Tilly Posted June 1, 2012 Author Share Posted June 1, 2012 Pornogenic Matt Team or something. If you want to know what pornogenic is just scroll down. Geez, I never knew it was something that retarded ... I'm learning so many things today. No kidding. I kept seeing it and wondering what the hell it was, thought I would ask. Pornogenic Matt Team I almost choked on my Coke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamond_writer Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Personally I change the amount I 'fangirl' over them depending on who I am talking to. For example on tumblr I confess I join in the madness that takes place when we get news and all the speculation can be fun sometimes, something to enjoy being a part of like when they were running with the torch. How ever on here I have learnt to tone it down and it's far more about the music (naturally) than the band themselves. And since I have never met a 'muser' I just have to let it all out on the internet Belldom is weird, I agree, but again I'm sure I've been 'involved with it' on tumblr, plus its the same with any band of fandom out there. However fanfics disgust me. I read one a few months ago to see what all the fuss was about and it really disturbed me, I thought I was pretty obsessed but there are girls out there who sit writing gay porn for hours it just doesn't make sense to me. Finally I hate it when people (apart from jokingly) slag off any part of the bands looks, hair, or relationship choices. Imagine thinking I'll grow my hair long, oh no wait fans won't like that. It just bugs me how caught up people get in that stuff where who cares!? It's the bands music that matters, not criticising their social lives. And I agree, the hate towards Kate is absolutely stupid and disgusting. If I met them on the street I'm sure I would get very excited and emotional but wouldn't do anything silly and would chat about the music and wouldn't dream of asking questions on personal life, would just feel wrong. Ok rant over pick away at it if you must Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Ditto. Lazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kueller Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I miss the official message board page on MuseWiki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaking Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I miss the official message board page on MuseWiki Ya this one is too mainstream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HannahG123 Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Ditto. That's a first Not from you though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HannahG123 Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Will acted as Voldemort in the movie. How did it feel having no nose Will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furygirl Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 PMT = Pornogenic Matt Thread. Not Team. Pornogenic is from some inside joke from before my time and I forgot what it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamond_writer Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 That's a first Not from you though Well, I don't like reiterating, and besides, I'm busy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will_ Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Will acted as Voldemort in the movie. Init. Got my nose back now. But apparently he looks much taller onscreen. The magic of cinema How did it feel having no nose Will? Easier to breathe. OK, no right to complain is a bit harsh. But you can always privatize your tweets if you want. If someone posted naked pictures of themselves and then complained when people were using it as fap mateial... there's still some fault to the poster. Even if I somehow became famous I have no public material online whatsoever with my real name and information. If we're talking about fanfiction and waiting at their hotels that's something different, but in a site like Twitter they choose to broadcast themselves online. It doesn't make the creepy fangirls and obsessives any more in the clear. It's still over the line, it's still disrespectful to privacy, but they're there. The band I'm sure knew what they were getting into before making their accounts or they wouldn't have done it at all. Privatising is true! I could say "oh but why should they be forced to do that?!!" or something but it's true really, dickends and crazies come with the terrority if you're famous/associated with famous people, on places like twitter n whatnot. It's more that I don't get why people do associate themselves with these people. Or perhaps, I do get why, but I think it's invasive and creepy. Question. And I honestly don't mean this in a nasty way at all. But, didn't you know what you were getting yourself into becoming an actor in the first place? And taking a part in such a highly successful movie series? I agree that the media and obsessive whackos eat celebrities alive, but no one forces them into the spotlight. Or do they is some cases? ... It's not like that at all. Obviously when I was auditioning and then got the gig I wasn't thinking, "Oh christ what about all the fangirls and the stalking and ahhhhhhhhH" because I was just so excited. Not that I ever got stalked ofc Same applies with acting in general though; you don't think about the rammifications of getting a part, you just think about the part itself init. But there are a lot of mums who push their kids into the industries, unfortunately. Ditto. Oh, stunning contribution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kueller Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Ya this one is too mainstream. No it was a wiki page, but it was completely humorous and sarcastic (there was a redirect to another page that talked about the message board seriously). But they replaced it with a serious one only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tilly Posted June 1, 2012 Author Share Posted June 1, 2012 No it was a wiki page, but it was completely humorous and sarcastic (there was a redirect to another page that talked about the message board seriously). But they replaced it with a serious one only. *sniff sniff* but I like humorous and sarcastic. Why did they replace it I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FabriPav Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Init. Got my nose back now. The contract you signed was clear about this. No nose for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeboer01 Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 ... It's not like that at all. Obviously when I was auditioning and then got the gig I wasn't thinking, "Oh christ what about all the fangirls and the stalking and ahhhhhhhhH" because I was just so excited. Not that I ever got stalked ofc Same applies with acting in general though; you don't think about the rammifications of getting a part, you just think about the part itself init. But there are a lot of mums who push their kids into the industries, unfortunately. In your own opinion (and experience), what drives performing artists? I mean, one can play an instrument, or be an actor on a small local scale, and find satisfaction