Page 399/486
7 | 3 | 4 | 8 |

 
From rohan
 
post time 2007-08-09 06:46:26
Reply
LOL! Sorry, I just had to post this... it was so hilarious!

"Stewie is gay":



     

 
From Anita Mann
 
post time 2007-08-07 09:00:21
Reply
GO ROBYN!

Wooo-hooo! Swedish popster Robyn (who had a No. 1 hit 9 years ago with "Show Me Love") might just hit the top again this week.


Here are this week's UK midweeks:

01 (01) Timbaland – The Way I Are (only 407 copies ahead)
02 (05) Kleerup feat. Robyn – With Every Heartbeat
03 (02) Kate Nash – Foundations
04 (03) Fergie – Big Girls Don’t Cry
05 (04) Rihanna – Umbrella
06 (09) Plain White Ts – Hey There, Delilah
07 (07) Newton Faulkner – Dream Catch Me
08 (NE) Darren Hayes – On The Verge Of Something Wonderful
09 (06) Enrique Iglesias – Do You Know
10 (08) Hoosiers – Worried About Ray

Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2007-08-08 07:32:21
The ROBYN song is good... think it's gonna be huuuge...

Especially excited about the new DARREN HAYES single (and album soon!) though... (didn't like the song much at first, but it's grown on me and now really love it!) Hope he's still Top 10 by the end of the week!


Replied by Anita Mann
 
Post time: 2007-08-09 00:52:57
Good news is that Robyn has since moved to No. 1 (fingers crossed that she's still there come Sunday). Darren Hayes, however, had to make way in the Top 10 for the new Kanye West feat. Daft Punk single, which became available to download on Tuesday (I'm still not sure if I like it, but it's going to be MASSIVE!).


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2007-08-09 06:44:03
Well I hate to say it (since I generally have serious grudges with hip hop music), but the KANYE song is actually quite good... quite innovative. It deserves to do well I think (at least it's better than the majority of the %@!*& hip-hop out there at the moment).
(I STILL hope the Darren song will make the Top 10 though )


Replied by Anita Mann
 
Post time: 2007-08-09 08:07:19
I just had a peak at next week's Billboard Hot 100, and saw that Kanye's "Stronger" had bulleted from No. 47 to No. 6 in only its second week on the chart.
Impressive!


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2007-08-09 21:23:33
I'm just glad that P!NK's 'Who Knew' moves up from 40 to 27 this week on the Billboard Hot 100! May she go even further!


     

 
From rohan
 
post time 2007-08-06 21:07:57
Reply
A bit of a lengthy article, but interesting (and shocking!) nonetheless...

ARTISTS ABUSING SONGWRITERS / FALSELY CLAIMING TO CO-WRITE...

Of all the names in music, Chantal Kreviazuk may be the least likely to appear in a headline. Though she recently released her own album, the songwriter usually stays behind the scenes to pen hits with artists such as Kelly Clarkson, Gwen Stefani and Avril Lavigne.

Earlier this month, however, Miss Kreviazuk rocked the pop-music world by suggesting that Miss Lavigne was a collaborator in name only. Although she quickly retracted her comments and others defended Miss Lavigne, the flap illuminated a long-standing fraud that has become more prevalent than ever: "singer-songwriters" who do much less songwriting than their publicists would have you believe.

"It's crazy," exclaimed Grammy-winning songwriter Diane Warren, who has written for artists such as Whitney Houston, Celine Dion and Mary J. Blige. "How can someone look in the mirror and know they didn't do something and their name is on it? For money? For credit? It's a lie."

This being the music industry, money is, of course, a factor because the writers of hit songs can earn more than the singer over the long term. However, today's singers also press for writing credit because it gives them more cachet, presenting them as more of a "real artist" in comparison with a star who doesn't write a note.

"It's a practice that's been going on, but now it's really prevalent in every situation," says songwriter Adonis Shropshire, who helped pen the hit "My Boo" for Alicia Keys and Usher and has worked with Chris Brown, Ciara and others.

Mr. Shropshire says many artists will only allow songwriters to work on an album in return for song credit, and "if they do write, they ask for more publishing than they honestly contributed ... it is the way it is."

The practice has been prevalent for decades. Elvis Presley's manager, Col. Tom Parker, maneuvered to give the King songwriting credits on early hits such as "Love Me Tender" even though he never wrote a word. James Brown was sued by an associate over song credits. Lauryn Hill settled a lawsuit by a group that claimed she improperly took sole production and writing credit on her Grammy-winning album "The Miseducation of Lauryn Hill." Sean "Diddy" Combs seemed to acknowledge claims that he wasn't really writing his raps in the "Bad Boys for Life" song with the brushoff line: "Don't worry if I write rhymes, I write checks."

The notion that serious artists have to write their own songs seems to have grown over the past two decades. Today, even the fluffiest of pop acts is credited as having written its own material.

"We as an industry ... don't look at someone who has an incredible voice as an artist, whereas having an incredible voice is artistry," says Jody Gerson, an executive vice president of EMI Music Publishing. "People place more of a value on an artist if they write their own songs; it gives them credibility."

Indeed, Miss Lavigne's songwriting abilities have been touted since she broke out as a teen with the hit "Complicated." How much she contributed to her music has long been scrutinized, however.

On her first album, Miss Lavigne worked with the writing trio the Matrix, but she ditched them on her second album, complaining they were taking too much credit for the songs. "I am a writer, and I won't accept people trying to take that away from me, and anyone who does is ignorant and doesn't know what they're talking about," she defiantly told Associated Press in 2004.

She connected with Miss Kreviazuk for her sophomore album, and the two became close friends. Miss Kreviazuk lauded Miss Lavigne's songwriting ability in an interview with AP, also in 2004 — which made Miss Kreviazuk's comments to Performing Songwriting Magazine all the more curious.

"Avril doesn't really sit and write songs by herself or anything. Avril will also cross the ethical line, and no one says anything," Miss Kreviazuk told the magazine before retracting her statement. (She was not included on Miss Lavigne's latest album.) The Matrix later came out to defend Miss Lavigne's songwriting integrity.

Sean Garrett, who has created smashes for Beyonce, Kelis, Fergie and others, says he gave up credit when he was just starting out, which is common for newcomers. "It bothered me, but I knew it was just a price that I had to pay to continue my career and stay focused with the big prize," he says.

Ne-Yo, a true singer-songwriter who co-wrote Beyonce's "Irreplaceable," says early in his career he had to deal with the same thing. He says some artists feel they are doing a novice a favor by recording his or her song, especially if it becomes a hit, so they deserve a piece of the royalties.

"If you're an unknown songwriter and you are lucky enough to get on a superstar's album, and you know that the song is going to be a single," Ne-Yo says, "and it means if it becomes No. 1 everyone is going to know your name because you wrote it, I think it's worth giving up a piece of publishing ... you are going to make your money back."

Mr. Shropshire recalls working with an A-list singer, whom he did not want to name, who wrote two words on a song and ended up getting a large piece of the publishing rights. He couldn't complain when the song became a hit.

"It didn't really bother me that much. The song came out, and it did wonderfully well," he says. "That's just the way the industry works."

That shouldn't be the case, Miss Warren says. Although she had credit taken from her early in her career, she quickly put a stop to it. Later, one major superstar demanded some of her royalties for the privilege of said superstar recording her song. Miss Warren refused.

"You want some publishing? OK then, give me a piece of the money you're making touring for the next five years for the hit I just wrote you."

But now that songwriters such as Miss Warren, Mr. Garrett and Ne-Yo are established, they rarely find themselves taken advantage of any more.

"I give other people credit where credit is due, like Beyonce really did vocally arrange ['Irreplaceable']," Ne-Yo says. "So for someone to come in and take my credit because they are who they are? That doesn't work for me. I don't care who you are. ... I'm not going to give you something you don't deserve."

!!

     

 
From rohan
 
post time 2006-12-01 20:29:08
Reply
A movie I've seen recently that I've been meaning to mention... the new 007 movie CASINO ROYALE...
I wasn't planning on going to see it, as the last few 007's I saw didn't really impress me. We went to see something else, but as it wasn't showing, we opted for the new James Bond instead... and am I glad we did!

What I want to say is: WOW! First of all - a really good movie, I haven't enjoyed a Bond movie this much since I think I saw 'View To A Kill'!

What stands out and MAKES this movie, is the actor... Daniel Craig! Wow - James Bond hasn't been this convincing and intriguing in a long time! Craig again makes the character "larger than life" and truly impressive. Also, he has MUSCLES - which makes the (very impressive!) action scenes more realistic! Also gone are all the gadgetry that made recent 007's border on the ridiculous, and this Bond really gets BRUISED and BLEEDS - which seems much more realistic in the light of everything he goes through.



Many people's concern seems to be: the new Bond isn't "handsome" enough... (I must confess from seeing the posters I also thought he wasn't as 'good-looking' as his predecessors), but - you have to see the movie to realise how charming and attractive he really is - in a different way perhaps, but this takes it away from the typical hollywood idea of 'beauty', and makes him a much more convincing hero! (And did I mention he's got a BODY?! )

I think Daniel Craig - surprisingly - is the best Bond since Connery and Moore (and it's NICE to be surprised like this!)
If you want to see a GREAT action movie, and witness what I believe is the saving grace of James Bond... do yourself a favour and go see Casino Royale - you won't be sorry!

Replied by Pet shop Boy!
 
Post time: 2006-12-02 00:47:23
I wish I could agree , but couldn't disagree more... Keeping in mind that I've been a huge Bond fan all my life, I left the cinema with an empty unsatisfied feeling. The movie kicked off promising with what seemed to be an interesting storyline and some good action, but then slowly but surely started to bore me. The rest of the action scenes were very average. The villian died half way through the movie, and by the end of the movie I couldn't remember how he died or who killed him or why for that matter. Bad movie script and it seemed that poker game was never going to end. There were no Q , no MONEYPENNY , no gadgets, and these have always been the core factor of any good Bond Movie. The Bond Girls really weren't that hot, and both died!!!! I think Daniel has potential to be an excellent Bond , but there is only so much an actor can do with a bad movie script. This movie was an experiment that hopefully won't be repeated! Bring back the gadgets, Q , moneypenny, and most of all BRING BACK BOND!


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2006-12-02 08:40:06
Wow - fascinating how taste can differ...


Replied by Popmaster
 
Post time: 2006-12-02 22:31:55
“Casino Royale” is lovely and handsomely deserves a SOLID 4-Star rating, simply because there was only one scene they could've done without, and I personally didn't find the opening sequence to be as good as most of the other Bond movies.
Everything else about the movie was magnificently perfect: loads of action, TONS of twists in the storyline, suspense and many great laughing-out-loud moments. Daniel Craig does an AMAZING job! - he completely revitalizes James Bond from the bore Brosnan turned him into.
This is simpl, an instant classic, and I can't wait until the next one!
Oh, and I TOTALLY agree with Rohan on the gadgets! They were becoming boring and ridiculous! “Invincible car”, I mean REALLY!


Replied by Pet Shop Boy !
 
Post time: 2006-12-06 07:16:37
Without the gadgets , Q , Moneypenny , and without the wit and charm that came with Roger Moore , and Pierce Brosnan, this movie becomes just like any other, average action Movie on the market today. These were the reasons why James Bond have always been in a class of his own .....


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2006-12-06 19:11:59
Sorry, but I thought Craig had more "wit" and "charm" in his little finger than Brosnan had in his whole body... (no offence to Brosnan - I like him; he just didn't cut it for me as Bond). Also, action - yes, but there's nothing "average" about it! Casino Royale made 007 REAL and BELIEVABLE for me - and more in a class of his own than he's been for years!
One of the movies of the year!


Replied by Pet Shop Boy !
 
Post time: 2006-12-07 11:25:40


Replied by Pet shop Boy!
 
Post time: 2006-12-08 19:25:12
Hi ! Me again !
This whole "bond thing" has stirred someting in me , and now I can say that I truly prefer it shaken ! not stirred ! I've been reading a lot of reviews on the net , trying to find other dissappointed bond fans, in my quest to feel better about "how negative I feel about the movie" ! Surprisingly I've found quite a few negative reviews, and instantly I started to feel better. True - there are probably more positive reviews than negative, but I've decided to post one review that explains in detail how I feel. So this is not an attempt to change anyone's mind about the movie, but rather to try and explain why a lot of people weren't impressed.
And therefore I rest my case :

JFF - I'm not that happy with the movie either. My criticisms are a little different. Mostly Martin Campbell's flat, lousy direction that leaves the Vesper/Bond dialogue scenes stiff and not that convincing or emotionally involving. Like a lot of people I read the script and I think it was so much more exciting than the finished product.

My other problem is this right here... "Perhaps with the exception of suaveness". I agree. And that's what Bond is to me, one suave smart cool-as-a-cucumber motherf--er. That to me is the DEFINITION of Bondian. It's not about who has the most muscles, scowls the meanest, any of that. And Craig, while good, is lacking this key and crucial ingredient of what Bond is to me. That's why Bond became my hero of choice and not Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson or the million and one interchangeable tough guys that followed in their footsteps. Craig has a presence, no doubt, but he still comes off like a thug. That's not Bond to me. It will be interesting to see if in the next one this Bond who is supposed to have "changed" is actually any smoother or still just the bash-your-head-in type.

My opinion, as valid as Klaus' or anyone.

I forget who mentioned it, but they're right, Wilson has been wanting to change Bond into this other guy since Dalton days. CR is closer to the mark than those two movies I think, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Time magazine had it right as well: there's something lacking there that just doesn't satisfy. Ultimately, it seems a little pointless, I don't know.

As much as I liked the third act developments in the script, in the movie itself I felt myself longing for some action again. The Venice bit is rushed and confused and feels half-assed.

Although I like the idea of films being linked with an organization Bond is going up against like the old days, I worry that now they are going to try to outdo themselves on the angst and "revenge" yet again and veer farther away from just giving us a COOL ACTION-ADVENTURE.

I'm glad the movie is a success, but I'm also depressed. I can't believe I saw the same movie as those saying this is better than all 20 films that preceded it. Wow, I don't get that.

In a strange way it even feels like pandering. It's a Bond movie for people who have never really liked Bond movies that much. Bravo.

Edited by benskelly - 21/11/2006 - 06:17:16


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2006-12-08 21:19:24
I think this part says it best: "It's a Bond movie for people who have never really liked Bond movies that much."


Replied by
 
Post time: 2007-08-03 10:10:06
(Apols for reviving this 'old' thread, but this NEEDS to be said).

I'm am now the PROUD owner of the complete Bond Box-set (including Casino Royale) - and what a treat it is watching them all!

Now, about that opening sequence:

QUOTE myself (above): "...and I personally didn't find the opening sequence to be as good as most of the other Bond movies."

What utter CRAP was I writing! Casino Royale's opening sequence is fabby! I particularly love the scene where he comes out of the public restroom's cubicle punching the enemy, and Roskov requiring afterwards "Why did you kill him? He only asked you to touch it!" (How could I've missed this the first time?)

The opening is almost as good as MI2, but in my books nothing can beat mountaineer Tom Cruise's ascending to the beat of 'Iko Iko', and the exploding sunglasses EVER!


Replied by rohan
 
Post time: 2007-08-04 10:13:41
Actually, I missed that part as well...


     

 
From rohan
 
post time 2007-07-29 21:53:48
Reply
Remember them? I've always thought they had one of the best band names ever... Australia's PSEUDO ECHO! Mostly famous for their 80's hits 'Funky Town' and 'Listening' (oh - such memories!), and their classic album 'Love An Adventure'.



The band also reunited again after about a decade apart (beginning of this century), and are still constantly touring (as well as having recorded some new stuff that I look forward to hearing). Still... isn't that just one of the best names ever?

Replied by Reks
 
Post time: 2007-08-02 08:28:17
I love all the songs from their album "Race". I especially prefer the balled one. I think their music is amazing and so catchy! Thanks for showing them to me!


     

Page 399/486
7 | 3 | 4 | 8 |
Password: