Sunday, October 14, 2007


So after reading an article about how Larry the Cable Guy, Jeff Foxworthy and Dane Cook are two of the top money making comedians and see how much work they actually did to make those millions, I asked myself, "How much money has to be thrown at someone for them to whore themselves out?" I mean, don't get me wrong, if someone offered me a million bucks to do obnoxiously annoying commercials for TBS, I'd jump that in a second. Then again, I'm a poor grad student who works the night shift in the dorms for a mere 60 bucks. But what is their problems? Dane Cook came out as this edgy guy with funny sayings. Why in hell does he then have to do a shitty movie with Jessica Simpson? Unless unlimited blow jobs from miss Simpson or from any hot bittie for that matter was somehow snuck into his contract, there is no reason he needs to do this movie. Jerry Seinfield did it right. He left his show, which is possibly one of the best sitcoms of all time, because he felt it had run it's course and didn't want to drag it out. Did he move to movies? Nope. He's done one that I know of, that bee movie coming out. He still tours, but in small venues. So even though he's not touring HUGE venues like Cook and the others, where did he land on the top moneymakers from the last year? Number 1. Yep. He let his talent do the work. With Seinfield in syndication on pretty much every channel, he rakes in the millions just chilling in his sweat pants and hagendas ice cream. Does he press for more? Na. Not really. (What I also like about Seinfield is that he got married to a non-movie star and kept his private business private, something celebrities need to do. I'm tired of hearing about Britney's Battle against whatever the hell she is battling now. She could get cancer and I still wouldn't want to hear about it. Unless you're one of my family members or friends or even a casual acquaintance, I don't care.)

It baffles me how much money these people really need. I read a few articles over the past few months about how the music industry is doing terrible because technology allows "jerks like" me download albums for free. Technology is good for music, just not for the industry. I can now go on myspace or youtube and listen to a limitless amount of bands trying to make it big time. And you know what? A good number of these bands are good. I just discovered this band called Window ( check out their cover of Wonderwall, they make it their own in about ten different ways) who are pretty freaking rocking. But they are in Texas. And I am in Staten Island. If it weren't for this technology stealing from those who already have enough, I would never have found their sweet jams. But where does it go from the"I love playing in front of a crowd and enjoy the art of making music." mentality to the I'm charging hundreds of dollars for tickets when you know very well you don't need that extra money? I guess since I'm not even a struggling musician but just simply one who has no talent and only plays in his apartment when no one is around, that I'll never get it why most bands come to this point. And again, I am generalizing. Not all big bands do this. Pearl Jam purposely keeps ticket prices down and saves many of the best seats in the house for their fan club members and even refused to sell tickets through Ticketmaster since they didn't believe in their policies (not really sure why they use them still).

So what do I say to those who say downloading music is wrong. Well, nothing really. I'm still going to do it and I'm still going to enjoy music. Most of my downloads are from bands I would never have bought the album from anyway. If anything, it's helping their cause because now I might buy a concert ticket to their show if I like their music. That's what it's all about anyway, isn't it? Playing in front of a bunch of people who are the reason why you're able to make a living playing music? Thats my understanding of it at least.


No comments: