a while back, someone posted an artilce on tivo and how it compared to today's stars. it stated how in comparison how fans of today's stars won't die for them. in another forum, someone posted that the stardom of loyalty and greatness has come to an end. u know like the stardom :elvis,beatles,mj, madonna received.
why is that?
what can be done about it?
what can future/present stars do to get fame,respect,success on that HIGH LEVEL?
thanks.

First of all, why would anyone want crazed fans like that? That kind of stardom is crazy.

The only reason I can think of why that has changed is simply because in the music biz these days, stars aren't stars but only for a couple of years and then they fade out. That's just the way the record companies operate now, they're always looking for new trends or the latest thing. Nobody is as huge as Elvis, Micheal, or Madonna was back in the day, partly because of this, and partly because no one has that aura of mysteriousness like the most famous stars have had.

Nobody is as interesting as those folks were, except for maybe Eminem, and he is still doesn't have a wide enough acceptance to be a true superstar because of his offensiveness and because there are still a lot of people out there who don't care about hip hop. Thank goodness... Not to mention that there are still a lot of us that can't stand the sound of his voice.

Britney Spears certainly isn't interesting enough to be a true superstar. She's just a regular 'ole bimbo from Alabama.

suby, what do you do with the answers to all these questions?

2the9s said:

i keep them to myself, write them down, share with others. what's the point of giving it your all if ur star was to last only for a few years? why not have it big as elvis?

jtgillia said:

i agree on how annoying eminem's voice really is.
and it is true that the majority don't like hip hop and he does offense TOO many ppl.

what do u mean by the aura of mysteriousness? i always saw maddy as a girl to reveal it all. i dunno about elvis nor of the beatles. and i know mj is so shy. tell me more about this. thanks.

what others have said:

i think the age of the superstar is drawing to a end slowly but surely. Its becoming clear that the new generations havent much time for our 80's idealisms. In a good few years, people will frown upon the mere mention of Madonna and Michael Jackson



we've already seen the end of the superstars cuz the so called stars of today have NO personality whatsoever and the less said abt most of the music talents the better for all of us

also:

everything is done now! There isn't much to invent anymore! What kind of thing can be invented anymore! Music videos already look like expensive movies (thx to M.J. )! Maybe if the human race invents some new technologies, then we can get some new BIG stars again like M.J. and Madonna! Also the world tolerates almost everything! We have/had famous gay singers like Freddie, Elton and George! We have famous black singers (male and female) like Mike and Whitney! We have/had famous emancipated female singers like Marlene Dietrich (I have to mention her first! ) and Madonna! All doors are already opened! Whatelse can newer popstars do? We even had the androgyn Prince in high heels!

The whole world is a freak show today! We can do what we want, our generation can't be really shocked anymore! When Mr/Mrs Manson is performing, ppl might be a bit shocked! But Maddy had the S/M style already in the early 90's and an androgyn male singer isn't very new anymore aswell! He might could be a MEGASTAR if his music would be a bit more charts orientated!

Music and movie stars don't seem as glamorous and special as they used to. We live in a different time, with MTV and all kinds of media and marketing going on.

When Elvis and the Beatles hit big, there was no MTV or music videos channels playing 24 hours a day. Seeing them on TV was a special event. They were larger than life on the movie screen. Just hearing them speak was something special.

These days, the music and movie stars just don't seem that special any more. There are too many no talents in show business. People like Britney Spears are heavily marketed and pushed in our faces and we're supposed to accept that she is something special. It's all become so manufactured and phony that shows like "American Idol" are creating "superstars." The stars of today just aren't as special as they used to be.

subyduby said:

What the bloody hell does that mean, and why the bloody hell should the 80s be the ideal?



I'm frowning now.

Supernova said:

i meant since the 1980's, there hasn't been anyone who really has captured the success,admiration,fan base, critical acclaim that mj and maddy had.
britney comes to mind. and so does eminem. still...they are not the item.

GoldNigga said:

i agree with u on the statement of shows like idol,making the band,group search,etc.

since we have mtv,internet now; what can someone do to have success such as elvis,beatles,mj, and maddy?

subyduby said:

The rise of punk rock came about as a reaction against the big hair bands and arena rock bands. Punk rockers made fun of the overblown stadium bands like Led Zeppelin. I think that punk rock helped to create the whole notion that anybody can be a rock star, even if they can't sing or play an instrument. Once these no talents took over, they just don't seem as special as the earlier rock stars.

We are living in a time when mediorce people with marginal talent, such as J Lo, can become huge superstars.

subyduby said:

It will take someone who has a combination of talent, good looks, and a good marketing machine behind them to create a superstar in this day and age.

Clive Davis has been very successful at trying to turn Alicia Keys into a megastar. She isn't there yet, but she does have a lot of potential. I think the pop music world is waiting for a new superstar talent. Someone who becomes a household name like MJ or Madonna.

subyduby said:

Critical acclaim never came easy or often to Maddy. And it's only really been in the latter half of the 90s when she began to get it.

subyduby said:

A couple of teenagers in the US and Australia killed themselves after Kurt Cobain shot himself. And, if memory serves me right, two Japanese teenage girls also killed themself after they found out Jackie Chan was married. (He's a star, but of a different sort.)

I'm sure there are probably many many more cases very similar to the ones I've stated. If this isn't willing to die for a star, then I don't know what is.

The music biz is so much different than it used to be.Back when I was growing up,there was a thing called "fan loyalty",where fans supported an artist through every album.Nowadays,music has become "disposable",like fast food.Kids get into groups like The Backstreet Boys,and then a few albums later,they move on to something else.Very few artists are maintaining their success and it's not likely that most of these acts will have longevity and continued success.

subyduby said:

what about your 2 cents brain?, moron

Natsume said:

wow! i knpw every star gas fanatical fans who are overly desperate. but now, there really isn't anyone who is THAT successful,recognized,talented,intelligent overall. mariah was the biggest star of the 90's but we all know she hasn't impacted the world even though she has 120 million albums in 10 years.

50's-elvis
60's-beatles
70's-elton john/stevie wonder
80's-mj/madonna
90's?

DavidEye said:

yea, that's what i am talking about. even if there album sells, they are never respected. if they make it famous nowdays, it is moslty for their looks( n*sync, britney,etc.). do u know why then fan loyalty died? so thos music labels try to find the latest thing so they can make stars of kids for about 5 years, they kill the star by exposing them too much, and by doing what tommy m. did to mariah/mj.

jnoel said:

off-topic.
orgnote me if u want to discuss.
i am sure u have more than 2 words to say.
have a nice day so u can live to discuss why i trouble u so much and why u can not just ignore me.

Suby, are you for real or just spreading rumors about these fellow orgers?!

subyduby said:

you're the off topic princess here, moron (hey you blah blah)

Come on miss "if i was black, i would care", you know that you suck:
http://www.prince.org/msg...msg_143878

I think Suby and David have it figured out.

There's just no fan loyalty anymore.

Sometimes I think I'm one of the few people under 25 that listens to entire albums. I don't buy a CD for one or two hit songs like the majority of young people do now. In fact, I don't buy a CD unless I like at least 75% of the songs throughout. MTV has a lot of blame for this, in my opinion. Kids get enamored with music because of MTV these days, and MTV has managed to streamline music to where it's all about the hit single. Ironically, while all this is going on, they stop making singles, forcing people to buy the entire album. But most young people I know don't listen to the rest of the album!

I think the only way a superstar to emerge in the coming years is if they just do something completely different that no one has done before. That means the development of a different sounding music. We don't need another hip hop star or another boy band or country artist- we need something completely different that provides separation from everyone else. But not something too "weird" for the majority- like your Bjork and Radiohead and stuff like that.

The reasons why there isn't a "big superstar" these days is simple: There is no one out there showcasing talent and no one out there is putting out songs that gets people excited. Another reason is there is hardly any artist out there that is putting out material that crosses genres...every pop artists out there is the same. There's no one out there with originality and innovations. I honestly think that a artist don't really need a marketing machine behind him or her to be a superstar. I think the problem with artists these days is this: They start out with having mere talent and a "marketing" machine and then hit it big with their first couple of albums...and then they can't reproduce their success with latter albums and then they gradually fade away. They have no talent or vision to innovate. One of the reasons why Prince is such a megastar, or was; is because he started out with minimal success with his first couple of albums and then quickly innovated his sound with 1999...and from then on the excitement and album sales built with each album after that..that's why his first albums is classic today. There was no one doing what Prince was doing at the time...a Black rockstar musician playing music that transcends genres. What made it very interesting for me is that he played "white people" music that many black people enjoyed and appreciated...and not only that..there was a buildup of excitement when he dropped another album, you never knew what you were going to get. After the success of Purple Rain, Prince could have easily done a similiar album that would match the sales of Purple Rain and then tour and sell out Stadiums like Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd. But he didn't. He veered off into a completely different direction. That was the marking of a legend, not a megastar. It seemed like Prince didn't want to be a megastar. That's another marking of a legend. There's no megastar these days because most artists lack talent, vision, control and the ability to innovate and be original with each album. People don't take them seriously to get excited over them. There's no excitement with todays artists like MJ and Prince had.

jtgillia said:

I'm here with ya on this one... but for an added reason: the cost. CDs are about $15 these days, and I see no reason to throw away money on literally one song. I would MUCH rather just download it and burn it.

You've also got to keep in mind that a lot of bands nowadays make a few good songs for their albums (a few meaning 2 or 3) then fill up the rest of the CDs with filler tracks that are just plain crappy... otherwise their fans will bitch. "Even though the songs are just plain shit, I paid good money to hear them!" An obligation of sorts, if you will.

the last shall b first.

Natsume said:

how about the cds that cost: $8.99 for trl acts?

DavidEye said:

Actually, David,,we always had disposable acts and more enduring artists, especially in the pop market targeting teenagers. The 50s and 60s weren't all Elvis and the Fab Four... there were many one hit wonders and acts who vanished after two or three singles or LPs. In the 70's, we had classic examples -- ask The Osmonds and David Cassidy. It's no wonder, considering the audience targeted by poppy pop acts is almost completely replaced every five or six years. My sister had a big crush on David, but by the time she was 17, she was more into Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin. Today's acts try to make the transition with their audience, but it is doomed to failure unless it's a major, growing talent. Unless you're George Michael, you don't go from formulaic brainless fun songs to full blown adult albums. Whoever can survive the crop of current teen acts will need a lot of talent and a pretty good radar, like your dahling Madonna..
[This message was edited Mon Jul 1 15:25:10 PDT 2002 by Aerogram]

Natsume said:

Actually, I think the average is higher than that now. At retail places I'd bet the average cd is about $17. Of course there are those that you'll find that cost less (and sometimes those are the ones on sale), but along with tax you'll pay almost $20 for a single cd. The music industry likes to conveniently leave this fact out when they bring up the fact that sales are down and a lot of people are downloading music. They never allude to the inflated prices of cd's.