Lagerfeld Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Well, we all know that Britney had the edge in commercial performance and in the GP (at least after 2003), but was X-Tina seen as the more acclaimed artist of the duo in the eyes of the GP and stans? or are they seen the same level? Now, bear in mind that Lotus, Liberation, and Bionic were not well-received, however, Stripped, and B2B were. For Britney, I feel that In The Zone and Blackout aged the best in terms of acclaim for her. What do we think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popboi. Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 At first? Absolutely. But clearly Christina pissed off a lot of people behind the scenes with her attitude and the GP realized that later (releasing Lotus did not help things) Most of the acclaim for ITZ and Blackout is retroactive in the 2010s. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Xtripped Posted July 7 Popular Post Share Posted July 7 Both are strong women who faced misoginy in their careers, if something both deserves an apologize from critics, media and the gp as well. 3 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-V-XYZ Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Of course. That's why Xtina won the Best New Artist Grammy over Britney. Also that's why Xtina has 7 Grammy wins now and Britney only has 1 (which is a lowbrow Grammy at that). 3 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distantconstellation Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 That's not even a question. There's a reason why Chrisitna keeps getting grammy nods and wins still even if she doesn't have commercial success anymore. She's more respected in the industry Britney never had critical acclaim just commercial success and after a few years the commercial success was over too. 3 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-V-XYZ Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Britney hasn't gotten a single Grammy nomination in close to 15 years! 😳 Hahaha! 1 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UseYourIllusion2002 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 For their debut albums yes, but wasn't Stripped (unfairly) panned when it first came out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChooseyLover Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) Both were really undermined and underappreciated by critics when it comes to their discographies. It's crazy to see Christina stans above my post claiming she was adored by critics when that's so far from the truth. The only thing that gave her the edge and the acclaim is her voice, but her material was panned and not taken seriously enough. Critics were d1ckheads and snobs especially when it came to female pop artists like them. They both deserved better and the acclaim we see every pop girl get so easily these days because they worked twice as hard and released twice as better music. Edited July 7 by ChooseyLover 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Silva Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) Christina was perceived as being more gifted vocally and she was always more influenced by Rn'B (than Britney) and sought to stay true to that key influence through her own work. As music trends go that wasn't always what the market wanted and her career suffered as a result. At various points Christina conceded to label pressure to expand upon her musical repertoire but she felt out of her comfort zone doing so and always tried to steer her direction back to Rn'B. In a musical context, Britney was more malleable to what the changing market required and that adaptability won out over Christina's vocal prowess. Edited July 7 by Dante Silva 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexrex Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Of course 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leyaris11 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) For her voice? Yes but.... Edited July 7 by leyaris11 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuanticXplosion Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Always have and always will be. This is her more recent Grammy win, oh Christina, the legend that you are. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leyaris11 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 minutes ago, QuanticXplosion said: Always have and always will be. This is her more recent Grammy win, oh Christina, the legend that you are. The legend that sell cookies and lubes? 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy'sReceipts Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) Yes she was more acclaimed and still is. Christina can sing . The music industry gave her the Grammy for Best New Artist over Britney even though Britney was more popular and famous. Edited July 7 by Nippy'sReceipts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leyaris11 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, Distantconstellation said: That's not even a question. There's a reason why Chrisitna keeps getting grammy nods and wins still even if she doesn't have commercial success anymore. She's more respected in the industry Britney never had critical acclaim just commercial success and after a few years the commercial success was over too. Would you mind tell me what years is it? 4 minutes ago, Nippy'sReceipts said: Yes she was more acclaimed and still is. Christina can sing Baby, I think you confusing screaming with singing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minto Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) xtina is taken far more seriously in the industry than britney that's kind of obvious especially with the whole "voice of the generation" moniker. britney