» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: Grammy Winners

Written By: princessofpop on 02/24/03 at 04:07 a.m.

You can find all the winners in every category here:
http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=115603

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: L'Ettranger on 02/24/03 at 02:53 p.m.

I went out to the record store to listen to Norah Jones's album. She has a cover of Roxy Music's "More Than This." It was alright. She was probably one of the better acts out of all those people nominated.

Eminem was there and we laughed quite a bit when someone mentioned how he kind of resembles a Backstreet Boy. It's not a convincing comparison, but Eminem could be Justin Timberlake's older brother or cousin. Oh, they're just so gosh-darn cute :) :D ;D Yeah, we can tell Eminem totally wants Christina Aguilera :) :D ;D All that pent-up animosity and focus for no apparent reason? Naw. That just means he likes her ::) It would be a riot if that turned out true!

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/24/03 at 02:58 p.m.

I watched the show with my friends.  They all hated me because I wouldn't shut up about how much John Mayer sucks.

Reading some of the reviews of the show, I found out that this was the first time the Grammys had been in New York in five years.  Strange, you would think they would have mentioned once or twice during the show.

The Clash tribute truly rocked.  I excused myself during the Bee Gees tribute.

Eminem playing with the Roots also was awesome.  He gave a good speech too.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: panda on 02/24/03 at 03:00 p.m.

i love after-show lists...it saves the hassle of actually sitting through the show itself.

wow, norah jones really cleaned house!

it was nice to see that annoying avril lavigne didn't win anything and that awards went to GOOD performers.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Rice Cube on 02/24/03 at 03:01 p.m.


Quoting:
Reading some of the reviews of the show, I found out that this was the first time the Grammys had been in New York in five years.  Strange, you would think they would have mentioned once or twice during the show.End Quote



I believe Dustin Hoffman (the quasi-host) mentioned that at the beginning of the show before he introduced Simon and Garfunkel...it was cool that S&G were back together, but it didn't appear they harmonized very well this time around...maybe that's just me.

Quoting:

I excused myself during the Bee Gees tribute.

End Quote



I heard the N-Stink boys did the tribute.  I didn't actually get to see it, but if I had, there'd be a brick in the middle of my TV right now.  Whoever thought this was a good idea should be tortured.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/24/03 at 03:56 p.m.

Oh, I forgot the best part of the show:  Marshall "You think I give a d*** about a Grammy?" Mathers looking like he was about to cry as he read his speech.

Quoting:I believe Dustin Hoffman (the quasi-host) mentioned that at the beginning of the show before he introduced Simon and Garfunkel...it was cool that S&G were back together, but it didn't appear they harmonized very well this time around...maybe that's just me.End Quote



Actually, I was being sarcastic, 'cause to me it felt like they couldn't STOP mentioning New York New York.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Rice Cube on 02/24/03 at 03:58 p.m.


Quoting:

Actually, I was being sarcastic, 'cause to me it felt like they couldn't STOP mentioning New York New York.
End Quote



Couldn't tell.  My bad ;)

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: 80sRocked on 02/24/03 at 05:08 p.m.

Quoting:
i love after-show lists...it saves the hassle of actually sitting through the show itself.End Quote



you're right about that.  



Quoting:wow, norah jones really cleaned house!End Quote



I am a bit embarassed to admit this, but until this morning, I had never heard of Norah Jones!  Even now that I know she was the big winner of last nights show, I still can't name one song she has done.

Am I alone on this?




Quoting:it was nice to see that annoying avril lavigne didn't win anything and that awards went to GOOD performers.
End Quote



Actually, my neices will disagree with you. :)  They think she is great.  While I honestly can't name one song she has done, I will admit it is nice to see a teen pop singer that doesn't resort to the likes of Christina "Trampulara" and Britney Spears.  

Avril Lavigne is one of the few young pop stars that is actually presentable, and I commend her for that.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Hairspray on 02/24/03 at 05:13 p.m.


Quoting:until this morning, I had never heard of Norah Jones!  Even now that I know she was the big winner of last nights show, I still can't name one song she has done.

Am I alone on this?End Quote



Nope. I still know nothing more than what I just read in this thread.  :)

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: DaChazman on 02/24/03 at 05:57 p.m.

I wasn't watching The Grammys ( I wish I did) But I heard that Norah Jones won a lot of grammys. I seem to hear " Don't Know Why" everywhere and it's just annoying. When I watch VH1 or MTV and that video comes on I turn it straight off. The song just seems so...... boring.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: nightowl on 02/25/03 at 01:16 p.m.

I like Nora Jones and her 1 song that I am familiar with.  But I think it was a real shame that Bruce Springsteen didn't win for " The Rising". Where are everyones hearts at? These songs where all about 9 11 weren't they?
Anyone else agree?

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/25/03 at 01:37 p.m.


Quoting:
Where are everyones hearts at? These songs where all about 9 11 weren't they?
End Quote



That doesn't necessarily make them GOOD songs.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: shazinlurkmode on 02/25/03 at 02:19 p.m.


Quoting:


Nope. I still know nothing more than what I just read in this thread.  :)
End Quote



Ok, you aren't missing much. I am not  a Nora Jones basher, I don't even know who she is, but she doesn't write her own songs, she doesn't play any instruments, and her song that she won everything for was a demo. :-/ And this was supposed to be a better effort than the Boss?????? This is why I hate awards shows. >:( At least Nora had the guts to admit that she did nothing but sing. She brought an entourage on the stage to accept the album of the year.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Goreripper on 02/25/03 at 02:21 p.m.


Quoting:
Avril Lavigne is one of the few young pop stars that is actually presentable, and I commend her for that.
End Quote



Heh. I thought that too until I heard her at the Grammys. Sure, she actually played live which was commendable, but she sounded truly awful. They obviously did a lot of work on her voice in the studio. Maybe she was really nervous as she's hardly a seasoned performer yet and the Grammys is a big gig, but she was just atrocious.

Bruce, Elvis, Stevie and Dave was the highlight of the night. It was worth sitting through all the backslapping just to see that.

I think Barry and Robin really wanted to murder N'Sync. Perhaps if Maurice had been still alive and they'd been getting tributed for some other reason, they might have. For mine, the Bee Gees "tribute" was an absolute insult!

Something else I had to laugh about: when Norah Jones and the football team that helped her make her album went on stage to get the best album Grammy, one of her producers said something like "Working with her is great, you just have to sit back at watch". Which is why she needed four producers and three engineers.  ::)

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/25/03 at 02:23 p.m.

Quoting:
I don't even know who she is, End Quote



True.

Quoting:but she doesn't write her own songs, End Quote



False.

Quoting:she doesn't play any instruments, End Quote



False.

Quoting:and her song that she won everything for was a demo. End Quote



True, but irrelevant.

Quoting:And this was supposed to be a better effort than the Boss?????? End Quote



The Rising didn't deserve ANY awards, in my opinion, except maybe -- maybe -- something for the title track and "Lonesome Day."  As an album, it was cliche-ridden and far, FAR from The Boss' normal high standards.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/25/03 at 02:28 p.m.


Quoting:


Heh. I thought that too until I heard her at the Grammys. Sure, she actually played live which was commendable, but she sounded truly awful. They obviously did a lot of work on her voice in the studio. Maybe she was really nervous as she's hardly a seasoned performer yet and the Grammys is a big gig, but she was just atrocious.
End Quote



You know I'm no Avril fan, but in her defense, nearly everyone sounded bad that night.  I think there was something wrong with the mics.  Awards shows are notorious for not letting people make soundchecks and artists are often barely able to hear themselves when they perform.  

That and Avril kept trying to run around on stage.  Mick Jagger could pull that off, but Avril just doesn't have the energy to do that and sing well at the same time.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: shazzaah on 02/25/03 at 02:30 p.m.


Quoting:


Heh. I thought that too until I heard her at the Grammys. Sure, she actually played live which was commendable, but she sounded truly awful. They obviously did a lot of work on her voice in the studio. Maybe she was really nervous as she's hardly a seasoned performer yet and the Grammys is a big gig, but she was just atrocious.

Bruce, Elvis, Stevie and Dave was the highlight of the night. It was worth sitting through all the backslapping just to see that.

I think Barry and Robin really wanted to murder N'Sync. Perhaps if Maurice had been still alive and they'd been getting tributed for some other reason, they might have. For mine, the Bee Gees "tribute" was an absolute insult!

Something else I had to laugh about: when Norah Jones and the football team that helped her make her album went on stage to get the best album Grammy, one of her producers said something like "Working with her is great, you just have to sit back at watch". Which is why she needed four producers and three engineers.  ::)
End Quote



Couldn't agree more on all of your points, Goreripper, the Clash tribute was fantastic, boybands always bites the big one, and I was happy to see Maurice Gibb's son accept the Bee Gees award. And if Nora Jones writes her own music......where is it and why wasn't it honored? If she plays an instrument.......which one? I stand by my original statements about her.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/25/03 at 02:35 p.m.

She writes some of her music.  It's an invalid argument anyway; Elvis wrote none of his music and he's still the King.

And she plays piano.  She plays piano on her record.  She plays one in her music videos.  She was playing piano during her Grammy performance.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Goreripper on 02/25/03 at 02:42 p.m.

I have no problem with Norah winning the Grammy, as none of the acts I like (except Foo Fighters) got nominated for anything, so I couldn't really care less as it means nothing to me. But why did she need FOUR producers? And THREE engineers? No wonder CD prices are so high when record labels are hiring twice the number of producers and at least one more engineer than necessary.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Kenlos on 02/25/03 at 03:06 p.m.

I agree with most of the award winners except for Best New Artist i dont think Norah Jones should have won that cause from what i know of she has been around for a few years so shes not exactly new and more importantly i really think she is going to be a one hit wonder in two years people will be like "Norah who?".  JMO though.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: shazzaah on 02/25/03 at 03:06 p.m.


Quoting:
She writes some of her music.  It's an invalid argument anyway; Elvis wrote none of his music and he's still the King.

And she plays piano.  She plays piano on her record.  She plays one in her music videos.  She was playing piano during her Grammy performance.
End Quote



If I am wrong about instruments, I stand corrected. I still have no respect for her, a good voice isn't enough. That is why , as I pointed out, I do not like awards shows, because the truly deserving are hardly ever recognized. IMO. BTW I don't need anyone to point out that what I am saying is irrelevant. It may be irrelevant to you, but it obviously is not to me.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/25/03 at 03:17 p.m.


Quoting:
I still have no respect for her, a good voice isn't enough. End Quote



If you say so.  She is a songwriter and an accomplished pianist though.  I'm not even that big a fan of hers (her other single, "Come Away with Me," may be the most boring song I've ever heard), but in my opinion, writing songs isn't really a qualification for whether you're a good artist.  Aretha Franklin doesn't write her songs, and she's one of the greatest performers ever.  I would probably enjoy Michelle Branch a lot more if she let other, better songwriters write her material; writing her own stuff gives her "authenticity," I guess, but it sure doesn't give her quality songs.


Quoting:It may be irrelevant to you, but it obviously is not to me.
End Quote



Point.  But I still don't see what the song being a demo has to do with anything.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: 80sRocked on 02/25/03 at 03:41 p.m.


Quoting:
...in two years people will be like "Norah who?".  JMO though.
End Quote



hey, its less than a week after the Grammys and I still have no idea who she is.

Guess its a good thing I didn't waste my time watching it since the big winner was someone I had never even heard of.

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Gino on 02/27/03 at 03:41 p.m.

Fuck the Grammies!  Our so called best music award show is a joke.  The demise was two years ago when the Fucking chairman made a speech on Eminem about repecting Creatve freedom.  Oh God help Us!  Where have we come to with music today.  Avril Lagvine! was nominated for album of the year.  Are you Fuckin kidding me.  I want to die right now.  Go Simon And Garfunkle though, that was cool to see Paul Simom one of the best songwriters ever.  Hey Grammies how about Sigur Ros for album of the year.  I want to die! The music Industry in bullshit and American Idol, TRL, and Making the Band are influencing the youth of America and now even the Grammies.  I can't wait for Radiohead's new album then order will be restored in my heart.  Oh ya and Fuck Ja Rule and Ashanti to.  That was quiet terrible on the Grammies


Quoting:
You can find all the winners in every category here:
http://entertainment.msn.com/news/article.aspx?news=115603
End Quote

URLURLURLURL
TEXTTEXTURL

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: My_name_is_Kenny on 02/27/03 at 04:03 p.m.


Quoting:
Fuck the Grammies!  Our so called best music award show is a joke.  The demise was two years ago when the Fucking chairman made a speech on Eminem about repecting Creatve freedom.  End Quote



Yeah!  Fuck creative freedom!

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Tarzan Boy on 02/28/03 at 09:06 a.m.

I didn't know Norah Jones had that many people working on her album. That changes things for me.

Btw, Eminem was called "creative"?! Okay. I guess the word has gone through language-shift. It's a gross misuse of the word!

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: shazzaah on 02/28/03 at 09:33 a.m.

I was just looking thru this site;

http://www.rockonthenet.com/grammy/newartist.htm

and noticed that receiving the new artist award is the kiss of death for most of these people. I am not counting the Beatles, Crosby Stills and Nash, the Carpenters or Bette Midler, of course.

It is amusing to me that Bob Newhart won in 1961, if it is the same Bob I am thinking of....

Subject: Re: Grammy Winners

Written By: Goreripper on 02/28/03 at 09:54 a.m.

It's also interesting that out of the top 40 biggest-selling albums of all time, only 5 of them are Grammy "Best Album" winners:

http://hometown.aol.com/PaulHry/music/riaa.html