|
Post by angeltimes on Aug 15, 2008 7:38:35 GMT -5
How can anywone say a song that did really well was a terrible singlechoice?! It did better than most o their facorite songs. Good single choice! WOR IT BRIT! Because she had BETTER choices on her album for singles. This was one of the WORST possible choices and it wasnt even a huge hit it just did well off of the success of "Toxic." Had she released one of the better choices on the album "Breathe on me" "Boom, Boom" "Outrageous" "Shadow" "Early Mornin" they all would have done better.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 15, 2008 18:45:51 GMT -5
oh God, was I drunk that night? I have all kinds of typos in that post! LOL!!
IMO, this was not a terrible single choice. Britney isn't the type of person to really have a song do well off of a previous single. Radio is not afraid to flop her at any given moment. So you can't say this did well solely based on how well Toxic did. This is one of the best songs on the album, and IMO its one of the best songs of her career. Boom Boom is terrible, Outrageous is great, Breathe On Me is amazing, Shadow is meh, and Early Morning is the WORST song on the album.
|
|
|
Post by angeltimes on Aug 16, 2008 21:30:48 GMT -5
The ITZ album really marked a radio comeback for Britney so it can be said that it did well based off "Toxic." The song itself is not strong AT ALL and its one of her least remembered "hits." I dont think i have even heard the song since it came out. I think anything else could have easily done better as a single.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 17, 2008 7:25:57 GMT -5
How can you say "marked a radio comeback" when technically it was just Toxic that was a hit. Its not like it was the 5th single following 4 Top 10 hits. It only followed 1 top 10 hit. That doesn't exactly give you bragging rights for a full radio comeback. I think Everytime is one of the strongest from that entire era. How can you think Everytime isn't and Shadow or even Early Mornin are?? Thats ridiculous IMO.
|
|
|
Post by H.A.T.E. U on Aug 17, 2008 18:48:08 GMT -5
God, this song was just magical. Even people who normally didn't like Britney liked this song. Good single choice IMO!
|
|
|
Post by I HATE LA REID on Aug 17, 2008 19:17:05 GMT -5
How can you say "marked a radio comeback" when technically it was just Toxic that was a hit. Its not like it was the 5th single following 4 Top 10 hits. It only followed 1 top 10 hit. That doesn't exactly give you bragging rights for a full radio comeback. I think Everytime is one of the strongest from that entire era. How can you think Everytime isn't and Shadow or even Early Mornin are?? Thats ridiculous IMO. lol well this was a top15 airplay smash and we're talking about britney , she basically gets NO AIRPLAY so it is a comeback, the she flopped again...it was a short comeback.
|
|
|
Post by RedDragon on Aug 17, 2008 19:30:14 GMT -5
"Shadow" is an awful song, I'm glad it wasn't released.
But I have to say that I was really surprised when I found out this was the third single. I was expecting one of the urban crap-songs.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 18, 2008 4:09:37 GMT -5
How can you say "marked a radio comeback" when technically it was just Toxic that was a hit. Its not like it was the 5th single following 4 Top 10 hits. It only followed 1 top 10 hit. That doesn't exactly give you bragging rights for a full radio comeback. I think Everytime is one of the strongest from that entire era. How can you think Everytime isn't and Shadow or even Early Mornin are?? Thats ridiculous IMO. lol well this was a top15 airplay smash and we're talking about britney , she basically gets NO AIRPLAY so it is a comeback, the she flopped again...it was a short comeback. I know this was.. I was talking about Toxic. You can't say that just because she had 1 hit that she made a comeback. lol Thats why I was saying this was a hit because it was a good choice, and not just because it followed Toxic.
|
|
|
Post by angeltimes on Aug 18, 2008 7:50:03 GMT -5
How can you say "marked a radio comeback" when technically it was just Toxic that was a hit. Its not like it was the 5th single following 4 Top 10 hits. It only followed 1 top 10 hit. That doesn't exactly give you bragging rights for a full radio comeback. I think Everytime is one of the strongest from that entire era. How can you think Everytime isn't and Shadow or even Early Mornin are?? Thats ridiculous IMO. Are u serious? ITZ was easily a radio comeback for her. Everything from that album and even "Black out" did better than the singles from the “Britney” album. Even “Me Against the music” and “Outrageous” were more successful than the singles from “Britney.” So that’s easily a radio comeback from the string of flops from the 3rd album. I think “Everytime” was one of the weakest songs on the album and “Early morning was one of the strongest so everyone has a opinion.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 18, 2008 19:56:07 GMT -5
^But what I'm saying is that Me Against the Music peaked at #11 on Pop and then fell down the chart rather fast. Slave peaked 7 spots lower, but stayed in the Top 50 5 weeks longer. I'd call Slave the bigger hit. Then you had Toxic which went #1. Having ONE song go #1 after a string of semi-flops is NOT a comeback IMO. So you can't say that Everytime did as good as it did solely based on Toxic. Most people I know love this song. Just cause you think its weak doesn't mean it was a terrible single choice. You're not the only person who decides whats a hit and whats not. As for Blackout being more successful then Britney in terms of Pop radio.. well..
