Reply With Quote
I find it odd that people who state how horrible the Grammay's are still watch it.
There is only room in history for one white rapper, and he is renovating houses now.
I like the way you think.
I find it odd that people who state how horrible the Grammay's are still watch it.
Glad that The Black Keys won something, that was a kick ass album (Brothers).
Arcade Fire have been awesome for a long time, how can so many of you not have heard of them? Is it because they are Canadian?
Florence and the Machine should have won Best New Artist. Girl is an amazing singer.
Mumford and Sons are sooo repe ive.
And, Muse are awesome. Pfht, Americans and their dislike for England.
As for all of the country music and lady vomit, i refuse to comment as its .
It's like watching an NBA finals with lakers vs. celtics....
I hate them both...but I am a bb fan...
Completely different. If you're watching the Finals, there's a ~95% chance that you're watching two of the best teams playing, and probably an 80% chance that the two teams in the Finals ARE the best in the NBA.
Watching the Grammy's is the equivalent of watching an NBA Finals between between the Bucks and the Warriors while the announcers talk about how both teams are far and away the best in the league.
I stated how terrible it was and didn't watch a minute. I did read the awards, though.
Well you're one of the smarter ones, then.
I refuse to watch ANY awards shows, but the butthurt in this thread is hilarious.
The Grammy's? You mean popularity contest?? The Grammy's are worthless.
I don't routinely watch awards shows because they are so boring.....but I flipped by right when Jagger was skipping around and I found that pretty amusing
I don't really have a problem with the GrammAys per se; my problem is with what they feed us. So many deserving and talented artists won awards in the pre-telecast portion, but we just get to see the "media popularity" portion. Here's a list of the winners from the pre-telecast
http://www.goldderby.com/music/news/...lecast-winners
Good grief, I can easily pick out 10 acts that would blow away what they showed on the primetime broadcast. It could have been one of a show.
The outrage of the beliebers is hilarious. An actual musician winning best new artist? Who news.
Because Brothers is way better?
Boring show with lame acts.
Then why wasn't Brothers nominated for album of the year?
Because the Grammys suck.
The results for the winners of the hard rock & metal categories were leaked on line around 2 pm pst yesterday, making an already anticlimactic event that much more anticlimactic.
What was that whole 7 minute act toward the end where in the middle they said "Bob Dylan!" That didn't sound like Dylan at all. I wanted to mute the TV.
....yeah, that's not it.
Why does Eminem always appear to be so pissed off?
He's in recovery, duh.
http://whoisarcadefire.tumblr.com/
So many Philistines. This is the Grammys' audience.
So people are saying that the other nominees for album of the year sold more copies, but this is not about who sold the most, its about "best" album. Not most sold.
I just bought stock in a shoulder prosthesis company.
what a dumbass haha.
Not really, the grammy's are ``supposed'' to be the best in music for the given year...much like the nba finals...
I usually DVR it-and fast forward through most of it...but once in a while a good performance will be caught...then you can enjoy THAT performance...
the Bruno Mars soul type revue-was decent until it started to look like ANOTHER lip-synced production....
to each his own I guess...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