was ridiculed for most of her career Edited July 7 by Minto 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy'sReceipts Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, Popboi. said: At first? Absolutely. But clearly Christina pissed off a lot of people behind the scenes with her attitude and the GP realized that later (releasing Lotus did not help things) Most of the acclaim for ITZ and Blackout is retroactive in the 2010s. I've never seen anyone in the GP or younger artists praise ITZ the way they praise Stripped. They praise Toxic but ITZ outside of Toxic is a forgotten era. Britney was smart to fight her record label to release Toxic. They wanted I Got that Boom Boom with Ying Yang Twins as the second single but that single wouldn't have aged well at all or been critically acclaimed like Toxic. It's also Britney's only Grammy 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy'sReceipts Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 minutes ago, leyaris11 said: Would you mind tell me what years is it? Baby, I think you confusing screaming with singing. It's better to scream than to lip sync 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-V-XYZ Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 31 minutes ago, leyaris11 said: The legend that sell cookies and lubes? You're acting like Britney didn't work with Chips Ahoy and sell hair dryers. At least Xtina worked with a billion dollar+ cookie company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devin Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 yea bc society viewed britney as trashy/slutty. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eternium Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 2 hours ago, A-V-XYZ said: Of course. That's why Xtina won the Best New Artist Grammy over Britney. Also that's why Xtina has 7 Grammy wins now and Britney only has 1 (which is a lowbrow Grammy at that). 2 hours ago, Distantconstellation said: That's not even a question. There's a reason why Chrisitna keeps getting grammy nods and wins still even if she doesn't have commercial success anymore. She's more respected in the industry Britney never had critical acclaim just commercial success and after a few years the commercial success was over too. 2 hours ago, A-V-XYZ said: Britney hasn't gotten a single Grammy nomination in close to 15 years! 😳 Hahaha! 1 minute ago, Nippy'sReceipts said: Yes she was more acclaimed and still is. Christina can sing . The music industry gave her the Grammy for Best New Artist over Britney even though Britney was more popular and famous. That's not how the Grammy's work, but I'm sure you girls know that at your big ages. The Grammy's are a measure of how much the industry is pushing for you, and Christina was Sony's investment to cash in on Britney-mania. Of course she had more major label support. Realistically, Britney was more popular and more loved. Neither of these girls got a fraction of the acclaim they deserved in their time but time has been kind to Britney and it's only a matter of time before GIAB, WAGW and Hurt start to get the acclaim they deserve. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loveisdead9582 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) Acclaimed? Sure. Christina's vocals are some of the best out there. After B2B though she lost that acclaim. Britney was definitely more popular and commercially successful but she actually started to soak up some acclaim with ITZ and Blackout. It's kind of hard to compare the 2010's though since we know at least one of Britney's albums were primarily someone else's vocals and she didn't really have any control over them. Edited July 7 by loveisdead9582 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrahamjmr Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 3 hours ago, Distantconstellation said: That's not even a question. There's a reason why Chrisitna keeps getting grammy nods and wins still even if she doesn't have commercial success anymore. She's more respected in the industry Britney never had critical acclaim just commercial success and after a few years the commercial success was over too. Christina's last GRAMMY nod was in 2019 and before you bring up the Latin GRAMMY - they are not the same. Aguilera's last commercial successful album was Back to Basic, after that it was only downhill for her and critics never really liked her either. I am surprised by the level of delusion some of you Fighters still show, even after all these years. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leyaris11 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 (edited) 1 hour ago, Nippy'sReceipts said: It's better to scream than to lip sync Sure. I guess people just prefer the lip synced over the screaming. 1 hour ago, A-V-XYZ said: You're acting like Britney didn't work with Chips Ahoy and sell hair dryers. At least Xtina worked with a billion dollar+ cookie company. Grandma, the last time I checked Britney is an author and selling millions copied of her books and scored a top 10 year end chart on Hot 100 just last year. And you, instead of fighting as if your life depends on it, you should support your fave aka sale representative Christina Aguilera by calling 888-759-4763 and buy some lubes. Edited July 7 by leyaris11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futuresuperstar2023 Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Christina was always respected because she can sing her ass off. Both Women went through sexism but people didn't view Britney as being talented because she wasn't a vocalist and her music didn't really have substance tbh. We will never know if Britney would have broke the mode and got more artistic in her career. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts