Most expensive music videos
Paul Hyett
record company and/or artist must surely lose money, since promotional
videos are expensive to make.
Anyway - I haven't seen a list of the most expensive ones ever, but I
imagine that Red Hot Chili's 'Californication' must be right up there.
Very elaborate computer animation.
BTW, when was it that promotional videos became standard? I don't recall
seeing many before 1980 - IIRC, Pink Floyd's Another Brick In The Wall'
caused quite a stir.
--
Paul 'US Sitcom Fan' Hyett
mick
Paul Hyett wrote:
>
> BTW, when was it that promotional videos became standard? I don't recall
> seeing many before 1980 - IIRC, Pink Floyd's Another Brick In The Wall'
> caused quite a stir.
Although there were videos before 1980 they became "standard" with the
growth of music shows, and channels like Music Box and MTV.
mick
Galloise65
They should ditch music videos and bring back Legs&Co!!
Moley
--
芒"偕. Mel .滌"~
"Galloise65" <katherin...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:694fb181.0404...@posting.google.com...
Paul Hyett
I wonder if anyone has done a study as to whether they significantly
increase the sales of a single?
Paul Hyett
>>
>> BTW, when was it that promotional videos became standard? I don't recall
>> seeing many before 1980 - IIRC, Pink Floyd's Another Brick In The Wall'
>> caused quite a stir.
>
>They should ditch music videos and bring back Legs&Co!!
I assume you don't mean with the same personnel - at the age they must
be now, I don't think they would exactly boost TOTP's ratings! :)
Jeff Lawrence
I guess they would for songs aimed at the teenie market. But surely once
you get old enough to see past all the image and hype, videos shouldn't
really
matter that much, just how good the song is.
Saying that however, songs that have significant, clever or memorable videos
probably would do better as they would more likely to be in people's mind
when they are out shopping and browsing through the record shops, etc.
Cheers
Jeff
mick
Jeff Lawrence wrote:
> "Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:EfLbB7A9...@activist.demon.co.uk...
>> In uk.music.charts on Wed, 14 Apr 2004, mick wrote :
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul Hyett wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> BTW, when was it that promotional videos became standard? I don't
> recall
>>>> seeing many before 1980 - IIRC, Pink Floyd's Another Brick In The Wall'
>>>> caused quite a stir.
>>>
>>> Although there were videos before 1980 they became "standard" with the
>>> growth of music shows, and channels like Music Box and MTV.
>>
>> I wonder if anyone has done a study as to whether they significantly
>> increase the sales of a single?
>
> Saying that however, songs that have significant, clever or memorable
videos
> probably would do better as they would more likely to be in people's mind
> when they are out shopping and browsing through the record shops, etc.
The video for Take On Me by A-Ha certainly made an impact at the time and
most probably boosted sales for that song a lot.
mick
Moley
--
芒"偕. Mel .滌"~
"Paul Hyett" <p...@nojunkmailplease.co.uk> wrote in message
news:evldtEBG...@activist.demon.co.uk...
mick
Moley wrote:
> So were Pan's People before or after legs & co?
Before.
mick
Liam Gretton
> Saying that however, songs that have significant, clever or memorable videos
> probably would do better as they would more likely to be in people's mind
> when they are out shopping and browsing through the record shops, etc.
I love music vids. I've got hours and hours of MTV's Party Zone and Chill
Out Zone on tape, but I wish I could go out and buy them.
I don't understand why you can't buy a DVD equivalent of those awful 'Now
That's What I Call' compilations.
The only singles I've bought in nearly 20 years are DVD singles.
Dom Robinson
says...
> I don't understand why you can't buy a DVD equivalent of those awful 'Now
> That's What I Call' compilations.
>
Presumably they don't sell enough to make the video copyright clearance costs
worthwhile?
--
Dom Robinson Gamertag: DVDfever email: dom at dvdfever dot co dot uk
/* http://DVDfever.co.uk (editor), http://LeilaniWeb.co.uk (editor),
/* 970 DVDs, 284 games, 33 videos, 81 cinema films, 72 CDs, laserdiscs & news
/* battle royale, the shins, lee mendelson, easter beagle, max payne (gba)
Fight back against "PRESS RED": http://dvdfever.co.uk/pressrel/pressred.shtml
DVDfever.co.uk - as featured on BBC News 24's Click Online
Kevin Clark
> ISTM that unless a song goes to, or close to, the top of the charts, the
> record company and/or artist must surely lose money, since promotional
> videos are expensive to make.
