Talk:Misfits (band)

genre??

They are in no way heavy metal .why do punkers worships these guys with danzig they sound like the ramones ,with only they sound like fallout boy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.118.200.168 (talk) 22:40, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Please read the "Style" section of the article for references describing their '90s sound as largely heavy metal-based. Also read the archives of this talk page for past discussions of this issue and the resulting consensus. --IllaZilla (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be two articles?

I noticed the discussion about whether the band was called 'The Misfits' or 'Misfits' was sort of resolved when someone said that the they were called 'The Misfits' while fronted by Glenn Danzig in the late 70's early 80's but the 90's and onward band was just called 'Misfits'. So my question is this: Seeing as the line-up is different and the name is different aren't they two separate bands and thus shouldn't there be two separate articles. It's a bit like 'Nirvana' and 'The Foo Fighters' sharing the same article when they are different bands with different names and only one band member connects the the two.Addistheman (talk) 17:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

There are several flaws in your reasoning.

1. Firstly, the original incarnation dropped "The" from their album covers well before the second incarnation came about. Walk Among Us, Evilive, Earth A.D./Wolfs Blood, "Halloween", "Die, Die My Darling", and the post-breakup compilations Legacy of Brutality, Misfits, and Collection II all used "Misifts", and in the exact same stylization that the later incarnations of the band used as well. In fact the only releases that use "The Misfits" are Static Age, Beware, 3 Hits from Hell, "Cough/Cool", "Bullet", "Horror Business", "Night of the Living Dead", and the box set. So the name is not different. They have always been the Misfits; whether or not they actully print "The" on the title or not is entirely semantic.
2. The comparison to Nirvana/Foo Fighters is completely different. Foo Fighters are a totally different band, with a different lineup, name, and style of music. They do not go by the name Nirvana and do not lay claim to Nirvana's back catalog or legacy. The Misfits are an entirely different situation. Jerry Only not only has legal rights to use and perform under the name Misfits, he also shares merchandising rights with Glenn Danzig. The "new" Misfits use and build on the name, imagery, and history of the old band, and perform the old songs in addition to new material. So much so, in fact, that they are currently on an extended "30th Anniversary" tour. They are not an entirely different band.
3. You incorrectly state that only 1 member connects the early Misfits to the later incarnations, when in fact there are 2. Both Jerry and Doyle were instrumental in re-forming the band and were members during its '90s incarnation.
4. There have in fact been several distinct lineups of the Misfits. The current lineup (Only/Dez/Robo) shares only 1 member with the '90s lineup and with the early lineups. Should we therefore also have a separate article for the current lineup? Of course not.

A more apt comparison would be The Vandals, whose lineup since 1991 has been distinct from their early lineup, with only 1 member (Joe Escalante) still in the band from its early days. Yet we don't have separate articles for those either. Bottom line: No, these should not be separate articles. They are not 2 separate bands, they do not have different names, etc. Yes they have a complex history with disctinct lineups or eras, but that doesn't justify separate articles. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Myke Hideous?

I was just wondering why this guy isn't listed as a former member of the band? For that matter, I think it's missing quite a lot of former members... thanks. 71.116.54.86 (talk) 21:30, 23 June 2009 (UTC)