Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009

The correct answer is that it depends on where you're from. Here's a sort of long introduction about how the Simpsons broke all sorts of ground on American TV in the early 90s, but the sort of stuff that the Simpsons revolutionised -- deadbeat parents, very soft anti-establishmentarianisms, corrupt public officials or other types of authority etc. -- were all very well trodden ground in other countries, with that sort of stuff having been done for decades before in UK media at least (despite your link being from some guy from the UK).

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009
A timely, classic old ad on from 1997 (UK)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqNVTH1AP4I

Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009

Wheat Loaf posted:

I was into the Disney Afternoon stuff like Darkwing Duck (:swoon:) and TaleSpin. I remember the Disney Channel in Britain had this sort of "all day Live and Kicking" set-up, where there'd be stuff with presenters in the studio in between cartoons, who'd run competitions and take viewer calls. Then there was always a movie at 7pm.

It wouldn't be Live and Kicking (or whatever ITV equivilent was going out at the same time) without a near-unbearable half-hour gap between the first and second half of the cartoon filled with "wacky" studio antics that wound you up for the whole time as your patience was wearing thin. "BUT WHAT HAPPENED TO SPIDER-MAN"

Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009

ToxicSlurpee posted:

I've always been very, very confused at people bitching about musicians trying to make money off of their music. If a person is a professional musician then music is literally their job and they have to worry about how to make a living off of it. I can understand bitching about bands that are selling concert tickets or whatever for $500 and being legitimately greedy but complaining about "being in it for the money?" Well...that's why people go to their jobs. To make money.

The music industry is greedy as hell and deserves to be hated but the musicians themselves? Not so much.

Yes, I used to be a musician, why do you ask?

Non-music people (i.e. people who don't or aren't interested in the inner workings of the music industries) conflate the brashest and most successful artists with just about everybody else, and/or the jealousy of not doing a "real" job (despite the fact that the vast, vast majority of musicians make £gently caress all off music).

Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009

whiteyfats posted:

The video for Scream was over a million dollars, I think.

It was the most expensive music video at something like $7million, and the average cost of music videos in the late 90s was around $1m (source: an issue of Billboard I can't remember when trying to find any hard data about the cost effectiveness of music videos).

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Chocolate Teapot
May 8, 2009

Your Dunkle Sans posted:

If only history had gone differently.... :sigh:

What is the "musical destiny" of the 2000s and 2010s? Auto tune and...?

Home production is a pretty big deal.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply