35 responses for this post

1. Rona on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 9:52 am

   Were they going for an ’80’s-prom theme with those dresses?
   But Natalie looks great as a brunette, and that’s so great they won so many!

2. Lisa on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:03 am

   I want brown hair like Natalie. Whaddya think?

3. Lisa on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:04 am

   And was anyone else bored by The Police’s performance?

4. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:19 am

   Lisa, you’d look incredible.

   As for The Police, yeah, not so much with the exciting. I guess we’ll have to wait and pay $100/ticket to see them live.

5. Tom on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:42 am

   Since when did the Grammys change from recognizing the best in music to making a political statement? Without their back story, the Dixie Chicks would not have even been nominated.

6. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:48 am

   Now now, Tom. The Dixie Chicks have been consistently recognized by the Grammys (I believe they received Grammys eight times before last night). Music is an art form - and art is a response to society. People win Grammys for writing songs about politics, drugs, love, hate, racism, everything.

7. Chuck on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:49 am

   I thought The Police performance was AWESOME - I got chills and jumped out of my seat and cheered when they were done! I’m a HUGE fan though, so it’s no wonder I wasn’t underwhelmed. Sting became Sting again with one pluck of the bass after a 20 year hiatus as Gordon, the new age soft rocker. I think he remembered that he was once a ROCK GOD who sang songs about hookers, suicidal lovers, Lolitas, lustful obsession, and the apocolypse. I’m hoping he went home and smashed his Lyre into a thousand pieces. And the quick shot of Trudi going berzerk like a 20 year old groupie was about the cutest thing I’ve ever seen.

   Welcome back, sir.

8. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:50 am

   The shot of Trudi was definitely my favorite, Chuck. And I did get goosebumps; I think it was seeing Andy Summers and then Sting make a happy little smile.

   But I was hoping to hear more than one song, I guess. Plus, I still haven’t really forgiven Sting for the past few years quite yet.

9. Chuck on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 10:59 am

   Emilie said the same thing about wanting another song and I had to remind her that it was the Grammys, not The Police Reunion Show - her reply was “well why the hell not?”

   As far as not forgiving Sting - you’d be hard pressed to find someone more grossed out by him over the past 2 decades than myself, so I get it - but something visceral and unexpeted happened to me. It was like all the Yanni disappeared in an instant, I can’t explain it - HE WAS STING AGAIN! The dude onstage last night was the one I worshipped as a yute. And seeing Stuart pounding the shit out of his drums again instead of writing operas did the trick too.

10. Chips O'Toole on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 11:14 am

    did they just reunite because of the overwhelming pressure from bitter arch-rivals Scrantonicity?

11. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 11:20 am

    Ha! They should let Scrantonicity open.

12. Tom on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 11:45 am

    Come on, freakgirl. I’m not quite that naive. They’ve had some success in the Country categories, yes. But to win five in one night, include the big three - Album, Song, and Record? And it’s because people think they’re the best in music? No, the music industry sent a message that said, “we’re behind what you did.” Even Natalie Maines recognizes it: “I think people are using their freedom of speech with all these awards. We get the message.” I’m not saying they’re not talented, but that album standing on its own, without the politics, was not Grammy-worthy. The voters did a disservice to the nominated musicians who had produced outstanding music this year so that they could send a political message. Very sad.

13. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 11:50 am

    Personally, I think the album is one of their best. Opinions differ, of course. Of course they were rewarded because voters agreed with the message of their album…but why is rewarding the message behind the music wrong? It’s the reason a piece of shit like “My Humps” doesn’t have a Grammy.

    I do understand what you’re saying. I just think maybe it’s difficult to separate the music and the message.

14. GeekBoy on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:11 pm

    I don’t know, Tom. I’m not a country person, but I really enjoyed the Dixie Chicks latest album — politics or no politics. For record of the year, the only other artist that doesn’t bore me is Gnarls Barkley. Blige, Blunt, and Bailey Rae all put me to sleep, as talented as they might be. For album of the year, again, I’d probably lean toward Gnarls Barkley instead of Dixie Chicks, but I’m not a fan of John Mayer, Justin Timberlake, or the Chili Pepper’s latest stuff.

    My point here is that as Freakgirl said, music is subjective. It’s obvious that you don’t like Dixie Chicks, and I’m sure you have some very “objective” rationale for that. But people like what they like. Just because you don’t think the Dixie Chicks are Grammy-worthy doesn’t mean they aren’t, no matter how authoritatively you state otherwise.

15. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:15 pm

    I am SO EMBARASSED.

    That “piece of shit” My Humps actually DID win a Grammy last night for Best Pop Performance By A Duo Or Group With Vocal. And it beat Death Cab for Cutie’s I Will Follow You Into the Dark.

    So really, Tom, why are we even debating this? The Grammys are bullshit.

16. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    I really enjoyed this CD from the Dixie Chicks. It’s the first one I bought and I’m sure politics did enter into that. I think the 70s roots rock vibe is cohesive and the production and musicianship are top-notch. I like her voice, too.

    I see your point, though, Tom. Still, let us not pretend that it’s suddenly this year when the Grammys have strayed from being the mark of highest artistic achievement. C’mon. It’s been a while.

17. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:20 pm

    PS Their documentary “Shutup and Sing” is out on DVD next week. It’s good, if only because you get to see Pasdar in his jimjams.

18. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:27 pm

    Oh, wait a minute. Did I just read that Mayer was nominated?

    HE WAS ROBBED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

19. GeekBoy on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:34 pm

    Clearly, Mayer did not get the memo …

    

20. GeekBoy on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:38 pm

    And yeah, upon hearing that My Humps won anything at all, much less was even nominated, it’s safe to say that The Grammys are a joke. But I still stand by my assertion that the Dixie Chicks album was just as worthy as anything else on the list, if not moreso.

21. Chuck on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    For the record - the opening 5 minutes of the Grammy’s is the most I’ve watched since maybe… 1987. So I guess I agree with Tom - the Grammy’s are “very sad”.

22. Lisa on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    Chuck, I am a yooge Police fan, too. I must say that my heart LEAPT when I saw Stuart Copeland! I guess that’s why I was hoping for a little bit more … a medley perhaps? (Maybe I am still thinking about Prince’s AMAZING performance at the Superbowl.) At any rate, I was disappointed that they did the same dreamy, new-agey, re-mixey thing to Roxanne (a punky/reggae classic) that they did to Don’t Stand So Close to Me a few years ago. Blech.
    And yeah, Scrantonicity!

23. GeekBoy on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:43 pm

    Well, and let’s not forget to distinguish between a Grammy award and The Grammy Awards Show. I have some minor interest in who actually wins Grammys, but if not for Freakgirl, I definitely wouldn’t bother to watch the show. And even when I do, I read comic books all the way through it.

24. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:46 pm

    I have to say that my respect for John Mayer has gone up a little, since I saw how he totally faced Ryan Seacrest.
    

25. Lisa on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 12:53 pm

    I meant STEWART Copeland.

26. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 1:00 pm

    YOU’RE THE WORST FAN EVER!

27. Chuck on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 1:13 pm

    Lisa - a medley would have made me want to shoot myself.

    I thought the changes to Roxanne were pretty minimal compared to what they did with DSSCTM, which, to make us all feel old, was 21 YEARS AGO!!

28. Chuck on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    And BTW - that John Mayer bit was AWESOME. He totally pwnned him - do I even need to say who that reminded me of?

29. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 1:22 pm

    Have I mentioned Mayer was ROBBED!!!!!!!!!!!!????!!!!????

    He should have won. With Clapton presenting, of course.

30. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 3:57 pm

    She’s holding a frog?

31. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 3:59 pm

    I guess to match the lilypads stuck all over her outfit?

32. Michael on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 4:38 pm

    Ah.

    Makes sense now.

33. The Other Andrew on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 5:05 pm

    The big news in Oz is Wolfmother! Small town boys make good. Myles (the drummer) is the younger brother of a friend of mine, which makes me especially puffed up of course.

34. freakgirl on Monday, February 12, 2007 at 5:27 pm

    Yay! We like Wolfmother ’round these parts, too. Tell your friend congrats!

35. quelli on Thursday, February 15, 2007 at 12:49 pm

    I’d love to see Toby Keith put a boot in Natalie’s a…..

Comments are closed.