>
> Anyway - I haven't seen a list of the most expensive ones ever, but I
> imagine that Red Hot Chili's 'Californication' must be right up there.
> Very elaborate computer animation.
Nope. Janet Jackson features in a lot though!
1. "Scream"
Cost: $7,000,000+
Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
2. "Victory"
Cost: $2,700,000+
Artist: Puff Daddy (featuring Notorious B.I.G. & Busta Rhymes)
3. "Heartbreaker"
Cost: $2,500,000+
Artist: Mariah Carey
eek!!!
4. "What's It Gonna Be"
Cost: $2,400,000+
Artist: Busta Rhymes (featuring Janet Jackson)
5. "Larger Than Life"
Cost: $2,100,000+
Artist: Backstreet Boys
6. "Miami"
Cost: $2,000,000+
Artist: Will Smith
7. "She's a Bitch"
Cost: $2,000,000+
Artist: Missy Elliot
8. "Unpretty"
Cost: $1,600,000+
Artist: TLC
9. "November Rain"
Cost: $1,500,000+
Artist: Guns N' Roses
10. "Girlfriend/Boyfriend"
Cost: $1,500,000+
Artist: Blackstreet (featuring Janet Jackson)
Paul Hyett
>>
>> I wonder if anyone has done a study as to whether they significantly
>> increase the sales of a single?
>
>I guess they would for songs aimed at the teenie market. But surely once
>you get old enough to see past all the image and hype, videos shouldn't
>really
>matter that much, just how good the song is.
Of course in recent years there have been Maxi-CD's which include the
music video. I have occasionally bought them instead of the plain
2-track CD - but I've found their playback can be unreliable, especially
on an older PC.
>Saying that however, songs that have significant, clever or memorable videos
>probably would do better as they would more likely to be in people's mind
>when they are out shopping and browsing through the record shops, etc.
So they do their job, in other words.
Paul Hyett
>
>I love music vids. I've got hours and hours of MTV's Party Zone and Chill
>Out Zone on tape, but I wish I could go out and buy them.
I tape a lot of videos where I like the songs, but not enough to buy
them.
>
>I don't understand why you can't buy a DVD equivalent of those awful 'Now
>That's What I Call' compilations.
Probably copyright issues separate from just the plain music - payment
for actors, extras, etc.
I wonder how much David Boreanaz was paid for appearing in Dido's 'White
Flag' video, for instance.
Thanatos
Varicose Veins & Co?
Sarch
> 1. "Scream"
> Cost: $7,000,000+
> Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
Gawd knows how this video cost that much. There's nothing "advanced" in it.
Sarch
Paul Hyett
>
>1. "Scream"
>Cost: $7,000,000+
>Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
What about 'Thriller'?
Sarch
> What about 'Thriller'?
A measly $1 million as far as I'm aware.
Sarch
Daniel Titley
> Paul Hyett wrote:
> > ISTM that unless a song goes to, or close to, the top of the charts, the
> > record company and/or artist must surely lose money, since promotional
> > videos are expensive to make.
> >
> > Anyway - I haven't seen a list of the most expensive ones ever, but I
> > imagine that Red Hot Chili's 'Californication' must be right up there.
> > Very elaborate computer animation.
>
> Nope. Janet Jackson features in a lot though!
>
> 1. "Scream"
> Cost: $7,000,000+
> Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
Never seen it.
> 2. "Victory"
> Cost: $2,700,000+
> Artist: Puff Daddy (featuring Notorious B.I.G. & Busta Rhymes)
Never even heard of it.
> 3. "Heartbreaker"
> Cost: $2,500,000+
> Artist: Mariah Carey
This is quite a good video. You can clearly see the money on screen.
> 4. "What's It Gonna Be"
> Cost: $2,400,000+
> Artist: Busta Rhymes (featuring Janet Jackson)
Horrible video. Both Busta Rhymes and Janet Jackson look terible.
> 5. "Larger Than Life"
> Cost: $2,100,000+
> Artist: Backstreet Boys
Lots of CGI. Not very good, but at least you can see where the money
went.
> 6. "Miami"
> Cost: $2,000,000+
> Artist: Will Smith
An OK video. Lots of extras (the actor kind), some nice effect shots
and tons of expensive cars, planes and boats. Again you can see the
money on screen.
> 7. "She's a Bitch"
> Cost: $2,000,000+
> Artist: Missy Elliot
Never seen it.
> 8. "Unpretty"
> Cost: $1,600,000+
> Artist: TLC
Why was this so expensive?
> 9. "November Rain"
> Cost: $1,500,000+
> Artist: Guns N' Roses
Can not remember seeing it.
> 10. "Girlfriend/Boyfriend"
> Cost: $1,500,000+
> Artist: Blackstreet (featuring Janet Jackson)
Who is Blackstreet?
Kevin Clark
> "Kevin Clark" emitted :
>
>
>>3. "Heartbreaker"
>>Cost: $2,500,000+
>>Artist: Mariah Carey
>>eek!!!
>
>
I got the list from here
http://www.soyouwanna.com/site/toptens/musicvideos/musicvideos.html
Looks like they had to reshoot it cos it was cack.
Dom Robinson
d.ti...@bigfoot.com says...
> > 6. "Miami"
> > Cost: $2,000,000+
> > Artist: Will Smith
>
> An OK video. Lots of extras (the actor kind), some nice effect shots
> and tons of expensive cars, planes and boats. Again you can see the
> money on screen.
>
time of broadcast, possibly because of the effect put on the sound which could
make it slip by unnoticed if you're not looking for it, and they'd sometimes
show a censored version but at the time of release it was on music TV a lot
and was shown uncut a number of times.
http://dvdfever.co.uk/reviews/willsmit.shtml
Paul Hyett
But that was 20 years ago - what would the equivalent be, now?
Nick
wrote:
There's nothing "advanced" in it today, but look at the date it was
made.
--Nick.
--
http://www.sendit.com/scp/id/what - Want DVDs/Games?
icq: 9235201 -- Hayn on dal.net - Mmmm... chocolate!
Dom Robinson
nickm...@spamcop.net says...
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:32:10 +1000, Sarch <sarch_...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:32:11 +0000, Kevin Clark wrote:
> >
> >> 1. "Scream"
> >> Cost: $7,000,000+
> >> Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
> >
> >Gawd knows how this video cost that much. There's nothing "advanced" in it.
>
> There's nothing "advanced" in it today, but look at the date it was
> made.
>
Nick
<murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In article <9bh080tb02cc6nub5...@4ax.com>,
>nickm...@spamcop.net says...
>> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:32:10 +1000, Sarch <sarch_...@hotmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:32:11 +0000, Kevin Clark wrote:
>> >
>> >> 1. "Scream"
>> >> Cost: $7,000,000+
>> >> Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
>> >
>> >Gawd knows how this video cost that much. There's nothing "advanced" in it.
>>
>> There's nothing "advanced" in it today, but look at the date it was
>> made.
>>
>There was nothing "advanced" in it then, either.
Oooh! Get her!
Dom Robinson
nickm...@spamcop.net says...
> On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 12:08:25 +0100, Dom Robinson
> <murphyi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <9bh080tb02cc6nub5...@4ax.com>,
> >nickm...@spamcop.net says...
> >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 10:32:10 +1000, Sarch <sarch_...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 11:32:11 +0000, Kevin Clark wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> 1. "Scream"
> >> >> Cost: $7,000,000+
> >> >> Artist: Michael Jackson (featuring Janet Jackson)
> >> >
> >> >Gawd knows how this video cost that much. There's nothing "advanced" in it.
> >>
> >> There's nothing "advanced" in it today, but look at the date it was
> >> made.
> >>
> >There was nothing "advanced" in it then, either.
>
> Oooh! Get her!
>
version of a game did they have? Pong! And 'Pong' indeed because the song and
video stank!