The Christina Aguilera Mega-thread

[spice up your life]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

‎"You Lost Me" music video to premiere July 20th

 

[innocentbychoice]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

SO according to you, Lady Gaga invented putting your fingers near your eye? ok I get it now I like Lady Gaga and I like her music but her dumbass obsessed fans that think everyone walking on the streets is copying Lady Gaga is starting to make me really dislike her. On a more Aguilera related note, I really like "Not myself tonight" and "woohoo" isn't too bad either but apart from those two I haven't really heard much off of her album. I hope next time around she puts out a better album because she's very talented.

According to Gaga fans (or psycho stalkers) she also invented blonde bangs, fire, stilettos, sunglasses, lingerie, music and the sun.

And here's super original Gaga wearing Christina's leather chaps from 2002's Dirrty video:

http://cdn.buzznet.com/media/jj1//2010/06/gaga-falling/lady-gaga-falling-down-01.jpg

Ugh I'm so sick of all the Gaga shit. I actually like her...but I liked her a lot more before her stupid fans and Perez' fat-ass started saying everything that moved (Christina included) was copying her.

PS: Gonna buy Bionic tomorrow! It's actually a great album...too bad it was poorly promoted and the singles they chose weren't the best.

 

[GreenLagoon]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

You really shouldn't participate in debates unless you have some familiarity with the topic being discussed. Gaga is known for her hand-over-face gestures (i.e., the videos for "Just Dance", "Poker Face", and "Paparazzi"), and Christina is clearly attempting to emulate that.

This bizarre, Single White Female-esque obsession that Christina has developed is spinning out of control. Like I said, everybody knows that Christina has zero identity as a performer ("I'm a hip-hop diva! No wait, I'm a grungy, underground chick! No wait, I'm a 1940s siren! No wait, I'm a rocker grrl! No wait, I'm a mature, adult contemporary artist!" -- all over the course of a whopping two albums), but she needs to get a handle on herself.

Christina's "identity as a performer" IS her voice. Hands down she has the better set of chops in a comparison between her and Gaga. From what I gather, you would rather her remain stagnant, which frankly is the sign of a bad artist. The fact that she can even successfully convey all the personas you rattled off shows how versatile she really is.

Honestly, though, I could argue the same "identity crisis" of Lady G: initially her first singles "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" were clearly created as mainstream, stereotypical, flashy pop songs with the intention of getting her name out there in a market guided by predictability. Lady Gaga did not make these songs popular; give them to any stereotypical pop princess and I bet they would have enjoyed similar success. A majority of the album "The Fame" is marketed in the same way: flashy, fun, forgettable pop songs made purely to get her name out there, not to be a lasting musical achievement. Fashion-wise, she also never wore anything that was daring enough to be considered interesting before she had a few singles under her belt (this point is important because of how much her current identity is based on her choice of attire). Don't get me wrong, I bought the CD and listened to it extensively when it was still fairly new. But I can honestly say it isn't a CD I have ever had a hankering to listen to again since I shelved it.

Cue her steadily increasing popularity/fanbase and she released her second album "The Fame Monster." While she maintained some of her pop princess styling, this album was largely "an apology" for how commercial her first album was. She tried ditching her stereotypical singing throughout the album, and this is most prevalent in the songs "Teeth" and "Speechless." When I first heard "Teeth" I honestly thought of Christina. The music itself and the way she sings it is in a style that is reminiscient of Christina. Also, at some point between the albums she became increasingly more confident with her fashion and branched out to where she is now.

My point being Lady Gaga did not get to where she is based on her present persona. She rode the pop princess train all the way to full blown stardom, then decided to morph into the persona she depicts today. Initially, she was just a talentless pop princess carried by dance-worthy synthesized beats. Thus, criticizing Christina for varying personas is a bit hypocritical if you are comparing her to Miss G. They both were introduced as pop princesses and branched out from there. (For a quick showcase of Lady Gaga's transition listen to "Eh, Eh (Nothing Else I Can Say)" and compare it to "Speechless.")

The difference between the two artists is Christina has an underlying devotion to the quality of her music and maintaining the integrity of her voice, while Lady Gaga is willing to sacrifice the quality of her music in order to give the whole theatrical package. Christina is a musician; Lady Gaga is an entertainer.

I enjoy both artists, and honestly would say at present I have enjoyed Lady Gaga more than Christina overall. That being said, Christina is the better musician and has the better voice (a voice rivaled by few current artists in sheer power), so trying to act like she is where she is because of riding on people's coat-tails just shows a lack of an ear capable of discerning musical talent.

Besides, there is a finite number of animals Lady Gaga can spray-paint with glitter and plaster to her forehead for a costume.

 

[EqualsThree]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

Britney vs. Christina next

Gogo!

 

[innocentbychoice]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

I'm listening to Bionic right now. It's a nice album, a lot of dance tracks and ballads as well.

My favorites? Woohoo, Desnudate, I Hate boys, Vanity and You lost me.

 

[Ekim23]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

The video looks pretty decent

 

[Simon Spark]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

So I finally heard the radio mix of "You Lost Me" and I don't think it's horrible - but I do prefer the album version. After thinking about it for a while (because of the discussions in this thread), I actually agree with most of you that this shouldn't have been the 2nd single. It's amazing + beautiful (and should definitely have been the 3rd single), but after most people's reactions to "Not Myself Tonight", she needed to follow it up with something that better represented the fun/experimental spirit of the album. "Elastic Love" would have been the perfect 2nd single (or, at least a better choice than a ballad), in my opinion. We all know she can do the ballads like no one else, but I think, with most of the album's songs being so experimental and dance-oriented, she needs to focus on getting people to realize how amazing THOSE songs actually are.

By the way, GreenLagoon, I don't think anyone could have articulated that better than you did!

 

[innocentbychoice]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

Christina's "identity as a performer" IS her voice. Hands down she has the better set of chops in a comparison between her and Gaga. From what I gather, you would rather her remain stagnant, which frankly is the sign of a bad artist. The fact that she can even successfully convey all the personas you rattled off shows how versatile she really is.

Honestly, though, I could argue the same "identity crisis" of Lady G: initially her first singles "Just Dance" and "Poker Face" were clearly created as mainstream, stereotypical, flashy pop songs with the intention of getting her name out there in a market guided by predictability. Lady Gaga did not make these songs popular; give them to any stereotypical pop princess and I bet they would have enjoyed similar success. A majority of the album "The Fame" is marketed in the same way: flashy, fun, forgettable pop songs made purely to get her name out there, not to be a lasting musical achievement. Fashion-wise, she also never wore anything that was daring enough to be considered interesting before she had a few singles under her belt (this point is important because of how much her current identity is based on her choice of attire). Don't get me wrong, I bought the CD and listened to it extensively when it was still fairly new. But I can honestly say it isn't a CD I have ever had a hankering to listen to again since I shelved it.

Cue her steadily increasing popularity/fanbase and she released her second album "The Fame Monster." While she maintained some of her pop princess styling, this album was largely "an apology" for how commercial her first album was. She tried ditching her stereotypical singing throughout the album, and this is most prevalent in the songs "Teeth" and "Speechless." When I first heard "Teeth" I honestly thought of Christina. The music itself and the way she sings it is in a style that is reminiscient of Christina. Also, at some point between the albums she became increasingly more confident with her fashion and branched out to where she is now.

My point being Lady Gaga did not get to where she is based on her present persona. She rode the pop princess train all the way to full blown stardom, then decided to morph into the persona she depicts today. Initially, she was just a talentless pop princess carried by dance-worthy synthesized beats. Thus, criticizing Christina for varying personas is a bit hypocritical if you are comparing her to Miss G. They both were introduced as pop princesses and branched out from there. (For a quick showcase of Lady Gaga's transition listen to "Eh, Eh (Nothing Else I Can Say)" and compare it to "Speechless.")

The difference between the two artists is Christina has an underlying devotion to the quality of her music and maintaining the integrity of her voice, while Lady Gaga is willing to sacrifice the quality of her music in order to give the whole theatrical package. Christina is a musician; Lady Gaga is an entertainer.

I enjoy both artists, and honestly would say at present I have enjoyed Lady Gaga more than Christina overall. That being said, Christina is the better musician and has the better voice (a voice rivaled by few current artists in sheer power), so trying to act like she is where she is because of riding on people's coat-tails just shows a lack of an ear capable of discerning musical talent.

Besides, there is a finite number of animals Lady Gaga can spray-paint with glitter and plaster to her forehead for a costume.

I agree with some of your points but, in Gaga's defense, I don't think she is or ever was a generic pop princess. She's actually talented, she plays the piano and she makes her music (she even produced and wrote tracks for Britney's Blackout album before she released her own). And she's a smart girl, she knows her crazy outfits will give her attention.

