Madonna Highlights Rock Hall Inductees!
#101
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by nothingfails
I grew up in the 80's, just in time to experience and enjoy both Madonna and U2's explosions in popularity. U2 has always been huge, but Madonna had this larger than life personality and presence. In the past 25 years, only Michael Jackson has seen the same sort of iconic domination.
U2 have been consistantly huge for over 20 years (barring the "slump" they had with Pop, but who hasn't had a slump at one time or the others), but I don't think Bono has ever ever had the Elvis-ish larger than life presence that Madonna had in the 80's and 90's. When Madonna would have a world premiere video, it was an event that was advertised for weeks. She could be away for a year and people would still be talking her. OTOH, I remember when U2 came back in late 91, it was treated as a "comeback" to a lot of people since so many people had forgotten them during the 2 or so years they stayed quiet after the Rattle And Hum era ran its course.
All in all, I really think it depends on what age and style of music you're more on. While I love rock, I am a bigger pop fan (and I don't mean Britney, etc...), and while I've followed U2 since 1987 and bought every album they've put out, to me they have never been as "huge" as Madonna was pretty much in the 80's and 90's when her sneezing would get the worlds attention. That said, I do believe U2 is one of the most important bands to emerge in the past 30 years and they deserved getting in first year eligible, much like Madonna does.
U2 have been consistantly huge for over 20 years (barring the "slump" they had with Pop, but who hasn't had a slump at one time or the others), but I don't think Bono has ever ever had the Elvis-ish larger than life presence that Madonna had in the 80's and 90's. When Madonna would have a world premiere video, it was an event that was advertised for weeks. She could be away for a year and people would still be talking her. OTOH, I remember when U2 came back in late 91, it was treated as a "comeback" to a lot of people since so many people had forgotten them during the 2 or so years they stayed quiet after the Rattle And Hum era ran its course.
All in all, I really think it depends on what age and style of music you're more on. While I love rock, I am a bigger pop fan (and I don't mean Britney, etc...), and while I've followed U2 since 1987 and bought every album they've put out, to me they have never been as "huge" as Madonna was pretty much in the 80's and 90's when her sneezing would get the worlds attention. That said, I do believe U2 is one of the most important bands to emerge in the past 30 years and they deserved getting in first year eligible, much like Madonna does.
#102
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
and, not surprisingly, none of that answers the question at all.
Madonna and Michael Jackson are in a league of their own when it comes to pop stars from the past 25 years. Especially for people who grew up in time for the advent of MTV, those two are the biggest stars we will ever see in our lifetimes considering we were too young to enjoy/live through Elvis or Beatlemania. For an entire generation of people from their early 20's to mid/late 30's, Madonna IS Elvis. U2 have never ever ever ever ever been anywhere on the pop culture zeitgeist as Madonna was for the longest time.
U2 are certainly an iconic band, but you're crazy if you think Bono ever was the larger than life pop culture icon that Madonna became. Madonna is probably the biggest female celebrity of all time, and trust me, she wanted it that way.
#103
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by nothingfails
no, somebody asked what about Madonna is bigger than U2, and I answered it.
Madonna and Michael Jackson are in a league of their own when it comes to pop stars from the past 25 years. Especially for people who grew up in time for the advent of MTV, those two are the biggest stars we will ever see in our lifetimes considering we were too young to enjoy/live through Elvis or Beatlemania. For an entire generation of people from their early 20's to mid/late 30's, Madonna IS Elvis. U2 have never ever ever ever ever been anywhere on the pop culture zeitgeist as Madonna was for the longest time.
U2 are certainly an iconic band, but you're crazy if you think Bono ever was the larger than life pop culture icon that Madonna became. Madonna is probably the biggest female celebrity of all time, and trust me, she wanted it that way.
