Yupt, pretty much. I grew up in the "Nirvana has killed rock and roll" era, but I think it's pretty cynical to say that music today is any different. We just don't think of The Monkies as much as The Beatles today, even though they were both very prominent things in their days. Likewise, The Foo Fighters will be remembered in a few decades and Nickelback won't.

The Monkees were better.

>>We just don't think of The Monkies as much as The Beatles today, even though they were both very prominent things in their days.

I don't understand the analogy that you're trying to make, but I know that it's a bad analogy. In the sixties, the Monkees were a TV show. Their first album came out the week of the series premiere, and none of the four Monkees played any of the instruments. The music was a merchandising tie-in aimed at 11 year olds, a live-action version of the Archies. They actually turned out to be an okay band, but I don't think anybody really recognized it until maybe ten years later, about the time the Sex Pistols started playing "I'm Not Your Stepping Stone" at their shows, probably thinking it was a fine joke, but it sounded great.

On TV, the Monkees were a direct ripoff of the Beatles, and their Richard Lester movies. (For that matter, so were the Archies. Before the Archie cartoon show, the Archies appeared in the comic books in stories that took place in an alternate Archie universe, trying to reverse-engineer the absurdity of "A Hard Day's Night" and "Help".)

There was nothing like the Beatles in the sixties, and especially in the seventies, after they had broken up, and everybody was praying for them to get back together. Not in terms of prominence, anyway. You know, there's no real way to measure this, but I'd say the Beatles are slightly less prominent now than in the sixties, and the Monkees are somewhat more prominent than they used to be.

i kid, i kid

Dubstep? I love that song!

Bwaaaaa wop bwaWa wepwepwep wooWoOWOoWoow!