Remove this ad

#23 [url]

Apr 26 11 6:40 PM

Personally i believe that the #1's era was the pinacle of the commercial success of DD and Music Box plus the critical acclaim that Butterfly recieved, as well as being happy within her personal life. #1's was the combination of having the 7 previous amazing years of new artistry success plus the fact she was breaking free from a regime she was being sufficated by. TEOM era was i think a vindication of the fact she is a true legend cementing the fact she is a real and true talent. But anything after her Glitter days is slightly tarnished. Pre glitter Mariah truly could do no wrong.... she was the definition of ultimate success!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Arvin

Posts: 3,170 "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

#24 [url]

Apr 26 11 10:04 PM

BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 

Quote    Reply   

#25 [url]

Apr 27 11 1:30 AM

Definitely TEOM, in addition to what people mentioned above, I think it's also a big deal that she got invited to be a presenter at Golden Globe, considering how she was viewed as a joke in terms of actress. Everyone or every award show/event wants to be associated with Mariah at that era.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

BeyondIdolization

Posts: 24,919

May we always be together...
In the sands of time

#26 [url]

Apr 27 11 3:00 AM

davidwilkes5 wrote:
Personally i believe that the #1's era was the pinacle of the commercial success of DD and Music Box plus the critical acclaim that Butterfly recieved, as well as being happy within her personal life. #1's was the combination of having the 7 previous amazing years of new artistry success plus the fact she was breaking free from a regime she was being sufficated by. TEOM era was i think a vindication of the fact she is a true legend cementing the fact she is a real and true talent. But anything after her Glitter days is slightly tarnished. Pre glitter Mariah truly could do no wrong.... she was the definition of ultimate success!

Butterfly was the start of a commercial downfall that continued with #1's, so that couldn't possibly be the height of her star power.

 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

BeyondIdolization

Posts: 24,919

May we always be together...
In the sands of time

#27 [url]

Apr 27 11 3:02 AM

Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 


The reason why is irrelevant. We can't change the past, we have to look at the facts as they are.

 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

hottiecasanova

Posts: 12,806


"You think that's sexy? With the Rocket Pop's outside you?"

#28 [url]

Apr 27 11 3:07 AM

BeyondIdolization wrote:
Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 


The reason why is irrelevant. We can't change the past, we have to look at the facts as they are.


i agree. mariah was everywhere and on everyone's lips in '05-'06, whether they loved or hated her, the same cannot be said about the dd era b/c she was, to a ton of people, a voice on the radio.

Quote    Reply   

#29 [url]

Apr 27 11 3:14 AM

TEOM. Huge sales + #1 singles + 8 Grammy nominations = THE music comeback.

I remember reading in the press several times throughout the era that, along with Tina Turner ("What's Love Got To Do With It"}, TEOM was the biggest music comeback in history. The media loved that story, from the bottom (Glitter) to the top (TEOM). She was everywhere.

[USERNAME REMOVED BY REQUEST] wrote:
Mariah Carey On Rihanna: "I love Rihanna, I am a fan. I love that she is who she is, she's a superstar and she just lives as herself."


Quote    Reply   
avatar

Arvin

Posts: 3,170 "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

#30 [url]

Apr 27 11 4:12 AM

BeyondIdolization wrote:
Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 


The reason why is irrelevant. We can't change the past, we have to look at the facts as they are.
My point was that she could have gotten all those things you mentioned if she was allowed to, not because she didn't have as much star clout as she had during the TEOM era; it was a conscious choice. She kinda was allowed to partially bask in all that "sell-out" glory in Japan with some lipstick, coffee, English school, soap opera theme song (AIWFCIY which led to MC's huge success over there), what-have-you endorsements, etc. For some reason, Tommy restricted all those in her home country. What she had more of during the TEOM era, aside from the clout, was a personal comeback story post-Tommy and 2001 troubles, which made her more "intriguing" but I don't know if that necessarily equates/translates to "star power" as neither Lindsay Lohan nor Whitney have generated outstanding success after having certainly become more extremely "interesting" and media magnets. Whitney's staged comeback didn't have THE main key to the success of TEOM and its aftermath: WBT, which didn't have anything to do with her personal travails...just pure luck in its having been created and released in the most perfect timing.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

BeyondIdolization

Posts: 24,919

May we always be together...
In the sands of time

#31 [url]

Apr 27 11 8:24 AM

Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:
Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 


The reason why is irrelevant. We can't change the past, we have to look at the facts as they are.
My point was that she could have gotten all those things you mentioned if she was allowed to, not because she didn't have as much star clout as she had during the TEOM era; it was a conscious choice. She kinda was allowed to partially bask in all that "sell-out" glory in Japan with some lipstick, coffee, English school, soap opera theme song (AIWFCIY which led to MC's huge success over there), what-have-you endorsements, etc. For some reason, Tommy restricted all those in her home country. What she had more of during the TEOM era, aside from the clout, was a personal comeback story post-Tommy and 2001 troubles, which made her more "intriguing" but I don't know if that necessarily equates/translates to "star power" as neither Lindsay Lohan nor Whitney have generated outstanding success after having certainly become more extremely "interesting" and media magnets. Whitney's staged comeback didn't have THE main key to the success of TEOM and its aftermath: WBT, which didn't have anything to do with her personal travails...just pure luck in its having been created and released in the most perfect timing.


Again, we are looking at the past as it were, not "but had she done this in 1995 she would have...". Endorsements, magazine covers, perfume lines, etc, are all factors in someone's star power, and those things just weren't there in 1995. Period.

 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

carlos b fly

Administrator

Posts: 22,050 You'll never be ready. Memba I told you!

#32 [url]

Apr 27 11 8:41 AM

BeyondIdolization wrote:
Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:
Arvin wrote:
BeyondIdolization wrote:

But this was about which era she had the most star power. TEOM was basically as commercially successful as Daydream in the US. But with TEOM she also had endorsement deals with Pepsi and Intel, was launching her own perfume, had multiple magazine covers including Rolling Stone, multiple Grammy wins plus a well-received performance, was the 'Queen of TRL', etc. Did she have star power in 1995? Clearly. Was it on the same level as in 2005? Clearly not.
Most of those things you mentioned (i.e. product endorsements, multiple and major media coverage, her own product lines, etc.) did not happen during the Tommy years not because she couldn't get them but because Tommy shielded her away from them. I guess Tommy wanted to create a mystique around her so as not to get her overexposed, which we have to admit worked very well in her favor. Tommy didn't even let anybody with a movie proposal get anywhere near her and I remember her saying in an interview she got upset when she found out years later Debbie Allen wanted to approach with an idea for a project but she was barred from doing so. 


The reason why is irrelevant. We can't change the past, we have to look at the facts as they are.
My point was that she could have gotten all those things you mentioned if she was allowed to, not because she didn't have as much star clout as she had during the TEOM era; it was a conscious choice. She kinda was allowed to partially bask in all that "sell-out" glory in Japan with some lipstick, coffee, English school, soap opera theme song (AIWFCIY which led to MC's huge success over there), what-have-you endorsements, etc. For some reason, Tommy restricted all those in her home country. What she had more of during the TEOM era, aside from the clout, was a personal comeback story post-Tommy and 2001 troubles, which made her more "intriguing" but I don't know if that necessarily equates/translates to "star power" as neither Lindsay Lohan nor Whitney have generated outstanding success after having certainly become more extremely "interesting" and media magnets. Whitney's staged comeback didn't have THE main key to the success of TEOM and its aftermath: WBT, which didn't have anything to do with her personal travails...just pure luck in its having been created and released in the most perfect timing.


Again, we are looking at the past as it were, not "but had she done this in 1995 she would have...". Endorsements, magazine covers, perfume lines, etc, are all factors in someone's star power, and those things just weren't there in 1995. Period.




Arvin, I can't understand why you can't see what David is saying - we're debating the eras as they were. End of. If we go with your line of thinking, Memoirs or Glitter could have been her most superpowerful moments if we start with the 'what ifs' and 'if onlys'.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

carlos b fly

Administrator

Posts: 22,050 You'll never be ready. Memba I told you!

#33 [url]

Apr 27 11 8:47 AM

Really good thread.....

I've had to debate it and initially chose Daydream simply because the global album and single sales were all huge. But there is more to someone's star power than just that. Look at Gaga - he was having good success with stuff like Poker Face but peaked in sales and media presense with Bad Romance. THEN, she was a megastar. To be at your apex you need to be basically be on top of EVERYTHING as a media personality, something she had in far greater terms by 2005 with TEOM.

With that, she had album and singles success, the mega comeback, the endorsement deals, a pretty positive media following and (finally) the acceptance of her as not only a talented artist but someone who was regarded as legend. I do think TEOM was the first time the media actually bestowed that kind of praise on her.

It was about the only era where she loved and in vogue by everyone.