Madonna and Michael Jackson are in a league of their own when it comes to pop stars from the past 25 years. Especially for people who grew up in time for the advent of MTV, those two are the biggest stars we will ever see in our lifetimes considering we were too young to enjoy/live through Elvis or Beatlemania. For an entire generation of people from their early 20's to mid/late 30's, Madonna IS Elvis. U2 have never ever ever ever ever been anywhere on the pop culture zeitgeist as Madonna was for the longest time.
U2 are certainly an iconic band, but you're crazy if you think Bono ever was the larger than life pop culture icon that Madonna became. Madonna is probably the biggest female celebrity of all time, and trust me, she wanted it that way.
I think Elvis just rolled over in his grave.
Also, Oprah? Hepburns? Princess Di? Paris Hilton? Rachael Ray? All bigger than Madonna.
Last edited by DaveWadding; 12-18-07 at 02:04 PM.
#104
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
I think Elvis just rolled over in his grave.
Also, Oprah? Hepburns? Princess Di? Paris Hilton? Rachael Ray? All bigger than Madonna.
Also, Oprah? Hepburns? Princess Di? Paris Hilton? Rachael Ray? All bigger than Madonna.
It's obvious you just hate Madonna. I mean, come on, Paris Hilton and Rachael Ray are bigger than her? On what planet. You hate Madonna yet think Paris has talent? WTF!!!!! Princess Di was bigger than Madonna I'll give you, but you forgot the word "CELEBRITY". Di wasn't a celebrity. A celebrity is a singer/actor, she's an icon but she wasn't a celebrity.
It's pretty obvious I'm arguing with someone who hates Madonna, as opposed to just a "she isn't rock", I mean, come on... you think she's untalented and yet you like Paris freaking Hilton? Come on, there is a vast difference between not thinking Madonna belongs in a ROCK AND ROLL Hall Of Fame and someone who seriously thinks the likes of Hilton and Spears have more to offer.
#106
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by nothingfails
Princess Di was bigger than Madonna I'll give you, but you forgot the word "CELEBRITY". Di wasn't a celebrity. A celebrity is a singer/actor, she's an icon but she wasn't a celebrity.
noun
1. a widely known person; "he was a baseball celebrity"
2. the state or quality of being widely honored and acclaimed [syn: fame] [ant: infamy]
Just stop. Madonna couldn't hold Elvis' jock. Period.
Also, yes. I hate Madonna. I'm sorry.
#107
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 7,568
Received 229 Likes
on
129 Posts
From: Part of the Left-Wing Conspiracy
Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Madonna too. She has the "advantage" of being a single artist vs. a Band. Elvis, MJ and Madonna are all single names so they seem to be in there own league.
However U2 is a "bigger" name. When was the last time Madonna met the pope, most of the living Presidents, and been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize? Madonna has not launched a worldwide charity that top corporate companies belong to. Madonna hasn't done a huge World Tour in years like U2, or the Stones do.
No doubt Madonna belongs in the Rock Hall. I posted that list a few pages back as a reminder that MANY bands that do deserve it, aren't in. Nothing more.
However U2 is a "bigger" name. When was the last time Madonna met the pope, most of the living Presidents, and been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize? Madonna has not launched a worldwide charity that top corporate companies belong to. Madonna hasn't done a huge World Tour in years like U2, or the Stones do.
No doubt Madonna belongs in the Rock Hall. I posted that list a few pages back as a reminder that MANY bands that do deserve it, aren't in. Nothing more.
#108
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Madonna doesn't do full scale tours because she is the type of person who tires easily and wants to move on to something new. Plus, with the kids, she will only tour in the summer when they're out of school. I do think it's a little selfish on her behalf because if Cher can do a 2 1/2 year long tour and play practically every city on the face of the earth (I use Cher because she's another huge female artist who is more than just a singer, but yet when she finds it in her to go on tour, she tours her butt off), Madonna could do more than 3 months at a time, but I'm just saying... Madonna doesn't really want to go all out and do a year-long trek like The Stones, U2, Paul McCartney or someone else in that vein does, she wants to be a mother first. Although it sucks for those of us who don't live in the big cities, so we're used to being passed by every time she goes out on the road.
While Madonna has spoken up for charities she believes in and wants to put money into, I don't think she's ever wanted to be this huge spokesperson the way Bono has become. I think Bono is a fantastic humanitarian who wants to be remembered as something more than the lead singer of U2, but all in all, it's his choice. I think that is why he gets all the humanitatian awards and meets world leaders, because of all of his charity work, not because of U2.
While Madonna has spoken up for charities she believes in and wants to put money into, I don't think she's ever wanted to be this huge spokesperson the way Bono has become. I think Bono is a fantastic humanitarian who wants to be remembered as something more than the lead singer of U2, but all in all, it's his choice. I think that is why he gets all the humanitatian awards and meets world leaders, because of all of his charity work, not because of U2.
#109
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chrisedge
U2 2001 Tour = $109.7M
Madonna 2001 Tour = $75M
U2 2005/2006 Tour = $212M
Madonna Tour = $193.7
Now I know Madonna has more than half the number of shows, but at more than twice the average ticket price. I doubt Madonna could do a huge 120+ date tour like U2 can.
U2 Tops Billboard's Money Makers Chart
January 20, 2006, 11:10 AM ET
With $255,022,633.35, U2 reigns supreme on Billboard's inaugural Money Makers chart, which brings together Nielsen Music data and the magazine's Boxscore numbers to create a master top 20 chart of acts that generated the most income during 2005. The list includes album and digital sales as well as accumulated box-office receipts. U2 ranked 27th in album sales, ninth in digital sales and No. 1 at the box office. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/searc..._id=1001882362
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...ic/2043557.stm
Top music earners of 2001
1. U2 - $61.9m
2. Dr Dre - $51.9m
3. The Beatles - $47.9m
4. The Dave Matthews Band - $43.4m
5. Madonna - $40.8m
Madonna did do a 2004 Tour as well that grossed $125M as well. Madonna tours less, charges WAY more per ticket and comes up short.
Albums:
Boy 3m
October 3m
War 8m
UABRS 8m
Unforgettable Fire 8m
WAIA 2m
Joshua Tree 25m
Rattle & Hum 14m
Achtung Baby 17m
Zooropa 8m
Pop 6m
Best of 1980-90 16m*
ATYCLB 12m
Best of 1990-00 5m*
HTDAAB 9m
Total = 123M without the GH records or 144 million with.
Madonna 9M
Like a Virgin 19M
True Blue 20M
Like a Prayer 13M
Erotica 6M
Bedtime Stories 7M
Ray of Light 15M
Music 12M
American Life 4M
Confessions on a Dance Floor 8M
You Can Dance 6M
The Immaculate Collection 25M
Something to Remember 9M
GHV2 7M
Remixed & Revisited 1M
Total = 94 Million without GH or 142M with GH/Remixes
Madonna 2001 Tour = $75M
U2 2005/2006 Tour = $212M
Madonna Tour = $193.7
Now I know Madonna has more than half the number of shows, but at more than twice the average ticket price. I doubt Madonna could do a huge 120+ date tour like U2 can.
U2 Tops Billboard's Money Makers Chart
January 20, 2006, 11:10 AM ET
With $255,022,633.35, U2 reigns supreme on Billboard's inaugural Money Makers chart, which brings together Nielsen Music data and the magazine's Boxscore numbers to create a master top 20 chart of acts that generated the most income during 2005. The list includes album and digital sales as well as accumulated box-office receipts. U2 ranked 27th in album sales, ninth in digital sales and No. 1 at the box office. http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/searc..._id=1001882362
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...ic/2043557.stm
Top music earners of 2001
1. U2 - $61.9m
2. Dr Dre - $51.9m
3. The Beatles - $47.9m
4. The Dave Matthews Band - $43.4m
5. Madonna - $40.8m
Madonna did do a 2004 Tour as well that grossed $125M as well. Madonna tours less, charges WAY more per ticket and comes up short.