Slave - #18 - 17 weeks on Gimme More - #17 - 14 weeks on
Not A Girl... - #21 - 8 weeks on Piece Of Me - #28 - 21 weeks on
Overprotected - #34 - 7 weeks on Break The Ice - #22 - 18 weeks on
Boys - #32 - 7 weeks on No fourth single to compare to.
So Blackout was slightly better than the Britney era. But not really by much. Outrageous peaked at #23 and only lasted 8 weeks. Which is worse than 2 of the Britney singles.
|
|
|
Post by angeltimes on Aug 18, 2008 21:37:16 GMT -5
^. So you can't say that Everytime did as good as it did solely based on Toxic. Well I can say it, I did say it...and I still say it.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 18, 2008 21:43:48 GMT -5
Okay, but it doesn't make it fact.
|
|
|
Post by I HATE LA REID on Aug 19, 2008 7:47:33 GMT -5
i DO think this did well because of "Toxic" but whatever.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Aug 19, 2008 14:36:04 GMT -5
Well a song can only go so far though based on the success of the previous song. If it wasn't a good song it wouldn't have gone as far as it did. If it peaked at #17 then yeah, I would say that. But not for as long as it lasted on the chart and peaking at #4.
|
|
|
Post by angeltimes on Aug 19, 2008 21:30:14 GMT -5
It happens all the time. The song blew chunks. "toxic" saved it. i DO think this did well because of "Toxic" but whatever. Yup.
|
|
|
Post by H.A.T.E. U on Sept 18, 2008 21:42:11 GMT -5
^. So you can't say that Everytime did as good as it did solely based on Toxic. Well I can say it, I did say it...and I still say it. That's not always true though. Take Rihanna for example. "Umbrella" was a HUGE hit all across the board, so that meant the follow up single should've been a guaranteed top 5 right? Nope, it sure didn't happen. That's why I think "Everytime" got as far as it did because not only did it follow "Toxic" (which did help it a little bit, I can't deny this), but it was also a catchy pop song that attracted a pop audience.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Sept 20, 2008 15:22:38 GMT -5
^Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Someone Like You on Sept 20, 2008 16:34:53 GMT -5
I think "Toxic" boosted its adds rate and success, but I don't think it became a hit because of "Toxic".
|
|
|
Post by backintime on Oct 2, 2008 7:03:07 GMT -5
This is one of the best things she's done for sure. And I'm surprised no one thinks this did well because of "Toxic". I'm sure it wouldn't have completely flopped on it's own or anything, but I think "Toxic"'s success certainly jump started it.
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Oct 2, 2008 17:09:29 GMT -5
^Well yeah. Thats basically what I was saying. Toxic jump started it, but it got as high as it did because of the fact that its good. Kind of like Who Knew flopped by itself, but when it followed U + Ur Hand it did really well and it wasn't JUST because of U + Ur Hand either.
|
|
|
Post by angeltimes on Oct 20, 2008 23:39:07 GMT -5
Bottom Line: If "Toxic" wasnt a hit, this wouldn't have done half as well. I dont even understand why it's still a debate. LMAO
|
|
|
Post by dperkins on Oct 21, 2008 0:31:25 GMT -5
No, this probably wouldnt have been a hit on its own. But thats not what I was saying anyways. lol I was simply stating that it didn't do what it did only because of Toxic. It took off and got the chance to be heard because of Toxic though. Toxic gave it the legs, and it sustained itself.
|
|
|
Post by Someone Like You on Oct 21, 2008 1:07:05 GMT -5
Right. If "Toxic" weren't a hit, this probably still would've peaked around #8-12. The exposure of "Toxic" gave Britney a few extra requests and a bit more hype for this song and bumped up its research in return.
|
|
|
Post by H.A.T.E. U on Jan 12, 2009 0:07:26 GMT -5
Right. If "Toxic" weren't a hit, this probably still would've peaked around #8-12. The exposure of "Toxic" gave Britney a few extra requests and a bit more hype for this song and bumped up its research in return. I still think the song got good research because of it's such a great song. PERIOD. Toxic's success helped it initally, but if the song had sucked ass it would've gotten bad research and underperformed no matter how successful Toxic was. Toxic renewed people's interest in Britney, and she followed its success with an amazing ballad and an incredible video (that got a lot of buzz and hype on its own).
|
|
|
Post by Chains on Jan 29, 2009 6:09:44 GMT -5
This is her BEST ballad to date, hands down. The video punched. She punched the vocals. It was HOT. Whether "Toxic" was a hit or not, this would have made an impact.
|
|