MTV video Music Awards
 

To tell you the truth they were pretty disappointing this year. I 've seen better. The Performance of the night had to goto Alicia Keys. The rest of the program was boring as hell. Give me your opinion and take the vote.

i just caught the last few minutes but loved seeing that britney chick shake her ass around and even dance around with snake...what a great girl

HOW COULD THEY LET THOSE *NSYNC FOGHAT A** BEYOTCHES WIN THE BEST VIDEO AWARD???? THAT PIECE OF S**T MOTHERF**KIN SUCKED A**!!!!!

D12 SHOULDA WON THAT B**CH!!!!!!!!






R&R is -> this way so behave

I'll agree with Hellbound, pretty tame this year. I don't know why they started a trend of being damn insulting in the opening monologue... Jamie Foxx is funny, but he's tiring sometimes when he's trying too hard. I mean, and I know it's a Backstreet Boy, so all is fair game... but don't make fun of some guy who just said that he's been sober for xx days and he was just in a hospital for addiction, and offer him champagne like that. And don't make fun of Mariah having attempted suicide or what have you. I'm suprised he didn't make a joke about Aaliyah...

Btw, the aaliyah tribute was very nice. They did it well, especially the little video clip of her saying how much she enjoyed her life..

(Did anyone see Janet Jackson?) :wowza :yes :tongue


I didn't think nsync deserved to win all that crap, but you gotta remember who does the most for *** wins. You know, I was guessing the winners by saying to myself, okay, who's the biggest *** supporter nominated? I was at around 90%..

Britney is tryin to grow up then?? She don't want to be a little girl anymore... I say that she shoulda left that double-stick tape off that little top she was wearing, and given us a show, or do Playboy or something. She's a beaut, that's for sure.

All in all, not that entertaining of a show this year, but I'll watch again next year to see what happens.

(J-lo wasn't even naked!!!!)

One more thing.... How funny was the Ben Stiller thing?? That was awesome.!!

G}{ is in love with Britney. She's gonna be my next X-wife.

i spoke from the heart...

well alicia keys took the cake this year and linkin park ripped sh*t up i think there performance was tight as hell,that was linkin park right? dont know the group that well but who ever it was it was good.

And you say I'm a "tool". :ooo

I love her mind and body :D

Not her music.

Tool :p

Buttney looked pretty nice indeed:uhuh, but for the life of me I can't understand g}{'s appreciation for janet jackson (puke).

My personal heros (music-wise, not based on looks...) U2 performed mediocre at best, they can do MUCH better than that (and have the world tour to prove that). Actually, this wasn't even mediocre. This was auto-pilot.

Lot of energy from Linkin park, but they're nothing more than the next band of kids with powerchords and loud vocals (just MHO ofcourse). J-lo actually seemed to sing live, something that cannot be said for ms spears (JUST DON'T WEAR A F*CKING MICROPHONE THEN BIATCH!).

And a little word to all the dumb idiots in the met who figured neither U2 nor the Ramones deserved any respect and chose not to stand up or even applaude for them: check your own short-ass career next to that of either of them, and think again.

Jamie Foxx was hilarious at some points, "Michael Jackson on the recovery channel" but the champaign thing was over the line indeed.

BTW, who was that guy climbing the screen behind the stage, was that the Chili Peppers' drummer?

fucking lady marmalade won for best video...wheres the world coming to sheez

i was pretty toched by all the things bou ALiya tho :cry

Actually, that was my comment about Ms. Jackson, and it wasn't so much as a appreciation, as an appauling costume that she was wearing, she looked like a streetwalker....

I never did like U2, just my opinion, but they seem to recycle the same tired music that they started out with, and I don't think they're deserving of their "holier than though" attitudes. They were the grandfathers there, but they sounded tired, and have for 10 years now to me. I'm not tryin to pick a fight, just don't like them since joshua tree....

As far as the singing live.. yeah, don't wear a mic, but then again, who really cares? They're there to put on a show, I don't care if they sing live. In fact, I'm glad some of them don't. Ruins the beauty of the produced, remixed, I hit the note once in the studio notes that they sing on the album.

The guy climbing the screen was Will Ferrall from Saturday Night Live. That was dense what they did with that. It was funny last year.

I'd have applauded u2 and ramones, but just out of politeness, not out of respect or admiration. The ramone's were original, but someone who inspired other bands to create decent music doesn't necessarily have to have decent music theirselves.. and I think this is the case with the ramones.. may joey rest in peace...

where did I put those things, oh yeah, here they are
:2cents

Ooh don't look now, this is turning into an actual discussion.....

I don't know what it is with people & U2. There's a whole bunch that says they only produced shit after the Joshua tree, all the experimental/weird stuff whatever, now there are a lot of people saying the new album is "back to basics" and thus playing it safe...

I think Achtung baby was brilliant, both for it's music and the timing. They made it after biting the dust with Rattle & Hum. R&H, for the kids who don't know what it is, was an album/movie with live versions of songs, and a whole bunch of new songs inspired by their stay in America. Ofcourse, all this was at the height of U2's popularity after the Joshua tree, so people had this new album, the movie, all the media blitz - it bombed. Apparently, this venture into "new" music (inspired by American music such as BB King, back when R&B was still R&B) was a total blow.

So a few years later, they were set to come out with a new album. Everyone was expecting a step back to the Joshua tree era of anthem rock songs, and then the first single/video was released: The fly. Now, anyone with the balls to pull that off while the whole world is waiting/begging for a joshua tree type album deserves a big thumbs up:tu

Problem with Pop was it's description in the media, as being a dance album, lots of techno shit and what have you not. It's really not that weird an album, with a bunch of great songs that worked very well during concerts. But when the media buzz is against you, there's no rescue. Same thing has happened now with the new album - been labelled as a step back (three steps back actually) when it comes to progressiveness, but labelled a brilliant album nonetheless. So it's a smash hit with a sold out world tour to accompany it. Go figure.

On the stand up and pay respect issue: I think it's different for fellow musicians than it is for us 'fans'. For us it's simply a matter of liking something or not liking it - even if we hate it, it's something we could not do ourselves (I mean I totally hate all boybands etcetera but could not pull off what they do even if I wanted to). Fellow musicians present there should, IMHO, run a checklist by themselves to see if they should stand up and pay respect. Could be a simple checklist:

-do I write my own music (without having to resort to lame-ass samples)
-do I write my own lyrics
-can play/sing live without making a total fool of myself
-does my career last anything as long as that of the folks on stage (or will it ever)

If answering yes to all questions, an artist could consider thinking "screw them I'm way better and am not going to applaude them" (I can imagine Mick Jagger couldn't be arsed to stand up for britney spears, for example).

Sadly, the checklist would come up with a firm four NO's for most of the punks in the room at the VMAs....

(phew, gotta go easy on them pills........)

I disagree. Every once in a while, you get an artist, group that captures the sound of an era, or is identified by the media whores as capturing the sound of an era. This makes the nostolgic factor a big draw in a concert venue..

Example.... Michael Jackson. Was he an originator? Abso-friggin-lutely .... did he make tons of great music? Yes Was he a pioneer in videos, and marketing? Yes Has he put out any good music lately?? No way man! Would I pay more than I'd pay to see any other musical act perform? No... Would I pay 250 to see anyone perform... NO FRIGGIN WAY.

Now this, you'll have to admit, has a lot to do with U2's success as of late. Do many people really want to hear the new songs?? Sure there are a few, but I know that the concert goer, joe average concert goer, does not give a sh** about what's on the album, they want to hear Joshua tree, because that was on the radio the first time they ever felt up Mary Joe in their softmore year. Man! What a girl that was. How can I relive those days?? I know, I'll go to the u2 concert and relive those times with my freshman sweetheart.

Do I want to see Mick Jagger's dented in face up there pretending that he started it all? I mean, if we want to give credit to the right people, let's give credit to the really innovative musicians. The chicago blues men, and little richard, and all of the african american artists who gave us rock and roll, r&b, and soul, only to have the Elvis' of the world put thier marketing touch on it, and be hailed as the king of this or that.

I play guitar, so I consider myself a fellow musician. I'm not a professional, and I have respect for what it takes to get to that place.. but where on a u2 album, is there a place where I can listen to the music, and say, man, that's brand new stuff. I haven't heard anything like that. That's amazing. They're a commercial, they're marketable, they photograph well, they play their own instruments and they sing their own songs, but at the end of the day, they're no different from any other band, just have a bigger marketing department.

Like I said, maybe I'd clap, because I wouldn't want my absence of a clap to be considered rude, but I wouldn't be clapping from my heart..

[/soapbox]

Hmmm..........

Setlist of latest tour:
Main Set: Elevation, Beautiful Day, Until the End of the World, New Year's Day, Kite, Gone, New York, I Will Follow, Sunday Bloody Sunday, When I Get Home / Stuck In a Moment, In A Little While, Desire, Stay, Bad / 40, Where the Streets Have No Name, Mysterious Ways, The Fly
Encore(s): Bullet the Blue Sky, With or Without You, One, Wake Up Dead Man, Walk On

In 24 songs, that's a whopping three songs off of the Joshua tree, four from before that album and 17 more recent songs (seven of which from the latest album). Yes the oldies get the house moving the most (where the streets have no name is the absolute highlight in that department) but newer songs certainly get almost as good a reaction. I seriously think a lot of people going to U2 concerts want to hear the new songs. Ofcourse their having a back catalogue of songs ranging over 20 years really helps, but most people going to their concerts are 'die-hard' fans anyway (most concerts this tour have sold out within hours, people have been queueing ticketoffices everywhere since wee early in the morning or even worse).

I'm not american so I know jack about softmore/freshman and all that stuff, but I doubt there's 15 years between them? Because that is about how long ago the Joshua tree was made.

Are they very innovative? Yes and no. They've made rocksongs ranging from very simple (drums/bass/guitar/vocals) to much more complex (distorted sounds, synthesizer loops and shit like that), and there's certainly some innovating stuff between it. I doubt they were the very first to use a certain combination, influence or effect, but then being innovative is not their biggest asset. As far as innovative stuff goes, give Zooropa or Pop a try - don't know if it will contain innovation as you mean it though.

I agree on Jagger's introduction being a tad over the top (the first to mix this and that, incorporate such and so). I love the stones, but it's not all that 'weird'. But perhaps that's the problem: because it's so well-known it's considered normal, while it's really very unusual (I don't know that much about music history). And yes the true blues players deserve more respect indeed.

Are all bands the same at the end of the day? Don't think so. There's a good bunch that sounds okay on a record but really shit on stage, then there's the group who can just about recreate live what they do on their records, and then there's the small group who can even do better than that. Combine that with a long lasting career and I'd say they should be respected by fellow people in the music industry.

(hey this discussion-stuff is actually quite funny, might give up spamming in favour of discussing......)

i only saw the first hour or so, up until Jay-Z's performance...wish i could have seen the rest

couple of problems - Jamie Foxx! wtf was with him? jackass...why pick on the people he picked on? it wasn't funny at all...this year's performance was basically STOOPID!!!!!!

i don't like ***. at all. but i caught a little of the awards.

the best part was mudvayne winning the ***2 award.