There’s two sides to this story. On one side we have Britney Spears allegedly giving an awful performance. On the other side we hear of people actually paying $1500 to watch Britney Spears perform.
I didn’t think it was actually possible to have to pay that much to see anybody perform. Unless of course it’s some mega superstar giving a performance in Saudi Arabia.
The concert was in Perth. I heard Smerk and Nettie were there in the front row, had a great time, really enjoyed it and stayed for the whole thing!
Don’t be silly. They were the back-up dancers! That’s why the fans left: they wanted to see more of Smerk and Nettie, and not that silly Britney woman.
The Australian papers (online) that I have been reading have been making quite a big deal about Britney’s acknowledged lip-syncing most/if not all of her performances. I wonder if the news making such a big deal about it added in any way to last night’s disgruntlement? (And is the paper reporting this just trying to make up a story?...)
Sorry, I just have to say this: her name’s spelled Britney.
I don’t think much of her music or anything, but it’s only polite to at least use her name properly.
[/hijack]
Sorry, I just have to say this: her name’s spelled Britney.
I don’t think much of her music or anything, but it’s only polite to at least use her name properly.
[/hijack]
Only because her inbred bayou parents didn’t know how to spell Brittany! And what’s up with people spelling the name Chelsea as Chelsey? Anyway….
I’ve seen interviews and such where she just starts singing, and she has a very ordinary singing voice. Her pitch is OK, and I’m sure she’s much better than I am, but ahe requires a lot of technology and production to sound like she does on a recording. She became a star because she had charisma and sex appeal, not because of her voice. There’s no way she could duplicate her recording voice live. If her fans haven’t figured that out by now, then they deserve to lose $1500.00.
