IMDb > The 47th Annual Grammy Awards (2005) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
The 47th Annual Grammy Awards (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 4 reviews in total 

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:

The most entertaining Grammies in years!

Author: lil_alex_8 from Canada
14 February 2005

Wow! That's all i could say after watching the 3 and a half hour long Grammy awards on Feb. 13, 2005. The past few years were somewhat disappointing because the only entertaining part had been the opening act. Not this year, everything was top notch. And there were so many great performances, one after another! The only disappointing one was U2 because the song they sang was just to slow and did not fit well with the fast paced event! Other than that...AMAZING! I couldn't believe how many awards were presented compared to performances. It seemed like one big concert event. And the host Queen Latifah was not disappointing either because she didn't show up to much on stage like many hosts do and try to be funny when they really are not. She even performed her own number! Wow!

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

A Surprisingly Energetic Night

7/10
Author: XisLove03 (jrr4film@gmail.com) from United States
17 February 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The opening number definitely set the tone as the Black Eyed Peas, Gwen Stefani and Eve, Los Lonely Boys, Maroon 5 and Franz Ferdinand all performed. It culminated with all 4 (Gwen and Eve were not to be seen) performing their songs all at the same time.

Queen Latifah hosted, but she was just a transitionary tool as much was to be desired with her scripted material. So what owned the night was the performances, the production numbers and the few surprises along the way. Here are a few high notes and some other observations:

+ The 1st Ray Charles Tribute: Jamie Foxx, Alicia Keys, and Quincy Jones put on an emotional and powerful performance, which seemed to mix the classic "Georgia" with another song I am not familiar with. Favorite part: "Oh...Alicia!" Only minus: it was only 2 minutes or so long. +Prince beating Usher. Serves him right. Heck I like Usher's songs, but he has gotten way too arrogant. +Usher's performance...yes, he's arrogant and he doesn't have the best voice, but those dance moves with James Brown kept the energy up. Favorite part: the Trampoline. +Kanye West's performance...ambitious and well-conceived. +John Mayer's wins...2 for 2 and Song of the Year! Wow... -J LO and Marc Anthony...supposedly there was hype behind this performance, but I couldn't tell. -The Southern Rock tribute which followed...I don't know, but a friend of mine was disgusted by the fact that neither Freebird nor Sweet Home Alabama featured the solos which they are famous for. -----(yes 5 minuses) the Tsunami Relief performance...all for a good cause, but it was a huge disaster. None of them came out on the good end of the singing stick.

Despite the nice surprises, the Grammys ended up playing conservative in the end. It would have been nice to see Kanye West or the other nominees for Record and Album of the year to win, but when a musical legend like Ray Charles dies, it's hard to ignore the temptation to honor his departing gift to the industry.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

What we didn't need from the 47th Grammy's.

Author: Spider-Lou from Bristol, CT
23 February 2005

I got stuck watching this year's awards show on my down time at work. I must say that I liked the emphasis on performances over the awards. Too bad the performances weren't all that great.

The opening segment didn't need to have all of those guys perform at once. Was it because we'll never see them again? We didn't need to have Gretchen Wilson covered up more than a nun in winter and butcher "Sweet Home Alabama" with Lynrd Skynrd. We didn't need to hear a horribly voiced JLo duet with her infinitely more talented husband Marc Anthony. We didn't need to hear Alicia Keys impress us with her piano skills...again, and Jamie Foxx, while quite talented, should dial it back a bit.

We didn't need to hear Queen Latifa sing. There are likely better, yet starving singers out there who probably scratched their heads watching that. We didn't need the sappy ballad from U2, who could have done "All Because of You", since it hadn't been milked in a commercial. We didn't need to see Kanye West "murdered" during his act, but at least his acceptance speech was cool.

Green Day woke everyone up from all this with their hyper performance "American Idiot," the best rock performance on the Grammy's since Metallica performed "One." Oh, to long for those days again.

The Grammy's have always been a sham, and they may never get their act together when it comes to grouping the nominees and awarding those who truly deserve it. This year was no real exception.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

The show was 50/50

6/10
Author: bookertkilla from United Kingdom
15 March 2005

This is a place were all celebrities collide.Artists like Kanye West,Quentin Tarantino, Usher, Joss Stone and Green Day were all there. Best Performances were: 1.Kanye West - Jesus Walks performance was the performance of the night. 2.Alicia Keys and Jamie Foxx - Tribute to Ray Charlse.They sang 'Georgia' beautifully. 3.Alicia Keys - She sang her songs on the piano soulfully. 4.Usher and James Brown - The Godfather and Godson of soul were great. 5.U2 -Their song 'Vertigo' proved U2 are still a good rock band. 6.Joss Stone also gave a tribute to Led Zeppelin and she did it good. 7.Green Day - American Idiot was an average performance.

The rest of the performances were cheesy and horrible.

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Ratings Awards Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history