Judy Garland - Somewhere Over The Rainbow

[invisibleman275]

@The2020Watcher Actually they'd be amazed for a bit then they'd be rolling in their graves seeing what type of lyrics and such is being thrown out there so freely. They'd probably think we are the most corrupt immoral society to-date.

[invisibleman275]

@The2020Watcher You are right I don't have to like it but I still wish more stars today would not use enhancing technology for their singing. So much less raw talent now adays doesn't get as noticed long enough thanks to the media on tv telling us what is popular and what isn't, instead of letting us individually like them.

[The2020Watcher]

@pazure Whatever your personal beliefs about Michael Jackson are (and what you imagine they have to do with the measures of talent Reilly954 was talking about), that's your business, and I have no interest in discussing them with you. Furthermore, your smug calling me "charlie" ---and your "try again" remark, as if you were some judge whose criteria my examples had to meet--- suggest that you're just a petulant jerk, one who knows little about history, technology, OR talent. Enjoy your vacuum.

[psychedelicdaisies28]

I wish i lived in that time :)

[bubb1egummy98]

Like Its amazing I love it too but I LOVE ella fitzgerland

[bubb1egummy98]

I still like Ella Fitzgerland better

[invisibleman275]

As someone mentioned elsewhere, back then they didn't have technology to go change and edit vocals. You had to sing your best the first time and keep singing good and they did.

[The2020Watcher]

@invisibleman275 The performers ---or athletes, or authors, or farmers, or fishermen, or ANYTHING--- are not at fault for the technologies they inherit. I have access to more audio wizardry in my home studio than the Beatles or Stevie Wonder had at their peaks, who had more than Les Paul, Sinatra or Caruso, who had more than Bach. Let me drop a hint; TIMES CHANGE. The stars of today are NOT the stars of yore but, rather, a logical and inevitable continuation of a tradition. Like it or not...

[The2020Watcher]

@invisibleman275 And what might Will Rogers, Mark Twain, Ben Franklin, Dorothy Harper, et al, think of you and your social criticism, tapped into a disposable plastic computer ---with the benefit of cut/paste editing--- and stored as electro-magnetics data, rather than scribed with ink, quill, and parchment (or at least an antique Smith-Corona)?

Is it just me, or do you see the similitude?

[invisibleman275]

Justin Timberlake and Jennifer Lopez are no Bob Hope and Judy Garland. No where close. Just because they do many things doesn't make them close to their caliber of quality. Plus Timberlake and Lopez didn't start up in the 2000's. What do we have now? Lady Gaga that dresses in raw meat?

[AdamMichaelMercer]

1943

[ilovesexychocolate]

Awsome so kool how old it is!

[AnOtherChoosenOne]

how ooooooold^^

[Reilly954]

they don't make em like that anymore!! sing, dance, act, and comedianne!!! quadruple threat!!!!

[The2020Watcher]

@Reilly954 Well, that sounds nice an' nostalgic but... the reality is that they DO make 'em like that anymore. Michael Jackson - sang, danced, acted, authored books, wrote some of the most popular songs in history... Janet Jackson - sings, dances, acted comedy on TV for years, acted drama in film, writes songs... Justin Timberlake - sings, dances, acts comedy on SNL, acts drama in film... Jennifer Lopez - sings, dances, acts, is involved in design/fragrances... And there are many more...

[pazure]

@The2020Watcher Jackson also had a strange predilection for boys and fantasy. The others you list...really? Justin Timberlake = Judy Garland??? I believe what @Reilly954 is referring to is in how Garland has withstood the harshness of history (and her own failings) to still be considered a classic. She had a honey smooth voice that is her own without the use of software voice tuners. There may be a comparison to other popular entertainers, but the ones you list....sorry charlie. Try again.