KISS

Or maybe God Gave Rock n' Roll.

I'm torn on this, I like the song in the original Argent version for its melody (although it emanates a kind of pathos I don't exactly appreciate - for someone as driven by nostalgia and Romanticism, this exact mood that feels like pot-bellied Dads reminiscing of their glory days I find rather distasteful) and the Kiss cover makes sense and suits them, but also feels so very dumb-dumb-dumb again.

Again, these people
1746163262120.png

should always make sure and take precautions that everything they do will be slightly tongue-in-cheek, it would make everything so much more palatable.
(doesn't matter two of those were not in the band nor did they use make-up around that time)

In fact that is why I kinda mentioned those three other bands, ZZ Top and AC/DC are obviously tongue-in-cheek and while Manowar try to pose as hyper-serious, it's just inconceivable they'd really mean it. And they're better off for it.
For me, this is represented with Simmons trying to be "The Demon" (lol) on talk shows, scowling and trying to talk about the "moozik and artistry", like a fat CEO in a suit with a fat cigar trying to promote the label and the product without any hint of self-awareness, let alone self-irony - but here also while being dressed as "The Demon".

Every time the sense of perspective and certain grounded-ness shines through (and especially in that video Sheriff posted, where Simmons actually cracks and laughs), it elevates the band for me. Especially as it is one of the ways (along with downright bizarre, but eventually respectable decisions like Music from the Elder) the band can actually escape the corporate mindset that Simmons especially seems to have from the start.

(I realise this might be an unexpected take from me, since I am tired of the post-modern insincerity in everything, of the "Marvelisation" of cinema, of irony and everything else that protects cowardly artist from sincerity and having to actually engage emotions and such.
But with Kiss, it's necessary.)

God Gave Rock N Roll is an attempt at... well... pathos. By Kiss. And I don't know myself whether I consider it good or extreme cringe.

I think if KISS didn’t capture your imagination when you were younger, I don’t believe they have it in them to capture a fully developed brain.

For what it's worth, having suffered from reading seven and a half books by Sapkowski (some of them several times, as I repeatedly couldn't finish the series and started over), in the realm of "overrated dumb things that you can only properly like if you discover it when you're 13 - and then you become weirdly obsessed with it", Kiss are actually rather high-brow, enjoyable, respectable and overall exceptional and admirable in my book.

As someone who discovered them only as an adult, I see a band with obvious songwriting talent (at least potentially; not always utilised well), professional output (in terms of production and ... well, competent instrumental presentation) and somewhat original shtick/identity, with their overall career slanting toward mediocrity at best (and I wish they concentrated on their strong sides more), but in general, while I don't get the extremes (extreme love / extreme hate), I think the band should be universally mildly liked. Which is more than I can say about a lot of other bands.
 
I haven’t had a chance to do some research, but the official date given for Peter’s dismissal has been disputed before. I was wrong though that the Tom Snyder interview occurred after the dynasty tour - they toured through December that year.
 
The raunchy KISS stuff from the 80s ("Let's Put The X In Sex" LMAO) as Judas mentioned was totally artificial. Trying desperately to muscle in on Mötley Crue's territory (and failing, since by this point they had removed the makeup and everyone could see that they were just fugly old men).

Crazy Nights was their best 80s song imo. Or maybe God Gave Rock n' Roll.
Crazy Nights is interesting because it’s the absolute peak of the band’s glam period. The album is super heavy on synths, giant hooks, glitter all around. Yet it does work better than a lot of their other material from the 80s. Maybe it’s because they just focused more on songwriting with great hooks instead of trying to be shockingly raunchy. IDK.

Also, God Gave Rock and Roll is from the 90s and with Eric Singer, so a new phase for the band anyway. Definitely one of their great later period tracks.
 
Crazy Nights is interesting because it’s the absolute peak of the band’s glam period. The album is super heavy on synths, giant hooks, glitter all around. Yet it does work better than a lot of their other material from the 80s. Maybe it’s because they just focused more on songwriting with great hooks instead of trying to be shockingly raunchy. IDK.
The band had their 80's hits, and the (pure) glam metal period was 85-89 (the most CN, 83/84 were still more hard and fast rock/metal like COTN), but the songwriting has hooks on all albums. Maybe Asylum is the best example, the 80's have more fillers than the 70's, but maybe that's because of the material's strength and contrast. That's their thing since the 70's. In the context of the style, their 80's material is good (most of it is underrated imo). The layer of the music was always good and class. Paul saved the band with his input. But during that time they were just playing the more popular songs on support tours, because of thier 70's material. They were one of the perfect bands to jump the glam wave because of their writing approach and style.
KISS is fun rock, that's probably the best way to describe them.
Also, God Gave Rock and Roll is from the 90s and with Eric Singer, so a new phase for the band anyway. Definitely one of their great later period tracks.
Yep, an anthem. Revenge was cool (definitely some and heavy ideas) and the right shift in style for the 90's and for them.
 
Kulick also has the greatest sub 10 second solo on Turn On the Night. Shame there’s not an extended version of that solo out there somewhere.
 
Kiss is one of those bands I have tried to enjoy, but other than some decent songs here and there, I cannot really understand their success.
My understanding is that they never really caught on in Europe. Their first trip to the UK wasn't until 1976 and I don't believe they returned to Europe until the tour with Maiden in 1980, which by then they were well past their prime (and would be opening for Iron Maiden there by the end of the decade).

From an American standpoint, they are pop culture icons pretty much synonymous with the 70s.
 
My understanding is that they never really caught on in Europe. Their first trip to the UK wasn't until 1976 and I don't believe they returned to Europe until the tour with Maiden in 1980, which by then they were well past their prime (and would be opening for Iron Maiden there by the end of the decade).

From an American standpoint, they are pop culture icons pretty much synonymous with the 70s.

Not exactly. I can't speak for the rest of the Europe, but in Central Europe at least (and from what I gather, Germany as well), they are rather well-known and quite popular, funnily enough primarily through I Was Made for Loving You, that's their literally most popular song ever bar none.
 
My understanding is that they never really caught on in Europe. Their first trip to the UK wasn't until 1976 and I don't believe they returned to Europe until the tour with Maiden in 1980, which by then they were well past their prime (and would be opening for Iron Maiden there by the end of the decade).

From an American standpoint, they are pop culture icons pretty much synonymous with the 70s.
We had Slade.
 
I find Kiss hugely entertaining, I just don't care much about the music..
Their early stuff is a blatant Beatles rip off with some added heaviness. Then they went disco when it was hip, only to become glam when it was big, and then give alternative a try in the early 90s.
A total non-understanding of Rock/Metal ethics. To them, it's all competition and to them music is like baseball.
I find their antics hilarious, repulsive and fascinating at the same time. Arrogance and egos bigger than Canada, jealousy, drama...
Can't be bored with reading Kiss interviews.

Pretty much everything about Gene is awful, but there is a funny side to it, especially when he contradicts himself 3 times in 4 sentences and does not realise it at all. As a bass player, he is merely a plodder.
Paul is somewhat intelligent and seems to have some reason and common sense, but sometimes his asshole side takes over. Then it's cringe time. He has no humour and takes himself even more serious than Gene. I don't think he can really play guitar. He is usually so much into posing that he sometimes forgets to continue playing and you never hear a difference in the sound.
Ace is the only original member who could actually play and who had a sense of rock ethics. However, he was just not able to cope with it all.

While many people often despise Paul and Gene for their arrogance, I think Peter Criss is the biggest asshole of the original line up.
This guy is one of the most famous and successful drummers of all time despite being way below the average of the standard of his era. If it wasnt for Gene and Paul, Peter would have been a pizza delivery guy or taxi driver in the Bronx, playing the occasional local gig. He never wrote a full song on his own (despite taking credit). He could not record a full album without session guys or massive editing. In the 90s, he could not even play a whole show with help from others (having a headphone with a roadie guiding
him through all the songs). His entire career has been built by others. Many drummers with five times his skill didn't even have 10% of his success. He should thank the Lord on his knees every day for being so lucky.
Yet he constantly complains about being treated unfair, of being underpaid, of being such a poor fella, of being unfairly underrated, of others being greedy. I seriously want to punch that guy.

Musically, I enjoy some of their 80s stuff. I love me some cheesy hair metal every now and then, and Kiss is cheesy as hell.
 
I find Kiss hugely entertaining, I just don't care much about the music..
Their early stuff is a blatant Beatles rip off with some added heaviness. Then they went disco when it was hip, only to become glam when it was big, and then give alternative a try in the early 90s.
A total non-understanding of Rock/Metal ethics. To them, it's all competition and to them music is like baseball.
I find their antics hilarious, repulsive and fascinating at the same time. Arrogance and egos bigger than Canada, jealousy, drama...
Can't be bored with reading Kiss interviews.
One of the most accurate descriptions of KISS I've ever seen. Coming from a huge fan as a 11 yr old in the 70's up until 1981 when I discovered Maiden, Priest, and a whole bunch of other bands. :ok:
 
Criss feels like the desperately mid type that got extremely lucky - not just by getting in the band, but also with getting the chance to sing on the best song on the debut and such.

Ace is an alcoholic that masks his deep seated insecurities with humour (not exactly unlike some people I... uh... know).

Stanley always gave the vibe of this obnoxious dudebro (or "ladbloke", as we should probably say on this side of the ocean) that spends a lot of time in the gym ogling women in yoga pants.

But I admit that I am genuinely fascinated by Gene. I mean, he speaks like seven languages or so, he built one of the most consistent musical enterpreneurship of our times, he has moments like these

Simm.png

and yet he's so completely unaware and wholeheartedly dumb and ridiculous, I don't know. Also, most people in the business definitely haven't got away with as much shit as he has. And yet he's still there. Kinda natural phenomenon, of sorts.
 
Last edited:
But I admit that I am genuinely fascinated by Gene. I mean, he speaks like seven languages or so, he built one of the most consistent musical enterpreneurship of our times, he has moments like these

Nah that’s crap. That’s the image he wants to portray but it’s not true. Paul said in his book the biggest business success Gene ever had was portraying an image of having business success. Just about everything he ever did outside of being in KISS was a massive flop. His magazine in the early 00’s, his speaking tours, Simmons Records (both times), managing BAG (who?), he was brought in to do the marketing for IndyCar and it was such a disaster one of the owners actually MADE A PUBLIC APOLOGY for ever bringing him in, he was a disaster on Celebrity Apprentice (alienated and offended the judges and the company he was meant to be working for, got fired and then doubled down when he came back for the final episode and said he was right and Kodak (a billion dollar company) was wrong. The list goes on.

He’s great at pretending he’s a big success and that KISS are much more successful than they ever were. That’s been the game plan since day one. Sad more KISS fans haven’t seen through it.
 
It’s interesting how much people who don’t like Kiss are interested in talking about kiss. I get it to some degree, my fascination with their history is greater than my love of their music, although at the same time I still enjoy their music just fine.

Gene definitely made a persona for himself that doesn’t seem very grounded in reality. It’s pretty obvious that without Paul guiding the ship in the 80s and 90s, Kiss wouldn’t have made it through those tumultuous periods. It also seems obvious that sometime in the late 80s, Gene lost quite a bit of credibility and consequently control of the inner workings of the band. They still publicly put out the image of being an equal partnership, but I doubt anybody (including Gene) is allowed to say no to Paul Stanley. This is a contrast to the early 80s when the band continued with the makeup on when Paul had expressed being ready to take the makeup off. Obviously once the makeup finally did come off, it became Paul’s band.
 
Since we have many a Kiss afficionado and expert here, I'll post this question here, from the Ghost thread regarding whether "to unmask or not to unmask". True? False?
Wasn't Kiss finally unmasking exactly the gimmick that gave them a jolt when their popularity, especially in the US, was severely dwindling and wasn't it exactly that that helped them keep their nose above water for a while? Or am I remembering it wrong?
 
Yes. If Kiss had continued with the makeup they would have likely continued to be ignored by American media (primarily MTV) and probably wouldn't have survived the decade. In fact, Paul reportedly wanted to remove the makeup as early as 1980. The unmasking was largely a stunt to get the band on MTV, which worked as they did a special unmasking event on MTV and the Lick It Up video received heavy rotation, with Kiss in general being MTV staples throughout the rest of the decade.
 
Yes. If Kiss had continued with the makeup they would have likely continued to be ignored by American media (primarily MTV) and probably wouldn't have survived the decade. In fact, Paul reportedly wanted to remove the makeup as early as 1980. The unmasking was largely a stunt to get the band on MTV, which worked as they did a special unmasking event on MTV and the Lick It Up video received heavy rotation, with Kiss in general being MTV staples throughout the rest of the decade.

It's kinda weird that MTV in particular, who certainly wasn't any sworn enemy of visual spectacle, was the one ignoring them until they unmasked, lol, I'd expect the opposite.
 
Back
Top