Squealer © TY Inc.
Gold
Squealer likes to joke around. Listen to his stories awhile. No doubt he will make you smile!
Posts: 650
|
Post by Squealer © TY Inc. on Dec 6, 2012 12:47:02 GMT -5
Back in the day, winning a Grammy used to mean something. But in recent years, the credibility of the show has been thrown into question when artistic albums like Bionic by Christina Aguilera were ignored because they didn't sell well. Countless meaingless dance-pop songs like Single Ladies and Sexy And I Know got nominated, while unsuccessful masterpieces like You Lost Me by Christina Aguilera were ignored. However, the final straw came yesterday when a meaningless dance-pop song like Stronger got nominated for both ROTY and SOTY, while Lana Del Rey, arguably the greatest artist to have emerged in the last decade and a half was completely snubbed  Maybe Stronger is a jam, I admit, it's a cute bop I can shake my little cakes to, but it's sure as hell not well written. Its lyrics are basically one giant collection of cliches. Its not Grammy worthy Lana Del Rey is the lyrical voice of our generation. She takes bold chances that most artists could never even fathom (except perhaps Legend X). Her lyrics are a million times more impact and inspiring and her music sure as hell is more innovative than Kelly and her Dr Luke/Max Martin/Benny Blanco/David Guetta/Greg Kurstin factory creations. I'm not trying to be unreasonable and although Lana Del Rey deserved a 1000 nominations, I didn't think Video Games could get nominated for ROTY/SOTY. Not because it didn't deserve it, because it did, but a song like that is too ahead of its time for most people. Fair enough. But no nom for Best New Artist??? No nom for Pop Album? Get the f**k outta here!!  So is Dec 5 2012 the day we can officially say that the Grammys lost their relevance? 
|
|
Billy Uranus
3x Diamond
 
ANSER
100%
I'm a troll. And that's a fact!
Posts: 34,528
|
Post by Billy Uranus on Dec 7, 2012 10:53:55 GMT -5
They were never relevant to me, and never will be.
As for you, are you just upset that your favorites got rejected?
|
|
Pipa
Head Diva
Posts: 8,394
|
Post by Pipa on Dec 7, 2012 11:53:21 GMT -5
I don't see how one big circlejerk of super rich music execs patting themselves for producing terrible music could lose its meaning.
|
|
|
Post by BRiTNASTY on Dec 7, 2012 12:40:01 GMT -5
The Grammys have been overrated for years, last year took the cake with frigging Loud getting an Album of the Year nom.
With Lana getting the snub this year, it really proves out how out of touch the Grammy voting panel is.
There were so many amazing albums this year that were overlooked for contrived albums like Jack White's critically lukewarm received album or The Black Keys spec album with Danger Mouse. Grizzly Bear, The Weekend, Lana, Milo Greene all put out better albums than Jack Whites album.
Call Me Maybe getting any sort of recognition was also a joke. Arguably the biggest song of the year doesn't mean it should win Record of the Year or Song of the Year. It's some of the most basic ass songwriting I have ever heard.
There's also some massive rigging in there to get Taylor a Record of the Year nom for WANEGBT when it wasn't even nominated in its genre category. Proof positive that it was rigged to give her a nomination and to draw viewers.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs. KP on Apr 13, 2013 14:49:47 GMT -5
Grammys died the day BeyondSh!t was born.
|
|
XFER
Platinum
Would you go with me?
Posts: 1,536
|
Post by XFER on Apr 13, 2013 21:16:17 GMT -5
I remember when the Grammys were like MTV used to be... to a degree of course. You could see some artists that were worthwhile, and now said artists are only nominated in stuff like best packaging or something silly, while the typical pop stars with not much merit are loaded with nominations. Maybe the Grammys have always been bad and since I didn't know as much as now, I thought they were good, who knows?
|
|