Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Does Beyoncé do anything original or just bite off others?
MJ to start with the whole 'drill team' then Alanis ... ? |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
So Judas Priest wins a Grammy for a performance of a 32 year old song, while Megadeth gets screwed over again?
I like Judas Priest, but come on. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
So far Lady Gaga and Maxwell/Roberta Flack have been the standout performances.
Les Paul tribute :up: |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
I kinda just fast forwarded through it to see what theatrical bullshit performances there were and of course that was pretty much all of them. I mean I figured Green Day could of least pulled off something decent, but then they had to get all broadway musical. Also most of the best new artists had albums released in 2008 or have released 2nd albums.
|
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Thanks to CBS for yet again broadcasting this on a 3 hour tape delay. Don't worry, there aren't that many people who live west of the Rockies and most of us don't have an internet connection, I guess. Had to not check out this thread until after the show finished here at 11:30. This year they didn't even list the off-air winners on TV, so if you wanted to know, you had to check online and get all the on-air winners spoiled. Great idea, CBS.
Bet NBC does this same shit with the Olympics in a couple of weeks. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by TripWire
(Post 9974803)
Also most of the best new artists had albums released in 2008 or have released 2nd albums.
Best Rock Album Nominee Eric Clapton and Steve Winwood - Live From Madison Square Garden - Really? A live album of old material? There were no other studio albums of new material by other artists that weren't much better? Best Alternative Album David Byrne and Brina Eno - Everything That Happens Will Happen Today - Released in 2008, for one. Secondly, I'm a bit on the fence as to whether this should have even been nominated to begin with. Death Cab For Cutie - The Open Door - I like Death Cab, but this is a four song EP, not an album. Again, I'm sure any of us here could have come up with at least twenty alternate choices that were actually full length albums. ...and those are just scratching the surface, but just show how out of touch the Grammy nominee committee is. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by Rocketdog2000
(Post 9975189)
I agree, which is one of many reasons I feel the Grammys are complete BS. Here are some more...
Best Rock Album Nominee Eric Clapton and Steve Winwood - Live From Madison Square Garden - Really? A live album of old material? There were no other studio albums of new material by other artists that weren't much better? Best Alternative Album David Byrne and Brina Eno - Everything That Happens Will Happen Today - Released in 2008, for one. Secondly, I'm a bit on the fence as to whether this should have even been nominated to begin with. Death Cab For Cutie - The Open Door - I like Death Cab, but this is a four song EP, not an album. Again, I'm sure any of us here could have come up with at least twenty alternate choices that were actually full length albums. ...and those are just scratching the surface, but just show how out of touch the Grammy nominee committee is. http://music-mix.ew.com/2009/12/02/g...-idiots-guide/ Best Rock Album Nominee Eric Clapton and Steve Winwood - Live From Madison Square Garden - Really? A live album of old material? There were no other studio albums of new material by other artists that weren't much better? |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by Decker
(Post 9974960)
Thanks to CBS for yet again broadcasting this on a 3 hour tape delay. Don't worry, there aren't that many people who live west of the Rockies and most of us don't have an internet connection, I guess. Had to not check out this thread until after the show finished here at 11:30. This year they didn't even list the off-air winners on TV, so if you wanted to know, you had to check online and get all the on-air winners spoiled. Great idea, CBS.
Bet NBC does this same shit with the Olympics in a couple of weeks. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Not my thing at all, but Taylor Swift really sounded awful. Taylor Hicks is a better singer than her.
Really tired of that "Tonight's Going to be a Big Big Night" song ... from the Black Eyed Peas, is it? It's been completely overplayed, and it sick of hearing it played over everything. I sort of like Lady Gaga in spite of myself, but she really needs to get the fuck away from all of that no-talent, flash-in-pan hip-hop shit she's been associating herself with. And Tarantino came off like such a dipshit that I felt embarassed watching him, knowing that I had my Inglorious Basterds blu-ray in the same room. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Taylor Swift always sounds awful live.
|
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by Josh-da-man
(Post 9975485)
I sort of like Lady Gaga in spite of myself, but she really needs to get the fuck away from all of that no-talent, flash-in-pan hip-hop shit she's been associating herself with.
|
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by Decker
(Post 9974960)
Thanks to CBS for yet again broadcasting this on a 3 hour tape delay. Don't worry, there aren't that many people who live west of the Rockies and most of us don't have an internet connection, I guess. Had to not check out this thread until after the show finished here at 11:30. This year they didn't even list the off-air winners on TV, so if you wanted to know, you had to check online and get all the on-air winners spoiled. Great idea, CBS.