Albums:
Boy 3m
October 3m
War 8m
UABRS 8m
Unforgettable Fire 8m
WAIA 2m
Joshua Tree 25m
Rattle & Hum 14m
Achtung Baby 17m
Zooropa 8m
Pop 6m
Best of 1980-90 16m*
ATYCLB 12m
Best of 1990-00 5m*
HTDAAB 9m
Total = 123M without the GH records or 144 million with.
Madonna 9M
Like a Virgin 19M
True Blue 20M
Like a Prayer 13M
Erotica 6M
Bedtime Stories 7M
Ray of Light 15M
Music 12M
American Life 4M
Confessions on a Dance Floor 8M
You Can Dance 6M
The Immaculate Collection 25M
Something to Remember 9M
GHV2 7M
Remixed & Revisited 1M
Total = 94 Million without GH or 142M with GH/Remixes
Last edited by cyberguy13; 12-18-07 at 05:53 PM.
#110
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
I think Elvis just rolled over in his grave.
Also, Oprah? Hepburns? Princess Di? Paris Hilton? Rachael Ray? All bigger than Madonna.
Also, Oprah? Hepburns? Princess Di? Paris Hilton? Rachael Ray? All bigger than Madonna.
OK now you're being assinine. Are you going to derail this discussion with nonsense? If you hate her, fine. Just be factual as much as possible.
If anything, Madonna has more credibility than Elvis, who never wrote his songs, was controlled in every way. It kinda chaps my ass when someone gets in the Hall who isn't a songwriter as well. I do have to remind myself that personalities do matter so someone like Elvis, whose impact was enormous, must get in.
Haha, I just ran across this on Youtube when I googled Madonna concerts ( I need to study up on her since I lost track a bit since the early 00's). I have never seen this performance. Dayum. I mean, DAYUM! I have never seen her belt a song quite like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTMM4x7fyUs
#111
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by B5Erik
Again, my problem isn't so much Madonna getting in (although I wouldn't have voted for her), it's that she got in before legendary or important ROCK bands who were making albums 10-15 years before she came on the scene.
My main problem, though, with the R&RHOF is that Jann Wenner is using his bully pulpit to keep deserving bands out because HE doesn't like them. That's utter bullcrap.
My main problem, though, with the R&RHOF is that Jann Wenner is using his bully pulpit to keep deserving bands out because HE doesn't like them. That's utter bullcrap.
Its not her fault though. The HOF is a joke in that it is controlled and certain members have a grudge against certain bands/people and it isn't right in the least. We have to acknowledge and celebrate when a deserving person does get in because they would have to stop allowing newly eligible people in and just stick to allowing the past eligible people in. That would take years. That isn't fair to those that are deserving at their 25 year anniversary. Let's keep fighting for those others getting in!
#112
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Joined: Jun 1999
Posts: 7,568
Received 229 Likes
on
129 Posts
From: Part of the Left-Wing Conspiracy
Originally Posted by cyberguy13
Madonna has sold in excess of 200 million albums worldwide( Source: Billboard)
Originally Posted by cyberguy13
...and in overall impact...Though she takes it to another level...
Even Billboard admits they don't have accurate info pre-1991: (this is regarding Madonna vs Mariah Carey)
Originally Posted by Billboard
If we are going strictly by album and single sales, we don't have a way of getting an exact figure for both artists. Nielsen SoundScan, our sister company that was established in 1991, tracks U.S. music sales. Unfortunately, because a good chunk of Madonna's career (and a sliver of Carey's) pre-dates 1991, we don't have a complete sales record for either of them.
But I feel U2 will ALWAYS be held in higher regard as they have been critical darlings as well as having a huge fan base.
Last edited by Chrisedge; 12-18-07 at 06:47 PM.
