Posted in music | video on October 31, 2007

Sid & Nancy impersonators are rolling in their grave
Sid & Nancy

The Sex Pistols played at the Roxy, and then they played again on Leno...

The Sex Pistols performed “Anarchy In The UK” on Leno last night. Rather than make a joke about that sentence, I’m just going to type it again. The Sex Pistols performed “Anarchy In The UK” on Leno last night. [Best Week Ever]
Previously
* "Conan O’Brien will take over ‘The Tonight Show’ in 2009"
* The Sex Pistols played the Roxy in LA

---

      

Comments (38)

fucking travesty.

Posted by joey | October 31, 2007 3:15 PM

MAN, the Sex Pistols fucking suck.

Posted by Jeremy J | October 31, 2007 3:24 PM

Oh man, that is fucking pathetic. Really sad.

Posted by Anonymous | October 31, 2007 3:29 PM

Oof. I seriously wish I hadn't seen that.

Posted by maitai | October 31, 2007 4:22 PM

i just threw up a little bit.

Posted by cornslaw | October 31, 2007 4:31 PM

And Johnny Rotten shakes hands with Ron Paul at the end. Beautiful.

Posted by it gets better! | October 31, 2007 4:36 PM

it was borderline funny.

Posted by Anonymous | October 31, 2007 8:03 PM

Please check back in 30 years:
lets see what any other current fave band you like has held up,
what they look like,
and
what you look like.

Anarchy in the U.K. is 30 years old and is still great and they play great. Todays music is product and you kids have been sold lock stock and barrel no matter how alternative you think you are. This current generation has done shit and whines about ticket prices and makes shit music. So many bands with so little to say...the Sex Pistols said something and if it is safe to say... "Fuck you"

Posted by David S | October 31, 2007 9:32 PM

You poor man. Do you not see that is exactly why this video is so sad?

Yes, Anarchy in the UK is a great song, and the Sex Pistols were a band that kicked ass and took no prisoners.

These 4 old men going through the motions on national TV, and playing Anarchy in the UK like a fucking wedding song is so wrong on so many levels, and it completely insults and demeans the legacy of the song and what the Pistols accomplished 30 years ago.

I'm old enough to have bought Never Mind the Bullocks in 1977 on vinyl. I also have the double album The Great Rock and Rock Swindle. These albums mean a lot to the history of rock music, and still have a vitality today that is surely lacking in today's "punk".

However, what you see in that video is just a mimicry of a once-great song, and its truly sad and pathetic.

Posted by Anonymous | October 31, 2007 11:00 PM

i'm sick of apologists for bands that should stay in the past.

I saw it somewhere on BV before... and it still rings true: the Sex Pistols of 77 would piss on the Sex Pistols of today. They would hate them. fact.

Posted by Anonymous | October 31, 2007 11:15 PM

That performance was awesome. Stop being prats and leave your bullshit politics out of aural art.

Posted by Chris | November 1, 2007 12:29 AM

all of your posts have merit, but this is still better than any other band Leno's had on in the last, oh... ever. put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Posted by greg | November 1, 2007 12:42 AM

I think you guys are upset about the Pistols performing on TV in 2007 because you think it tarnishes their pristine legacy or something like that. Well, the reason that it's ok for them to do whatever the fuck they want is because that's what they've always done. Back in '77, the Pistols would've given a two-fingered fuck off to any notion of a legacy for their band. So, by fucking the image that has now been created about them--which is the inevitable result of any opportunistic revival--they are actually staying true to their original spirit, which was certainly not "sad" or "pathetic" or "funny."

Posted by ryan | November 1, 2007 1:36 AM

I think you guys are upset about the Pistols performing on TV in 2007 because you think it tarnishes their pristine legacy or something like that. Well, the reason that it's ok for them to do whatever the fuck they want is because that's what they've always done. Back in '77, the Pistols would've given a two-fingered fuck off to any notion of a legacy for their band. So, by fucking the image that has now been created about them--which is the inevitable result of any opportunistic revival--they are actually staying true to their original spirit, which was certainly not "sad" or "pathetic" or "funny."

Posted by ryan | November 1, 2007 1:37 AM

Actually it was about as great a performance as any other band you're going to see on late night TV. I'd rather watch that than Arcade Fire's brutal performance with the choreographed guitar smashing that happened on SNL and had all the scenesters cooing and awing about how awesome that fucking joke was.

Posted by Jerry Koffman | November 1, 2007 1:57 AM

They were even better doing Pretty Vacant tonite on that crap Craig Ferguson show. They totally wallop with main man Matlock on bass, and Mr. Rotten doing his best impersonation of late era PiL Lydon. Solid as shit rock n' roll from the last best rock n' roll band. Lemme see yr twee "indie rock" high hat lovin' drummers lay down a groove like Paul Cook. You should be so graceful. Even now, you can't hope to compete you young and unwise twerps.

Posted by noisejoke | November 1, 2007 2:19 AM

yes, the pistols can do WHATEVER they want at this point and it is still intrinsically FAR more credible than anything today's so-called bands can accomplish.

be your own pet? clap your hands say, huh? that shit band that opened for arctic monkeys at summerstage this year? they are no talent hacks that probably spent more time coming up with ridiculous band names than the glorious, tragic trajectory that was the pistols in 1977.

some bands have earned the right to parody themselves. and the pistols are one of the very few.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 7:53 AM

the sad part is, no one sees the significance of their performance following RON PAUL. --- find out why -- PRISONPLANET.COM

Posted by SYG J | November 1, 2007 8:51 AM

"some bands have earned the right to parody themselves. and the pistols are one of the very few."

What kind of right is that? Making money for playing music with guys you dissed for the last 30 years? Do you really think that some artists are craving for the right to "parody themselves"?
Will you buy tickets to see then "pardoy themselves" because it's their right?

My right is saying that they look like buffoons.

P.S. Just for the record, Never Mind is my favorite album.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 9:35 AM

If they told Leno to go fuck himself, that would have been cool. They didnt, so it wasnt.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 9:37 AM

These aren't the Sex Pistols '77, these are the Sex Pistols '07. They are not the same people they were (literally and figuratively). They cannot 'tarnish' what they had done in the past - look at them as a cover band. You're not gonna find a better Pistols cover band than the one you saw on Leno.

It's a sad fact - people get old. And rock stars, who are supposed to die before that happens, get old too. And it's rarely graceful. And there's a lot of cashing in. But why not? I'm sure performing on Leno was a lot of fun. A lot more than fun than looking through old photo albums and press clips. They deserve it.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 10:25 AM

No one's upset about the performance because it tarnishes their "legacy" ryan, it just was fucking awful. Even Johnny Rotten can get hypocritcal, fat and embarrasing. Deal with it.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 5:25 PM

it's funny, the only way punk rockers can shock anyone anymore is by selling out. well, it's working.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 5:29 PM

Still my earlier post asked what song will hold up 30 years from now and no takers...

It is easy to be negative but harder to be positive. C'mon posters name a current song as good that will stand the test of time.
I challenge you...

Posted by David S | November 1, 2007 6:13 PM

What 10:25 said.

Posted by Cupcake | November 1, 2007 6:17 PM

David S, I fail to understand your point.
You're trying to defend a dreadful performance of a 30 year old song by pointing out that no 30 year old song can stand the "test of time". Your point is well taken, unfortunately it pretty much proves the opposite of what you would like to believe.

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 6:29 PM

Think kids in black cars or flying skateboards will still be listening to Led Zep...and the Sex Pistols, Nirvana all will still be played and remembered.

Once more, can anyone with some balls name one song that that kids will still play in 30 years from this current crop of such current "great bands" you place in such high esteem? Pretty Vacant indeed.

Seems there is a lot of quantity in NYC. Bands, clubs everywhere, everynight, its a funny competition even of claiming which show is the coolest scene (why I love Bklyn Vegan)...
but in 1977 there was a handful of places, and do you think today the quality is as good?

Posted by David S | November 1, 2007 9:59 PM

Again, idiots repeat ad nauseum that some of us are defending something that sucked. No. I think both performances on both shows were great and they were great at Roseland 10 years ago.

Please go on and on about "selling out" (there was never a more juvenile and imbecilic term utilized by know nothing college kids), or "punk" or some bogus legacy. Are they a wedding band because they stuck to playing instead of entertaining you with monkey jumping? Did you not enjoy Lydon's taking the piss on everything, which includes you? Could you have less of a sense of humor and less of an ability to actually listen to a band playing music instead of some romantic and childish notion of lifestyle appendage you call indie rock. Go listen to your twee punks who say yeah, yeah and clap radios and plink plunk their sad guitars. LISTEN to the Pistols then and now, and yes, hear the lyrics he wrote at 20 yrs of age 30 fucking years ago that still make you piss your pants.

Posted by noisejoke | November 1, 2007 11:29 PM

You're out of your little mind, noisejoke. Either that, or you have an incredible ability to fool yourself into believing anything--like something as dreadful as that Leno performance was "great".

Posted by Anonymous | November 1, 2007 11:50 PM

ahahaha, this is what happens when you make punk music and turn old.

Posted by i don't drink pabst | November 2, 2007 12:15 AM

Former Bromley Contingent member Siouxsie Sioux is still making original music (new album out last month), maintaining her integrity, speaking her mind, and looking great at 50...without appearing on Leno.

Posted by Lori | November 2, 2007 12:12 PM

In 30 years, people will talk about Dan Deacon and how great he was, like people now talk about Suicide in 1977. I hope that answers your question.

Posted by Anonymous | November 2, 2007 12:18 PM

Sonic Youth is better than Sex Pistols. Im thinking about burning my Sex Pistols cds after this latest outrage.

Posted by Anonymous | November 2, 2007 12:20 PM

is this really shocking anymore? Johnny Rotten hasn't held up the ideas the band represented for decades.

they played the Trump Marina, Atlantic City a few years ago.

Posted by Anonymous | November 3, 2007 4:53 PM

"In 30 years, people will talk about Dan Deacon and how great he was,"

No. Sorry, but...no.

Posted by Anonymous | November 3, 2007 9:51 PM

Let's all take these "today's music is MANUFACTURED" assertions seriously, because the Sex Pistols were original totally and not a manufactured McLaren/Westwood product, right?

Posted by drowned_in_milk | July 24, 2008 10:37 AM

That performance was far away awesome.this old vedio let me think about lady gaga. maybe she is inspired by this video

Posted by ProSolution Gel | May 2, 2010 9:46 AM

all of your posts have merit, but this is still better than any other band Leno's had on in the last, oh... ever. put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Posted by شات اكابر | February 2, 2011 10:22 PM

Leave a Comment