Bieber upset...

I don't know guys? I'm sure I won't surprise anyone when I say I don't have any of his cd's :wink:, but I have a hard time thinking anyone successful enough to get nominated, doesn't have any talent.

Heck, music that I can't hardly listen to (won't name the gendre), I can't say doesn't have talent. It's just not talent that I particularly like.

I'm sure none of them care what we think, while they're earning their millions, but I think people are awful hard on these people
 
Actually, I thought I saw talent in last night's performance.
Nothing amazing, but talent.
(Maybe, when you say someone has talent, you mean reeeeal talent. And I don't think he's got that.)
This is the Grammy's. They're not supposed to settle for mediocrity, and pass it off as "talent".

His performance was okay at best. Okay just doesn't cut it, not when you're nominated for what is supposed to be the most prestigious of music awards.

As a wise friend of mine likes to say, "fuck her".
 
This is the Grammy's. They're not supposed to settle for mediocrity, and pass it off as "talent".

You are a bit too idealistic. They are very much about sales ... as much about those as about talent.

His performance was okay at best. Okay just doesn't cut it, not when you're nominated for what is supposed to be the most prestigious of music awards.

He was considered a strong prospect to win something ... and I don't suppose everyone who thought that way was deluded about his actual talent.
I don't think he has, as I said, "reeeeeal talent."
So we agree about his talent.
Get yah mind out of the gudder when I say: "His endowment is modest."
 
I was in and out of watching the show last night, and I missed the Bieb's performance. Gotta say though, that I saw a whole lot more slick production and spectacle than raw talent or anything unique in most of the performances. Seems like the music business anymore has become just like Hollywood - repeating itself and relying on tried and true formulas and genres, rather than allowing any truly original talent to emerge.

I'd never seen Lady Gaga perform before, and my takeaway was she could be the lovechild of Madonna and Bjork, in fact that song sounded just like a Madonna song, but with Bjorkish staging and Fosse choreography.
I thought the whole show was pretty much a big yawn, just a 3.5 hour commercial to sell product.

The 'Dueling Divas' medley at the top of the show was fun, if uneven. Wish the Queen of Soul had been there to raise the bar on the whole evening. Hope she's going to be okay.
 
I'd never seen Lady Gaga perform before, and my takeaway was she could be the lovechild of Madonna and Bjork, in fact that song sounded just like a Madonna song, but with Bjorkish staging and Fosse choreography.
I thought the whole show was pretty much a big yawn, just a 3.5 hour commercial to sell product.
You mean this one? Yeah, it does.

I'm not particularly a Gaga fan, but I have quite enjoyed her performances in the past. They're creative, entertaining and she's more talented than one would assume.

However, her performance at this years Grammy's was very forgettable. Sub-par relative to other Gaga performances, but I think that's in part due to her boring [clone of a] song. I hope she isn't losing her touch.
 
You mean this one? Yeah, it does.
Yeah, that's the one (among others).

I'm not particularly a Gaga fan, but I have quite enjoyed her performances in the past. They're creative, entertaining and she's more talented than one would assume.
Obviously I haven't seen enough of her to judge her talent, other than to say her vocals were strong, she's got presence, and she can move. Her success strongly parallel's Madonna's success, if not directly modeled on it. How much of that is Lady Gaga and how much is her producers is the question. Madonna is/was a decent talent, not great. Her true genius has been shameless self-promotion, creating an outrageous personna, pushing boundaries, continual reinvention, becoming a gay icon through her dance music and lyrical themes.
If I were Madge I'd be calling Lady G and asking for my act back. :wink:
 
Last edited:
Obviously I haven't seen enough of her to judge her talent, other than to say her vocals were strong, she's got presence, and she can move.

On one level, I would certainly have to agree that she can move.
But on another, I find something rather lumpy about her dancing.
It's kinetic, I certainly couldn't do it, and she conveys excitement ... but I honestly feel she's not a natural dancer.
(Which I suppose might make her achievement all the more remarkable.)
I have decided this entirely on the basis of what I saw last night.
Maybe I'm full of it.


Her success strongly parallel's Madonna's success, if not directly modeled on it. How much of that is Lady Gaga and how much is her producers is the question.

I have a feeling she's really pulling the strings herself, just as Madonna did and does.

Madonna is/was a decent talent, not great. Her true genius has been shameless self-promotion, creating an outrageous personna, pushing boundaries, continual reinvention, becoming a gay icon through her dance music and lyrical themes.

Bingo. And that's exactly what Gagoyle is doing.
(Actually, apart from Madonna, she reminds me, in the self-invented quality she has, of Bill Kaulitz, of Tokio Hotel, who I think has the exact same gift for self-promotion and -presentation. Their music doesn't speak to me, but there's some really deep creativity going on in both cases.)


If I were Madge I'd be calling Lady G and asking for my act back. :wink:

Were those shoulder pads last night, or Madge's purloined and repurposed pointy bra?
 
Last edited:
On one level, I would certainly have to agree that she can move.
But on another, I find something rather lumpy about her dancing.
It's kinetic, I certainly couldn't do it, and she conveys excitement ... but I honestly feel she's not a natural dancer.
Which is why I only went so far as to say "she can move", which is still better than many. To be fair, Miss Ciccone didn't move that well in the beginning when she decided to skip past the chorus line and take the direct path to stardom, though she did improve over time. Should have mentioned too that she had the "hunger" and an amazing work ethic, not to be discounted in her spectacular success.

I have a feeling she's really pulling the strings herself, just as Madonna did and does.
Possibly, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if her producers saw in her "the next Madonna" and her career's been molded in that direction, which is not to say that what she's doing isn't representative of her. It's rare for any performer, much less a female performer, to maintain as much control over her career as Madonna did/does.
On the other hand, there are alot of people in the biz who like to ride a gravy train.

Bingo. And that's exactly what Gagoyle is doing.
Eggsackly. Why I suspect the image "branding" could all be exactly modeled, including her 'self-determination'.
It's all too exactly parallel to be accidental, and she doesn't seem anywhere near as smart as Madge.

Were those shoulder pads last night, or Madge's purloined and repurposed pointy bra?
It's all Bjork/Madonna redux. I just want to know how one sits on those butt bumps? :11:

Lady Gaga accepting the GRAMMY for Best Pop Vocal Album @ :28 sec.
 
Last edited:
justin bieber does not deserve a grammy yet. so im glad he didnt win. i like his songs but its not real music by him cuz he sings wutever they tell him to. and the songs are so corny. but nothing special music wise
 

(Actually, apart from Madonna, she reminds me, in the self-invented quality she has, of Bill Kaulitz, of Tokio Hotel, who I think has the exact same gift for self-promotion and -presentation. Their music doesn't speak to me, but there's some really deep creativity going on in both cases.)

]

I think she is closer to Marilyn Manson then Bill Kaulitz,and in this case Gaga has admitted that she is a fan (think a read that in some newspaper). If theres anyone who knows how to do the self promotion stuff its Manson.