#113
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by nothingfails
Madonna doesn't do full scale tours because she is the type of person who tires easily and wants to move on to something new. Plus, with the kids, she will only tour in the summer when they're out of school. I do think it's a little selfish on her behalf because if Cher can do a 2 1/2 year long tour and play practically every city on the face of the earth (I use Cher because she's another huge female artist who is more than just a singer, but yet when she finds it in her to go on tour, she tours her butt off), Madonna could do more than 3 months at a time, but I'm just saying... Madonna doesn't really want to go all out and do a year-long trek like The Stones, U2, Paul McCartney or someone else in that vein does, she wants to be a mother first. Although it sucks for those of us who don't live in the big cities, so we're used to being passed by every time she goes out on the road.
Originally Posted by cyberguy13
OK now you're being assinine. Are you going to derail this discussion with nonsense? If you hate her, fine. Just be factual as much as possible.
If anything, Madonna has more credibility than Elvis, who never wrote his songs, was controlled in every way. It kinda chaps my ass when someone gets in the Hall who isn't a songwriter as well. I do have to remind myself that personalities do matter so someone like Elvis, whose impact was enormous, must get in.
If anything, Madonna has more credibility than Elvis, who never wrote his songs, was controlled in every way. It kinda chaps my ass when someone gets in the Hall who isn't a songwriter as well. I do have to remind myself that personalities do matter so someone like Elvis, whose impact was enormous, must get in.
Also, it's hilarious that you attack me for not being factually accurate and then you go on to say that Elvis never wrote anything...Elvis has writing credits on the following hits:
Don't Be Cruel
Love Me Tender
Heartbreak Hotel
All Shook Up
Not to mention his work as an arranger and producer....But I would honestly like you to name 4 Madonna-written songs that can hold a candle to the above Elvis songs.
Let me just make it clear to you who are persuing this Madonna/Elvis comparison: Madonna would never be any better than a boil on Fat Elvis' ass.
#114
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Chrisedge
Link?
This is subjective. I tried to at least provide some facts behind my reasoning.
Even Billboard admits they don't have accurate info pre-1991: (this is regarding Madonna vs Mariah Carey)
EDITED TO ADD: Looking around it DOES appear that Madonna has sold more records than U2. I would still argue, the "Whole other level" thing. They are both superstars, and both deserve first year inductions.
But I feel U2 will ALWAYS be held in higher regard as they have been critical darlings as well as having a huge fan base.
This is subjective. I tried to at least provide some facts behind my reasoning.
Even Billboard admits they don't have accurate info pre-1991: (this is regarding Madonna vs Mariah Carey)
EDITED TO ADD: Looking around it DOES appear that Madonna has sold more records than U2. I would still argue, the "Whole other level" thing. They are both superstars, and both deserve first year inductions.
But I feel U2 will ALWAYS be held in higher regard as they have been critical darlings as well as having a huge fan base.
Oh well of course. U2 and particularly Bono are megastars. As for U2 being critical darlings, well, yes but rock bands have always had an easier time of it( when they are good) becoming critical darlings than a pop/rock performer. They deserve every bit of it and then some. U2 level fame/influence will likely not ever be achieved by another band again( given the lackluster state of music at the moment). They are the template for super-bands to follow. I am afraid those days of grande entertainers/musicians are long dead. The likes of U2 or Madonna will not likely ever be seen again.
I have yet to see them in concert( I know I know). It just pains me that I missed out because of my self imposed exile from attending due to prices, which, haha, were a bargain compared to NOW!
#115
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
Excuses, excuses...
Hey, We're all prone to a little hyperbole arent we? "Madonna is the biggest female celebrity in the world." "Paris Hilton and Rachael Ray are bigger than Madonna." I'm just using the precedent already set in this thread. But since it's the other way around it's not cool. Have it your way.
Also, it's hilarious that you attack me for not being factually accurate and then you go on to say that Elvis never wrote anything...Elvis has writing credits on the following hits:
Don't Be Cruel
Love Me Tender
Heartbreak Hotel
All Shook Up
Not to mention his work as an arranger and producer....But I would honestly like you to name 4 Madonna-written songs that can hold a candle to the above Elvis songs.
Let me just make it clear to you who are persuing this Madonna/Elvis comparison: Madonna would never be any better than a boil on Fat Elvis' ass.
