|
|
Post by AnnaK on Nov 28, 2007 18:35:41 GMT -5
No ((Maria)). I meant what I said. Why -- if David was so unpleasant to work with -- did David, Eddie and Dennis get together again?(They actually did join.) And why did Paul, too, express his intent to work with David? I was just wondering whether the guys had ever worked with David Ruffin again, if he really was as destructive to the team as he usually is portrayed to have been ... Just wondering in response to ((janebe's)) post. Yeah, yeah ... I'm still in David's corner. lol AK Excuse me sista, DUH, still had cobwebs in my head when I post. Gotch Ya!  No big deal ((Maria)). There's so much to the Tempts story that doesn't make much sense. (At least to me.) AK |
|
|
|
Post by tman2429 on Nov 28, 2007 20:50:51 GMT -5
I think Mr. ABA21 is on the "money". It is not a mystery that people especially in the entertainment field will work with someone that has not had a good reputation or had a bad experience with. Money has always made the difference. If you think about the Reunion. If Otis was so bad or the reason for all The Tempts problems, why would the reunite with him? The answer has to be for money. Or did they have pity on Otis and joined up with him as a favor? I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Nov 29, 2007 10:15:45 GMT -5
Are you wondering why they did not get together an form their own group Temptation's?  I would say it had something to do with legality. Which on the other hand as Aba21 has suggested, would have definitely cost Money!!!!  No ((Maria)). I meant what I said. Why -- if David was so unpleasant to work with -- did David, Eddie and Dennis get together again?(They actually did join.) And why did Paul, too, express his intent to work with David? I was just wondering whether the guys had ever worked with David Ruffin again, if he really was as destructive to the team as he usually is portrayed to have been ... Just wondering in response to ((janebe's)) post. Yeah, yeah ... I'm still in David's corner. lol AK David was not hard to work with. David just didn't come to work all the time. I never heard one of his group mates say he was hard to work with. David's problems had nothing to do with how he sang. What I don't get is why people feel its all right not to follow the rules and in spite of what situations he put the group in by not showing up, let him stay cause he's the lead singer. Sometimes the reward is not worth the risk and I believe that is what the rest of the Temptations thought. I am a huge David fan but not so much so that he was bigger than the group. Listen that movie is not the real story of the Temptations.......sorry to disappoint so many...so any quotes from that movie have to be looked upon with an eye toward poetic license to make that movie work. It is obvious he was not the Temptations because his replacement, Dennis Edwards set just as many records and more than David. If you can for one moment take the emotion out of your feelings for David and see it was going to happen at some point in time. Many people say Otis should have stood up for David, made waves with management, did something to protect David. The fact is that during those times, Blacks were told not to make waves if they wanted to be successful and I believe that was the tact Otis took. If you look back at Jackie Robinson, he was told not to say a word back to anyone for the first two years he was in the league. Can you imagine the taunts and derisive catcalls he had to take before he could actually stand up and be a man. The problem is David didn't look at the big picture because he was caught up in the moment. The Temptations were not just another male vocal group, they were the best male vocal group in the world. People were looking at them in places blacks had never performed before. And they were not going to take a group in turmoil and bring them to the Copa or Las Vegas where people were paying top bucks to see five Temptations not four. It doesn't matter how many shows or rehearsals he missed. When you are in his position, unless you are in the hospital, cynical fans won't accept any unexcused absense. I believe those were some of the factors involved in whether David was allowed to stay or go and not whether he was liked by his group mates. It was and still a business and it will always be business first and everything else second. |
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Nov 29, 2007 10:22:03 GMT -5
Hi Mr. Aba! You mean they formed their own group just because they need to make money so badly that they even would put up with unruly David? AK That is exactly right. They all needed money!!! |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaK on Nov 29, 2007 10:22:37 GMT -5
The movie, according to a recent Otis interview is about 95% accurate. I just wonder what one can believe. But -- I think the Temptations "case" is not as different from many "bios" about other stars ... I'ts just under closer scrutiny because we/I are rather interested in the story.
AK
|
|
|
|
Post by Aba21 on Nov 29, 2007 10:38:19 GMT -5
The movie, according to a recent Otis interview is about 95% accurate. I just wonder what one can believe. But -- I think the Temptations "case" is not as different from many "bios" about other stars ... I'ts just under closer scrutiny because we/I are rather interested in the story. AK Its all about who you believe. And you are right it is not much different than many other "stars" in other "groups". It is hard for those who were not around during those times to understand how he could not "see" what we "see" today. |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaK on Nov 29, 2007 11:00:37 GMT -5
I think Mr. ABA21 is on the "money". It is not a mystery that people especially in the entertainment field will work with someone that has not had a good reputation or had a bad experience with. Money has always made the difference. If you think about the Reunion. If Otis was so bad or the reason for all The Tempts problems, why would the reunite with him? The answer has to be for money. Or did they have pity on Otis and joined up with him as a favor? I doubt it. I see your point ((tman)). It's a little different, however, in my opinion, to make a short term commitment as in the case of the reunion tour than getting together to form a (more or less) stable relationship. In addition, I don't think Otis had all that much say-so in the reunion event. He was not the one in charge all by himself. That may have had a considerable impact on the other guys. It's kind of different, imo, to work with someone who's a team member for a short time than working for someone who is your boss ... |
|
|
|
Post by AnnaK on Nov 29, 2007 12:47:20 GMT -5
The movie, according to a recent Otis interview is about 95% accurate. I just wonder what one can believe. But -- I think the Temptations "case" is not as different from many "bios" about other stars ... I'ts just under closer scrutiny because we/I are rather interested in the story. AK Its all about who you believe. And you are right it is not much different than many other "stars" in other "groups". It is hard for those who were not around during those times to understand how he could not "see" what we "see" today. True. And, unfortunately, it's true for most "everyday" people too ... |
|
