Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pinkie
I agree with every word. You don't sound old, you sound like you have good taste!  It was a classy move on the SB planners behalf, and the Beatles rock!  |
Well....gosh, ma'am. Thanks
Now I'm all flustered....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by saut
Don't get me wrong, here, I really enjoy Paul McCartney's work -- both with Wings and the Beatles. However, I don't think he was the right choice for a football game. C'mon, I want something a little manlier and less poppy. Something to get everyone pumped up for the game, you know? The superbowl has become pussified. Every superbowl in my lifetime has been a pretty big snoozefest (I'm only 19 though). To me, a lot of the magic and glory of more distant superbowls is gone. Maybe I'm wrong, though. I've only ever seen highlights.
The superbowl now, though, feels like one big corporate wankfest and has little to do with football.
|
Well, you're not too far off the mark. My understanding is that the halftime show as we know it was a relatively recent addition by the NFL to bring larger, non-football fanatic crowds to watch the game. More viewers mean more advertising and by extension corporate money to pimp their products to those viewers.
So, yeah, I guess the superbowl has been turned into a 'big corporate wankfest.'
I don't care much though. I watch the Superbowl for the game and most of the time use the halftime break to grab a snack or hit the bathroom as it's usually stocked with artists I don't care to see perform. (not my bathroom...ahh you get the point) This year, however, I was decidely pleased to see a halftime show that was actually entertaining and worth sticking around for.
The same could not be said for the pre-game concert. That Ray Charles thing was....decidedly odd....
