me1981

It is film grain. If you scrub that grain away you lose detail and actors faces become waxy and the environment becomes blocky and you see these patches of crushed blacks and poor colour reproduction. Yes film stock has improved and is less grainy than it used to be. It also depends on the type of film you use. 16mm is very grainy and most likely was what they used for JML. 35mm is less grainy and is most likely what she used for the majority of her music videos. 70mm pretty much has no grain at all, but is expensive and I doubt she shot any of her music videos on that format.

Yeah I get the feeling Oh Father and Bad Girl were matted for effect. If not, then yes both would be great in wide format. Though my guess would be anything pre 1993 is doubtful

Just to clear something up, just because a movie was shot on film, doesn't mean it was automatically widescreen or 16x9 or some other larger format like Panavision. Yes there is framing that occurs, so technically there would be more info on top and to the sides, but I don't believe any of her music videos were shot in the 80's or early 90's in anamorphic or with 16x9 protection, meaning you frame for both 4x3 and 16x9 (many 90's sitcoms did this, which is why Friends is available this way, but it was not technically shot this way, which is why the original HD masters had mistakes in them) In fact I doubt seriously they ever did this as the end result had to be for 4x3 screening and unlike sitcoms which go into syndication and have the possibility of being seen decades after production, no one would have forseen the social media age where 80's music videos were still being played with the same regularity. It really wasn't until 1993 that the US adopted practices for HD broadcasts, that was when HD tv was originally planned for roll out but ended up being scrapped for almost 10 years. Again many shows filmed with the future in mind, many did not. Yes if they went back to the camera negative it would need to be re-edited, but that just means following the original notes left by the editor at the time. Yes it would be expensive, which is why I doubt they will ever do it. Warner and M know where they are, I don't think they see the value in it.

I don't think she has really been interested in making music since American Life tanked Confessions was to try and get back her commercial success, it mostly worked everywhere but the US, so she did Hard Candy, a more R&B flavoured album with relatively hot US producers and that didn't get her commercial US success back either. Radio was done with her and it hurt her in a big way. The next few years was more a result of her Live Nation deal, which she signed in the midst of a marriage that was falling apart. Working herself into the ground was probably an attractive prospect at that point, but I am certain she regretted it. Then she brought Orbit back for MDNA, but I am convinced she had mostly given up and was nowhere near as involved in the making of that album as previous albums. She barely wanted to promote the album, spent more time on other projects and the tour and generally had a "i'm over it" vibe during the few interviews that we got. I get the feeling with Rebel Heart she went into it wanting to do good work, but Diplo was all wrong for her and she had lost her mojo, you can see it in some of the interviews where she laments how making music has changed and how she had to chase after him to get the album completed. I do think she had high hopes and big plans, but it all went pear shaped during the promo. I have no doubt if she hadn't left the US and been inspired by the music scene overseas, Madam X would have never happened, she pretty much said this at the time. I'd be shocked if we got much new music in the future. I think like Madam X, she will need to be inspired to write and record, I honestly don't see it happening.

Not sure if they did more, though I remember someone uploading a couple of music videos here with Telegenics in the title. I somewhat skipped over them. Maybe do a search with Telegenics and it might come up. It may have been Express Yourself, but no idea if that was official. I guess maybe it was. Honestly I found this info by accident while I was searching for other stuff.

For the record here is the broadcast from Night Tracks Jan 1988. It was only listed once in Night Tracks rotation list, so I am unsure if it got much airplay

From Jan 1988 - Just found this from Billboard. Mega Mix video was official and was a joint project between WB and Telegenics. The 11 min version may have been played in clubs but a shorter 7min version that used Where's the Party? aired on Night Tracks the first week of Jan 1988. Not sure if MTV or others played it as it never appeared on their rotation lists printed in Billboard.

And the last part. Sorry for breaking it up, but I could only upload a small file each time

Here are the pictures for the above article from The Tennessean July 01, 1985

That picture of Madonna jogging is from June 30, 1985. The day Sean Penn threw a brick at two Brit Photo Journalists who swore they were not stalking Madonna and definitely did not take any pictures of her on her morning run. They sued for damages, but the lawsuit went quiet after a few months. From The Tennessean July 01, 1985

Chris Finch (the boy on tour) pops up on Madonna socials often when tagged in photos and leaves a comment here and there.

I don't agree it is only fans out there giving poor reviews. You do realise part of the M.O of those other fanbases is to give poor reviews to artists they hate and see as a threat. In terms of building her up, sorry but you are talking to a mostly aging fanbase that isn't as drawn to social media and the things you have to do to support her that way. This is why M, for the longest time, had poor streaming figures compared to her status as a performer. I know there are negative people on this forum. I don't think they are responsible for all the things happening outside this forum. There are many factors that I think are getting conflated.

As much as there are people who bitch and moan about everything she does, there are also those that would eat up her shit if she took a big dump in their hand - and then ask for more. There are also those in the middle. The beyhive is fanatical and insane - say one bad word and they will murder you Little Monsters are just as bad and so are the Lambs. And I mean they are scary. These are not fanbases - they are cults. I am certain there are people who don't agree with everything their YASSS QUEEN does, difference is, unlike M fans, other fan bases are so unhealthy, if you say one bad or even level headed thing they percieve to be against their QUEEN, they will reduce you to dust. No fan base is perfect. I prefer to scroll past a few negative comments here, than feel like a hivemind cult member in other fan base forums.

I was just picking apart her 95 MTV Awards appearance like everyone is her 2021 appearance, it was nothing. All she said was "I guess this is the closest I will ever get to George Clooney" when he handed her an award. Honestly it was a bit of an awkward joke, but no big deal. Just like her 2021 appearance isn't this failure everyone seems to think it was

It's also time. I can tell you in the 90's I always watched through my fingers as she was considered cringe even back then. Now I look back and wonder what I was so worried about. The thing is M back then wasn't like everyone else, which was awkward and uncomfortable for me as a young man that wanted her to fit in. She was always being crucified all the time and especially between 93 - 97 she was seen as a pathetic has been. The truth is nothing has changed. Maybe she isn't that on fire 20-40 year old, but she isn't some sad pathetic shell of a human either. Nothing. NOTHING anyone says about her appearances today wasn't being said back in the 90's, and much worse. She has always had the same comments I see here in this forum.

1997 - Since when has M cared about being nominated for an award, how desperate is she for acceptance? Why should she be nervous? She's Madonna, she had rehearsal time and she shouldn't care so much. She should own the room. Not the Madonna I remember, she wouldn't have cared so much but she has changed. What emotions, she wasn't nominated, she should have been fine. That wasn't even her song. 1991 - She was trembling and many said her performance was lame/trashy back then, which shocked me. Not as many people were impressed as we think. She also messed up the words "A girl can get awfully awful in the spotlight" What does that mean? Awfully awful. Did she mean Awfully lonely? 1988 - She spent the 88 Tony's going on about the mic stand and seeming so out of place in a ridiculous flower dress that she looked awful in (see how easy that was) Honestly I can rip anything just like everyone has the 2021 MTV Awards. I watched it again. She was fine. She repeated herself as she wanted to be heard, just like she has done in other appearances. Normally she bellows to be heard. She had a slight jolt when she turned, but she walked in and off with confidence. So she was nervous, she is always nervous. If you can forgive her past nervousness I don't get why this is any different. If you can forgive past cringe moments of which there are plenty, then why is this so different. If you can forgive past times she looked terrible in an outfit then why not this time. This was not the sad pathetic moment people think it was. It just wasn't. I am not a M apologist nor a stan who can't be critical. I have had my moments, but this wasn't it.

I mean I could pull apart her 1995 MTV Awards appearance as well. 1. Who does she think she is Catherine Deneuve with that fake hair 2. Drooling over George Clooney, how embarrassing. Why does she do this, she can have any man. She is obviously desperate to stay relevant by even ackowledging him. 3. Stumbling over her words Um, Um...um I'd like to thank. Really? Where is her confidence 4. That dance, so cringe. Why does she try to be funny. Is she on drugs? So easy to rip her apart. I could do this for any appearance. Her 88 Tony awards or her nervous warbling at the 97 Oscars or 99 Grammy Awards.

Even her hair on the front of her debut album is short. It looks long, but is about the same length as the Corman pics and it was shot around May 1983

It was shot in London when she went for a promo visit in Feb 1983. Her hair is the same as in the Camden Palace gig.

I don't know about the bracelet but her hair was still pretty short when she was in London in mid to late Feb 1983. If this shot was around spring 83 than her hair wouldn't be that much longer. Here she is in Feb 83 and this looks pretty similar. In saying that the period between 82 - 83 is confusing in terms of chronology.

@Rebel I'm not sure any of these were 1982. Based on Cis Corman's assertion that she was the one who introduced or referred Madonna to her son in the first place. This was as a result of the audition Madonna did in early 1983, probably around Mar/Apr 83, which was roughly when the auditions for The Last Temptation of Christ were being held. Richard had just finished studying with Dick Avedon, the legendary fashion photographer and needed to put together a portfolio, and while Cis didn't think Madonna was right for the movie (which didn't end being made until 1987/88) she did think she would be good for her son's project. I did some more research and there doesn't seem to have been any auditions for the movie prior to 1983. So at best the earliest shots were most likely spring 83 then maybe Jun 17 and I think the ones in the studio were probably Sep 83. As M wore the braids in her hair around that time.

Pretty sure the 1983 date is most accurate. His mother Cis Corman referred him to M after M auditioned for Martin Scorsese's first attempt at putting together The Last Temptation of Christ, which was in early 1983. However I am certain some of the shots were done at other times. More so the ones in the studio, but I could be wrong

Does that mean the official Dick Tracy Soundtrack is a studio album? Since half those songs don't even appear in the film? Lol. I don't think it matters. I still include it as a studio album. Even though M's numbers from the film only appear on I'm Breathless and many tracks not in the film are on the official soundtrack, haha. Both are a hybrid but I'm Breathless is all Madonna and sounds like a studio album, so that's enough for me.

Oh if you are talking about an instrumental score, you are very wrong. Composers are generally hired after a film is completed and score the movie over a rough cut or often completed cut. it is the last thing to be added, not the first. John Williams was pissed at Dick Donner because he scored the movie when it was supposed to be 3 hrs but then Donner was forced to cut it down more and he lost much of Williams score. No one ever scores a movie before it is made. You can't score a film when it is simply a script, even if you have ideas and plans and plasn change, scenes get scrapped/merged/end up on the cutting room floor. You can map things but you shouldn't build a film around it or the score around an unmade film. Okay except Hans Zimmer and Chris Nolan

We don't know what the original script was and what was cut from the film, there may have been room for a song or two and that was what she was hoping for, a song over a montage or over a scene that got scrapped. Maybe Breathless was featured more and Madonna had hoped for a song playing during one of her scenes, or was hoping to convince Warren to use it somewhere. Just because he had it all planned out, doesn't mean she wasn't hopeful for use of her songs in the film. It does happen. During editing many times things change and it can result in needing a piece of music that you didn't think you needed in pre-production. Post-production can change many things, many films are often different from pre to post production for a variety of reasons. As much planning as occurs in films, there is also fluidity at times too. I agree Warren isn't really like that, but when has that stopped Madonna from trying to get what she wants. In other words I disagree that she lied. She may have been hopeful for things that were never going to happen, but I believe she believed she had a shot at getting a song or two in the film. Also who's to say that when she signed her deal, part of that was Warren agreeing that he would consider one or two of her songs over scenes, even if he had mapped those out with Sondheim already.