news EW lists ‘32 of the most shocking performances ever’ - Britney mentioned twice but not for the snake....

[Isla]

2003 was shocking, not really 2007 though, that performance is memorable but I wouldn't necessarily say for being 'shocking', it just became memorable for being a bad performance.

Both the 2000 and 2001 performances really should be there though.

[fnfurter]

21 hours ago, LostInAnImage said:

and his embrace with Elton John at the Grammys following a performance of “Stan,” were literally talked about for years on end.

But it had been done before and sold the exact same way, back in 1992. Eminem was far from the first controversial artist to perform with Elton. That credit goes to this performance--

(Starts at 0:50.) So while I agree on his performance of Real Slim Shady, I would've been annoyed had they mentioned that performance.

[fnfurter]

And of course I hit enter before I included them performing with him for the tribute to Freddie/doing Bohemian Rhapsody, but that performance, too.

[stateofgracebritney]

[ss0725]

I can't find the photo of the Palms casino signage from the 2007 VMAs, but I believe it was the first time MTV ever branded the awards show as featuring/starring someone - it was either "The VMA's Starring Britney Spears" or "Featuring Britney Spears". Pretty epic - and that show rated through the roof because of her comeback.

[LeglessJamie]

On 1/14/2019 at 9:32 AM, DignifiedLove said:

VMA 2000 deserved a spot on that list, that was like the epitome of a shocking performance and the birth of Britney as the daring performer she became known for.  Mess list remains mess.

I expected this performance to be in it. Britney faced SEVERE backlash for stripping down from the tux to the nude costume, it was like THE moment she said goodbye to the innocent days.

I remember her seeing the video where a lot of people are saying she was outrageous and she was like "I decide what I wanna wear".

This was way more shocking than the 07 VMAs ...

[LostInAnImage]

59 minutes ago, f**knfurter said:

But it had been done before and sold the exact same way, back in 1992. Eminem was far from the first controversial artist to perform with Elton. That credit goes to this performance--

(Starts at 0:50.) So while I agree on his performance of Real Slim Shady, I would've been annoyed had they mentioned that performance.

Oh, of course you’re right and I definitely should’ve mentioned that as well. I just meant that it was extremely “shocking” that year, and with that artist specifically, because a lot of people were protesting the Grammys for having nominated Eminem’s album for all the top honors, as multiple human rights groups insisted he was genuinely homophobic rather than performing satire.

And the Grammys are arguably a bigger platform, more representative of the wider population of music consumers, than the relatively narrow demographic for whom MTV caters their programming. 

I mean, even though the Guns N’ Roses are obviously iconic, and I'm aware Elton has also had to issue statements pertaining to false allegations re: Axl Rose and homophobia just as he did with Eminem, I think the instance involving the latter was likely more memorable in terms of the general populace, not just due to generational gaps but also because Eminem is the best-selling artist of the entire 2000s decade. Admittedly, this could certainly be confirmation bias on my part. But also, the list is clearly "ageist" to a degree. Most of the truly shocking performances had occurred by the end of the 80s, to be quite honest.

But due to the sheer pandemonium that was/is Eminem in pop culture terms, it’d be like seeing ****** hug a Jew on live TV, had ****** been the best-selling rapper of all time and not a horrific anti-semitic despot who was primarily embittered due to being rejected from art school, of all things.

Speaking of which, I've noticed a pattern wherein revenge of the theater nerds is a rare occurrence, but particularly brutal whenever it does happen (Charles Manson is another good example, who only started his homicidal cult after he spent a summer with The Beach Boys, residing in their pool house I believe, and was rejected by a record label after having submitted a demo CD). Needless to say, he didn't take the rejection well. 

Although weirdly enough, his songs weren't half-bad; but then again, neither was ******’s art. And now, I've deviated from the topic so substantially that I am actually having to reread your reply to remember what I'm actually responding to (shout-out to adult ADHD)!

Oh, but back to GNR: as I’m sure you’re acutely more aware than I, they’ve done a ton of seriously controversial things but for whatever reason, much of it appears to bypass public consciousness, at least now. Maybe some of it is simply too controversial, and persisted for too long, yet without that element of an obvious "wink” that allows room for more commercial appeal (not that they lacked that in their heyday, either). 

However, I will say that their antics (and music in general) were far more appreciated whilst I lived in Europe in contrast to the US, but as a general rule, the former population is also far less easily offended than the latter. 

[LostInAnImage]

13 minutes ago, Pinty said:

Where’s camilla cabellos????

Oh my God, I legitimately totally forgot about her! I didn’t even know she’d had any "shocking" or high-profile performances. It was hilarious back whenever she had exactly one hit song and immediately all of exhale simultaneously declared her "the new Princess of Pop." 