Bet NBC does this same shit with the Olympics in a couple of weeks. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
I'm just AMAZED that the Grammys still get even the least bit of respect after the Milli Vanilli fiasco- they didn't even learn very much from that.
|
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by ctyankee
(Post 9975260)
It's partly the rules that suck. Nominations are for material released between October 1, 2008 and August 31, 2009 so it's an odd period of time as well as being MORE than a year. They also have some cover-their-asses stuff like an album can be nominated when the material became 'prominent' so I personally don't even pay attention. More here:
http://music-mix.ew.com/2009/12/02/g...-idiots-guide/ Look when some of these other nominated albums were released... The Byrne/Eno - album came out November 2008. Talyor Swift - Fearless - came out November 2008. Kings Of Leon - Only By Night - came out September 2008. Lady Gaga - The Fame - was released in October 2008. Beyonce - I Am...Sasha Fierce - another November 2008 release. Now granted, it's fair to say that most of these albums didn't truly break and have hit singles until 2009 - so I'd cut them a little slack for that. But still, it's cutting almost too fine a hair for me. I also consider it an insult to all the other music that was released in the year proper that didn't get nominated. It's not that you don't have a point, but I would be much more concerned if ALL music didn't have a chance at a nomination. Why limit nominations to only studio-processed material? As for only new material? Plenty of great songs have come from songs that were re-interpreted by artists. Should they be excluded? |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
what i read is that for best new artist, its essentially the first time a band or artist comes into mainstream prominance. Thats what they go by. Also, the artist can't be nominated prior.
this article sums it up While everybody in Los Angeles should feel thrilled for local rockers Silversun Pickups on their Best New Artist Grammy nomination, it does beg one question -- how does a band whose 2006 full-length debut "Carnavas" sold 370,000 copies get considered a potential "Best New Artist" in 2010? The band's long-simmering rise to the top of the Silver Lake rock heap has been exceedingly documented in these pages over many years, and they've been a national act at least since their single "Lazy Eye" topped out at No. 5 on Billboard's Alternative Rock chart in 2007. If Lady Gaga can be out of the running due to her "Best Dance Recording" nomination in 2009, how can the Pickups make the cut this year? In short, because they haven't been nominated before. The official rulebook for the Best New Artist category is as follows: A new artist is defined as any performing artist who releases, during the eligibility year, the recording that first establishes the public identity of that artist as a performer. Any previous GRAMMY nomination for the artist as a performer precludes eligibility in the Best New Artist category (including a nomination as an established performing member of a nominated group). Eligibility may, however, include individuals or groups who have appeared as non-featured performers on prior recordings and solo artists formerly with groups whose recordings were released prior to the eligibility year, provided they had not received a GRAMMY Award in a performance category as a member of the group. NOTE: The artist must have released, as a featured performing artist, at least one album but not more than three; and the artist must not have been entered for Best New Artist more than three times, including as a performing member of an established group. Choirs, choruses and large band ensembles are not eligible. So the Pickups, who have two full-length albums to their name, have not been nominated for a previous Grammy and weren't entered more than three times for consideration up until now, technically are, in fact, a "new artist" under this metric. Because Gaga surfaced on a minor Grammy nomination just a hair too early in her career, she misses out on what would have been all but a shoo-in for a Best New Artist nod. Kid Cudi and Phoenix fell prey to similar technicalities. I assume next year Jay's The Blueprint 3 will be up for alot of the top awards, also same with Muse's "The Reisistance" as both were released on 9/11. Also there is a very good chance that both 'the Fame Monster' and 'bad romance' will be up for top awards next year as well |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by cungar
(Post 9975277)
Wow I can't imagine the friggin Grammys being so important to you that it caused you this much frustration.
I kept waiting for someone to say "My family is going to be so excited in three hours when they see this!". Besides, I can't comment on the show in this forum if I'm watching all the performances three hours later. |
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y0Wjo9rapWA&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Y0Wjo9rapWA&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Re: the 2010 Grammy Awards Live on CBS 1/31
Originally Posted by ctyankee
(Post 9975260)
It's partly the rules that suck. Nominations are for material released between October 1, 2008 and August 31, 2009 so it's an odd period of time as well as being MORE than a year. They also have some cover-their-asses stuff like an album can be nominated when the material became 'prominent' so I personally don't even pay attention. More here:
In 2010 Stephen Marley won Best Reggae Album for his 2007 debut album Mind Control. :confused: Ok, not quite, as this award was for an acoustic version, released 10/26/09. Still, a bit silly perhaps? |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:45 PM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.