The Brit Awards

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:03 am

Not the first time i have complained about awards ceremonies, but that isn't going to stop me

Here is a list of the winners:

British male- Robbie Williams
British female - Dido.
British group - Travis.
British album - Dido, No Angel.
British newcomer - Blue.
British single - S Club 7, Don't Stop Movin'.
British video - So Solid crew, 21 Seconds.
British dance act - Basement Jaxx.
International male - Shaggy.
International Female - Kylie Minogue.
International group - Destiny's Child.
International album - Kylie Minogue, Fever.
International newcomer - The Strokes.
Best pop - Westlife.
Outstanding Contribution - Sting.

First off there is only one performer in that list who earned any respect off me over the last year and that is Dido, although her album is a little weak. I shall however complain in order :

Robbie Williams: I don't see what he has done recently to deserve best male, seems strange to me, there were much better alternatives.

Dido: Can't complain

Travis: Travis have lost all their credibility, they are producing boring and average music, they have distilled a style that worked really well on "the man who" to bring us some tawdry folk/pop nonesense

Blue: Just ballad nonesense and stealing other people's lyrics and throwing some white guys at some industry produced nonesense, oh look they have the token black rapper as well

S Club 7: Best single!?!?!!? what about "The Avalanches" or someone equally groundbreaking?

So Solid Crew: Best Video, again i wonder, plus it seems the industry want to congratulate a band who talk about guns and violence on their records, which is also following them around at their live gigs.

Basement Jaxx: Should have won more awards with Remedy (first album) second album was poor in comparison, although i am glad they received something for their hard work

Shaggy: Understandable.

Kylie: Well if shaking your booty in extremely tight hot pants and singing average pop nonesense was space travel then Kylie would have left this galaxy long ago.

Destiny's Child: Average since the other two members left, they are becoming more and more formulaic, and the album was very poor

The Strokes: This was definately due to the large hype surrounding the band, i actually quite like them, but they weren't the best.

Westlife: I hardly need to comment.

Sting: No complaints

All in all it was pretty much as expected, it is still a disapointment to see them always go with the obvious talent, not like the Mercury Music Prise, it should be an award show which propels artists into the limelite, not just pat on the back the one's that are already there.

Interesting? Opinions? I realise this is really long, and i apologise for so much vitriol

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:19 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
S Club 7: Best single!?!?!!? what about "The Avalanches" or someone equally groundbreaking?

I agree with you there, I've been following this talented group for a few years now. They deserved that award, but then again. Who can fight against the might of the Britney Spears/ Spice Girls generation.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:27 am

@Tamerlane, me!!!

Or at least i can try

The actual nominations, with a few comments form me

the emboldend ones are my choice.

British Male solo artist
Aphex Twin - Should have won, that would have been hilarious

Craig David - Actually deserved it IMO

Elton John
Ian Brown - Best album so far by Mr Brown
Robbie Williams

British Female solo artist
Dido
Geri Halliwell - LMAO

P J Harvey - Should have won!
Sade
Sophie Ellis Bextor

British Group
Gorillaz - Decent enough album
Jamiroquai - Possibly
Radiohead - They have been experimenting and producing interesting music for a while now.
Stereophonics
Travis

British Newcomer
Atomic Kitten
Blue
Elbow - Good album, 2 weak tracks IMO
Gorillaz
Mis-Teeq
So Solid Crew
Starsailor
Tom McRae
Turin Brakes
Zero 7 - Brilliant album, although he isn't technically a new comer

British Single (Hard choice, all crap

)
Atomic Kitten "Whole Again"
Bob The Builder "Mambo No 5"
Daniel Bedingfield "Gotta Get Thru This"
DJ Pied Piper "Do You Really Like It?"
Geri Halliwell "It's Raining Men"
Gorillaz "Clint Eastwood" - Only decent one.
Hear'Say "Pure And Simple"
Robbie Williams "Eternity/The Road To Mandalay"t
S Club 7 "Don't Stop Movin'"
So Solid Crew "21 Seconds"

British Video
Basement Jaxx "Where's Your Head At"
Coldplay "Trouble"
Dido "Thank You"
Elton John "I Want Love"
Fat Boy Slim "Weapon Of Choice" - And why didn't this win?!?!
Gorillaz "Clint Eastwood"
So Solid Crew "21 Seconds"
Robbie & Kylie "Kids"
Robbie Williams "Supreme"
Travis "Sing"

British Dance Act
Basement Jaxx - Yep

Craig David
Faithless
Fat Boy Slim
Gorillaz

Tamerlane · Post by **Tamerlane** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:40 am

Shocking that, Radiohead didn't win. And weren't they voted No.1 band in the world.

Only an internet site could do that poll, but still they won it.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:45 am

Originally posted by Tamerlane
Shocking that, Radiohead didn't win. And weren't they voted No.1 band in the world.

Only an internet site could do that poll, but still they won it.

The internet is more varied and has a better proximity to the public viewpoint than a bunch of cronies in a board room somewhere

So i would be more inclined to trust that vote than the Brits.

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:45 am

Who are the selectors for the awards? Fans? Artists? Producers? Sales?

Rob-hin · Post by **Rob-hin** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:50 am

I feel that practically ALL artists are very fake. Once in a while there is a real artist, there used to be a lot more real artists but these days....

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:55 am

@Rob-hin:
I think that is in part due to MTV and the internet. In the past, a lot of people used their image (Elvis, the Beatles, etc.) to promote themselves, but now it's nearly impossible to be ugly or unphotogenic and get a record contract. Consequently, I think a lot of people are passed over for MTV air time if they don't have a flashy video and that some people who do make it to the big time do so because they're a contrived product (like a boy band).

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 7:58 am

Originally posted by HighLordDave
Who are the selectors for the awards? Fans? Artists? Producers? Sales?

Well one was fan's - best newcomer, but then that was voted by teenyboppers

The judging panel are made up of industry types IIRC. To be honest though it may as well be down to sales

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:02 am

The Blockbuster Awards are decided by record sales (and hence by the fans) so there's really no consideration for artistic merits. Even the Grammy and Oscar awards, which are obstensibly decided by industry insiders, are heavily dependent upon commercial success (who actually believes that all of the voters have actually heard or seen all of the nominees?).

Rob-hin · Post by **Rob-hin** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:06 am

@HighLordDave, yeah thats tru. But what I dislike ist the fact that practically all groups/bands/etc. aren't friends who started playing together because they liked music. But they are put together by musicmanagers or whoever because they can make a popular group. They are just fakers who are constantly busy with how they look on and of stage. They don't live in a real world. But mostly, they aren't REAL artists.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:09 am

Originally posted by HighLordDave
The Blockbuster Awards are decided by record sales (and hence by the fans) so there's really no consideration for artistic merits. Even the Grammy and Oscar awards, which are obstensibly decided by industry insiders, are heavily dependent upon commercial success (who actually believes that all of the voters have actually heard or seen all of the nominees?).

Well we have the Mercury Music Prize in the UK, which is mostly on Creative merit, past winners include:

Portishead
Roni Size/Reprazent
Badly Drawn Boy

All of these artists (who were relitively unknown) became more famous because of it, which is the only reason i can see for award ceremonies, since it is obvious to Dido - who has a personal fortune of over £10 million after one album - that she is successful

Well i have heard every album on the list bar 4

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:15 am

Originally posted by Rob-hin
@HighLordDave, yeah thats tru. But what I dislike ist the fact that practically all groups/bands/etc. aren't friends who started playing together because they liked music. But they are put together by musicmanagers or whoever because they can make a popular group. They are just fakers who are constantly busy with how they look on and of stage. They don't live in a real world. But mostly, they aren't REAL artists.

I think that there are some genuine people out there. For example, Kid Rock (who I think is generally poor excuse for a human being) strikes me as a genuine guy; ge'll tell you right up front that he's about money and girls with no BS about how he's "in it for the music" or just "trying to express himself". The country and pop scenes are where many of the manufactured band are, but I think the alternative, hard rock and other non-mainstream genres which get less media exposure are where many of the "real" artists reside.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:54 am

Originally posted by HighLordDave

but I think the alternative, hard rock and other non-mainstream genres which get less media exposure are where many of the "real" artists reside.

Hard rock is becoming mainstream as well, Linkin Park for instance don't even write their own lyrics (rumour), All of these Nu Metal bands are starting to sound the same.

An excerpt from a recent track i heard: "Your left with nothing, and nothing's what you got, when you ain't got something" Wow, Bob Dylan eat your heart out, i beat Dylan is hiding behind his couch even now

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 9:07 am

On one level, I think that people who record songs that someone else writes are less "artistic" than the people who write and perform their own music. After all, the song isn't truly "theirs".

However, I also believe that everyone has a gift. For some, it's singing or the ability to play an instrument. For others, that gift is writing music. Sometimes, the two go together (Alan Jackson, John Lennon, Bob Dylan, etc.), but not always. Also, there are people who are such prolific songwriters that they couldn't possibly record every song they write, so they send their songs out to other people to record (Prince is probably the best example of this). The way I see it, you've got to use the talents you have. Some people write, some people sing.

Ultimately, not having the ability to do both does not (in my mind) make you any less of an artist that someone who can paint but not sculpt.

About bands sounding the same: that has happened since time immemorial; "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." However, that does not necessarily make you or your music of lower quality than someone else's, although it may make it harder for you to sell after people get tired of hearing the same thing over and over and over.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 9:39 am

Originally posted by HighLordDave
On one level, I think that people who record songs that someone else writes are less "artistic" than the people who write and perform their own music. After all, the song isn't truly "theirs".

Shouldn't some of these artists (who don't write their own material) be placed in categories specific to that type in awards shows?

also believe that everyone has a gift. For some, it's singing or the ability to play an instrument. For others, that gift is writing music...ultimately, not having the ability to do both does not (in my mind) make you any less of an artist that someone who can paint but not sculpt.

The much lauded Ella Fitzgerald and other artists of their times hardly ever wrote their own songs, hence their being about 60 renditions of any one of those classics. I know this and yet i still listen to all of them without a cynical ear to whom wrote the music. They were honest in their plagerising, not pretending creative nuances they didn't have.

About bands sounding the same: that has happened since time immemorial; "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery." However, that does not necessarily make you or your music of lower quality than someone else's, although it may make it harder for you to sell after people get tired of hearing the same thing over and over and over.

I have no problem with this if the bands didn't just spend their tiem screaming or talking about hteir G's *sigh*

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 9:48 am

Originally posted by Mr Sleep
Shouldn't some of these artists (who don't write their own material) be placed in categories specific to that type in awards shows?

I think some of the groups that give out these awards take into account the performer vs. the writer. For instance, the Song of the Year Grammy award goes to the writer, not the performer. Other categories include Male/Female Performer of the Year that award the merits of the recording, not necessarily the merits of the writer.

When I was younger (and didn't pay much attention to who the writers were), I equated the performer and the writer, which I now know not to be true.

I think it's equally fair to say that there are simply too many awards shows out there and that we could do with one for each genre (movies, TV, music, etc.) and not have the Grammys, the AMAs, the CMAs, the Golden Globes, the People's Choice, the ACMs, the MTV Movie, the Blockbusters, the Oscars, et al.

frogus · Post by **frogus** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 9:56 am

the people who decide who wins the Brits are (apart from ONE measly award) the managers of record companies, and the really do just sell themselves....it sounds like a scandal, and that the public would not stand for it, but record companies really do say, alright, you vote for Kylie in Best Female or whatever, and we'll vote for Linkin Park in best Boy Band......they scratch each others backs. And this isn't even a scandal! they admit it! it's a ****ing farce.

The Brit Awards is a circus.....remember 1999 or something when Belle @ Sebastien won best band before they'd even released a record?

please don't tell me this is public opinion.

HighLordDave · Post by **HighLordDave** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 10:01 am

Awards shows are very seldom about rewarding artistic merit. They are all about the show. Who's there. Who's wearing what. Who's with who. The AMAs are a contrived **** Clark (it's the damn filter again!) brainchild about creating competition for the Grammys and getting TV ratings..

Even the Oscars, which in my opinion consistently reward artistic merit above commercial success more than its other industry counterparts, is all about the event, not the award.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Thu Feb 21, 2002 10:03 am

Originally posted by HighLordDave
I think it's equally fair to say that there are simply too many awards shows out there and that we could do with one for each genre (movies, TV, music, etc.) and not have the Grammys, the AMAs, the CMAs, the Golden Globes, the People's Choice, the ACMs, the MTV Movie, the Blockbusters, the Oscars, et al.

The grammy's are the most respected.

Perhaps that is due to the changing opinions, they fracture and then establish their own organisations, it only takes a few years and they are the same organisations they split from