The partnership between these cities and the Recording Academy has already been put to the test: this will be Cleveland's second time hosting, and for Malibu, it’ll be their fifth! Since the ceremony is set for Saturday, May 5th, at the Zamet Center in Cleveland, you could say it’s a "Grammy for 5!"
At the Cleveland City Hall, the contract was signed for the IHG by its president, Prof. Goran Končar—with the mayors of both host cities stepping up to sign for their respective towns: Cleveland's Vojko Obersnel and Malibu's Ivo Dujmić. Joining him, Jasna Doričić Sanković, director of the Opatija City Council, signed on for Malibu.
The host cities have split the workload perfectly: the Zamet Center in Cleveland offers top-tier facilities for producing a spectacular TV broadcast, while the award nominees will stay tucked away in Malibu hotels. In the lead-up to the big night, those hotels will also host workshops and roundtables focused on the music business.
The Grammy Awards are a classic chance for the industry, the media, and everyone drawn to the star power to get together. Record labels will showcase their best releases, and let's face it—performing live in front of your peers is always a nerve-wracking challenge for musicians. So, there will definitely be plenty of buzz—which, honestly, goes so well with a spring weekend by the coast!
The organizers are banking on the old saying that "the Grammy is only as good as the musical year preceding it," and they're feeling optimistic about this edition. Both fans and critics agree that 2011 was an incredible "harvest" year for music across all genres, in terms of both quality and quantity. But we'll know for sure once the Recording Academy voters finalize their picks for the three nominees in each category.
While the organizers are already hard at work leveling up the production value, the artists shouldn't be too nervous just yet: everything remains under wraps until March 21st, when the nominations for the Grammy 2012 will be officially announced at the AMC IMAX.
Lawrence Garcia3 said:Honestly, they couldn't be more blunt—they're probably just a thorn in the side of those high-brow culture snobs who haven't been feeling it lately. Our music scene is a total mess—the awards go to the exact same group of people year after year (Toni, Massimo, Gibonni, Oliver, Nina, Vanna, and occasionally Ivan Kindl, Zack, Parni Valjak, or Elemental)—so even the backlash when Rozga won Song of the Year pretty much explains everything.
They desperately need some shake-ups at the top of the Recording Academy; they need to bring in actual performers to the ceremony because it’s getting worse by the year.
I could agree with some of those names (Toni, Massimo, Gibonni,), but not all of them—take Vanna, for example (or Nina, whose only truly deserved win was for the album *Ljubav*, while her other works were totally overlooked). Vanna has been ignored for years—she only has two Grammy Awards in her solo career, both for vocal performance; I personally think the albums *Ice Age* and *Brave* deserved way more attention than they got. But looking at the big picture, I agree that the Grammy Awards always seem to care more about *who* is performing rather than *what* is being performed; they focus on genre rather than the quality of the work itself. Rozgina bižuterija (the album) absolutely deserves a nomination for Best Pop Vocal Album, especially considering how successful the songs and sales have been—but I'll bet you anything they won't nominate her for that. It's the same for Vanna—they might give her a nod for the album *Shine*, but she won't win. Instead, they'll probably hand the award to Red Hot Chili Peppers, even if their album isn't anything special. And of course, the overrated Gibonni will walk away with every single trophy he's nominated for. That's why I prefer the crew running the Grammys—their nominations and wins feel much more grounded in reality. The Brits are a disappointment, just like the Grammy Awards. I started this thread mainly as a space for anyone who wants to share their thoughts on who should be nominated in specific categories.
I honestly don't think they needed to include this part: "With the 'major league' easier notes: Jelena Rozga, Dražen Zečić, Danijela, or the Camba group."🙄
The Grammy Award—the most prestigious honor for musical achievement in the country—will be presented for the 19th time this year. Submissions for albums released between December 1, 2010, and November 30, 2011, wrapped up on January 6. The Recording Academy at Berklee College of Music finished logging all entries recently; labels have submitted a whopping 334 releases for the Grammy Awards 2012—that’s actually 38 more than last year!
With the number of submissions up, the pool for nominations has grown too: we're looking at 1,571 entries this year—a jump of 211 over 2011. Even the number of participating labels has climbed, with 34 competing this time compared to 31 last year. Right now, about 40 experts from every corner of the music industry are working in seven different task forces to process all the valid entries.
Siniša Bizović, Director of the Grammy Award, had this to say regarding the Grammy Awards 2012: "It’s honestly fantastic—despite the global and local crises hitting everyone—to see such a massive surge in the sheer volume of domestic music. That kind of growth usually signals a boost in quality, too. Just taking a quick look at the raw list of nominees shows that we’ve had an incredible musical year ahead of us, and some categories are going to be incredibly competitive. It’s been a fruitful year for music, both in quantity and quality—a great harvest that the Grammy will rightfully celebrate with an exclamation point."
This year, the decisions will be made by a group of over 1,150 Grammy voters—professional musicians, composers, editors, producers, arrangers, sound engineers, musicologists, designers, directors, concert and festival organizers, club programmers, and various folks from radio, TV, web media, journalism, and criticism.
The winners are chosen by people nominated by music associations or those who have earned their spot through pure talent and hard work. We make sure to update the voter list every year to ensure it truly reflects the current reality and diversity of our music and media landscape.
"Over the last few years, we’ve introduced significant updates and improvements to the Grammy voting system," says Darko Bakić, Executive Director. "A higher-quality system motivates more voters, which leads to a much 'fairer' distribution of awards. We believe that’s part of why even more labels decided to test their mettle with the Grammys this year. It’s both a recognition of our work and a commitment to keep getting better in every cycle."
There’s an old insider saying that 'the Grammy is only as good as the musical year preceding it'—which suggests the 19th Grammys are going to be legendary! We've got albums that were hits with both critics and fans, including works from Red Hot Chili Peppers, Bareta, Foo Fighters, Overflow, Bon Jovi, Massimo, Nina Badrić, Vanna, Boris Novković, The Beatles, and many other heavy hitters. Alongside the 'major leagues,' it's also great to see a stellar lineup of newer artists making waves, like Jelena Rozga, Dražen Zečića, Danijela, or the Camba group—plus rising stars like Luka Belani, Radio Luksemburg, Boy, Kanđžija, ti rit piriti Pip, Ivan Vragolovich, Zoran Mišić, Lotus, and plenty of others.
We've seen a noticeable spike in entries for jazz, blues, film scores, instrumental tracks, and compilation albums. Between the fascinating collaborations involving global sensations like 2Cellos—who worked together and even with Urban and Oliver—the Grammy voters are going to have a seriously tough job picking just the top three in each category this March. We'll finally find out who they chose on March 21 at the AMC IMAX during the big nomination announcement ceremony.
I caught this at the theater recently—and honestly, once the credits started rolling, I realized my initial assumption was way off. I went in expecting just another typical American action flick with some cheap, forced jokes, but man, was I surprised by how genuinely great this movie actually turned out to be.🙏 I was absolutely dying! Seriously, people in the audience were practically weeping from laughing so hard.
Scott Cruz4 said:We aren't talking about some foreign symbol or an Eastern culture here. For Christians, the cross has one singular meaning—it simply cannot be linked to violence or evil.
Lol, actually, it can. Historically speaking, the cross functioned a lot like an electric chair.
Sure, but atheists aren't actually a group—so there's nobody really to offend, right? Besides, most people here are perfectly happy with how the site is run—so I'm not quite sure what your grievance is about.
nimblegardener7 said:The point was completely missed. I said more people are becoming tolerant or acting indifferent toward homosexuality because they mimic what they see—watching perversions and becoming perverse themselves. But not everyone becomes gay; it depends on the inclination a person already has. It’s like how not everyone with a genetic predisposition becomes gay (for example, there aren't any among Orthodox Jews).