from that. But others want more from it. Matt famously said he got into music because he "wanted to get laid" but I'm guessing there's more to the story than that. Every profession has it's downsides. But do most people who seek large scale success at the performing arts also seek fame and fortune? Is that that part of it? Wanting to be "loved" or admired? And do you think that most performing artists take for granted going into it that they will likely lose anonymity and quite possibly their privacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kueller Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Privatising is true! I could say "oh but why should they be forced to do that?!!" or something but it's true really, dickends and crazies come with the terrority if you're famous/associated with famous people, on places like twitter n whatnot. It's more that I don't get why people do associate themselves with these people. Or perhaps, I do get why, but I think it's invasive and creepy. ... It's not like that at all. Obviously when I was auditioning and then got the gig I wasn't thinking, "Oh christ what about all the fangirls and the stalking and ahhhhhhhhH" because I was just so excited. Not that I ever got stalked ofc Same applies with acting in general though; you don't think about the rammifications of getting a part, you just think about the part itself init. You got the chance to see things from the other perspective though that the crazies might not see. I'm sure if they knew how uncomfortable someone got with it they'd stop. It's sort of a price to fame that you get lots of attention, but not all of it is good. Again, I'm sure the band on their public social sites are aware of this but I'm also sure it bothers them a bit too, resulting in Matt ignoring people and wearing bags on his head and shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will_ Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 In your own opinion (and experience), what drives performing artists? I mean, one can play an instrument, or be an actor on a small local scale, and find satisfaction from that. But others want more from it. Matt famously said he got into music because he "wanted to get laid" but I'm guessing there's more to the story than that. Every profession has it's downsides. But do most people who seek large scale success at the performing arts also seek fame and fortune? Is that that part of it? Wanting to be "loved" or admired? And do you think that most performing artists take for granted going into it that they will likely lose anonymity and quite possibly their privacy? Can vary. For most it's a love of what they do, for some it's because they want fame. I kind of despise people who just want fame, and don't have a clue why they'd ever want it. Fame, from what I've seen, not myself, can be cool, but mostly it just destroys any privacy you ever had and gives you lots of weirdos to run away from. But yeah, although they're both my biggest passions, I want to be successful at music and acting, not for the fame, but to an extent that I want to be recognised for it. I guess in a way that's seeking fame, although I don't see it like that. It's hard to explain really I guess if you have a talent, or think you do, you want to be admired and recognised for it, right? For me though, acting and music are two very different things. Music, I just want to gig, that's it. Getting recognised for my work would be awesome and I hope I can do it, but gigging and just making music is the main thing. Mooz probably thought this way too. Acting on the other hand... I'd prefer the bigger gigs, shall we say I sometimes think that wanting to be successful will stop me from becoming it; seems to me most successful people didn't neccessarily strive to achieve that, they just got there. But I reckon for the band, the deep roots of doing what they did is because they loved it. I reckon they never would've thought about all the crazy shit now, they just focused on their music and making it. You got the chance to see things from the other perspective though that the crazies might not see. I'm sure if they knew how uncomfortable someone got with it they'd stop. It's sort of a price to fame that you get lots of attention, but not all of it is good. Again, I'm sure the band on their public social sites are aware of this but I'm also sure it bothers them a bit too, resulting in Matt ignoring people and wearing bags on his head and shit. Mmm, lots are just excitable people that never actually have bad intentions, they just don't know when to stop I don't think it excuses it though, or some of the things that happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaking Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 You got the chance to see things from the other perspective though that the crazies might not see. I'm sure if they knew how uncomfortable someone got with it they'd stop. It's sort of a price to fame that you get lots of attention, but not all of it is good. Again, I'm sure the band on their public social sites are aware of this but I'm also sure it bothers them a bit too, resulting in Matt ignoring people and wearing bags on his head and shit. Lol Kueller actually giving these people the benefit of the doubt. #Cute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeboer01 Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Can vary. For most it's a love of what they do, for some it's because they want fame. I kind of despise people who just want fame, and don't have a clue why they'd ever want it. Fame, from what I've seen, not myself, can be cool, but mostly it just destroys any privacy you ever had and gives you lots of weirdos to run away from. I can certainly see how there can be conflicting emotions with performing artists. My dad was a hobbyist actor, and was very active in the local college theater groups. He was very, very good, and did go to some auditions in NYC for a time. But my dad is basically very, very shy and introverted. Fame would have killed him if he ever achieved it. I think he found acting to be an emotional release from his own introversion. He could "be someone else" on stage. But yeah, although they're both my biggest passions, I want to be successful at music and acting, not for the fame, but to an extent that I want to be recognised for it. I guess in a way that's seeking fame, although I don't see it like that. It's hard to explain really I guess if you have a talent, or think you do, you want to be admired and recognised for it, right? It's funny. I've played guitar since I was a kid, and it means SO MUCH to me as an emotional outlet. But despite that I've hung out with a fair amount of musicians in my younger days, and being told I'm quite capable, I never had the onions to get a band together and perform myself. I would feel as if I were exposing my most vulnerable emotions to a critical viewership. And to have someone think I suck would have killed me. I HATE being the center of attention. It gives me an anxiety attack! For me though, acting and music are two very different things. Music, I just want to gig, that's it. Getting recognised for my work would be awesome and I hope I can do it, but gigging and