Hey, We're all prone to a little hyperbole arent we? "Madonna is the biggest female celebrity in the world." "Paris Hilton and Rachael Ray are bigger than Madonna." I'm just using the precedent already set in this thread. But since it's the other way around it's not cool. Have it your way.
Also, it's hilarious that you attack me for not being factually accurate and then you go on to say that Elvis never wrote anything...Elvis has writing credits on the following hits:
Don't Be Cruel
Love Me Tender
Heartbreak Hotel
All Shook Up
Not to mention his work as an arranger and producer....But I would honestly like you to name 4 Madonna-written songs that can hold a candle to the above Elvis songs.
Let me just make it clear to you who are persuing this Madonna/Elvis comparison: Madonna would never be any better than a boil on Fat Elvis' ass.
It seems your claims on Elvis might not be wholly accurate: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Presley-E...ongwriting.htm
Seems he was given songwriting credit for business reasons( at Parkers request) but did have a hand in arranging songs, putting his signature on them. It was common back in the day, artists getting songwriting credit for songs they did not write. The secret is in the publishing of the songs. THAT is where, if you know where to look, you can find out who really wrote the songs and who didn't.
#116
DVD Talk Legend
Not that I think you can use record sales, concert tickets, awards etc. to determine which is bigger, I think that singles are included in the above figures, so I can see Madonna selling more.
I think U2 is bigger merely because more people are aware of what is going on with them and care. I would be hard pressed to find someone that is aware of much that Madonna has done in the last 15 years other than write the theme song for a Bond movie, kiss Britney onstage, and appear with Borat in a music video. I don't know anyone who has any Madonna material other than maybe her first compilation. Sure, maybe those who still watch MTV and follow dance and pop music keep up with Madonna, but I do not think her fan base is nearly as widespread. Just about every person I know under 50, regardless of their musical taste, still follows U2 and buys their stuff. They are much less polarizing and seem to have a wider audience demographic.
Basically, I think that U2 is by far the biggest and most well-known musical artist of the last 25 years. I don't really think anyone comes close.
I think U2 is bigger merely because more people are aware of what is going on with them and care. I would be hard pressed to find someone that is aware of much that Madonna has done in the last 15 years other than write the theme song for a Bond movie, kiss Britney onstage, and appear with Borat in a music video. I don't know anyone who has any Madonna material other than maybe her first compilation. Sure, maybe those who still watch MTV and follow dance and pop music keep up with Madonna, but I do not think her fan base is nearly as widespread. Just about every person I know under 50, regardless of their musical taste, still follows U2 and buys their stuff. They are much less polarizing and seem to have a wider audience demographic.
Basically, I think that U2 is by far the biggest and most well-known musical artist of the last 25 years. I don't really think anyone comes close.
#118
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by cdollaz
Not that I think you can use record sales, concert tickets, awards etc. to determine which is bigger, I think that singles are included in the above figures, so I can see Madonna selling more.
I think U2 is bigger merely because more people are aware of what is going on with them and care. I would be hard pressed to find someone that is aware of much that Madonna has done in the last 15 years other than write the theme song for a Bond movie, kiss Britney onstage, and appear with Borat in a music video. I don't know anyone who has any Madonna material other than maybe her first compilation. Sure, maybe those who still watch MTV and follow dance and pop music keep up with Madonna, but I do not think her fan base is nearly as widespread. Just about every person I know under 50, regardless of their musical taste, still follows U2 and buys their stuff. They are much less polarizing and seem to have a wider audience demographic.
Basically, I think that U2 is by far the biggest and most well-known musical artist of the last 25 years. I don't really think anyone comes close.
I think U2 is bigger merely because more people are aware of what is going on with them and care. I would be hard pressed to find someone that is aware of much that Madonna has done in the last 15 years other than write the theme song for a Bond movie, kiss Britney onstage, and appear with Borat in a music video. I don't know anyone who has any Madonna material other than maybe her first compilation. Sure, maybe those who still watch MTV and follow dance and pop music keep up with Madonna, but I do not think her fan base is nearly as widespread. Just about every person I know under 50, regardless of their musical taste, still follows U2 and buys their stuff. They are much less polarizing and seem to have a wider audience demographic.
Basically, I think that U2 is by far the biggest and most well-known musical artist of the last 25 years. I don't really think anyone comes close.
It's the sorry state of music. If you are over the age of 24, this generation( and even some GenXers) don't care.
But to say no one has followed, knows or cares what she has done in the last 15 years is an incredible statement. Sheesh, she has been everywhere for nearly her entire run so far! Just about everyone knows what she is up to, at least up until the early 00's and still hearing about her tours. I mean, christ, I heard all about her tours and I wasn't even living near a city she went to.
Last edited by cyberguy13; 12-18-07 at 08:08 PM.
#119
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by cyberguy13
Dude, in the last 15 years???? Are you kidding? I would say the last 5 no one has followed her that closely but then again, in the hip/hop era, no one other than a rap artist is followed closely that includes U2. If you are under 40( I'm 32) you generally don't give a fig about anyone besides those in the hip/hop genre. Other than the diehards, no one follows an artist that closely that was around before the mid-90's. No one under 30 gives a sh*t about U2 because Bono ain't 50 Cent. Key words here are "artists that were around before the mid-90's".
It's the sorry state of music. If you are over the age of 24, this generation( and even some GenXers) don't care.
It's the sorry state of music. If you are over the age of 24, this generation( and even some GenXers) don't care.
I'm 21 and all my favorite music is generally 50s to 70s music.
#120
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
I'm 21 and all my favorite music is generally 50s to 70s music.
That is rare. I love the Eagles. Aside from Soundgarden, they are my favorite band. I listen to all decades except most 50's stuff. I am an anomoly to my friends. Most of them, ranging in age from 25-42, love all the hip/hop crap.
#122
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
I'm 21 and all my favorite music is generally 50s to 70s music.
#123
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Originally Posted by nothingfails
oh, no wonder you're so quick to bash on Madonna, you're too young to remember what an impact she made in the day. I was listening to her first two albums before you were even BORN.
No, I'm so quick to bash Madonna because she is hugely overrated with her gigantic following of MTV worshipping lemmings.
#124
New Member
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
No, I'm so quick to bash Madonna because she is hugely overrated with her gigantic following of MTV worshipping lemmings.
Wow we have something in common, The Eagles! I think I have their greatest hits on a continuous loop. I never stop playing them!
IMO, you are just dead wrong about Madonna. Overrated? Not by a mile. She has made 2 albums considered masterpieces by 'most' critics ( and when I say 'most' I mean MOST). They would be Like A Prayer and Ray Of Light. They routinely make the "Best Of" lists from any and all music pubs/mags/tv/critics. I also posted an Oscar performance from 1991 that is just mindblowing.
As for Mtv, does anyone watch it still? I only know of "The Hills" and last I checked, that wasn't a music video. lol
#125
DVD Talk Special Edition
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveWadding
No, I'm so quick to bash Madonna because she is hugely overrated with her gigantic following of MTV worshipping lemmings.
I hate MTV btw, I loved it as a kid but I can't say I've purposely watched it for more than a half hour without changing the channels since the late 90's. I loved MTV in the 80's and early 90's but then they stopped playing music and became a hellhole and it's gotten worse with time.
BTW, I happen to like Elvis and a lot of the 50's-70's legends you love too. But Madonna's career came up alongside my childhood and I've been following her since 1984/85, and I do believe she is one of the biggest icons I've ever experienced in my lifetime. If you weren't there to remember Madonna's heyday of power or didn't have a parent or older sibling who was into it, you'll never truly grasp how larger than life Madonna was from practically 1985-1995. It was a level of fame and iconness that Hilton, Britney, Beyonce, or any other famous female out today has yet to come close to.
Last edited by nothingfails; 12-18-07 at 08:48 PM.



