|
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 |
Newsgroups: alt.elvis.king
From: "Yvonne W." <Jonq...@att.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2005 00:05:26 GMT
Local: Sun, Aug 28 2005 8:05 pm
Subject: Re: Marty: "Remixes" tarnish Elvis' legacy!
I understand where you're coming from, because I too love the originals.
But I think remixing is a way to keep Elvis' legacy alive with the younger generation. Some of those remixes stirred interest in Elvis among the teens, and that intest lead many of them to his movies and original recordings. And they love Elvis. You have to move along with the times if you want to get radio play. Elvis was always ahead of his time and changed as he grew. As his career moved on, Elvis did too. Maybe if Elvis was alive they wouldn't be remixing his old hits, but I think if he was still recording he would be putting out more modern music, maybe even with a hiphop-type or modern day R&B beat -- but the bottom would always remain rock & roll. He paid respect to the songs that made him famous, but did not spend a whole of time doing it. He was more focused on new music and new sounds, always pushing the music to the limit. He was the ultimate entertainer, and would never have accepted pumping out repeat performances of the same material, performed the same way, year after year. He needed to move forward. Cher is another example of how to keep a career alive for decades -- always changing with the times but never losing her essence. As the greatest entertainer ever, I think Elvis would be able to do just about anything and it would sell, but he would always essentially be Elvis. Yvonne You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||