Do you think 2015's choice of Katy Perry is any better/worse/same as past performances? Now let's keep in mind the real secret here. The powers that be cannot afford ANY problem during the halftime show, so practically everything is pre-recorded. So how much of a performance are we really getting?
2014: Bruno Mars, Red Hot Chili Peppers
2013: Beyoncé, Destiny's Child
2012: Madonna, LMFAO, Nicki Minaj, M.I.A., Cee Lo Green
2011: The Black Eyed Peas, Usher, Slash
2010: The Who
2009: Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band
2008: Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers
2007: Prince
2006: The Rolling Stones
2005: Paul McCartney
2004: Janet Jackson, P. Diddy, Nelly, Kid Rock, and Justin Timberlake (BOOB ALERT!)
2003: Shania Twain, No Doubt, Sting
2002: U2
2001: Aerosmith, 'N Sync, Britney Spears, Mary J. Blige, Nelly
2000: Tina Turner, Phil Collins, Christina Aguilera, Enrique Iglesias, Toni Braxton.
(Photo courtesy of Wikipedia)
And don't forget on top of all that pre-recorded mumbo jumbo, the Wall Street Journal reported back in August of the NFL's willingness for artists to pay for a shot at the halftime show. So let's get this straight...
America's favourite sport has an average team value of $1.3 billion, generates approximately 111+ million viewers during it's annual Super Bowl finals, only pays for the travel and production expenses, now wants artists to PAY for their shot at the halftime show? As much as I am not a fan of the music, Katy squashed that dumb ass move right away with the comment: "I'm not the kind of girl who would pay to play the Super Bowl."
Whether or not she has the money to front for this performance is irrelevant. I think the principal stands here is not the value of the artist performing. The fact you are on the halftime show stage is a test to the level of artist you are (if that makes any sense). If you have made it to one of the largest audiences and stages in the continent (maybe the world), then isn't a little redundant to front out some cash for that opportunity?
No comments:
Post a Comment