I just checked on Rhapsody for the new releases this week. They have a new album by the above referred to "artist". It is her SECOND album. I have been hearing about this sk__k for years, and this is only her second album? God help this country.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 03:30 AM
I just checked on Rhapsody for the new releases this week. They have a new album by the above referred to "artist". It is her SECOND album. I have been hearing about this sk__k for years, and this is only her second album? God help this country.
hahah i thought the same thing when i saw that....granted she's not as bad as some other popular artists....overrated? yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup ::)
Quote from: wolof7 on May 26, 2011, 06:14 AM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 03:30 AM
I just checked on Rhapsody for the new releases this week. They have a new album by the above referred to "artist". It is her SECOND album. I have been hearing about this sk__k for years, and this is only her second album? God help this country.
hahah i thought the same thing when i saw that....granted she's not as bad as some other popular artists....overrated? yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup ::)
She's not as bad.... she's the worst :bath:
PILE OF SHIT!!!
That succubus is going to be on my Rolling Stone with the Circuital review......oh the horror!
Quote from: youreveningcoat on May 26, 2011, 06:48 AM
Quote from: wolof7 on May 26, 2011, 06:14 AM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 03:30 AM
I just checked on Rhapsody for the new releases this week. They have a new album by the above referred to "artist". It is her SECOND album. I have been hearing about this sk__k for years, and this is only her second album? God help this country.
hahah i thought the same thing when i saw that....granted she's not as bad as some other popular artists....overrated? yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup ::)
She's not as bad.... she's the worst :bath:
She's far from the worst. I direct your attention to Ke$ha.
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 08:51 AM
Quote from: youreveningcoat on May 26, 2011, 06:48 AM
Quote from: wolof7 on May 26, 2011, 06:14 AM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 03:30 AM
I just checked on Rhapsody for the new releases this week. They have a new album by the above referred to "artist". It is her SECOND album. I have been hearing about this sk__k for years, and this is only her second album? God help this country.
hahah i thought the same thing when i saw that....granted she's not as bad as some other popular artists....overrated? yuuuuuuuuuuuuuuup ::)
She's not as bad.... she's the worst :bath:
She's far from the worst. I direct your attention to Ke$ha.
Bingo we have a winner. Then again, this is like trying to compare a fully formed turd to explosive diarrhea.
Whoa, easy people! Lady Gaga has like 35 million followers on Facebook and is the most popular musician in the world. If you listen to her music and read the lyrics (without judging so quick) she is actually a very crafty songwriter and talented singer. Plus, b/c of her $$, she gets top notch musicians.
Plus, she's becomming a zillionaire, you think she cares what any of you think?
Will always be a Madonna wannabe...
She may drive you nuts, but Gaga is a musical chamelion and does what she does really well. I'm no fan of dance-pop or whatever style she chooses to switch to, but she does have talent. Ke$ha does not. Gaga's music is not original in the least, but you gotta give her some credit for creating a compelling persona in a music world filled with vapid E! starlets.
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
She is that artist that is needed for the time. The artist that is trendy and out there. Her songs are not bad but are pop fluff. She is as important as Cher and Madonna were before her for her time. I do not think she will have the longevity or overall success the other two did, but she is what she is for this era. It is funny a bunch of "quality" music fans of MMJ would be discussing GaGa ;D
I think she is a strangely unique individual,with wild imagination. I rarely listen to her music, but she is talented at what she does. I saw her performance on American Idol last night; which kinda pissed me off. She was wearing a big cross around her half naked body, as she danced sexually up on male dancer. Madonna has done the same , idiots!
I think she'll really one up madonna when she reveals that she's really a man.
That's pretty much the only way she could usurp Madonna as The Queen of Pop.
(http://fixedair.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/lady-gaga-cosmo1.jpg)
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 12:54 PM
I think she'll really one up madonna when she reveals that she's really a man.
That's pretty much the only way she could usurp Madonna as The Queen of Pop.
(http://fixedair.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/lady-gaga-cosmo1.jpg)
I <3 you Trace.
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 01:20 PM
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
incorrect
Madonna hit the stratosphere in 1985 when she released Like a Virgin (her 2nd album). Use the logic of it being the pre-internet days and she was as big as you could get.
I mean, these days, if you YouTube yourself farting in a remotely funny way you can become a huge star. ;)
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 01:34 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 01:20 PM
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
incorrect
Madonna hit the stratosphere in 1985 when she released Like a Virgin (her 2nd album). Use the logic of it being the pre-internet days and she was as big as you could get.
I mean, if you YouTube yourself farting in a remotely funny way you can be huge these days. ;)
You beat me to the punch my 1960s-born sibling (I believe we are roughly the same age?). She was big with her first album, but blew-up huge when Like a Virgin dropped.
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 01:36 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 01:34 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 01:20 PM
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
incorrect
Madonna hit the stratosphere in 1985 when she released Like a Virgin (her 2nd album). Use the logic of it being the pre-internet days and she was as big as you could get.
I mean, if you YouTube yourself farting in a remotely funny way you can be huge these days. ;)
You beat me to the punch my 1960s-born sibling (I believe we are roughly the same age?). She was big with her first album, but blew-up huge when Like a Virgin dropped.
1964 baby.
And I recall hating madonna with a passion in the 80's. I was much more full of false bravado back then (and a metal head!).
"stunningly homely" ;D
Nice Jaimoe
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 01:41 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 01:36 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 01:34 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 01:20 PM
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
incorrect
Madonna hit the stratosphere in 1985 when she released Like a Virgin (her 2nd album). Use the logic of it being the pre-internet days and she was as big as you could get.
I mean, if you YouTube yourself farting in a remotely funny way you can be huge these days. ;)
You beat me to the punch my 1960s-born sibling (I believe we are roughly the same age?). She was big with her first album, but blew-up huge when Like a Virgin dropped.
1964 baby.
And I recall hating madonna with a passion in the 80's. I was much more full of false bravado back then (and a metal head!).
1968! I also hated Madonna with a passion in the '80s, then grew to respect her in the '90s, then moved on to indifference in the 2000s; now, I just can't stand what she's become. In politics, you'd call it "flip-flop", but that's ok since flip-flop can reflect growth. Still, her career is impressive.
Quote from: Ruckus on May 26, 2011, 01:43 PM
"stunningly homely" ;D
Nice Jaimoe
Definite BOBFOC
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 01:34 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 01:20 PM
Regardless of whether she is talented or not, it is only her SECOND album.At least Madonna had about 4 or 5 before she hit the stratosphere of celebrity.
incorrect
Madonna hit the stratosphere in 1985 when she released Like a Virgin (her 2nd album). Use the logic of it being the pre-internet days and she was as big as you could get.
I mean, these days, if you YouTube yourself farting in a remotely funny way you can become a huge star. ;)
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.I ignored her until I heard Ray of Light. That is a great album, and she can actually sing.
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
Nothing wrong with using producers to help fine-tune your music at all. But in the same way I don't respect Slipknot, regardless of their music (which sucks, incidentally) because they hid behind an image, the same goes for her. There's Jim wearing a cape over his head weird, and there's a dress made of salami and fake cheekbones attention whoring that really gets my goat.
I'll quote Mr. James:
"It seems like so much shit rises to the top thanks to brilliant marketing, while the real players are striving to just make ends meet. The music scene is truly, absolutely 100 percent fucked in that way."
Thread over.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.I ignored her until I heard Ray of Light. That is a great album, and she can actually sing.
Madonna is not bigger than Michael Jackson except for maybe the early 90s when she peaked and he was fondling 8 year olds
Quote from: Ruckus on May 26, 2011, 01:43 PM
"stunningly homely" ;D
Nice Jaimoe
::) Except she's really not.
Love her, love love love. Y'all can suck it.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 03:02 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
Nothing wrong with using producers to help fine-tune your music at all. But in the same way I don't respect Slipknot, regardless of their music (which sucks, incidentally) because they hid behind an image, the same goes for her. There's Jim wearing a cape over his head weird, and there's a dress made of salami and fake cheekbones attention whoring that really gets my goat.
At least for some, hiding worked quite well: KISS, David Bowie, Alice Cooper to today's Buckethead. I agree that at some point you gotta give it up such as Elton John did when he purged his ridiculous costumes in the '80s (although his music began sucking in the late '70s).
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 05:07 PM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 03:02 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
Nothing wrong with using producers to help fine-tune your music at all. But in the same way I don't respect Slipknot, regardless of their music (which sucks, incidentally) because they hid behind an image, the same goes for her. There's Jim wearing a cape over his head weird, and there's a dress made of salami and fake cheekbones attention whoring that really gets my goat.
At least for some, hiding worked quite well: KISS, David Bowie, Alice Cooper to today's Buckethead. I agree that at some point you gotta give it up such as Elton John did when he purged his ridiculous costumes in the '80s (although his music began sucking in the late '70s).
No one seems to be mad at GWAR
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 05:09 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 05:07 PM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 03:02 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
Nothing wrong with using producers to help fine-tune your music at all. But in the same way I don't respect Slipknot, regardless of their music (which sucks, incidentally) because they hid behind an image, the same goes for her. There's Jim wearing a cape over his head weird, and there's a dress made of salami and fake cheekbones attention whoring that really gets my goat.
At least for some, hiding worked quite well: KISS, David Bowie, Alice Cooper to today's Buckethead. I agree that at some point you gotta give it up such as Elton John did when he purged his ridiculous costumes in the '80s (although his music began sucking in the late '70s).
No one seems to be mad at GWAR
or Culture Club.
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 05:09 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 05:07 PM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 03:02 PM
Quote from: Jaimoe on May 26, 2011, 09:54 AM
Quote from: el_chode on May 26, 2011, 09:35 AM
I give her credit for at least doing her own thing and (I believe) composing her own music. But at the same time, stop being preachy and weird for the sake of weird. At some point it's more "HEY EVERYONE! LOOK AT ME! I'M SO UNIQUE!" than anything inspiring.
I agree with the latter. At some point she'll have to tone it down. I think some of the hiding she does (behind makeup, wigs, costumes and glasses) comes because she is stunningly homely, and knows it. I don't think she writes much of her own stuff, but has control over the production. She surrounds herself with top producers and writers much like Madonna has done for the better part of 30 years.
Nothing wrong with using producers to help fine-tune your music at all. But in the same way I don't respect Slipknot, regardless of their music (which sucks, incidentally) because they hid behind an image, the same goes for her. There's Jim wearing a cape over his head weird, and there's a dress made of salami and fake cheekbones attention whoring that really gets my goat.
At least for some, hiding worked quite well: KISS, David Bowie, Alice Cooper to today's Buckethead. I agree that at some point you gotta give it up such as Elton John did when he purged his ridiculous costumes in the '80s (although his music began sucking in the late '70s).
No one seems to be mad at GWAR
GG Allin & The Toilet Rockers Hated GWAR
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
I feel honored you support an opinion of mine
Quote from: capt. scotty on May 26, 2011, 05:18 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
I feel honored you support an opinion of mine
Thanks (but I hate to see you lower your standards)
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
She continued to release music while he did not. After Bad he never had any real success. She may not be bigger in a historical sense, bur she was far more popular and relevant after the 80's. The last 15 or more years of his life he was a universal punch line.
Lewis Black has a joke where he says all you have to do to make a joke funny is have the punch line Michael Jackson. Now Lewis is a funny guy.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 06:22 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
After Bad he never had any real success.
Not any real success after Bad?
In 1991, Dangerous spent 4 weeks at #1 and has sold over 32 million copies.
2001's Invincible sold 13 million copies reaching #1 on the charts.
I dunno man, I'd say selling over 45 million records from 2 releases is pretty successful. I say, one day I hope to be as unsuccessful as post-Bad Micahel Jackson! ;D
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 06:42 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 06:22 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
After Bad he never had any real success.
Not any real success after Bad?
In 1991, Dangerous spent 4 weeks at #1 and has sold over 32 million copies.
2001's Invincible sold 13 million copies reaching #1 on the charts.
I dunno man, I'd say selling over 45 million records from 2 releases is pretty successful. I say, one day I hope to be as unsuccessful as post-Bad Micahel Jackson! ;D
I'd say that he was still in full control over his powers, but even Bad was seen as a dropoff. MJ's albums and tours did do really well after Bad, but his creative peak was years behind him... although he really had no music rival so it didn't matter too much.
Well, I did not do sales research. All I know is after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 06:22 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
She continued to release music while he did not. After Bad he never had any real success. She may not be bigger in a historical sense, bur she was far more popular and relevant after the 80's.
Yeah...MJ also had four #1 singles before Madonna was 12 years old. Nine #1 songs before Madonna had her first.
He's the freaking King Of Pop, man
Quote from: capt. scotty on May 26, 2011, 07:30 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 06:22 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 04:59 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 02:00 PM
Yeah, I remember all that too. The difference is she was on the same level as Prince and Michael Jackson,(All three were born in the same summer) so she did not stick out as much, as Lady Gaga seems to have the limelight almost to herself. I think after 4 or 5 albums Madonna was clearly bigger than the other 2.
Madonna clearly bigger than Michael Jackson? Never. I don't think anyone has ever gotten bigger than Michael Jackson.
She continued to release music while he did not. After Bad he never had any real success. She may not be bigger in a historical sense, bur she was far more popular and relevant after the 80's.
Yeah...MJ also had four #1 singles before Madonna was 12 years old. Nine #1 songs before Madonna had her first.
He's the freaking King Of Pop, man
I started this thread about Lady Gaga having all this media exposure, and she is only releasing her second album. It then led to comparisons to Madonna. That led to comparisons to MJ. Does that mean the media hype regarding Lady Gaga is irrelevant because Michael Jackson is the King of Pop? We could bring in Sinatra, the Beatles, Elvis, and even Hitler. Just not Elvis Hitler. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Hitler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Hitler)
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 07:20 PM
Well, I did not do sales research. All I know is after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to.
Oh, OK. When you said "After Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success", I thought you meant > after Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success.
I was actually supposed to somehow magically read into your statement that what you meant was"after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to."
I apologize for not being able to see in the future and see how you will change your point. I'll try to do better. :thumbsup:
(and as soon as I figure out what ubiquitous means I will properly respond to your post)
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 08:57 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 07:20 PM
Well, I did not do sales research. All I know is after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to.
Oh, OK. When you said "After Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success", I thought you meant > after Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success.
I was actually supposed to somehow magically read into your statement that what you meant was"after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to."
I apologize for not being able to see in the future and see how you will change your point. I'll try to do better. :thumbsup:
(and as soon as I figure out what ubiquitous means I will properly respond to your post)
Really? Because I elaborate on a prior statement I made, you assume I expect you to read my mind? Lighten up.
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 11:24 PM
Quote from: Tracy 2112 on May 26, 2011, 08:57 PM
Quote from: rincon on May 26, 2011, 07:20 PM
Well, I did not do sales research. All I know is after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to.
Oh, OK. When you said "After Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success", I thought you meant > after Bad he (Michael Jackson) never had any real success.
I was actually supposed to somehow magically read into your statement that what you meant was"after Bad he had no ubiquitous presence in the media that was not negative, or songs that someone like me who is not a fan were overexposed to."
I apologize for not being able to see in the future and see how you will change your point. I'll try to do better. :thumbsup:
(and as soon as I figure out what ubiquitous means I will properly respond to your post)
Really? Because I elaborate on a prior statement I made, you assume I expect you to read my mind? Lighten up.
Lighten up? How do you expect me to get a lame ass Lady Gaga thread over 5 pages if I lighten up? ;)
Not a fan.
And she's not original in the least, at least not musically. Outfits are interesting, but thinking about it even outrageous costumes are nothing new. So, on a scale of 1 to 10, I guess I'd give her a 2.
Not a fan.
Being different for the sake of being different doesn't justify success or popularity, especially when her "different-ness" seems so contrived and reeks of trying too hard.
I think she's great*. She has such a special connection with her fans. And the shoes! The hats! Walking around wearing nothing but a net curtain and some tit tape!
