In the spirit of Sunday, amen Reverend, amen.
I love your impassioned admonition against the music industry nowadays.
I agree with most of it, but I like to add a few of my own points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem
I wouldn't know. I don't watch any of his garbage.
|
He has the same formulaic recycled show he puts out every few years.
Dharma and Greg? Same as The Big Bang Theory.
Two people from different side of society falling in love with one another.
That's the premise of both shows.
Mike and Molly? Just a little tweak, with that two unlikely people who finds love with one another.
Two and a Half Men? Seems to be similar to Grace Under Fire, at least from what I read from wiki.
The show was before my time.
To be fair to him, there are reasons for his success.
He is able to find talented actors who have chemistry with one another, and he is able to create strong supporting characters who are usually more memorable than the main characters.
Also, he hires the right people to write lively dialogues that sounds fitting for the characters from the different shows, to distract people from the realization that all of the shows are pretty much similar.
Right now, he has found a way to keep his shows on air for as long as possible.
If you look all three shows that he has on currently, no end seems to be in sight.
All 3 shows can go on 100 years if they want to.
It gets boring after a while.
He is down to The Big Bang Theory as the only show I watch.
I kind of like the quirky, nerdy dialogues, and the chemistry between the characters are very strong.
Mike and Molly is not my kind of show, and Two and a half men is done, proven by its move to Thursday by CBS.
There are almost no chemistry between the leads.
It is especially worst with the kid and the new guy, and that one episode where they shared screen time alone was painful to watch.
Quote:
|
(most) popular music has always been bad. They just haven't used (submissive) women to drive the point home. Most bands, I feel loathe saying that - we'll say artists play **** live shows because they have no talent. I am against the industry, really though not the artists themselves. Rock n' roll has been shown the door - in a world with Foo Fighters, The Black Keys, etc. we instead get the privilege of listened to the same recycled garbage that Katy Perry, Florida, or Justin Bieber put out. I actually feel bad saying that because I believe Justin is talented, I hate him from a marketing standpoint solely. I can't wait to see what he does when he matures out of the target audience he currently performs to.
|
Yeah, most eras have their crap and good stuff.
Even the greatest eras for music, which are the 60s and 70s in my opinion, have their share of mass produced, industry influenced songs.
For every Beatles, there will be a Bobby Vinton and his sappy love songs.
The difference between then and now?
They still attempt something different even in the mainstream, and that's why some songs from that genre are considered classics.
For example, Bobby Vinton has a ton of forgettable songs, but he still has something like "Mr. Lonely".
It has the same sappy melody, but it is very socially conscience.
It is different, and that is why people still remember and listen to it today.
Man, you are awfully generous towards Bieber.
He probably has talent, but he is going to be a mess.
Unless a person have strong conviction, nothing is going to change.
Bieber does not seem like a man of strong convictions.
In fact, from the few interviews I heard, I think he actually believes what he is doing now is good music.
He also looks up to Michael Jackson, and to be honest with you, and I know I am going to get flamed for this, I think most of Jackson's greatest hits from the 80s are bubble gum pop.
They have good beat and gets paired with a great video, but they are just fast paced pop songs that is just like the songs from the era.
The only exception to the rule is "We are the World", and I think that song helped him become more socially conscience in his song writing, starting from the late 80's.
That said, I do like his music and still listen to "Thriller" and his other early 80's stuff, but the stuff from the early 80s lose a lot of luster without the videos.
I actually enjoy his latter stuff more, even though they are not as popular.
Hopefully Bieber become the late 80's version of MJ, but I highly doubt it.
Quote:
|
Does nobody take notice how attractive Katy Perry is and how much she's dominated MTV (when they actually do play music) while people that actually appreciate music have to actively search for something other than what her or some Joe Blow puts out and recycles for the next 2 years? Why do we get fake hip-hop **** when there are real rappers like Eminem out there? Why do we have to listen to the same genre of music again and again? A song will be playing on the radio and I can't tell who the artist is because they all sound the ******* same. If radio stations were a civilization on Earth they'd be xenophobes because they have no ****ing clue how to diversify the songs. I thought stations like MTV and Much were supposed to make real music lovers lives easier? Anything for a quick buck, I guess.
|
Katy Perry is not that attractive.
I have seen her sans make up pictures.
Everything about her is manufactured.
You hold Eminem in a very high regard.
To be honest with you, even though I think he is pretty talented, and I do enjoy his strange sense of humor, I find him whiny.
I always see him as a wannabe bad ass.
It might be the things he write about though.
His music are more about domestic violence and struggles, which is not as glamorous or hardcore as the world Biggie and Tupac writes about.
