base talk Why wasn't Madonna able to get a smash hit 34 years into her career like Cher did?

[Pikachoo]

In 1965, Cher released one of the defining songs of the 60s; I Got You Babe.

 

In 1999, 34 years later, she released another decade defining song: Believe.

 

In 1985, Madonna released her first smash hit: Like a Virgin.

 

34 years later, she released "Medellin" which flopped on the charts. 

 

why was Cher able to smash 34 years later, while Medellin failed to impact any charts?

[reymiu]

She just had a hit with "Popular" last year, which should reach 1B streams on Spotify soon ... 

 

Next 

[Princess Aurora]

She did actually 

[Katamari]

Maluma is streaming poison

 

carti and Weeknd are streaming elixir

 

hope that helps! 

[Funnyfatty]

Do you really think that a woman like Madonna cares about chasing hits after being a legend? 
 

if cher didn't have believe, she wouldn't even be around today. Madonna will be the biggest topic of pop music whether she gets a hit today or not. Her songs are also getting viral moments so i'm not sure what this is all about.

[LittleStarmen]

Coz she is about to release her new smash 43 years after Like A virgin

[#Beautiful]

the 2014 hit single BACK THAT UP (DO IT) ruled the charts and hearts recently. its a worldwide hit. it had to marinate because people simply werent ready for HARD CANDY flavored hits anymore, scalps werent safe. so she came and she smashed with it. untouched demo version too, the best one, not the MX version. so she sorta slayed. unfortunately the gutted version of Frozen was popular too to a new demographic completely. Material Girl too after Stranger Things

[MatiRod]

The answer is ageism and sexism in the music industry. Women are judged more harshly for the way they look and the powers that be don't want to invest in women who are considered "too old". Cher was 53 when 'Believe' came out, for Madonna that would've been 2011. Both still looked relatively young/snatched during that time, thanks in no small part to how hard they both worked at their fitness and appearance. But that's the reality in entertainment, everyone is image conscious and people are pathological about staying youthful. 

 

 

 

You need a lot of wheels to turn to get a huge smash hit. A lot of important people have to agree to funnel a lot of $ towards creating that smash. Especially back then when it was all about radio and TV exposure to create a hit. Rewind your mind to 2011. Ad syncs, Glee, TV talent competition performances, and radio airplay were the main way of creating a hit song. Similar in 1999. Clearly TPTB agreed "Believe" was worth the push and Cher could still appeal to a youthful audience, especially back then when you needed retail, radio, TV etc on your side. For "Believe" to go #1 the world over, the label would've needed to agree to manufacture and ship a lot of CD singles. Radio had to agree to play it. Big TV shows had to agree to have her perform on them. Magazines had to agree to write about the song.

 

Madonna also could've conceivably had a smash in 2011 with the right song. TPTB agreed she was still viable, so they gave her the Superbowl, she had a radio deal, American Idol video premiere, and "Give Me All Your Luvin'" released at the start of 2012 went Top 10 in the US and sold like 250k copies in its first ten days. There was some hype for her still. But the song was ass and it fell off the charts quickly. If she'd released a certified smash as a single, it could've been her last big hit.

 

But by the time Madonna had been in the industry for as long as Cher had been (34 years), it was 2019 and she looked noticeably older and clearly she was not given enough of a push to have a shot at a legit hit song. Look at the level of promo compared to the MDNA era. She had to share that couch on Graham Norton instead of getting it all to herself. Interscope probably didn't even bother trying for a radio deal. No big syncs for the singles (remember that Motorola ad for "Hung Up"? No such thing for Madame X).

[enchanted0]

She didn't believe in life after love

[Mordecai]

Does it matter? Madonna's success was uninterrupted for 25 years, no other woman from that time can match that

[Pikachoo]

4 minutes ago, MatiRod said:

The answer is ageism and sexism in the music industry. Women are judged more harshly for the way they look and the powers that be don't want to invest in women who are considered "too old". Cher was 53 when 'Believe' came out, for Madonna that would've been 2011. Both still looked relatively young/snatched during that time, thanks in no small part to how hard they both worked at their fitness and appearance. But that's the reality in entertainment, everyone is image conscious and people are pathological about staying youthful. 

 

 

 

You need a lot of wheels to turn to get a huge smash hit. A lot of important people have to agree to funnel a lot of $ towards creating that smash. Especially back then when it was all about radio and TV exposure to create a hit. Rewind your mind to 2011. Ad syncs, Glee, TV talent competition performances, and radio airplay were the main way of creating a hit song. Similar in 1999. Clearly TPTB agreed "Believe" was worth the push and Cher could still appeal to a youthful audience, especially back then when you needed retail, radio, TV etc on your side. For "Believe" to go #1 the world over, the label would've needed to agree to manufacture and ship a lot of CD singles. Radio had to agree to play it. Big TV shows had to agree to have her perform on them. Magazines had to agree to write about the song.

 

Madonna also could've conceivably had a smash in 2011 with the right song. TPTB agreed she was still viable, so they gave her the Superbowl, she had a radio deal, American Idol video premiere, and "Give Me All Your Luvin'" released at the start of 2012 went Top 10 in the US and sold like 250k copies in its first ten days. There was some hype for her still. But the song was ass and it fell off the charts quickly. If she'd released a certified smash as a single, it could've been her last big hit.

 

But by the time Madonna had been in the industry for as long as Cher had been (34 years), it was 2019 and she looked noticeably older and clearly she was not given enough of a push to have a shot at a legit hit song. Look at the level of promo compared to the MDNA era. She had to share that couch on Graham Norton instead of getting it all to herself. Interscope probably didn't even bother trying for a radio deal. No big syncs for the singles (remember that Motorola ad for "Hung Up"? No such thing for Madame X).

great response. thank you

[LittleStarmen]

madonnas was 60 when she released medelin

ched was 52 on believe

 

huge difference in entertainment

[UseYourIllusion2002]

5 minutes ago, Mordecai said:

Does it matter? Madonna's success was uninterrupted for 25 years, no other woman from that time can match that

Exactly while Cher has like 40 albums with only like 3 of them being successes. 

[Monsieurgedeon]

Because Cher did what she wanted to do and it worked (a bit like Kylie and Padam). Madonna is a trend chaser that has nothing to bring music wise. Cool artist for some times tho (but not since Hard Candy let's be honest). 
 

she cater to no one and no one is really interested in her but the old white gays. Considering Popular like an even slightly  comparable to Believe is really a reach your honor. 

Edited Monday at 06:27 AM by Monsieurgedeon

[Cain]

Unlike Cher, Madonna had smash hits in all those years in between

[Capris Groove]

37 years into her career, Cher had 12 top 10 hits.

 

37 years into her career, Madonna had 38 top 10 hits.

 

Why?

[allforyou]

Because Believe was an undeniably great song, while Medellin (even though I like it) isn't the same. Plus I think it's harder for older artists to have hits nowadays than in the 90s.

[Achilles.]

Believe didn't just fall out of a coconut tree.
 

Sonny Bono died in January 1998, so Sonny and Cher were back in the news and public discourse. She hosted a CBS special paying tribute to him in May, and accepted Sonny & Cher's star on the Walk of Fame. So Cher was already in the spotlight by the time she dropped "Believe" in October.
 

I don't know if it was explicitly promoted as a response to Sonny's passing, but I'm sure that some people made a connection. Like everyone knows she's grieving the loss of someone important to her, and then she releases a song about picking yourself up after losing someone. It was just the right song in the right hands at the right moment, in a way that can't be forced or replicated. 

[prézli]

Is this thread serious?

[mike_int]

M is doing just fine honey

 

[LikeaRebel]

Believe was an anomaly. No other female artist has had a massive hit like that in their 50s. 

[Lover]

1 hour ago, reymiu said:

She just had a hit with "Popular" last year, which should reach 1B streams on Spotify soon ... 

 

Next 

believe 663.061.154

popular 941.844.799

 

[edutada]

[dumbsparce]

Why wasn't Cher able to score a hit prior and after her 34th year though?

[Tropical]

2 hours ago, MatiRod said:

The answer is ageism and sexism in the music industry. Women are judged more harshly for the way they look and the powers that be don't want to invest in women who are considered "too old". Cher was 53 when 'Believe' came out, for Madonna that would've been 2011. Both still looked relatively young/snatched during that time, thanks in no small part to how hard they both worked at their fitness and appearance. But that's the reality in entertainment, everyone is image conscious and people are pathological about staying youthful. 

 

 

 

You need a lot of wheels to turn to get a huge smash hit. A lot of important people have to agree to funnel a lot of $ towards creating that smash. Especially back then when it was all about radio and TV exposure to create a hit. Rewind your mind to 2011. Ad syncs, Glee, TV talent competition performances, and radio airplay were the main way of creating a hit song. Similar in 1999. Clearly TPTB agreed "Believe" was worth the push and Cher could still appeal to a youthful audience, especially back then when you needed retail, radio, TV etc on your side. For "Believe" to go #1 the world over, the label would've needed to agree to manufacture and ship a lot of CD singles. Radio had to agree to play it. Big TV shows had to agree to have her perform on them. Magazines had to agree to write about the song.

 

Madonna also could've conceivably had a smash in 2011 with the right song. TPTB agreed she was still viable, so they gave her the Superbowl, she had a radio deal, American Idol video premiere, and "Give Me All Your Luvin'" released at the start of 2012 went Top 10 in the US and sold like 250k copies in its first ten days. There was some hype for her still. But the song was ass and it fell off the charts quickly. If she'd released a certified smash as a single, it could've been her last big hit.

 

But by the time Madonna had been in the industry for as long as Cher had been (34 years), it was 2019 and she looked noticeably older and clearly she was not given enough of a push to have a shot at a legit hit song. Look at the level of promo compared to the MDNA era. She had to share that couch on Graham Norton instead of getting it all to herself. Interscope probably didn't even bother trying for a radio deal. No big syncs for the singles (remember that Motorola ad for "Hung Up"? No such thing for Madame X).

God this comment is so refreshing! Something thought through, not just rage bait, not delusional, actual facts and figures.

 

So rare on ATRL. Thank you!