And she was literally everyWHERE too.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Arvin

Posts: 3,170 "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

#34 [url]

Apr 27 11 3:17 PM

I guess what I've been saying is that there is no way to fairly compare eras because they weren't properly tested similarly to gauge Mariah's true "star power" given that there were severe restrictions/limitations imposed on her from 93-96 and practically no restrictions post-Sony. It's like stating how powerful a certain drug is in general due to its having been tested recently for a wide range of conditions but it wasn't really that potent before because it wasn't effective for as many conditions simply because it wasn't tested for those conditions. We also do not know how much her subsequent albums/eras during the Sony but post-Tommy years could have performed with the full backing she received prior to that. Bottomline is we do not really know her true "star power" during the Sony years and cannot compare fairly.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

robjv1

Posts: 10,743 True in love and wisdom, well off and witty, using god's sleeve to wipe the hell off the city.

#35 [url]

Apr 27 11 9:29 PM

I think so much of how you evaluate this depends on your definition of what "star power" is too. It's a bit of a fuzzy term and as both of you have pointed it, a term that's usage is not really consistently used through time. Given the difference in media environments, it's hard to make an objective comparison, apples to oranges if you will.

I always think of this same thing with Madonna. To me at least, I'd pinpoint her absolute peak in terms of cultural relevance in America to the Blond Ambition Tour. For lack of a more objective term, that seems to be the time she mattered the most here. It's kinda hard to compare a time like that to something like Ray of Light, which was a huge hit in it's own right here and she was certainly on her share of media outlets and was back in the public eye and made lots of money and garnered critical respect, but despite all that, she had significantly less relevance in the mainstream culture.  To me, that's a much more significant measure of star power -- in terms of how much influence you have over the industry and the cultural environment.

It would be interesting to see Mariah's Q Score since 1990, which is both a measure of popularity and likability among those paying attention to her.

Edit:  One more thing I wanted to add, as I was thinking about this more in the shower :p

I think that stuff like the perfumes, the endorsement deals, etc. definitely add to her star presence, but I'm not so sure I am convinced they add to her star power, because she's not a dominant force in any one of those aspects.  Her influence in 2005 (compared to 1996) may have been a mile wide, but it's an inch deep.

Around Daydream, she was pretty much without contention the biggest musical force in America.  She was riding a huge crest that was about to peak, with a long string of hit albums and singles.  The whole thing was very meteoric, but with TEOM, while it was a hit "comeback" album -- it looks to have been a brief uptick in popularity, but not overall influence.

Like I said, it really comes down to definitions and I can see the argument being made either way.  That's my 2 cents for what it's worth (about 2 cents!)

Last Edited By: robjv1 Apr 27 11 10:16 PM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

MisplacedValidity

Administrator

Posts: 39,260 He bites the metaphorical carrot.

#36 [url]

Apr 27 11 10:00 PM

^ Good point because you could actually make a case for the Glitter time being her peak in star power. She never got as much press coverage as she did during that time.

Quote    Reply   

#37 [url]

Apr 27 11 11:13 PM

MisplacedValidity wrote:
^ Good point because you could actually make a case for the Glitter time being her peak in star power. She never got as much press coverage as she did during that time.
Is a sh!tload of negative press coverage the same as "star power" though?
  

[USERNAME REMOVED BY REQUEST] wrote:
Mariah Carey On Rihanna: "I love Rihanna, I am a fan. I love that she is who she is, she's a superstar and she just lives as herself."


Quote    Reply   
avatar

MisplacedValidity

Administrator

Posts: 39,260 He bites the metaphorical carrot.

#38 [url]

Apr 28 11 10:12 AM

^ The way some are talking, yes. Think of "stars" like Paris Hilton, Snooki, etc. who never really get positive coverage but are stars because of media coverage.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

BeyondIdolization

Posts: 24,919

May we always be together...
In the sands of time

#39 [url]

Apr 28 11 11:13 AM

^But Mariah is a music artist, so she needs to have success in music as well. Which is why TEOM is THE era in terms of star power, she had a subsequent media presence because of Glitter and the breakdown that she just didn't have in the 90s, and then the huge success and comeback story made her one of the biggest entertainment stories of the year.

 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

carlos b fly

Administrator

Posts: 22,050 You'll never be ready. Memba I told you!

#40 [url]

Apr 29 11 11:43 AM

BeyondIdolization wrote:
^But Mariah is a music artist, so she needs to have success in music as well. 
  


Precisely. For someone is a true talent (not a wannabe for frickin' Snooki) you need to be firing on all cylinders, at your apex in terms of commercial success/ventures. Which in entertainment, covers many aspects, not just exclusively your film/album doing well or getting press coverage.

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help