Marrk said:

Madonna had success before she had videos though. Everybody and Holiday do not have videos. She writes her lyrics and melodies. At least she has some talent. You're right, time will tell for Britney. If she wants to start writing her stuff and take some vocal lessons, she might be able to have a real music career, but then again who knows. Stranger things have happened.

By the way I'm a guy
and Harlepolis that avatar is fierce
I want me that ICON lol
now there's a sex symbol, if you want to see a real one
[This message was edited Thu Jul 31 9:57:32 PDT 2003 by twink69]

VinaBlue said:

exactly

LadyCabDriver said:

VinaBlue said:

When was music about art? There have always been popular groups like the Monkees or the New Kids on the Block and there always will be people that achieve popularity without a lot of talent. I say it doesn't matter. You can buy the records of people you think are talented and let everyone else listen to Britney

BTW - She is looking UNBELIEVABLE in picture 2. She is officially on my list of celebrities I would like to fuck.

lovemachine said:

:LOL:
Very well put. Though I believe music IS art. The music business is another thing entirely. This thread was about her photos anyway.

Besides, I know plenty of women and of course men who think Britney Spears is lovely and enjoy her music. I'm not a huge fan by any means. I have seen people on here criticize musical artists about their image and such. Yet are too quick to defend another artist also known for his provocatve imagery. Oh what's his name again? Oh that's right. PRINCE. So if you choose to discuss music on a thread about music..fine. This thread is about image. Even the "real musicians" are concerned about image. Album covers, photo shoots, interviews etc. When they get up there and say otherwise it's nothing but a bullshit elitist game anyway.
[This message was edited Thu Jul 31 20:21:35 PDT 2003 by XXX]

If she does Playboy I'm buying Three copies. One for viewing, and the other two will stay in the plastic in two different locations.

lovemachine said:

There was a time when people who wrote their music could end up on the cover of Rolling Stone. Even when New Kids were around, there was still room for artists who write their music. Now the music industry favors people who look good and the reason for that is, they have all these other people that need jobs: Songwriters, producers, musicians, etc. So it's kind of annoying to people who write their own music. I have friends who have been to record companies and are on the verge of getting signed, but they want them to use the record company's producers. Why? Because the producer works for the record company.

Anyway, XXX is right, this thread isn't about music, it's about ass. So excuse me for throwing my 2 cents in. Go back to enjoying the pictures. Yeah, she looks good.

XXX said:

Hey XXX, how ya been?

I know what you mean about Prince, but he is a musician and for me, that makes him super sexy. An artist that can create is way sexier (to me) than an artist that can't. Although I love me some Angelina Jolie, but she's creative too, she's a great actress, IMO. Anyway, there are many artists who are creative and sexy, and they don't have to be naked all the time to be sexy. Sure, it's nice to have tight abs and a nice tan, but many artists have musical talent instead of "beauty" and I prefer them.

Like Nick Rhodes. I LOVE that man. He is suuuper sexy to me because of how he plays and what he writes. If he posed half-nekkid all the time it wouldn't be pretty: No tan and no muscles. But MAN, I Luuuv him!


That's all I'm saying. Just my opinion, my preference and my right to go off on a tangent if that's what Britney inspires me to do.

XXX said:

Image only means something where there is something behind it. Using Prince as your example is so far off base I don't know where to start. Let's just say, Brit isn't known for writing, producing and playing all her instruments at the age of 17. There's more but I'll just leave it there.

intha916 said:

THANK YOU. RIGHT ON.

origmnd said:

Somebody post these pictures pleeease!

intha916 said:

Again. What does her music have to do with this post? This is about her image. Though it is a "sex sells" image, you cannot tell me Prince, Madonna, Janet, etc.. aren't or weren't using that same motto. She may not be in charge of it, sure, I'll agree with that. So; image only means something where something is behind it?? An image is an image. Because you may not hold the same value that someone else does or even appreciate what is being conveyed, my opinion was not off base. These topics always turn into defending one's favourite performer. No one is saying Britney is the next Prince or as talented as Madonna, or whomever. This was about her photo shoot. Nothing more nothing less. She looks great. She looks like a slut. It does nothing for me. All opinions. So what??? Comparing her image and her music to me is off base. Tell you what. If you release an album or some form of product that is intended for the mases, don't put an image on it. Make the cover blank. No pictures, no paintngs,etc. Just blank with typed letters for a description of its contents. Who cares who you are or what you look like. After all it's about the music right? What would an image have to say about your music? Do you buy clothing or pictures, or apply make up? Have you ever said "that's ugly" "that's pretty"? Image is a part of society, businesses, attracting the opposite sex or same sex for that matter, etc. It's a part of life. You may not like the image, but still it's an image. Accept it or not.

Not trying to argue or defend Britney in anyway...just my humble ass opinion. :MRGREEN:

anyone upload those from W magazine?


Wow, im not sayin what i'd do with her

.
[This message was edited Fri Aug 1 21:22:09 PDT 2003 by Chico319]

Here's one SDLAWN: :WINK: