EmmaMcG said:

MotownSubdivision said:

Why is Charlie Puth popular? This question can be applied to too many of today's mainstream acts but let's focus on this one. This dude is as generic as it gets. And though he is (somewhat) easily ignorable, the reason I'm picking on him in particular is because of this: I absolutely hate this song. It's trash in every sense of the word and it is an insult to Marvin Gaye to have his name on this embarrassing excuse for music. Firstly, Marvin was/is a sex icon. The man oozed sexiness and passion which non-coincidentally are 2 of the things this song miserably lacks. Did Puth (such an ugly name) think that by making Marvin's name the title of the song that it would automatically make it a sex anthem? He had to because surely he can't really think there is anything hot about this. Newsflash: If the best thing about your song is its title then your song is far beyond the point of sucking. Listening to the lyrics, I don't think Charlie or Meghan have ever actually listened to a Marvin Gaye song. They basically namecheck a handful of his songs with no rhyme or reason like they were going through a list. And the chorus... so lazy trying to make Marvin's name a verb. The style of music isn't even right, it's 1950s doo-wop which Marvin has never done! This song is disgusting. It just missed the Top 20 but it's amazing how such a hollow husk of a cash-in on Marvin's name even managed that. Charlie is also one of the writers (yes, one of 4 writers; it really took 4 people to write this fecal matter) so he's definitely to blame. Why is such an interchangeable, flavorless cardboard cutout of a singer like him successful? Also, "Puth"... what a marquee name. Blegh. [Edited 2/25/17 8:37am]

Yeah, I hate this song, too. Leave Marvin alone.

[Edited 2/25/17 9:18am]

MotownSubdivision said:

Why is Charlie Puth popular? This question can be applied to too many of today's mainstream acts but let's focus on this one. This dude is as generic as it gets. And though he is (somewhat) easily ignorable, the reason I'm picking on him in particular is because of this: I absolutely hate this song. It's trash in every sense of the word and it is an insult to Marvin Gaye to have his name on this embarrassing excuse for music. Firstly, Marvin was/is a sex icon. The man oozed sexiness and passion which non-coincidentally are 2 of the things this song miserably lacks. Did Puth (such an ugly name) think that by making Marvin's name the title of the song that it would automatically make it a sex anthem? He had to because surely he can't really think there is anything hot about this. Newsflash: If the best thing about your song is its title then your song is far beyond the point of sucking. Listening to the lyrics, I don't think Charlie or Meghan have ever actually listened to a Marvin Gaye song. They basically namecheck a handful of his songs with no rhyme or reason like they were going through a list. And the chorus... so lazy trying to make Marvin's name a verb. The style of music isn't even right, it's 1950s doo-wop which Marvin has never done! This song is disgusting. It just missed the Top 20 but it's amazing how such a hollow husk of a cash-in on Marvin's name even managed that. Charlie is also one of the writers (yes, one of 4 writers; it really took 4 people to write this fecal matter) so he's definitely to blame. Why is such an interchangeable, flavorless cardboard cutout of a singer like him successful? Also, "Puth"... what a marquee name. Blegh. [Edited 2/25/17 8:37am]

The song is not any worse than anything else that is on the radio right now, but it certainly does
sound uninspired and generic. But your posts turns Marvin Gaye into nothing but a sex symbol!

Man, I'm not saying this song is all that great or anything, but you are sounding like grumpy old men screaming "Get off my lawn!" He's only had a couple of hits after "See You Again", but he's still a relatively new artist, and he's a songwriter on top of that, so he's as likely to be writing songs for other pop artists as he is to write songs for himself. Also, this dude wasn't even born until December, 1991, so for him Marvin Gaye is a historical figure just like Frank Sinatra, Judy Garland, and Hank Williams were for our generation. Besides, I'd rather have him sing about Marvin Gaye and not Prince or some lamer easy listening artists.

728huey said:

I've heard this in the supermarket a few times..

everytime i hear it i think:

"What kind of Bullshit, Corny-ass, Song is this?!!!"

MotownSubdivision said:

728huey said:

Man, I'm not saying this song is all that great or anything, but you are sounding like grumpy old men screaming "Get off my lawn!" He's only had a couple of hits after "See You Again", but he's still a relatively new artist, and he's a songwriter on top of that, so he's as likely to be writing songs for other pop artists as he is to write songs for himself. Also, this dude wasn't even born until December, 1991, so for him Marvin Gaye is a historical figure just like Frank Sinatra, Judy Garland, and Hank Williams were for our generation. Besides, I'd rather have him sing about Marvin Gaye and not Prince or some lamer easy listening artists.

Him being young is no excuse for making this travesty. The song sucks, plain and simple. BTW, I'm younger than he is (January 1994) so what does that say?

[Edited 2/25/17 19:47pm]

thedoorkeeper said:

Come on everybody.... Let's Marvin Gaye & get it on!!!!!

Okay, that was bad.

American pop music blows.