Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: One Direction paid too much for being pretty
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
andrew |
Any news on what happened to the millions of pounds the BCR made ? |
|
honey!oh sugar sugar. |
I always suspected that the Rollers who joined later were chosen because they were pretty?
One direction irritate me a bit because it looks as if there is too little effort. There was no need for the shambling performance at the Brits, and the song is almost the worst cover ever recorded.
On the other hand, I wish more bands were "manufactured" and put together for ability rather than because they sat next to the guitarist in science class.
I have no idea why you keep saying you were not pretty. You were handsome then and handsome now. |
|
JK2006 |
Let's be honest; One Direction were not picked for having talent; they were correctly put together by Simon Cowell for being young and pretty. Their music, look, performance etc have been totally manufactured (sadly not very well; like Bieber) to sell to teenage girls and boys who are attracted by their appearance.
I've mentioned before - I started this in the UK with The Bay City Rollers in the early 1970s. Larry Parnes had successfully done it with male singers in the 1960s. Americans did it with The Monkees.
We didn't pay band members very much for being pretty (and I've never been paid a penny for my massive contribution by Bell - later Arista). I'm delighted the Oners are getting decent cash. They deserve every penny. Incidentally I was on a 2% royalty for Everyone's Gone To The Moon in 1965 and I wrote the damn thing. And I wasn't at all pretty. But I was damn grateful for every penny (taxed 95p in the pound) and earned enough to buy my little house, in which I reside today as I type these very words. |
|
|
|
