mick Mars comes across as being even more repetitive on this album than on the Crue previous releases. I don't know it they thought that it made heavier or if they just ran out of ideas. Either way it doesn't help the album. The Def Leppard duo should have been slapped for losing the hooks they so easily pulled off on the previous albums. They hide behind slick production here, but they don't bore me quite as fast as Mick Mars does.

Point to Def Leppard

Rhythm section

We have Nikki Sixx and Tommy Lee taking on Rik Savage and Rick Allen. If the slick production tones down the guitars than it practically makes the bass non-existent on both albums. Rick Allen's drum beats are basic and the sound is loud, but not really engaging. Tommy Lee is one of the best hard rock drummers of all time, but this wasn't his best work primarily because it's so basic and the production robs it of some of what could have been. Still there are moments where you hear Lee's mastery of rhythms come through.

Point to Motley Crue

The disappointment factor

Motley Crue were following up Theater of pain which was a very average album. The band were insisting that Girls, Girls, Girls this was to be a return to their heavier style (they lied). Still I don't think that my expectations were that high for the Crue at this point due to the fact that Theater of pain wasn't that good. Still it had been a commercial success so deep down I didn't think they were going to become much heavier. Def Leppard were following up a far better album in Pyromania. They were also coming back after a four year gap and Rick Allen's accident. Still most people believed they were going to get back to form this time around. Then they push out this fluffed up piece of polished pop that sounds as sickening today as it did twenty-two years ago.

Point to Motley Crue

Who rocks more

If the bands rocked at all when they recorded these songs then the production certainly managed to suck the life out of what little might have actually been there. Def Leppard probably hit a song or two that's better than anything on the Motley Crue album, but they also have a couple that are even worse than anything that the Crue clunk out on their album. I don't think either band rocks nearly enough to please me or to really be that much better than their opponent in this category. So let's call it a...

Tie

The Crue take it 3-1-1 in a fairly close battle. Neither of these have albums have gotten any better over the years and both bands should be ashamed of themselves for putting out this gunk. Motley Crue tried to look and talk tough. Instead they sound tired and limp. Del Leppard thought that giving a long crappy album would be better than turning out a normal length crappy album. They were wrong and we all had to suffer hearing their lifeless songs on the radio over and over as well. I have given both of these albums chances over the years and the most I have gotten out it is nauseous. Here's hoping that my ears don't have to be assaulted by these two poor excuse for albums for some time.

Clash of the album covers

Here is a match-up of two glam bands. It's.....

Motley Crue-Shout at the devil


Vs.

Poison-Look what the cat dragged in


***So which cover do you prefer?

Motley Crue-Saints of Los Angeles

Motley Records
2008

It doesn’t seem that long ago that the members of Motley Crue seemed distant from one another and certain members seemed very much involved in other projects, actually that was last year. It was beginning to feel like another studio album might be a long ways away if ever. Then all of a sudden Tommy was back in, the band was working hard (and apparently rather quickly), they crank out a new album glistening with nude bodies on the cover and everyone is throwing up their hands in praise proclaiming that the old Crue is back. Whoa, let’s back up a little bit and see what’s really transpiring here before we start tugging on our old faded “Shout a the devil” pentagram shirts, strapping on studded bracelets and flashing devil horns like it’s 1983 again. There are thirteen tracks on the new disc so they have given us a lot to absorb, but quantity doesn’t necessarily equal quality. Not to get too far sidetracked, but a good portion of this album reminds me of Ozzy’s "Ozzmosis" album in a way. Granted the Crue’s album is better, yet both albums have a number of songs with a thick (not altogether heavy) sound that is almost like a shell around the song. At first it seems sort of heavy, but really it’s just a rather tacky glob of production that’s covering up a rather mundane riff. They try this tactic on several tracks and I got the impression that the thought this was a stab at a “modern” sound, but really that style just came across as being rather lazy. However, there are few tracks that are rather heavy including the title track, “Goin’ out swingin’” and a few others. Now these songs are nowhere near a “Shout at the devil” or “Too fast for love” level yet they work. Is the old attitude there? I think their attitude was always rather fake, but they do a good job of believing in what they are doing for a few songs on the new release. Okay, that’s probably descriptions of the worst and best type of songs on this disc. The rest is largely filler that varies from tolerable down to “this is going nowhere fast”. I would have welcomed a return to form for this band because those first two records were two of if the best hard rock albums of their decade. Still at best we get a few tracks here that might be as good as some of the material on “Dr. Feelgood” which is a plus, but unfortunately it’s just a few tracks. There are also several very moderate songs and a few groan worthy clunkers. In the end “Saints of Los Angeles” is a little above average and would fall right around the middle if I were ranking their albums. Return to form? For a few tracks only, but unfortunately it contains far too much padding and limp noodles hiding behind some generously slathered production work. So for Motley Crue their once glorious past remains a peak they will never likely fully achieve again in their career.

http://www.myspace.com/motleycrue

Motley Crue announcement

Like probably every other hard rock/metal blog I received an invite to post a link to a live Motley Crue announcement taking place today. I have decided not to post that link and have instead opted for a more challenging Motley Crue post. Anyone can post news from another site, but not everyone can predict the news. So I have come up with what I think are the top three topics that this announcement might be about. Here they are in no real order.



A)They are going to announce their touring plans for the summer.

B)Tommy will finally admit that he has never had a brain.

C)Vince will announce he is launching his own line of vodka flavored doughnuts.



Now we just have to wait and see if any of these are correct.

Judge the album cover

Motley Crue's Theatre of pain was probably the most anticipated hard rock release of 1985. I remember waiting for it to come out and then being a bit surprised by the cover. Much like their costumes for this tour and their sound, this cover was very different from the previous two Crue albums.

***So do you like the cover, don't like it or is it just alright?