Whitenail said:
However, knocking up an obvious cash-grab "biography" of him when he's only gone through 16 years of life for the appeasement of a gazillion fan-girls world-wide in 3D is just so laden in the kind of crap that's destroying the film industry that it fills me with rage. You can't argue that they're making it to document some kind of "amazing journey" (one that probably involved control freak parents and a damn good agent), my grandfather migrating to Australia after surviving the Nazi occupation of Poland for several years when only in his teens would be something to document, this is just a commercialized, un-intelligent cash-grab to milk this Bieber cow even faster.
Did you really just put "unintelligent" next to "cash-grab" right there? If so, can I send you my bank account details so you can deposit me some money? In Justin's case, it sure makes more sense to grab the cash now while he's hot, than later on when he may or may not be. Anyway, it
is an amazing journey - how many people get to go through something like that (whether good or bad) in their lifetime? Less people than who went through what your grandfather did, although that's also a unique story worthy of coverage, hence why there have been films about that too (I recommend The Pianist if you haven't seen it). It makes sense therefore that Justin Beiber's story is a story that some people might be curious about. Not vouching for the quality of the film here, chances are it'll be sappy and boring as these things usually are, but there is at least the
potential here for something interesting, and if people want to see it, and there's demand for it, and that demand is being filled, why is that bad? Sure, you could say "they could be watching something better" - but who decides what's "better"? You? Some asshole who writes for a magazine? Some bunch of guys in an office somewhere? I think it's better to let people decide for themselves what they want to see. If the film sucks I'm sure it'll suffer the same fate as Mariah Carey's "Glitter"...
team star pug said:
BonsaiK said:
It certainly is. And do you know who wins the most? Justin Bieber.
Every time you post his name here, that's another match that will come up in a Google search, so when the record company proudly brags that he's "the kid with over 100 million hits on Google!" give yourself a pat on the back, because you contributed to that. Every time you talk about him or link a video of his, you're spreading his fame further. Sure, 99% of the people who are reading this know who he is, and now the 1% of people who didn't know, now do know. Thanks to YOU. And if you don't believe me, remember that I work in the music industry and I first found out about Justin Bieber through an Escapist hate-thread.
And then everyone in you works in the music industry for justin beiber will do futher research than just "lulz his name are have 100 million hitz" then they will cough awkwardly and be silent before doing another crap teenage act with no talent that is aimed at deaf6year olds.
being famous doesn't mean he is getting money from it. if someone found him on an escapist hate thread, they will not read it and go " uhh hah, that beiber sounds like a greatr guy, now to buy his merchandising"
I work with a moderatly successful music company in seattle, and a guy was litreally
fired because he refused to stop abnouxiously listening to justin beiber.
I'd probably fire him too, but that's not the point. 100 million hits means that 100 million people had
something to say about Justin Bieber (or one person did, but he was so excited he said it 100 million times). The tagline for Justin Bieber's promo is actually "love him or hate him, you can't ignore him" and if you type "justin bieber love him or hate him" into google the amount of hits goes from about 110 to about 740 million. 740 million! Imagine if the record company had to
pay normal Internet advertising rates for each one of those free advertisements.
One thing that music fans always underestimate is the taste of other music fans. Just because person A posts something and says "god this sucks" doesn't mean person B, C and D are going to read it and go "yeah you're right this does suck". Here's something which I think is completely brilliant, and I found out about it thanks to people on this very forum bitching and moaning about how crap it was:
I wouldn't have heard about it otherwise, my friends sure don't listen to this stuff, they're all far too busy name-checking only "socially approved" bands and maintaining their credibility-friendly "rock" image to actually
enjoy the music they listen to... but the point is that advertising
works, and free advertising works just as well as paid advertising, even if you're saying that the product is crap. Did you know that Kazahakstan received a massive increase in tourism dollars after the release of the film Borat?
NewYork_Comedian said:
Fair enough, im not an expert but im curious to know how posting hate on him will benefit him. Is it the idea that any fame is good fame in the music industry?
It's not the
idea that any fame is good fame when you're trying to sell a product, it's the
proven fact that any fame is good fame when you're trying to sell a product. This user hits the nail right on the head:
drisky said:
Honestly the only time I hear about Beiber is when the internet complains about him.
Negative publicity can be enormously powerful, and media-savvy artists who know how to harness it these days can ride free publicity on "teh internetz" all the way to the bank. Here's Millionaires again, saying upfront what a lot of people in the industry damn well know behind the scenes:
Without the buzz generated by haters, they wouldn't even exist - and they know it. Hence they troll like crazy in every song they have:
Let's face it, if those girls signed up to this forum the mods would ban them based solely on their musical reputation for inciting flamebait and free advertising...