Jump to content

MTV: It's no easy task to follow BigYawnce

makemeslay

By makemeslay
in Britney Community

Recommended Posts

makemeslay Explorer

makemeslay

Posted
Posted

BRITNEY SPEARS’S VMA COMEBACK IS A TOTAL THROWBACK TO 2000

WORK, *****

bell-250-1421175405.png?format=jpg&quality=.8&width=45&height=45
CRYSTAL BELL1h ago
 

Seventeen years ago, a baby-faced Britney Spearsmade her VMA debut with a sizzling performance of her breakthrough hit “...Baby One More Time.” The following year, she took the stage by storm, delivering her first truly iconic performances with “Oops! ...I Did It Again” — all while wearing a controversial nude ensemble. In 2001, she cemented her place as one of pop music's most daring divas when she belly-danced across the VMA stage with an albino burmese python casually draped around her shoulders for an electrifying performance of “I'm a Slave 4 U.” Then, in 2003,she kissed Madonna while performing “Like a Virgin.” And although she stumbled through her 2007 “comeback” performance of “Gimme More,” Spears showed up to the 2016 VMAs ready to prove the naysayers wrong.

Britney's back, *****

 

Spears took to the 2016 VMAs stage with rapper G-Eazy to perform the lead single off her latest album (read: masterpiece), Glory, and it was a glorious mix of old Brit (sparkly nude bodysuit!) and new. It's no easy task to follow Beyoncé, but Britney Spears did what she does best: She served us slinky dance moves and lots of personality. Midway through the performance, Spears even subbed in for Bebe Rexha in a surprise performance of “Me, Myself & I.”

 

giphy-1-1472440065.gif?quality=.8&height=254&width=480Getty Images

Will it be remembered as her greatest VMA performance of all time? Probably not. But damn, it's good to see Britney smiling again.

 

http://www.mtv.com/news/2924290/britney-spears-2016-vmas-comeback-performance/
 


If it's good enough for MTV, it's good enough for you homos.

Link to comment
  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Delicious Pork Chops Mentor

Delicious Pork Chops

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Nando. said:

Will it be remembered as her greatest VMA performance of all time? Probably not.

Then why TF market it like it would top the birth of Jesus Christ?

They knew how it would be

Stupid pricks

It's called marketing.

It's like watching a trailer of a movie and it looks good, but when you watch the movie itself....it wasn't what you expected. 

Link to comment
DirtyMind Proficient

DirtyMind

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Slave4yew said:

Yet they gave her the slot after Beyonce. All that hype. She needs to leave MTV in the past. The show has been **** the past 4 years :NYcackle:

Lbr, she would have been compared to Beyoncé no matter where in the show she performed.  That was inevitable.  I just can't with some of you thinking MTV was intentionally trying to embarrass her.  :ricackle:  What exactly would they gain from that?

7 minutes ago, Nando. said:

Will it be remembered as her greatest VMA performance of all time? Probably not.

Then why TF market it like it would top the birth of Jesus Christ?

They knew how it would be

Stupid pricks

A few days ago everyone was creaming themselves over all the Britney promo MTV was doing- now that was a bad thing and MTV is a bunch of pricks?

14xf4eb.gif

Link to comment
Guest emailmycock

Guest emailmycock

Posted
Posted

This is the first time I watch the VMAs since 2011 and all I'm gonna say is that this year's VMAs were easily the worst awards show I've watched in my life, the unfunny commentators, the immature hosts who later tweeted bad things about Britney and Ariana, MTV trying too hard to please black people, horrible stage, celebrities who have nothing to do with music showing up, etc.:donewithit: I hope Britney never attends the VMAs again

Link to comment
jamesedward94 Mentor

jamesedward94

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Nando. said:

Will it be remembered as her greatest VMA performance of all time? Probably not.

Then why TF market it like it would top the birth of Jesus Christ?

They knew how it would be

Stupid pricks

The performance didn't live up to the commercial. It was a GREAT performance but I don't understand why they had that commercial for it. Too much hype.

Link to comment
makemeslay Explorer

makemeslay

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 minutes ago, JoffBaratheon said:

I didn't know $636 million off a $175 million budget was a flop.... :nothavingit:

It is when you consider the fact that half the revenue they make goes back to the cinemas for showing the movie. So that $636 is actually $318. Then add to that marketing/promotion/advertising costs which will easily take $150-$200 million considering the size/fame of the big names of the cast. So that $318 becomes more like $118, which makes their sales revenue less than their production expenses.
 

And then add in the royalties they have to pay DC for using their characters. Then factor in all those expensive reshoots they had to go back to do.

 

And then factor in that Marvel's movies are raking in $1 billion dollars a film now, while DC hasn't had one since 2008 with TDKR, and their previous movie with Batman, Superman & Wonder Woman side by side ALSO failed to hit $1 billion. 

 

:nothavingit:

Link to comment
Nando. Proficient

Nando.

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, - Kyle - said:

It's called marketing.

It's like watching a trailer of a movie and it looks good, but when you watch the movie itself....it wasn't what you expected. 

but the movie studio doesnt bash it right after

"oh the new avengers 2 trailer looks good"

movie comes out

sucks

MAERVEL STUDIOS: "did avengers 2 top avengers 1? no. bye."

:cricket:

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go To Topic Listing
×
×
  • Create New...