PDA

View Full Version : Madonna loathes hydrangeas



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

cruisin
09-09-2011, 02:03 PM
She did it on Broadway before it was filmed. Anyway, apparently a lot of it is Broadway trickery. They have pit/off-stage singers hidden from view and microphones that amplify one's voice...ask Michael Crawford in Phantom of the Opera.

I still don't see where that would indicate that Ronstadt's boice is lacking.


Agreed.

There is no other female pop star who has had the career of Madoanna. She did something right. She is talented-just not in a conventional way and many people have a problem with that because she expressed her sexuality.

Aerosmith was used as an example and they are good but they exploited women in most of their videos so nit sure what exactly the difference is, in the long run. Or maybe I did not get the point. I did not actually get the Bruce Springsteen point either other than all three have been able to maintain their fan base. that is not easy.

You're not alone in the not getting the Bruce Springsteen thing. Being from NJ, it's traitorous to not love Bruce, but I can't stand him. I think Holley's point is right on, they are entertainers. Some people make it on pure talent, some make it on entertainment and shock value. We live in a world where there are Paris Hiltons, Kardashians, and Kate Gosselins, who are celebrities for doing nothing more than existing. So.....

Ziggy
09-09-2011, 02:09 PM
2. In most European countries I have been to, a service charge is included in the bill, but people often pay an additional tip if the service is average or better. In certain countries, the United Kingdom being one, there is no service charge, and the tip is extra.

Most UK restaurants have a 10% service charge added onto the bill.

olympic
09-09-2011, 02:47 PM
I've had an on-off fan relationship with Madonna. I dismissed her as a Cyndi Lauper clone in '84 when I saw the videos for Borderline and Lucky Star. Lauper had come out first, so to my teenage mind, it seemed she was riding Cyndi's coattails. But I really got into 'Like a Virgin' which was her breakthrough album. I cooled it when 'True Blue' came out [probably because my parents didn't cable right away. No MTV. Thus never saw the videos :o], which in retrospect was one of her best albums, and then I was a total fan w/ 'Like a Prayer' album, Vogue, Truth or Dare documentary.

I was like 'eh' with Erotica, the whole Sex book thing and I paid money to see the Girlie Show. :yawn: And she's never had the same effect on me ever since. Probably getting older. Although, I found 'Jump' in '06 a motivational work out song

One thing she did that wasn't in character was pulling the original video for 'American Life' back in '03. I've never seen Madonna be afraid of anything controversial, but that time she was. 9/11 changed things.

danceronice
09-09-2011, 03:10 PM
Bad example. Michael Crawford has a stunning voice -- I've attended a couple of his live concerts. Microphones don't give you a voice if you don't already have one!

Yes. Phantom may have been one of the first shows to have the actors wearing glue-on microphones, but at least in Crawford's case it was mostly to help him sing around a lot of makeup, a mask, and a part that usually required his back being to the audience, climbing on gantries, pushing a boat along the stage (apparenlty that's a lot harder than it was meant to be.)

I also think dissing Marilyn Monroe as nothing but a pretty face is rather unfair to her. Even the 'pretty face and body' had more to do with how she presented herself than just lucky genes. (She once demonstrated that walking down the street with someone who noted no one was even glanced at them--she asked "Do you want to see Marilyn?" and just made a tiny change in how she carried herself, and suddenly everyone was "OMG IT'S MARILYN MONROE!") She took her acting very seriously, she just ended up getting eaten alive by her persona.

I like some of Madonna's music. Her little kabbalah habit was somewhere between stupid and offensive (it is NOT meant to be something dabbled in by non-scholars, and while she started the trend that goes for all the other celebrities who followed), and her look lately is a bit scary. There's "ripped" and then there's "ropey tendons and paper skin." Her movie acting...less said, the better. But I will admit she worked to get where is, she had/has actual talent, and she's hardly the only celebrity to buy into her own press and get an attitude about it.

Vagabond
09-09-2011, 03:13 PM
Most UK restaurants have a 10% service charge added onto the bill.

Either things have changed over the past few years, or you and I have been going to different restaurants! But that reminds me of another point, since I certainly have been to restaurants in the U.K. that do add the 10% service charge.

I have noticed that Britons and other Europeans accustomed to 10% service charges tend to tack on a 10% tip when they're in the U.S. Even if they do this on the post-tax total, that is still on the lower side of the tip range, and if it's on the pre-tax total, it's very low indeed. It's even low by European standards because VAT rates are considerably higher than sales tax rates.

This means that if some random British celebrity goes to a restaurant in New York or California (both of which do have a sales tax), racks up a post-tax total of $49.77, and tips $5.00, he will be adjudged a poor tipper even though it seems to him like the correct amount.

aliceanne
09-09-2011, 03:16 PM
Which is funny because she was parodied by Forbidden Broadway when she was (stunt)cast in Pirates of Penzance on Broadway. Basically, they said she had to fake her notes and needed tons of back-up vocalists, microphones, and amplifiers. They even called her "Poor Warbling Star."

Just goes to show you how subjective these things are.

You know, Tina Turner has quite a voice and yet still depended on dance rock, a smokin' body, style by Ike Turner and choreography to sell herself in the 60s and 70s.

Anyway, sex appeal isn't all bad, take a look at Adam Ant, ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Z7fV-wB2z8&ob=av2e

No, sex appeal isn't bad. Nothing wrong with an awesome costume and a catchy tune. I was just pointing out that some people are visual performers and some people rely on other talents. If you have it all you are really lucky.

allezfred
09-09-2011, 03:31 PM
It would be so much easier if the servers would just say how much they want for a tip and then can be told to feck off or not as the case may be. :P

UGG
09-09-2011, 03:52 PM
Just imagine using the word "coloratura" in ANY way associated with Madonna. Sure, Linda might not have been the perfect opera singer, but is being an opera singer the only criteria for being an artist? I think not. I linked to her "Songs of My Father" as an example of her artistry, to me, and that isn't opera. One could argue that Madonna is an artist, but I put her far down the scale...I think of her as an entertainer, which is a fine thing to be.

Oh I agree she is more of an entertainer than anything, but she definitly has a type of artistry. Linda may sing better than her but it is doubtful to me that she could pull off anything performance wise Madonna has ever done-other than just standing there and singing the song.

In general, it just bothers me when people make the blanket statement that Madonna is where she is today because of selling sex. If that was the case then more entertainers would be just as popular. If you go back to the 80's, there were singers like Samantha Fox who were doing the whole sex thing and where are they now? Obviously it is not the key to a 25 year career. You have to do more.

People shell out money to see Madonna because she is awesome live. Her stage presence is seriously amazing. She is a great dancer, and her shows are very theatrical. Her singing is ok but who the hell goes to a Madonna concert to see her sing ballads. Not me!

UGG
09-09-2011, 03:54 PM
I would use Britney Spears as more of an example of someone with zero talent who made it on selling sex. I mean she was entertaining when she was younger, but now she is like a robot who just hair flips from one chair to another. She does not even dance anymore and does not sing live. There is no way she is going to be able to be entertaining when she is in her 50's.

orbitz
09-09-2011, 04:07 PM
It would be so much easier if the servers would just say how much they want for a tip and then can be told to feck off or not as the case may be. :P

Have you ever toured Eypt? Tips is expected for practically everything, and sometimes they're not shy to inform you that they're disappointed with what you gave them :lol: Of course I just ignore it and move on.

Southpaw
09-09-2011, 04:26 PM
People shell out money to see Madonna because she is awesome live. Her stage presence is seriously amazing. She is a great dancer, and her shows are very theatrical.