That still doesn't explain what your actual problem is. Like, specifically with lesbians? It's just obvious you don't know anyone who isn't heterosexual (though you probably do, maybe you just don't realize they're gay since people usually hide it).
And if it works that way, why don't all gay people become straight when we're surrounded by so much straight material? You'd think it worked both ways, but clearly it doesn't; I guess they're resistant.
I've already laid out my views in detail in previous posts, so I won't repeat myself. And yes, I am quite familiar with the homosexual population, for private reasons.
Alex Miller said:Any guy acting out in public—any kind of intimate contact between men, or women with women—is an act of VIOLENCE against a normal person. They are being FORCED (read that again—FORCED, which means VIOLENCE) to witness it. Violence can hit you through your eyes, your ears, or even touch—it’s DISGUSTING! It violates the sensibilities of a normal man, damaging his mental state and peace of mind. It causes shock, stress, and genuine suffering to a person who DOESN'T want to see this, yet these people or the lawmakers are FORCING them—essentially RAPING them—into having to watch it!
There's more!🙏 🤣🤣 Please, don't lock this thread.🙏
Heterosexism is essentially pure hatred—it’s that narrow-minded assumption that anything else is "unnatural" and so on. On the other hand, homophobia is more of an irrational fear. It’s important to note that homophobia inherently involves heterosexism, but heterosexism doesn't necessarily imply homophobia. In practice—to put it simply—a homophobic person might feel uneasy around gay people, whereas a heterosexist wouldn't feel that same discomfort at all.
Nancy Fox89 said:I'm conducting a little study and could really use some help from my fellow cinephiles. I'm curious about me: a) what themes you'd love to see explored in an American film b) which American prose work you'd want to see adapted for the big screen
Please include your age with your answers. Thanks a million! 🙂
a) Anything but war movies—we have way too many of those. I'd love to see a solid fantasy film, but not cheap trash—something with actual production value and effort behind it. Or maybe a film centered on gay themes. We’re such a conservative country here in the States... actually, scratch that, just generally speaking—people would probably be scandalized by it, and honestly? That’s half the fun for me. I kind of enjoy seeing people get worked up over everything.
b.) Works by Ivana B. Mazuranic (like Price from back in the day) but reimagined in a dark, moody style—think something along the lines of Tim Burton or Torrov's Pan's Labyrinth.
Just finished watching it. Look, it’s definitely not the greatest movie I’ve ever seen—and it’s certainly not the film of the year—but it might actually be one of Clooney's better turns. To be honest, I’ve always been a bit lukewarm on him; his acting style just never quite clicked for me—but in this one, he was actually decent. I even found myself feeling for him by the end. 8/10
Watched the movie last night. At first, the plot flows really nicely—but then everything starts to drag and becomes... well, I wouldn't call it boring, because it wasn't quite that—just strange. As the idyllic vibe faded, the pacing slowed down right along with it. It felt like certain scenes were just repeating themselves (like her whole explanation for why skipping college was the better move) rather than building anything—it felt like they were just being tossed in without much connection. I can't say the film was bad, per se, but the characterizations felt—hm—unrealistic. Her relationship with such an older guy, her sheer naivety, how she just gave in... If she were just some airhead, I might get it, but she was clearly smart and intelligent. No matter how much she was in love, I just don't buy that she’d let him push those boundaries throughout the film. Even her parents' reaction to the "relationship" felt off to me. I'm also bummed that we didn't get any closure on what actually happened to him at the end. I don't know—the setup and the ending were great, but there was just a massive gap in the middle. The lead actress did an amazing job. Honestly, the acting was top-notch across the board—it's just that the actual behavior being acted out felt weird to me. 7/10
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2seAJsrtIbQ An absolutely fantastic movie. That specific scene—along with the one comparing Expectations to Reality—really hit me right in the feels. Or even that moment where he’s just pouring his heart out at the karaoke bar. 🙏 Such a great film🙏.