|
Post by MrsOldManBalls on Sept 17, 2014 7:40:52 GMT -4
I think he started to believe the hype about how great he was, got a little too big for his britches, and karma had to do something about it.
|
|
|
Post by americanchai on Sept 17, 2014 8:45:04 GMT -4
It seems like when he made the move from "lite pop" to "whatever will sell millions of records and get my name all over the place and ruin my marriage" he sold whatever soul he had to the devil. I feel sorry for his kid - the most embarrassing dad this side of David Hasselhoff.
|
|
|
Post by deeconsistent on Sept 17, 2014 9:39:56 GMT -4
I'm sorry for him if he has a substance abuse issue, but he can get help for that, and I hope he does if necessary. This is another reason why it seems so obvious that he's lying to protect their royalties. He said he was high out of his mind during all of the interviews he gave while promoting that song, including his sit down with Oprah. Now, I don't doubt that he may use/have used drugs (and Paula always seems high). But he said the the Oprah interview was one of his most incoherent days, but he clearly is not so high that he can't be held responsible for what he's saying. Even if he were to claim that he was just a high functioning addict (which is not what this looks like to me), if these videos are his baseline, then his drug use shouldn't have prevented him from contributing during the creative process.
|
|
roseland
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,039
Mar 7, 2005 17:11:37 GMT -4
|
Post by roseland on Sept 17, 2014 13:57:46 GMT -4
If the song is ruled to be a rip-off of Marvin Gaye's song, nothing is going to protect the royalties. Marvin Gaye's estate will get what's comming to them regardless of who wrote the song and he'll lose whatever monies he would have had due to being credited as a songwriter. What he did was throw Pharrell under the bus and make him legally responsible for an plagiarism charge that might be handed down.
|
|
|
Post by deeconsistent on Sept 17, 2014 14:20:38 GMT -4
What he did was throw Pharrell under the bus and make him legally responsible for an plagiarism charge that might be handed down. I don't think he did. Robin claimed that Marvin Gaye inspired the song in countless interviews. Pharell NEVER said Marvin Gaye's music inspired the song. Robin is trying to re-write history by claiming he couldn't know if Marvin Gaye inspired the song because he was incapable of having written it. All of his revelations about drug use were in response to questions the defense asked him in regards to his statements about how Marvin Gaye had inspired the song. He and Pharell are co-plaintiffs. There would be nothing to be gained from "throwing him under the bus". They'd both still be on the hook for any settlement if the judgement is not in their favor. A plagiarism charge isn't going to be handed down. It's a civil trial not a criminal trial.
|
|
roseland
Sloane Ranger
Posts: 2,039
Mar 7, 2005 17:11:37 GMT -4
|
Post by roseland on Sept 18, 2014 13:50:12 GMT -4
I was speaking of public opinion. I apologize if that wasn't clear.
|
|
|
Post by famvir on Sept 18, 2014 14:00:19 GMT -4
In public opinion at this time, after Happy and Get Lucky, I think we could see Pharell light puppies on fire and he would still get a nice guy pass. There is no bus for Thicke to throw him under. This is why keeping your nose clean is a good PR measure. The stink just doesn't wash off, and Thicke has terminal stink.
|
|
|
Post by discoprincess on Sept 18, 2014 15:42:07 GMT -4
narm, I love the (new?) term "douchelord".
|
|
|
Post by deeconsistent on Sept 18, 2014 16:53:42 GMT -4
I was speaking of public opinion. I apologize if that wasn't clear. Ok. Got it now. But I also forgot to mention that Pharell also testified that Robin didnt have any part in writing the song either. When the Gayes' lawyers tried to get Pharell to admit that the music was what made the song such a hit, Pharell denied that and said tha it was because Robin was white and white musicians don't get a chance to do traditionally black music. It is just completely obvious what they are doing.
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Sept 18, 2014 18:38:07 GMT -4
Doesn't he make himself vulnerable in other ways with this admission? Putting aside the whole "Blurred Lines" situation-why would Robin put out there that he was basically high for most of an entire year? Isn't he going through divorce proceedings? Did he and Paula even settle on custody of their son? Either way, not cute. Heh. I don't think Paula is going to want to get into a court battle over which one of them is too high to have custody of their son. No matter how much Vicodin and alcohol he took, I think she'd still lose.
|
|