* not really. I just thought Tracy & I could probably get this to 20 pages if we took opposing sides. ;)
Quote from: MarkW on May 27, 2011, 08:57 AM
I think she's great*. She has such a special connection with her fans. And the shoes! The hats! Walking around wearing nothing but a net curtain and some tit tape!
What do you mean by tit tape?
Quote from: YouAre_GivenToFly on May 27, 2011, 12:43 AM
Not a fan.
Being different for the sake of being different doesn't justify success or popularity, especially when her "different-ness" seems so contrived and reeks of trying too hard.
1000000000% agreed
And Mark, tit tape? I think I might need some of that for my next marathon?
This is from Wikipedia, so it is definitely correct:
Lingerie tape, also known as cleavage tape, fashion tape and tit tape, is a double-sided adhesive tape, used to secure the edges of a strapless dress or top to the cleavage or side of the breasts or on shoulders to secure bra straps from slipping, in order to keep the item of clothing in place and to avoid a wardrobe malfunction. It may also be referred to as toupee tape or wig tape, a similar double-sided tape intended for a different function (securing a hairpiece or merkin*).
You can see it in action here:
(http://www.onlinecelebrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/petra-nemcova-boob.jpg)
here:
(http://worldfashiondiary.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/fashion-tape-240x300.jpg)
and (less successfully) here, with Lady GaGa:
(http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/430ladygagasideboob.jpg)
*In case you were wondering, a merkin is the technical term for a pubic wig.
GAGA has to put tape over her nipples to keep them from falling off.
I can imagine her nipples look like a doberman has been chewing on them.
Quote from: MarkW on May 27, 2011, 10:02 AM
This is from Wikipedia, so it is definitely correct:
Lingerie tape, also known as cleavage tape, fashion tape and tit tape, is a double-sided adhesive tape, used to secure the edges of a strapless dress or top to the cleavage or side of the breasts or on shoulders to secure bra straps from slipping, in order to keep the item of clothing in place and to avoid a wardrobe malfunction. It may also be referred to as toupee tape or wig tape, a similar double-sided tape intended for a different function (securing a hairpiece or merkin*).
You can see it in action here:
(http://www.onlinecelebrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/petra-nemcova-boob.jpg)
here:
(http://worldfashiondiary.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/fashion-tape-240x300.jpg)
and (less successfully) here, with Lady GaGa:
(http://static.entertainmentwise.com/photos/Image/430ladygagasideboob.jpg)
*In case you were wondering, a merkin is the technical term for a pubic wig.
#1, please
Quote from: ALady on May 26, 2011, 04:22 PM
Quote from: Ruckus on May 26, 2011, 01:43 PM
"stunningly homely" ;D
Nice Jaimoe
::) Except she's really not.
Love her, love love love. Y'all can suck it.
YES! With you on this one, ALady.
:-*
Don't really care for her style of music, but she's def. talented. Plus she can actually sing live without lipsynching or adding huge amounts of computer help. And she plays an instrument. Several depending on your definition of instrument.
Quote from: BH on Jun 02, 2011, 03:20 PM
Don't really care for her style of music, but she's def. talented. Plus she can actually sing live without lipsynching or adding huge amounts of computer help. And she plays an instrument. Several depending on your definition of instrument.
skinflute count?
Can she play her own skinflute? I just blew my own mind.
Quote from: bowl of soup on Jun 02, 2011, 04:01 PM
Can she play her own skinflute? I just blew my own mind.
I think so. I heard she had a rib removed to do it. :-\
She's also very talented with the meat whistle :D
Quote from: Taterbug on Jun 02, 2011, 04:41 PM
She's also very talented with the meat whistle :D
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/lotus07/RxOiTiX10mI/AAAAAAAAAKU/p_P-cH4nO3g/meat_team_1949_0.jpg)
There's a lot of testosterone in here, chaps. Which is somewhat ironic in a Lady Gaga thread.
Well, she can be rather manish
Lola-The Kinks #5.*Top Of The Pops-70s* (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixqbc7X2NQY#)