Author Topic: 2009 Grammy Awards  (Read 13971 times)

Sage 703

  • Member
  • Posts: 1710
2009 Grammy Awards
« on: February 09, 2009, 11:37:36 am »
All in all, a much better show that it has been in the past, I thought.  That said - I thought the actual awards themselves were still very predictable and boring in terms of who won.  Plant/Krauss is a perfectly nice album, but it is also exactly the type of record that seems to always take home the trophy at the Grammys.

Highlights for me:

MIA/Kanye/TI/Jay-Z/Lil Wayne: This stole the show for me.  M.I.A.'s outfit was remarkable, and having those four guys on stage in that way was pretty incredible.  The music came across as a bit too loud, which made it hard to hear them on their respective verses, but all in all, I was completely impressed with the performance and its execution.

Justin Timberlake and Al Green: Great performance.  Al Green was awesome, and Timberlake held his own.

Carrie Underwood: Every single time I see her perform, I like it WAY more than I expect I will.  I think she's the real deal top to bottom; bonus points for her blonde bombshell lead guitarist.

Kanye and Estelle: Solid performance of a song I don't love.

Radiohead with the marching band: Yeah, the mix was muddy, Thom Yorke didn't seem completely on...but I thought the visual effect and the arrangement was pretty gripping.

Jennifer Hudson: I'm no huge fan, but great performance.  She has a tremendous voice.


Lowlights:

U2: I thought U2 got totally outclassed at this show; they just did not have the live show to compete with the bands that followed them, and the new song came across as disjointed and unmemorable

Jonas Brothers w/ Stevie Wonder: self-explanatory.  The Jonas Brothers didn't have any business being on that stage with Stevie Wonder, and were mediocre overall.

Paul McCartney w/ Dave Grohl: Why are they performing this song?  Add in the fact that McCartney doesn't have his high range the way he used to, and I thought this came off as average and dull.

Neil Diamond: Again...why?

Katy Perry: First, what the hell was with the fruit?  Second, did nobody inform the Grammy planners that Katy Perry can't sing live?

Julian, Alleged Computer F**kface

  • Member
  • Posts: 5970
  • JULIAN'S AMERICA - It makes my taco pop!
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2009, 11:41:41 am »
No comments on Blink-182 announcing they're reuniting? 20 year old mall punks, unite and take over!

Darth Ed

  • Member
  • Posts: 1159
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2009, 11:45:47 am »
Nice recap. Thanks! Now I know which YouTube videos to search for. :)

walkonby

  • Guest
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2009, 11:50:21 am »
i wanted to see the pre party where chris brown beats rihanna

Relaxer

  • Member
  • Posts: 5409
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2009, 11:52:22 am »
i wanted to see the pre party where chris brown beats rihanna

Was that the opening number?
oword

walkonby

  • Guest
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2009, 12:02:38 pm »
i wanted to see the pre party where chris brown beats rihanna

Was that the opening number?

he attempted to prove he was the next michael jackson at another award show once, so i guess he's shooting for bobby brown and james brown as well.

but thank god he is famous, where a felony assult is merely a payoff goodbye.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 12:08:27 pm by walkonby »

Sage 703

  • Member
  • Posts: 1710
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2009, 12:03:54 pm »
Also worth noting:

Whitney Houston must have been stoned out of her mind.  She could barely open her eyes.  Maybe not the wisest of choices to have her presenting an award right at the outset of the show...

Justin Tonation

  • Member
  • Posts: 5321
  • Did you ever wonder?
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2009, 12:13:19 pm »
i wanted to see the pre party where chris brown beats rihanna

Was that the opening number?

he attempted to prove he was the next michael jackson at another award show once, so i guess he's shooting for bobby brown and james brown as well.

but thank god he is famous, where a felony assult is merely a payoff goodbye.

I still have no idea who Chris Brown is.
😐 🎶

walkonby

  • Guest
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2009, 12:19:03 pm »
i wanted to see the pre party where chris brown beats rihanna

Was that the opening number?

he attempted to prove he was the next michael jackson at another award show once, so i guess he's shooting for bobby brown and james brown as well.

but thank god he is famous, where a felony assult is merely a payoff goodbye.

I still have no idea who Chris Brown is.


i heard he's got the best beats in town.

Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2009, 01:20:25 pm »
I think this guy pretty accurately summed it up for me. What a fucking trainwreck.  Calla, i'm not sure I can take anything you ever post on this board seriously after reading your generally positive review.

Pulling Names from a Hat: The 2009 Grammy Awards
[9 February 2009]

by Evan Sawdey
PopMatters Associate Interviews Editor


Mark Hoppus said it best: ?Isn?t it great to see the Jonas Brothers and Stevie Wonder back together again??

After previous years were hindered by decrepit reality-show styled conceits (My Grammy Moment, anyone?), the producers for the Grammys decided to keep it simple for the 2009 edition of music?s most drawn-out glitz marathon: this time around, there would be no host and no games. Just three-and-a-half bloated hours of anemic performances and half-hearted, sometimes downright bizarre collaborations. If the Grammy Awards are really supposed to be ?Music?s Biggest Night? (as its numerous ads have claimed), then what does the 2009 ceremony say about the state of sonic entertainment right now?

Not much, really.

The show?s opening should have been spectacular: U2 performing their new single ?Get Your Boots On?. It should have been a rallying cry, a band for everyone to get behind and sing along with; after all, U2 singles are?by and large?anthemic and crowd-pleasing, which are words that absolutely cannot be applied towards the chugging, toothless ?Boots?. Bono tried to strike artistic poses while wearing gigantic boots, his voice barely audible, the song?s chorus instantly forgettable, and, with that, the show?s first real opportunity to strike a chord with viewers was missed.

Next thing we know, we?re already handing out awards, Dwayne ?The Rock? Johnson is giving a painfully unfunny monologue, and Justin Timberlake managed to deliver an even worse one right after. We have no thesis statement, no grand introduction to the proceedings: we just have an awards show that?s fueled by spectacle, star-power, and little else. Some of the celebrity appearances were absolutely meaningless (what was the musical significance of getting CSI cast members as presenters, pray tell?), while others simply did not make any coherent sense whatsoever (Kate Beckinsale introducing Paul McCartney? Really?).

Grammy president Neil Portnow?who has embarrassed himself in the past by using his token speech to unveil supposedly ?hip? anti-downloading campaigns (and let?s not forget that whole ?My Grammy Moment? fiasco)?continued his losing streak by asking fellow Grammy-winner Barack Obama to create a cabinet-level position of Secretary for the Arts, Portnow?s not-so-subtle intention being to have powerful government backing when it comes to backing anti-piracy laws and making sure artists are compensated for the distribution of their music. Though his intentions are noble, the irony is inescapable: Lil? Wayne?whose success can be attributed to the intimidating mass of music he releases for free, online, each year?won the Rap Album of the Year Grammy only moments later.

In fact, Lil? Wayne had one of the best moments of the night, singing his powerful New Orleans anthem ?Tie My Hands? near the close of the evening, the song soon transforming into a full-on celebration of the Big Easy with Alan Toussaint and the Dirty Dozen Brass Band in tow. It was one of the broadcast?s few moments of genuine emotion, which is more than can be said for a majority of the performances, in which artists appeared to be matched up by the studied methodology of having their names pulled out of a hat at random. Keith Urban and Al Green? Miley Cyrus overperforming her way through Taylor Swift?s sensitive ballad ?Fifteen?? The Jonas Brothers mumbling their way through ?Superstition? with Stevie Wonder himself in tow? Coldplay?s Chris Martin delivering a sensitive piano rendition of ?Lost!? only to have Jay-Z barge in half-way through in order to move more copies of the Prospekt?s March EP?

It was almost funny, even, that right in the middle of ?Chasing Pavements??the trademark song by Best New Artist winner Adele?Sugarland?s Jennifer Nettles stopped by and managed to actually outsing Adele herself. During a night in which country music was both forgettable (Kenny Chesney?s snore-inducing rendition of ?Better as a Memory") and overstimulated (Carrie Underwood lurched her way through ?Last Name? only to be upstaged by her own sultry female guitarist), leave it to Nettles to bring the best, most coherent performance of the entire night with a powerful rendition of Sugarland?s sparse ballad ?Stay?. As American Idol has proved to us over the years, bucketloads of people have stadium-filling voices?only a blessed few have the ability to actually sell a song (and Nettles, thankfully, is one of them).

Some performances were downright terrible (as if the world actually needed more proof that Katy Perry couldn?t sing), and the most left-field one of them all (Radiohead performing ?15 Step? with the USC Trojan Marching Band) was absolutely transcendent. The night?s saddest moment, however, was the deliberate manipulation of Jennifer Hudson?a genuinely talented performer in her own right?here singing the heartstring-pulling ballad ?You Pulled Me Through?, and, given the meaning of the song and the much-publicized losses that she?s suffered in recent months, her climax brought her own self to tears and the entire Staples Center audience to its feet. It?s a moment that, despite all good intentions, felt deliberately, coldly calculated, mining the suffering of others for mass televised catharsis. As great as it is to see Hudson performing again (and winning a few well-deserved awards), the nagging feeling looms in the background: couldn?t have there been a better way to go about it?

Then again, if this is truly ?Music?s Biggest Night?, then there could?ve been a better way to go about everything. For starters, having T.I., Jay-Z, Kanye West, and Lil? Wayne become the Sinatra-aping ?Rap Pack? wasn?t a good idea from the get-go. Having people collaborate with seemingly unrelated artists all Girl Talk-styled isn?t doing any favors for anyone either (this ?mash-up performance? craze has plagued the broadcast for the past couple of years). And finally, if the Grammys want to be daring and actually reach a younger audience (instead of facing diminishing ratings returns with each passing year), then perhaps they can stop doling out Album of the Year trophies to releases that so safely pander to soft-rock constituents (will 2008 truly be remembered as the year that Raising Sand swept our hearts away?).

Grammy Night 2009 was not a night of surprises?just disappointments. We, as viewers, show up each year expecting an unbridled celebration of music, and instead are treated to an overbudget production of ?Top of the Pops? with movie stars inserted in between songs. Are all of our classically trained musicians going to be relegated to string section work for T.I.?s latest single? Was jazz a genre not worth representing at the ceremony this year? Why did Mark Hoppus? cynical, offhand remark about the Jonas/Wonder collaboration feel like the most truthful thing said all night?

Perhaps amidst all the spectacle, we?ve forgotten that the reason we?re all here is to celebrate music in all its forms?not just to move units and discourage down loaders year after year. To reiterate: what, exactly, do the Grammy Awards say about the state of our current music industry? Simply this: at a time when our economy is in flux and people (and artists especially) are looking upwards for help, support, and encouragement, not having anything significant to say is a very bad state to be in.

Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2009, 01:22:15 pm »
From the Boston Globe-

This year's nominees for alternative music album (which will be decided at tonight's Grammy Awards, airing at 8 on CBS) are Beck, Death Cab for Cutie, My Morning Jacket, Gnarls Barkley, and Radiohead - all respectable choices who made solid albums. But, with the exception of Radiohead, they're all on major labels.

The even more glaring problem is what's missing from the category. Independent artists such as Fleet Foxes, TV on the Radio, Vampire Weekend, and Bon Iver were completely shut out. They made albums that mattered and resonated with both critics and consumers last year, yet they're still not on Grammy voters' radars. (And if you want to get even more esoteric, what about Santogold, MGMT, or Deerhunter?)

Sage 703

  • Member
  • Posts: 1710
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2009, 01:29:21 pm »
Well, the review you posted doesn't really conflict with anything that I had to say, apart from their review of Jennifer Hudson (which I agree with - it was a bit exploitative) and the "Rap Pack" thing...but this statement:

"Then again, if this is truly ?Music?s Biggest Night?, then there could?ve been a better way to go about everything. For starters, having T.I., Jay-Z, Kanye West, and Lil? Wayne become the Sinatra-aping ?Rap Pack? wasn?t a good idea from the get-go. Having people collaborate with seemingly unrelated artists all Girl Talk-styled isn?t doing any favors for anyone either (this ?mash-up performance? craze has plagued the broadcast for the past couple of years)."

Well, that's a stupid thing to say.  "Swagger Like Us" isn't a Grammy concocted mash-up.  It's a song off T.I.'s "Paper Trail," and it actually features M.I.A., Jay-Z, Kanye and Lil' Wayne.  So if you don't like the song, that's one thing - but to say it is a bad idea from the get go isn't an indictment of the Grammy performance, but the song itself.

As for other things in that review...Keith Urban with Al Green was odd, but he also wasn't really a big part of that performance.  I agree that the monologues were awful (the Rock was painful, Timberlake missed the mark right after that).  And Lil' Wayne was also strong on his own...

Other than that, where do we disagree?

Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2009, 01:35:40 pm »
But now you're changing your tune. At first you said Timberlake held his own, now you're aying he missed the mark.

Though I didn't catch her performance, I can't imagine Carrie Underwood ever doing anything that's not complete crap.

And if last nights show was "much better than past shows", I shudder to think how bad the past shows were.  "Much better" to me implies that you must have had overall good feelings about the show...but perhaps what you meant was that the bar was so low it had no place to go but up?

Sage 703

  • Member
  • Posts: 1710
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2009, 01:39:56 pm »
But now you're changing your tune. At first you said Timberlake held his own, now you're aying he missed the mark.

Though I didn't catch her performance, I can't imagine Carrie Underwood ever doing anything that's not complete crap.

And if last nights show was "much better than past shows", I shudder to think how bad the past shows were.  "Much better" to me implies that you must have had overall good feelings about the show...but perhaps what you meant was that the bar was so low it had no place to go but up?

I said his missed the mark in his monologue.  His performance with Al Green was excellent, and he was good with T.I. later in the show.  As for Carrie Underwood, if you want to indict a performance without seeing it, your call.  I wouldn't have expected it to be good either.

And yes, it was much better than past shows.  Overall, I thought the show was too long and the awards uninteresting, but it was punctuated with some strong moments - and generally more than in past years.  I usually don't watch the Grammy Awards at all.  The fact that they pulled together any kind of lineup that I was interested in watching is a step up to begin with.

sweetcell

  • Member
  • Posts: 21676
  • I don't belong here.
Re: 2009 Grammy Awards
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2009, 02:44:27 pm »
Calla, i'm not sure I can take anything you ever post on this board seriously after reading your generally positive review.

well that's rather un-generous of you, charles: i certainly try my hardest to take your posts seriously, despite how predictable their negativity is.
<sig>