just making music is the main thing. Mooz probably thought this way too. Acting on the other hand... I'd prefer the bigger gigs, shall we say I sometimes think that wanting to be successful will stop me from becoming it; seems to me most successful people didn't neccessarily strive to achieve that, they just got there. Oh, I think you're giving the successful too much credit! Mooz had a publicist even back in the early days, and Matt's dad was intimately knowledgeable about "the industry", shall we say. My dad got a glimpse of the seedier side of acting auditions in NYC, and I surely get the impression that the vast majority of those who are famous didn't have it fall into their laps! But I reckon for the band, the deep roots of doing what they did is because they loved it. I reckon they never would've thought about all the crazy shit now, they just focused on their music and making it. Agreed. I think that's part of their appeal. They were musicians first. They didn't come off as attention whores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kati Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 I would like to point out that to some extent the creepy fangirling is what entertainment industry wants. If music consumers were not fans, just reasonable people listening to music as such, they would just buy the albums and occasionally go to a concert. They would not go to concerts several times during a tour of one album, they would not buy fan products, they would not buy magazines for interviews, they would not discuss on a forum like this. Unfortunately such a "fan" is not profitable enough for the industry. They want more hype. This is where "selling an artist's personality" comes into picture. Why the hell do you people think bands do the interviews where they talk about what kind of people they are or their personal lives? They try to make themselves more interesting for the audience (no doubt the record companies require that, it's part of the business). This stuff is much clearer in the Hollywood film industry, actors do these personal type of interviews when promoting films even though films have much less to do with actor's private life than music - a band like Muse is the director, screenwriter and actor of the entertainment type called music (thus their personality has more relevance to the final product), whereas in film industry the actors do most of the personality sales even though the story creation is done more by other people. Now some people swallow the hook deeper than others. Be it problems with mental health like depression or suicidal tendency, loneliness, boredom, need to identify among social group, all this has effect on how strong is the (imagined) effect of the art on person's life and thus the extent of desparate acts to get closer to the artist. Yes, stalking a hairdresser or family members on twitter or writing sexual fantasies to web is creepy, but so is going to nine gigs on a tour or calling band members liars when they do not obey some poll results on songs to perform. Writing long posts on a message board at four o'clock in the night is super creepy I still find it even creepier when artists who blab about their private lives and children in television interviews get all butthurt about paps. Is it fair that a person selecting a career in entertainment business gets weirdos after him/her when successful/famous enough? When originally it was about wanting to do the art and the probability of huge success was neglectible? I don't know. There are burdens in other professions too, that you don't realise when young and idealistic. At least the very successful artists are able to step out of the business if they are willing to give up the attention and lavish life style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furygirl Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 If Matt had an aversion to vultures/paps, he shouldn't have hooked up with that Kate girl. Not that his fame excuses the behavior of the more fanatical fans (they'd be around regardless of his "LA lifestyle"), but I'm sure he had to know what to expect once he got himself "involved". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaking Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 If Matt had an aversion to vultures/paps, he shouldn't have hooked up with that Kate girl. Not that his fame excuses the behavior of the more fanatical fans (they'd be around regardless of his "LA lifestyle"), but I'm sure he had to know what to expect once he got himself "involved". Damn Matt for falling in love with that Kate girl. He should have known that others would stalk him even more ... Totes his fault and not societies fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furygirl Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Edit: meh, nvm. Deleted my response post. I shouldn't post drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaking Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 I knew I shouldve deleted my post. Not saying it makes it okay how society treats famous people. I'm thinking more of paps, not fans. I'm just saying I'm sure he knew that his privacy would be compromised a bit from what he was used to. Obviously it must be worth it, and hopefully he's used to it. I would not want to be famous! Bellamy should be allowed to do what he wants to do. If he wants to marry the fracking queen he should be allowed to without being harassed. I understand what you are saying but you are basing it off of it being acceptable to follow people around and take photo's and videotape people (which is sadly our world today) but it still doesn't make it right. I knew I shouldve deleted my post. I know that feeling. Edit: meh, nvm. Deleted my response post. I shouldn't post drunk. Haha, I'm sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furygirl Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Dammit! if only I wasn't hindered by my slow, shitty phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeboer01 Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Bellamy should be allowed to do what he wants to do. If he wants to marry the fracking queen he should be allowed to without being harassed. I understand what you are saying but you are basing it off of it being acceptable to follow people around and take photo's and videotape people (which is sadly our world today) but it still doesn't make it right. Dude, "reality" and "should" are two radically different things. I don't think anyone disputes that Matt should be able to marry the fucking queen or not. Love is love, and no matter who it's between, it's a very cool thing. But I tend to disagree that if someone TRULY wants anonymity, that they would choose a pap-target as their lover, and expect to remain pap-free in their private lives There are plenty of celebrities that are hugely famous, yet not a staple on "The Daily Mail". It IS POSSIBLE to be a successful actor/musician, and not be a tabloid darling. The individuals at stake have the power to control their private lives if they choose to do so. One needs to realize that there is a love-hate relationship between paps and celebs. It aint rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.