Even with television trying to clean up the halftime show after the Janet Jackson incident, the Super Bowl still fails to bring in a good show. Sure, the Black Eyed Peas are somewhat more relevant than Prince or the Rolling Stones, but the R & B group's biggest songs, "Boom Boom Pow" and "I Gotta Feeling", were major successes in 2009, and would have been more relevant last year. Instead, those songs have been ingrained into our skulls to the point that, two years later, it gets the same play, if not more, as songs that just came out.
Why can the Super Bowl not give the fans a good show? Why in the 2000s, which was supposed to be a new age of life, did we get Paul McCartney, The Rolling Stones, Prince, Tom Petty & the Heartbreakers, Bruce Springsteen and The Who? Not like it was any better before that, where they tried to fit 100 artists and one song each from them into a 8 minute time frame. None of the shows above came close to the absurdity in 2001 when Ben Stiller, Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, Aerosmith, N'Sync, Brittney Spears, Mary J. Blige and Nelly.
The Super Bowl is the championship game of one of the most physical sports played. It deserves better than teeny boppers and past-their-prime performers to make a mess of their field. The Super Bowl used to have some of the best collegiate marching bands come play during the break. When Prince performed in 2007, he was joined by Florida A&M's band. However, the only part most people recall about that show was the provocative silhouette "the artist formerly or is currently or whatever known as" threw onto the viewing population.
I don't see this getting any better. The only way I could see a nice remedy would be for fans to vote online and they do some sort of band playoff to determine who plays in the Halftime Show. That way the fans get what they want. The Black Eyed Peas are an ok step in the right direction in terms of the kind of music that should be played, but there is a definite room for improvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment