Sunday, November 8, 2009

To Lip Or Not ...


That is the question ... but what's the right thing to do? The other day I read an article about Britney Spears being in Australia to start her current tour. Click here if you want to read it. Apparently, some people are upset over the fact that she will be lip-syncing the show and not actually singing it. A source close to her said that Britney just isn't capable of singing and dancing at the same time. I don't know why, but I thought that was funny. It reminded me of a time when my in-laws took my girls to spend a weekend at Disneyland. The girls told us about my mother-in-law yelling at her husband in the car because she had missed a sign and went the wrong way. "I can't read and drive at the same time!" she yelled. That's just funny to me. Okay, so my MIL can't read and drive at the same time. Britney can't sing and dance at the same time. Isn't it funny how Britney can drink a Frappachinno and drive at the same time, or hold her baby on her lap and drive at the same time? I guess she has priorities.

Anyway, the Australian government isn't too happy about this and are considering enforcing new measures that would require artists to notify fans that they will be lip-syncing. Apparently, Britney's tour manager says fans come for the "pop spectacular experience" and that her not singing isn't a big deal. What do you think? Would you rather watch Britney Spears lip-sync and dance? Or would you prefer to hear her actually singing? Now, I know a lot of artists sound way better on album than they ever do on stage, so I understand Britney's side of this. However, I do agree that it should be made public before someone dishes out $1500 for a ticket. I think artists owe at least that much to their fans. What they choose to do on stage is their business, but they should at least be honest when it comes to lip-syncing. Maybe I'm wrong. What do you think?

12 comments:

  1. Hell yes. If I'm paying good money to see a fave artist/musician, I'm paying that much because I want to see AND hear them perform their material live. Not something pre-recorded, so they can appear to be singing while dancing or whatnot.

    What I find funny is that the Australian public is actually shocked that Spears will be lip-syncing. Erm, hello? What do they think she's been doing for most of her career?

    Gale

    ReplyDelete
  2. I am part of the Aussie public and am not shocked over here.... It's Britney and she IS known for doing that kinda thing, i would not pay to go see an artist lip sync their way through a whole concert and yes it would be good if the government do make artist say that they will be singing live or not.

    The real outrage over Britney here is the fact that she is charging such a huge amount for some of her tickets, thats what the whole big deal is about and those people are not seeing her sing live for that price.... well each to their own, i wouldnt pay it and there are some crazy fans out there :-)

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree, Tania. Performers charge that much in the US too and I've missed some big names because of the outrageous prizes. I skipped Stevie Nicks and The Who because the prices were ridiculous. They're not worth that much to me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That should say PRICES, not prizes. LOL! They're not much of a prize either.

    ReplyDelete
  5. LOL at the coffee drinking and driving!
    I so agree that if they are going to lip synch it should be stated before anyone buys tickets.
    I pay to hear it live. I can hear the song on my CD at home for free (well, price of the CD).
    A fave band of mine, Avenged Sevenfold, cancelled several concerts because the lead singers voice was compromised last year. Would I have liked to just hear him lip sync? No way. I'd wait to hear him sing live.
    She is a singer. She should dance in the parts where she doesn't have to sing and actually sing her songs (and bounce along instead)if she can't handle both. Beyonce can do it!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't understand why an artist wouldn't sing at their concert. Maybe it's like ghost writing. Personally, if they are not going to actually sing I'd like to know. That way I could just buy the cd and skip the concert.

    ReplyDelete
  7. OK the real question is can Brittney or your MIL walk and chew gum at the same time?
    I would not pay to see Brittney do either one she gives me a headache.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I thought it was well known that Britney doesn’t sing at her concerts. I have no personal desire to see her perform knows this, I would think her fans would known

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have never understood the Britney fascination. Give me a Neil Diamond, Jon Bon Jovi, Rob Thomas, Chantal Kreviazuk, Joni Mitchell or Bono any day...real singers who have and will stand the test of time.

    Rena, I got on your blog to see if you had said anything about your daughter. I know Ida is heading her way. Hope she is in a nice secure building inland!

    Heather

    ReplyDelete
  10. I agree people deserve to know what they're paying for.
    I think a live performance should be just that.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I didn't know Britney didn't sing at her shows. To me,that takes away some of the respect I have for her as an artist,which is close to none already. LOL. People definantly have the right to know before they fork over two months rent for a ticket.

    Leanne

    ReplyDelete
  12. lol - are those my only 2 choices? I think I would choose to save my money and not see Brittany at all if I could?


    Just kidding. I know what you mean. I do think the audience has a right to know if lip synching is happening but saying that, any regular - smart person is going to know! In all of these 'pop spectacular experiences' there is so much overdubbing that who knows who is singing. (I guess I will stick with the Wiggles!)

    ReplyDelete