It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
August isn't an eventful month for news generally, so that's probably an explanation. No doubt more unnecessary coverage is going to be spent on a lot of stuff throughout the month!
A couple of songs from the 80's/90's that has got some recognition and a more recent song that's only mentioned because of the sample of the ABBA classic Gimme! Gimme! Gimme! (A Man After Midnight)?
Relating to that, here's some news that I can relate to you with.
https://theplaylist.net/scarlett-johansson-avengers-payday-20180817/
She's not talented. She has like one facial expression. Everyone in Avengers Infinity War played their part well, and had something to do in the story. She had two fight scenes, that's it. She treats average people bad, and she steals roles from other races and cultures.
What roles has she 'stolen from other races and cultures' exactly?
There was Ghost in the Shell, which is meant for a Asian actress. Then, there was that transgender role that she dropped out of. Ironically, they were made by the same director.
And i'm sure a man or a woman could play a 'transgender' part as the he/she is neither one or the other strictly speaking.
So that's just two examples of all the roles she's apparently 'stolen'
I think your beef with Johansson is merely personal dislike.
Pretty much it is personal dislike. But I was probably in a bad mood, and saw the title of the post. It was people giving their personal opinions, I felt like giving mine. I can drop it, however. I don't want to start an argument.
One of if not the most famous female artists of all time. Been a hugely successful singer and songwriter since the early 80's and has constantly re-invented herself while still maintaining a huge following.
Is the best selling female artist of all time and has only sold less records than The Beatles, Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson.
I'd say she certainly has something....
A talent for marketing perhaps... or finding the right people to help her with marketing, I don´t know? She certainly does not distinguish hersker as an artist...
She certainly isn't very likeable, personal opinion of course
You're probably right, but Jobo's assertion was that she had no talent which obviously isn't the case looking at her success and longevity. Even if you can't stand her you have to acknowledge her achievements.
The marketing world is full of pretty talentless people who make carreers and earn big money. They are everywhere! That is the thing about commercialism in general. It is not necesarrily connected with art or actual ability. It is basically all about branding.
Marketing will take you so far. To be the biggest selling female artist of all time takes a little more than just 'marketing' i would imagine.
Off the top of my head i can only think of the Khardashians that you could level that accusation at, but then they were already very rich before they became a reality TV phenomenon.
Any other names you wanna throw in the hat that have made it all through 'marketing' and no talent?
Then again, she's not alone in failing to make a lasting impression of genius on me. I also never caught on to Michael Jackson and Prince, and even Saint David Bowie. Maybe good musicians, and I'm sorry they had to leave so early, but that's it. I don't like the term "overrated", but that's what they are for my own personal taste.
As a Bears fan, this comic resonates with me.
What a world that'd be.
Yet again the people you mention, although not to your particular taste, have made a lot of music that a lot of people like. Nothing or little to do with 'marketing' as such.
A lot of people like their music and like their peformances.
Marketing helps but if no one likes your songs then all the marketing in the world ain't gonna do squat.
Can I at least keep my Guinness?
Anyone can keep anything they like, old chum.
Just saying what makes the most sense.
They both should be legal IMO. And the drinking age in the US should be lowered to 18. I’m condident alcohol-related crimes would see a drop if it happened.
I didn’t even know the former was Scottish until recently.
Martin Compston could've made a great C/Max Denbigh I think.
1. I prefer Indie Rock Music to any of the mainstream nowadays, I feel that there's more complexity, creativity, and distinctiveness compared to the samey, generic and formulaic music that's played everywhere, especially Pop Songs, now don't get me wrong, I liked Pop Music, I do enjoy some of them as a kid, and I get why Taylor Swift was highly praised among the Pop Stars, she's a decent lyricist (not good, but decent), I could still listen to them, but there's a part of me inside that I wish those artists of today were more creative, I especially liked All Female Rock Bands because they have angst and more creative, think of The Warning, Plush, or even The Beaches (mind you all, this one's Pop), and other Indie Girl Bands, they're awesome.
2. The Feminism in the Mainstream were just used for Marketing Tool for me, how could I buy their campaign for Feminism if they're not showing it? All they do was to conform, again, in music, this is mostly the case, they were somewhat constrained by pop music conventions, which often featured similar sounds, simplistic lyrics, and stereotypical styles, while Men were allowed to be creative and experimental in their sounds, female artists should demonstrate true feminist values through their work rather than merely using the label as a marketing strategy, Feminism for me should be proved, to show, and how could they show it if they make the same bubblegum songs over and over again which would not equal the greatness of the male musicians, male listeners even underestimates the pop music, if they really want to prove it, they should show more talent, artistic ability and creativeness, they're only content with it all, worse, some of them were just using their appearances of all things, no angst at all, no respect would be directed towards these female artists if they keep staying on their girlish stereotypes and as long as they're not getting out of their comfort zones.
3. And probably in this thread, I'm not sure if people would come against me, but I'm tired of The Beatles being held in high pedestal, I mean, don't get me wrong, I know they're iconic, but to say that they're the Greatest Band on Earth like what I'm hearing from some people, it's too much, I think, are their songs any special? I don't think so, at least in my very humble personal opinion, the thing that keeps The Beatles this way is through the ongoing 'Survivorship Bias' where the lesser (albeit great) songs got died out in passing times for the favor of the more popular ones, and upon hearing and discovering those tracks, there were many great musicians and songs in the 60s, and I'd argue, better than The Beatles in terms of musical ability, talent and skills, and even in compositions, or the lyrics that makes more sense that got me, been listening to some of The Beatles songs, and maybe it's because they're overplayed in media that they have no effect on me, and when I'm doing a listening of my own, I don't listen to them often, depending upon my mood, but with the lesser songs, I've mentioned above, I could listen to them anytime, because from the instrumentation, the composition and mental imagery that's forming in my mind, they've got me, for example, listening to Nashville Teens' Tobacco Road (1964) like I'm even thinking if The Beatles could've done a song like that in the same year, yes, 1964?, I would argue that they're not even that great in instrumentation, sure they're great songwriters in the later years, and that's because they've been under the influence of drugs like LSD at the time and some Political movements which just don't affect The Beatles songs at the time, but almost half of the music in the era, so it's not only Beatles who had gone a transformation but other bands as well, and their early songs were enough for me to justify The Beatles in its raw form (without drugs or any Political movements like Hippie and such), I'm done, they're overrated to me, I still acknowledge their fame and being iconic, think of Goldfinger, but they're not to say the best band ever? They're not, I could guarantee that some bands in the 60s like The Nashville Teens and The Fortunes (yep, lesser bands), were better than them in terms of musical creativity and they've been doing it since the early 60s, it's fine to adore the band you liked, but to put them as the greatest of all doesn't ring true to me, it's also evident in their solo songs, sure you may say that they're great, some of them, yes, I could count on fingers how many good songs they have in their solo careers, only few, but again, if you've enjoyed a particular song of the either of them, then, good, for me, they've just been carried on by how iconic and popular were they, and Billy Joel is right, Taylor Swift is being in the same vein of fame, despite her songs being generically pop without quality (read the #4), The Beatles' being put on high pedestal were unfair to other artists who were just or if not more, talented than them who had just got overshadowed.
4. Music Industry is more about fame than quality.
Were they the greatest band in the world? Then. But like all groups, their star faded. Individually they continued to make music, but not with the energy and creativity of their early years. A lot of what they created individually after, I don't care for. Old rockers never seem to be able to tap into what's current. They still do great concerts playing their oldies.
One may fairly dispute their being the greatest band of all time, but you cannot argue the impact they had on music, culture, and the times. Whether you like their music or not, you also cannot argue the genius of the song writing talent of L&M. Their collective and individual output is stunning.
Don't take this as being snarky, but who has been as influential to your generation as The Beatles were to theirs?
No question, lots of talented individuals get overlooked. What unknown artists have today that unknown artists didn't have when I was growing was social media. Anyone these days with a smartphone can be seen. Whether they get rich and famous is anyone's guess. Even TV shows make stars out of amateurs.
For me music isn't about generations. A good song is a good song, irrespective who sang it in what period. Admittedly, a lot of what passes for music these days doesn't interest me. A song filled with the F-word etc. bores me. I'm not shocked. I'm just not interested. I've heard it all before.
Not a fan of country or rap, but there are songs in both categories I like. Taylor Swift? I've heard some of her music. Can't name a single title. She seems like a nice lady, but not my cup of tea. I feel the same about Adele. I like her as a personality, but not a fan of her music.
Who's the greatest? Let me know when you have answer.