Well, there's the difference between Madonna and Samantha Fox. People are still willing to shell out money for Madonna because she puts on a good show and she makes people happy for a few hours. She's been going just a bit longer than Phantom of the Opera. Phantom is still on Broadway because people are still paying money to see it. There were better shows that have come and gone and yet, Phantom endures. Maybe it's the chandelier that keeps 'em coming. 25 years that show has been running. Jeezus!

One thing I found interesting about Madonna is that she didn't let her kids watch television. Why would she have shielded them from American pop culture like that?

milanessa
09-09-2011, 04:29 PM
Why would she have shielded them from American pop culture like that?

Because she's British? Oh, wait a minute...

UGG
09-09-2011, 04:30 PM
Yeah I always found that to be rather dumb LOL.

Andora
09-09-2011, 06:45 PM
Aerosmith, even after alllllllll these years, is still chugging along and still playing stadium shows. Is that because the music they are creating is relevant, or is that just because there are still plenty of people out there who are willing to part with their dollars for a few hours of fun? It's true, Madonna still has plenty of fans who are willing to pay money to see her for a bunch of reasons. They still like her, she takes them back to their stoopid youths, her shows make them happy. Younger people want to see her because they're intrigued, she's a legend. It's the same with any major artist/band. Bruce Springsteen, same thing. He's still making music but I think its artistic relevance is debatable. I think his years of relevance are behind him and now he enjoys success because, well, he's Bruce. He'll fill an arena no matter what. Madonna will fill an arena no matter what. U2 will fill an arena no matter what. I also that Madonna endures because there are so many female pop singers out there who follow the Madonna business model that there's really no getting away from her.

Would 25 year-old Madonna stand out in a post-Madonna world? No way. She'd just be one of many and would have to change her name to Lady Gaga to get any significant attention. I don't see Gaga selling out arenas in 25 years like Madonna still does, though. But we'll see. Yes, unlike Madonna Gaga writes her own music that sounds good now, but does it have staying power? I don't think so. She lifts a LOT from 80s music, anyway. I think if she has any success in the future it will be as a throwback act because that's essentially what she is right now.


:huh:

I'm not sure why you're so sold on short-changing Madonna's career/talent. Madonna was fun, poppy music to me until Ray Of Light came out. I'm not sure how I missed her other fantastic albums in the '90s, but I did. Same for a lot of teenagers I knew-- Ray Of Light really brought a number of us to Madonna because it was a great CD. Not because she's a legend. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happened with her last CD and kids now. Or 2000s Music.

Would Madonna hit big if she'd come out now? Probably, because she's driven and smart-- just like Lady Gaga is. Lady Gaga's doing things Madonna didn't, and it's keeping her relevant in a very over-crowded music scene-- things many artists didn't have to do even as recent as the early 2000s. So what? If you have to re-write history to make someone unimportant, it seems a bit of a stretch.

Bringing up Bruce and U2. :lol: Bruce will probably never be who he was around the time of Born To Run, but he's consistently made good music since, and had a very interesting and somewhat provocative album with Devils & Dust in 2005. And U2 is a legendary band because they have continued to make legendary music over the years, switching gears when they had to (Achtung Baby) and pumping out arena hits at worst, like their 2004 album.

VIETgrlTerifa
09-09-2011, 06:48 PM
I was like 'eh' with Erotica, the whole Sex book thing and I paid money to see the Girlie Show. :yawn:


Yeah...watching her concerts on DVD, I have to say despite some great numbers, The Girlie Show was by far her most underwhelming. Her brother bitched about not being hired to direct her Drowned World Tour in 2001, but since he was in charge of Girlie Show and that underwhelming 1999 Grammy Awards performance, I can see why Madonna went in a different direction (that and all of her personal relationships don't seem to be healthy).

Off topic but, it's a funny thing about Madonna. We all have very strong opinions about her and we all have an idea of what kind of person she is, but despite being arguably the most famous woman in the world (at least during her peak) and having had so much press and two documentaries films and bios written, we really know nothing about her. What we do know is very surface-level and it's up to us to fill in the blanks and psychoanalyze her through our own biases.