I like Gaga. But my main problems with her are:

1. The fact that she keeps wearing crazy shit got annoying just because you can clearly tell she does it for the attention. At first everyone thought she was just different, but now is so obvious she just wants people to talk about her that it's irritating. Her persona is becoming bigger than her music and that's not a good thing.

2. The whole "___________ copied Lady Gaga" thing. Seriously, who the fuck is Gaga anyways? she hasn't invented anything, and people keep saying this or that copied her. I think the only thing I've seen her do that nobody else did was wearing those glasses with screens and messages on it, way back when she was promoting Just Dance (and I seriously doubt she wasn't inspired by other people to do that, she looked a lot like Roisin Murphy when she was starting).

 

[volumee]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

I have to agree with Perez on this. I really dislike her new album, it sounds very poor with a lack of effort, compared to her older songs, and especially, the new songs in today's industry. The only songs I actually enjoy are Not Myself Tonight & You Lost Me =\ It's unfortunate because I am a fan, but c'mon.. a lot of the songs sound like garabage. They sound like demos!

If CA wants to get back into the industry, she better step it up! Because this isn't cutting it. I mean, isn't the album decling rapidly right now?

 

[J-23]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

By the way, GreenLagoon, I don't think anyone could have articulated that better than you did!

It's nice to know that you're finally seeing the light, Simon. I was beginning to think the day would never come when you would agree that Christina is a "bad artist." Welcome to the Monster bandwagon!

 

[J-23]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

I have to agree with Perez on this. I really dislike her new album, it sounds very poor with a lack of effort, compared to her older songs, and especially, the new songs in today's industry. The only songs I actually enjoy are Not Myself Tonight & You Lost Me = It's unfortunate because I am a fan, but c'mon.. a lot of the songs sound like garabage. They sound like demos!

If CA wants to get back into the industry, she better step it up! Because this isn't cutting it. I mean, isn't the album decling rapidly right now?

Yep. Bionic has sold only a fraction of the copies that her earlier albums have sold, and it's tumbling down the charts at a rapid rate.

Christina needs to get it through her dense mind that she's become obsolete in today's pop music scene. Gaga and Ke$ha are still holding strong after MONTHS on the charts, while Christina can't even keep her album -- the one first in four years! -- within the Top 20 for a couple weeks.

Sorry, Christina. Shrieking mindlessly through generic midtempo pop ballads will only get you so far in life before you fade into obscurity.

 

[J-23]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

The difference between the two artists is Christina has an underlying devotion to the quality of her music and maintaining the integrity of her voice, while Lady Gaga is willing to sacrifice the quality of her music in order to give the whole theatrical package. Christina is a musician; Lady Gaga is an entertainer.

I'd say that your analysis of Gaga is less than correct. Between her and Christina, it's clear that she's the one who has a true appreciation for her music since she actually WRITES and PERFORMS it, unlike Christina who simply regurgitates whatever pedestrian, trend-hopping garbage her producers give to her.

While Lady Gaga clearly didn't invent electropop dance music, she is the one who brought it to mainstream American radio. Christina, as always, grabbed onto her coattails since she knew that she was due for a new album and she wanted a surefire success rather than something that captured her (inexistent) artistic identity.

Also, I think you need to dust up on your history of Gaga as a performer. She most certainly DID wear avant-garde outfits while performing conceptual pieces looong before "Just Dance" or "Poker Face" were released. As a musician in New York's underground club and bar circuit, she has the street cred to back this up, whereas Christina is only emulating the style in an effort to curry favor with the fanbase of the music industry's most popular artist.

 

[innocentbychoice]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

I'd say that your analysis of Gaga is less than correct. Between her and Christina, it's clear that she's the one who has a true appreciation for her music since she actually WRITES and PERFORMS it, unlike Christina who simply regurgitates whatever pedestrian, trend-hopping garbage her producers give to her.

I'm guessing you haven't go through Christina's albums. Besides her first album, all the other three albums list her as the author of 98% of the songs, and executive producer of the albums, meaning that, she actually writes, makes and performs her music just like Gaga, so you got no point there.

While Lady Gaga clearly didn't invent electropop dance music, she is the one who brought it to mainstream American radio. Christina, as always, grabbed onto her coattails since she knew that she was due for a new album and she wanted a surefire success rather than something that captured her (inexistent) artistic identity.

Electropop dance music? As in, Madonna's Ray of Light (1998 ) or Music (2000)? Or, Britney's In the Zone (2003)? Yeah it was Gaga who brought it to the mainstream, sure.

Hey psst, what the fuck is all this artistic identity bullshit? Christina's voice is her trademark. You'll know if it's one of her song whenever you hear it, for all the juggling she does with her voice. Whether you like it or not, whether you think she screams or whatever, she is recognizable. And about her style, who says artists NEED to stick with one thing? Look at Madonna...She has evolved. Christina has tried it all and has succeeded each time.

Also, I think you need to dust up on your history of Gaga as a performer. She most certainly DID wear avant-garde outfits while performing conceptual pieces looong before "Just Dance" or "Poker Face" were released. As a musician in New York's underground club and bar circuit, she has the street cred to back this up, whereas Christina is only emulating the style in an effort to curry favor with the fanbase of the music industry's most popular artist.

Not that I've followed Gaga's career before she was famous, but from the pics I've seen from when she performed with Lady Starlight, she wore black and silver panties and bras...the same shit she's still wearing today. Is that what you call avant-garde?

Oh and if you are talking about her days in school, she was a regular girl like any other, long before she created this fake character that wears crazy shit 24/7 to get attention.

 

[Simon Spark]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

It's nice to know that you're finally seeing the light, Simon. I was beginning to think the day would never come when you would agree that Christina is a "bad artist." Welcome to the Monster bandwagon!

What the hell did you read? Because it obviously wasn't anything I wrote. Christina is an amazing artist who is constantly reinventing herself visually AND musically, uses her fame to actually address several important issues/causes, and has one of the most soulful, distinctive voices of all time (which she uses to it's full potential time and time again). Please don't expect my appearance at the "Monster bandwagon", because I won't be showing up to that one.

 

[Callum]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

Sorry, Christina. Shrieking mindlessly through generic midtempo pop ballads will only get you so far in life before you fade into obscurity.

Hmmm. Strange, with 44 million albums sold I wouldn't say she's fading 'into obscurity'. Whether one likes her voice or not, it's legendary, and your opinion cannot change such.

I give Gaga four more years before people get annoyed with her attention-whoring antics and move onto the next 'Great Thing' in the fifteen minute flashpan of Hollywood. Which, ironically, a decade later...Aguilera is still in. It's not like Gaga has a pretty face to fall back on. Well, maybe a 26er and a half later...

 

[bokan800]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

I can't wait for the YLM video to come out. >.<

Desnudate or Elastic Love needs to be the 3rd single.



PS, This GaGa vs Xtina battle needs to end... it's retarded. I don't think those two artists even give two shits what each other are doing. They're doing their own thing. Let them be. LOL

 

[volumee]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

Hmmm. Strange, with 44 million albums sold I wouldn't say she's fading 'into obscurity'. Whether one likes her voice or not, it's legendary, and your opinion cannot change such.

I give Gaga four more years before people get annoyed with her attention-whoring antics and move onto the next 'Great Thing' in the fifteen minute flashpan of Hollywood. Which, ironically, a decade later...Aguilera is still in. It's not like Gaga has a pretty face to fall back on. Well, maybe a 26er and a half later...

44million isn't a lot compared to other stars like Britney, and Madonna (I don't care what complaints you have about them). Each individually have sold over 100million. Gaga, only 2 years into the industry, her debut record has sold over 10 million copies. Mind you, people hardly buy albums these days.

 

[Callum]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

44million isn't a lot compared to other stars like Britney, and Madonna (I don't care what complaints you have about them). Each individually have sold over 100million. Gaga, only 2 years into the industry, her debut record has sold over 10 million copies. Mind you, people hardly buy albums these days.

That's because they're some of the best-selling artists of all time.

44 million is still a massive amount, either way you look at it.

 

[innocentbychoice]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

44million isn't a lot compared to other stars like Britney, and Madonna (I don't care what complaints you have about them). Each individually have sold over 100million. Gaga, only 2 years into the industry, her debut record has sold over 10 million copies. Mind you, people hardly buy albums these days.

Yo do realize that Madonna and Britney have both released a lot more albums than Xtina, right?. Either way, 44 million is A LOT! She's a star and always will be.

 

[EqualsThree]

Re: Aguilera: Bionic [Spring 2010]

^ ?

Britney has only released two more albums then Christina and has sold 100million copies worldwide.

But hey, shes sold more then my favourite artist (Alicia Keys).