I mean, Gangnam Style was a way bigger hit than Havana, but no one started referring to Psy as “the King of Pop.”

Spoiler

ETA: It just occurred to me that you may be a legitimate fan genuinely asking this question rather than being sarcastic as I assumed, in which case I genuinely apologize because it wasn’t my intent to make fun of anyone else’s favorite artist (for reference, I still regularly listen to the BSB, so it’s not like my taste in music is exactly refined). 

 

[fnfurter]

14 hours ago, LostInAnImage said:

Oh, of course you’re right and I definitely should’ve mentioned that as well. I just meant that it was extremely “shocking” that year, and with that artist specifically, because a lot of people were protesting the Grammys for having nominated Eminem’s album for all the top honors, as multiple human rights groups insisted he was genuinely homophobic rather than performing satire.

 

And the Grammys are arguably a bigger platform, more representative of the wider population of music consumers, than the relatively narrow demographic for whom MTV caters their programming.

Hm.... definitely could see why it could be considered more shocking being on the.... I guess more respected.... platform, especially if groups were protesting as a result. As for Guns, however, the reason Elton had to put out the same statement before/after performing with them was because of a song Axl wrote/they released called "One In A Million", which-- not only has a homophobic slur, it also drops a racial slur as well. The song itself is about Axl arriving in Los Angeles from Indiana and being bombarded by people trying to sell him things while he was simply trying to find where he was going, and the chorus revolves around a homeless man who helped him out. But still-- the song is considered offensive, rightfully so, and a lot of anti-gay groups and even the KKK tried to back and support Axl once GN'R Lies dropped and the song hit, much to his dismay.

14 hours ago, LostInAnImage said:

I think the instance involving the latter was likely more memorable in terms of the general populace, not just due to generational gaps but also because Eminem is the best-selling artist of the entire 2000s decade. Admittedly, this could certainly be confirmation bias on my part. But also, the list is clearly "ageist" to a degree. Most of the truly shocking performances had occurred by the end of the 80s, to be quite honest.

I mean, to be fair, Guns was the biggest band of their time, particularly the nineties-- but I can say its likely a case of a more influential platform, being more current, and a bit of ageism, yes. (Also, Guns burned out pretty quick and their time on top was short-lived; yes, despite them being together again and still around now.) I think that's a problem in general with lists like these -- not this one in particular, they covered events most have forgotten, though I did notice they left out the people who got squashed at a concert back in the seventies -- is that the one covering the events is usually too young to remember the history. I think I would just appreciate it more if a subject was covered and both topics listed within said subject, if that makes sense. Just cover them all, is my opinion.

But this is very true.

14 hours ago, LostInAnImage said:

But due to the sheer pandemonium that was/is Eminem in pop culture terms, it’d be like seeing ****** hug a Jew on live TV, had ****** been the best-selling rapper of all time and not a horrific anti-semitic despot who was primarily embittered due to being rejected from art school, of all things.

Speaking of which, I've noticed a pattern wherein revenge of the theater nerds is a rare occurrence, but particularly brutal whenever it does happen (Charles Manson is another good example, who only started his homicidal cult after he spent a summer with The Beach Boys, residing in their pool house I believe, and was rejected by a record label after having submitted a demo CD). Needless to say, he didn't take the rejection well. 

Although weirdly enough, his songs weren't half-bad; but then again, neither was ******’s art. And now, I've deviated from the topic so substantially that I am actually having to reread your reply to remember what I'm actually responding to (shout-out to adult ADHD)!

Amusingly, I've both seen ******'s artwork and heard one of Charles' songs -- and because Guns N' Roses covered it in their The Spaghetti Incident? album, hilariously, as a hidden bonus track -- and can report that ******'s art, while not terrible, was incredibly mediocre, and so was Charlie's songwriting. Its ironic to me that both were bitter over a lack of success in their chosen areas when the truth was, the reason they didn't succeed was a lack of talent. (And LMFAO, i... was quite all right with the subject switch.)

14 hours ago, LostInAnImage said:

Oh, but back to GNR: as I’m sure you’re acutely more aware than I, they’ve done a ton of seriously controversial things but for whatever reason, much of it appears to bypass public consciousness, at least now. Maybe some of it is simply too controversial, and persisted for too long, yet without that element of an obvious "wink” that allows room for more commercial appeal (not that they lacked that in their heyday, either). 

However, I will say that their antics (and music in general) were far more appreciated whilst I lived in Europe in contrast to the US, but as a general rule, the former population is also far less easily offended than the latter. 

True, though I think more people than expected remember the riots (Axl is actually responsible for two; one in St. Louis, which I believe was the one on this list, and one after the aforementioned Metallica stage fire that was included on this list. Maybe that's the riot they listed, seeing as the fire itself was mentioned? Idk), which is understandable, and Axl's rather infamous for never being on time-- so much so that its a reoccurring joke people use with him, and I heard he once pulled a comedian aside who made the joke and insisted that it wasn't always true.

I could definitely see that, however.

[LostInAnImage]

1 hour ago, f**knfurter said:

Hm.... definitely could see why it could be considered more shocking being on the.... I guess more respected.... platform, especially if groups were protesting as a result. As for Guns, however, the reason Elton had to put out the same statement before/after performing with them was because of a song Axl wrote/they released called "One In A Million", which-- not only has a homophobic slur, it also drops a racial slur as well. The song itself is about Axl arriving in Los Angeles from Indiana and being bombarded by people trying to sell him things while he was simply trying to find where he was going, and the chorus revolves around a homeless man who helped him out. But still-- the song is considered offensive, rightfully so, and a lot of anti-gay groups and even the KKK tried to back and support Axl once GN'R Lies dropped and the song hit, much to his dismay.

I mean, to be fair, Guns was the biggest band of their time, particularly the nineties-- but I can say its likely a case of a more influential platform, being more current, and a bit of ageism, yes. (Also, Guns burned out pretty quick and their time on top was short-lived; yes, despite them being together again and still around now.) I think that's a problem in general with lists like these -- not this one in particular, they covered events most have forgotten, though I did notice they left out the people who got squashed at a concert back in the seventies -- is that the one covering the events is usually too young to remember the history. I think I would just appreciate it more if a subject was covered and both topics listed within said subject, if that makes sense. Just cover them all, is my opinion.

But this is very true.

Amusingly, I've both seen ******'s artwork and heard one of Charles' songs -- and because Guns N' Roses covered it in their The Spaghetti Incident? album, hilariously, as a hidden bonus track -- and can report that ******'s art, while not terrible, was incredibly mediocre, and so was Charlie's songwriting. Its ironic to me that both were bitter over a lack of success in their chosen areas when the truth was, the reason they didn't succeed was a lack of talent. (And LMFAO, i... was quite all right with the subject switch.)

True, though I think more people than expected remember the riots (Axl is actually responsible for two; one in St. Louis, which I believe was the one on this list, and one after the aforementioned Metallica stage fire that was included on this list. Maybe that's the riot they listed, seeing as the fire itself was mentioned? Idk), which is understandable, and Axl's rather infamous for never being on time-- so much so that its a reoccurring joke people use with him, and I heard he once pulled a comedian aside who made the joke and insisted that it wasn't always true.

I could definitely see that, however.

I love your posts, as they effectively provide me with a much-needed lesson in the history of music (admittedly, neither my musical taste nor preferred genre have evolved in the slightest following the very first three albums I ever purchased: Spice Girls, BSB, and Britney, respectively. I suppose now that 20-something years have gone by, it would be expected for me to broaden my horizons a bit. However, I still stubbornly maintain that nothing beats a great pop song). 

If I recall correctly, aren't Britney and Kesha more or less your two outliers with regard to genre of music, in that you don't listen to much (or any) pop aside from them? (With the notable exception, of course, of the mutual lifelong loyalty to the Spice Girls which all of us childhood fans continue to share after having collectively taken a solemn vow of “Girl Power”).

[fnfurter]

40 minutes ago, LostInAnImage said:

I love your posts, as they effectively provide me with a much-needed lesson in the history of music (admittedly, neither my musical taste nor preferred genre have evolved in the slightest following the very first three albums I ever purchased: Spice Girls, BSB, and Britney, respectively. I suppose now that 20-something years have gone by, it would be expected for me to broaden my horizons a bit. However, I still stubbornly maintain that nothing beats a great pop song). 

If I recall correctly, aren't Britney and Kesha more or less your two outliers with regard to genre of music, in that you don't listen to much (or any) pop aside from them? (With the notable exception, of course, of the mutual lifelong loyalty to the Spice Girls which all of us childhood fans continue to share after having collectively taken a solemn vow of “Girl Power”).

Aw, thank you! I just have bits of random knowledge I kind of pointlessly poured research into that I spout at people when I feel it comes up in conversation, lmao. But to be fair, I'm actually kind of the same way; I may have a bit of a broader comfort zone, but I still insist on sticking to it.  Right now, a friend's trying to get me into another rock band that I know a bit about, but instead it sort of collapsed on her and it just kicked off my Guns obsession all over again.

Yes-- admittedly I haven't listened to Kesha in a while, and every now and then I may listen to something from Ariana or Christina, but its mostly Britney who is the outlier. Oh, and Janet. (And yes, the Spice Girls. I can't ignore my Girl Power pledge roots. I don't think I'd be as into pop as I can be, if not for them.)