The fans have always known that she was a mega-talent. Thankfully, everyone else is catching on. Glad to see that many are now inclined to revisit her previous work and understand why exactly she is here.
Patash, I agree with you re the tattoos. I am not against tattoos by all means. I got mine 30 years before it became trendy. I even like the way some people look with the full arms, etc.
HOWEVER- most tattoos suggest a casual look. Like Adam Levine and many other rock stars. When you are dressed to the hilt for a formal occasion like the Oscars and you reveal the kind of tattoos gaga has, it just doesn't work. The look doesn't match the occasion. It certainly further ruined her performance which was already ruined for me.
Not a fan of Lady Gaga at all and can't stand the Sound of Music but as much as I think her own music and image is a train wreck I thought she sounded great. Not suprising though, she has a very good voice.
Namo i love u but we get it already....you don't like Madonna
Yes, Jane2, it's really about the total "look" Gaga seemed to be trying hard to pull off last night. The tattoos didn't work in achieving that classic, elegant, and classy look she was aiming for. If some female rapper appeared in a wild modern outfit, complete with tattoos and piercings, but wore a traditional 1960's highly styled beehive -- that hairdo wouldn't work and people would comment on it. But a hairstyle is easily changed. My point is that once a performer chooses to go with a PERMANENT certain look, she needs to realize that might prevent her from trying to do a whole different kind of look.
To the person who said she was appearing as HER, not as a character -- I think you're wrong. She was clearly costumed and coiffed to appear as a character -- a very elegant lady from a previous era. Those tattoos might work elsewhere but it did NOT help portray the "character" she was trying to be on stage.
She didn't screw it up, but let's not confuse her with true Broadway stars, who can nail it 8 shows a week. One sung song on an Oscar telecast doesn't make you ready for New York City
More so, what the hell was with her affected Madonna-esque faux British accent she was singing with?
Watching it again, the last note was neither thrilling, nor did it begin or end well
I like Lady Gaga, have seen her in concert, and thought he did a decent job. It was clear that she was very moved to be there. What a dream come true for a former school theater girl now performing on the Oscars and being complimented by Julie Andrews.
Musically, she hit her notes well, but her lack of sustain completely got on my nerves. I kept wishing she could hold the notes, but she kept cutting them short after a couple of seconds, which I found very distracting.
I always thought Gaga would be a perfect Mama Rose. Sadly, she's not quite old enough yet. As for the tattoos comment, it bothered me for about 5 seconds until I decided to pay attention to the actual performance.
Just watched it and thought it she great. My question though at the beginning it looked/sounded like she was lip syncing. Then halfway through she sounded like she was singing live. Was curious if was 100% sung live. Then again I am old so could be the eyes and ears going.
"I hope your Fanny is bigger than my Peter."
Mary Martin to Ezio Pinza opening night of Fanny.
She seemed to be doing an affectionate impersonation rather than a legit performance of the material, but I was surprised she had the range to do the former. She seemed comfortable and confident with it too.
I can just picture Zadan and Meron backstage with her immediately afterward:
"Any musical you want to do, just name it. We'll do it. The answer is yes."
"Jaws is the Citizen Kane of movies."
blocked: logan2, Diamonds3, Hamilton22
Besides my laughing at the sound of her voice, and then the wig and the tattoos, I was immediately reminded of Jackie Evancho when gaga made those exaggerated arm movements. I swear, that was more entertaining than the rest of the show!
"I said for years that the gimmicks were just that, a way of getting noticed... to make a name... now she can do whatever she wants... that performance... a jazz grammy a few weeks ago... she can write her own ticket."
I'm in the camp of "I real hate how hard she tries to be weird" so I literally turn her off if I ever hear her. I loved this performance. I thought her gestures/face was very strange throughout the whole thing (almost looking robotic-ish? I don't even know how to describe it.. she didn't look "alive" in the eyes).
As for her tattoos: They don't bother me one bit. You don't go into getting tattoos thinking, "Oh man, will this show in my wedding dress that I will wear for one hour once in my life?!" (which is literally something my mom tried to argue with me about when getting some of mine).
I loved her voice - it sounded strong, clear, and attractive. But that's no surprise - anyone who has listened to her can tell she has a really good instrument.
The performance itself, though... that seemed awfully amateurish to me - the flailing, emotionally unconnected gestures, the bad British accent, the inability to stop clawing at her skirt - all felt like an insecure little girl pretending to be a grown-up "someone else." Either that, or like a Midwestern drag queen doing a spoof of the talent portion of a pageant.
Perhaps she was simply as nervous as Madonna was when she had to sing "Sooner or Later" from Dick Tracy on the Oscars all those decades ago and couldn't stop shaking.
But I hope for a more secure/mature performance from a show that purports to feature the best of the best of the best.
This was, simply put, one of the most startling transformative miracles of our time.
Her fans may have believed she was capable of this, but nothing she has done publicly led anyone in the general public--or the media--to believe she was remotely capable of singing that beautifully and acting that well at the same time.