Which era was much more bigger? Britney or In The Zone?

[LikeShatteredGlass]

23 hours ago, fays1 said:

The Britney era was much bigger, even though it was not her best album, and the singles did not do that good. 

Britney is part of the Trinity. Every. Song. Was. Is. A. Bop. 

[studlygeorge]

On 9/24/2020 at 6:05 AM, LikeShatteredGlass said:

I would say the Britney era was bigger. She. Was. Everywhere. Slave gave her a new image, which was much needed. The Pepsi deal was massive and the commercials were iconic. We got Crossroads during this era. She performed at the damn Superbowl with Aerosmith. The Slave 4 U VMA performance was perfection. 

By the time we got to ITZ not only was Britney over it but she had been so overexposed that the general public started to look the other way. Don't get me wrong, this era gave us a lot. Toxic is iconic. Onyx Hotel was a totally new and different side of her artistry. But something about it felt forced. 

This. Her image was also in a steady decline with ITZ. There was a lot of press surrounding Britney, arguably just as much as the Britney era, but a lot of it was negative as I remember. The marriage scandal, the whole aftermath of the JT situation. I was really young at the time but I really only remember Toxic being the signature positive moment

[ElenaB]

No one will ever top 2001ney. It was the best era of all. And the DWAD tour remains being the best tout she ever did imo

[LikeShatteredGlass]

11 minutes ago, studlygeorge said:

This. Her image was also in a steady decline with ITZ. There was a lot of press surrounding Britney, arguably just as much as the Britney era, but a lot of it was negative as I remember. The marriage scandal, the whole aftermath of the JT situation. I was really young at the time but I really only remember Toxic being the signature positive moment

YES! And she got so much **** from the media for having an even more mature image during ITZ compared to the reaction she got for switching things up during the Britney era. For instance, the 2003 Diane Sawyer interview where Britney was ripped apart for having more mature photo shoots, more mature lyrics, etc. It was **** shaming. They way she was treated after releasing ITZ was totally unacceptable. The album is iconic, but she was treated horribly during this time because people had some terrible misconception that she should never be allowed to grow up. 

[HeySister]

Let's not forget the Britney era gave us the MJ performance and this absolute work of art ...

 

 

#flawlessny

 

[zxcvb]

On 9/24/2020 at 6:05 AM, LikeShatteredGlass said:

 But something about it felt forced. 

Couldn't you argue her first three eras were as forced as anything about In The Zone?  After all, she released three albums in three straight years. (and went on three tours in three years.)

Isn't that the very definition of forced?

I will say in retrospect, the biggest issues with the era could be the Madonna kiss and Outrageous.  While the kiss did rematerialize more global attention, it arguably took attention from the album.  (Although MATM was a global hit) And obviously the Outrageous video damaged her as a performer.

On 9/24/2020 at 10:27 AM, Peter Pan said:

Britney Era. She was everywhere back then. Even though ITZ had better hits (Toxic and Everytime) the Britney Era was the Britney superstar era. Music, movies, commercials, products. Everywhere!
 

Honestly... The Oops era was also bigger than ITZ. 

Again, like my previous post, Baby Oops and Britney eras literally happening back to back to back (and all occurring in the already launched teen pop era) is the only reason those eras were bigger than ITZ.

ITZ is Britney at her most artistic, so I can't pick any other era over it.

On 9/24/2020 at 12:06 PM, Bundy said:

I dont see that much of difference between both eras. Britney was also everywhere from 2003-2004. The biggest difference imo is by 2003 Britney was very much hated by gp and media. During Britney era and before the break up, I feel like some people didnt have the courage to be completely nasty towards her bc she was still a teen with a clean image. Then the break up happened, she became even more ******, she was overexposed, she was partying, drinking, smoking, hooking up with older or married men, there was the Bush comments, then she started dressing more and more like she didnt give a **** anymore, and people just jumped on the hate train full force. 

But I remember she was also on the cover of every ******* magazine, the VMAs was huge, she did her last Pepsi commercial and other ones, MATM was a hit in Europe, Toxic and Everytime were a hit around the world. Her first 3 videos were big on MTV and there were a lot of fuss over them for different reasons back in the day. Every channel, outlet was talking non stop about her in every single way possible. But obviously the era was very short and Britney was overworked and over fame. 

 

You're right.  The difference is that Baby Oops and Britney eras were all back to back to back with clean image, the already existing teen pop era and Timberlake relationship.

She was becoming an adult with In The Zone, no "Celebrity/Media/PR romance, the industry leaving teen pop behind etc... It should be no surprise at all that her popularity waned by ITZ.

Still, ITZ is her best from album by far from her first 4 eras.

[Peter Pan]

2 hours ago, zxcvb said:

Couldn't you argue her first three eras were as forced as anything about In The Zone?  After all, she released three albums in three straight years. (and went on three tours in three years.)

Isn't that the very definition of forced?

I will say in retrospect, the biggest issues with the era could be the Madonna kiss and Outrageous.  While the kiss did rematerialize more global attention, it arguably took attention from the album.  (Although MATM was a global hit) And obviously the Outrageous video damaged her as a performer.

Again, like my previous post, Baby Oops and Britney eras literally happening back to back to back (and all occurring in the already launched teen pop era) is the only reason those eras were bigger than ITZ.

ITZ is Britney at her most artistic, so I can't pick any other era over it.

You're right.  The difference is that Baby Oops and Britney eras were all back to back to back with clean image, the already existing teen pop era and Timberlake relationship.

She was becoming an adult with In The Zone, no "Celebrity/Media/PR romance, the industry leaving teen pop behind etc... It should be no surprise at all that her popularity waned by ITZ.

Still, ITZ is her best from album by far from her first 4 eras.

You definitely have a point about BOMT, Oops and Britney being released back to back. ITZ was a huge era and definitely her most creative one and I understand that’s why people like it so much (personally I don’t care for half of the songs much but I get how people like it) but the question here was which era was bigger. And just because those eras were back to back doesn’t change the fact those eras were bigger. You just gave a good reason why 

[vzlafan]

Britney Era the best the bad thing is she was tired and annoyed of everything! i mean everyday she was performing, press conference, traveling, interviews, appeareance, shootings , photoshops all day all night 

[Leolileinstein]

In the zone in the US, Britney dominated outside of the US in 2001/2002, it was her peak

[Eda]

11 hours ago, Leolileinstein said:

In the zone in the US

ITZ Was Global too. ( 3 no 1 UK singles ) Toxic was bigger than anything on "Britney". But there was so much negative press ( first marriage , knee , K-fed , JT breakup , madonna kiss)

[Leolileinstein]

1 hour ago, Eda said:

ITZ Was Global too. ( 3 no 1 UK singles ) Toxic was bigger than anything on "Britney". But there was so much negative press ( first marriage , knee , K-fed , JT breakup , madonna kiss)

Yes  indeed