Worst mainstream album titles?

[Princess Zelda 720]

16 hours ago, CheapGin said:

This thread has every pop album title from the last 10 years 

What is your point 

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

17 hours ago, Gagz said:

It's not tongue in cheek at all. She's very clear in what she means.

The term is inherently tongue in cheek? She's pointing out double standards between men and women when it comes to sex. I believe she loves the title, but that doesn't hangs the fact that the name is inherently a dig.

[YeehawKylie 7,817]

19 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

It sounds ridiculous and too raunchy. I know I wouldn't want to buy such a title in a shop or tell somebody that was my favourite album. It would make people think you listened to lesbian p0rn in music from. And can you imagine if a really naive person asked you what it meant? I don't know how her record label let her name the album such a thing (and allowed her to do that cover either). A non-offensive title and cover is marketing 101.

It's funny that you mention the cover, as it is heavily inspired by Madonna's 'Like a Prayer' album cover, which hit 4x-Platinum in the United States alone during a period where sex was not as openly discussed as it is today. In regards to title, lets just stick with Madonna and look at her 1992 album Erotica, which also sounds "ridiculous and raunchy". It sold just fine, again in a less sex-conscious time, and didn't become the taboo you seem to suggest sexualizing an album title would do...

I don't think it's quite the marketing nightmare it's being made out to be. As we've discussed in previous posts back-and-forth, a major marketing campaign using the album title has not been restricted due to the name and on late-night talk show performances the host readily uses the album name when introducing her. Purchasing music these days is very easy to do alone and in secret, so I just don't see it heavily impacting sales. If someone wants the album they'll probably buy it and if they're insecure about the name, they can go to self-checkout, download on iTunes, or order offline. Lots of avenues to avoid people seeing what you buy these days...

I think the only downside of the title is that it is a bit cheesy and if she was going to have a title track, I believe there were better to choose from (though the title track is probably my 4th fave off the album). So, I'd agree that it's not my favorite album title, but when I first heard it I honestly didn't have an opinion one way or another. AKA it didn't phase me. I didn't realize how hated it was until I got on this site and read. Haha.

[Ophelia 3,704]

On 5.11.2016 at 0:37 AM, Maleficent said:

Even though it's not the definition, emancipation gives me the image of something going through a meat-grinder. 

I imagine constipation tbh 

[StrawberryBlond 13,394]

5 hours ago, koonsisme said:

My question wasn't whether marketability matters. It is why you're dictating that people who find a title boring cannot put those albums on this list. Is finding a title unmemorable any different than marketability? I was pointing out a double standard you created. That was the point and I'm honestly shocked it went over your head. You must've ducked....cause it  should've hit you right in the face.

And considering the album is moving the same weekly numbers as QOTC...it doesn't seem to be bothering most people.

I don't think it's a double standard. I just think that boring is different from bad. I know what you're trying to say, it's just that it doesn't seem to be fulfilling the question I asked. Maybe some people do put boring and bad on the same level, but I think there's a difference. You can still sell boring but it's very hard to sell bad.

Maybe it will start picking up, but the only people I see talking about this album is GGD.

4 hours ago, koonsisme said:

It's funny that you mention the cover, as it is heavily inspired by Madonna's 'Like a Prayer' album cover, which hit 4x-Platinum in the United States alone during a period where sex was not as openly discussed as it is today. In regards to title, lets just stick with Madonna and look at her 1992 album Erotica, which also sounds "ridiculous and raunchy". It sold just fine, again in a less sex-conscious time, and didn't become the taboo you seem to suggest sexualizing an album title would do...

I don't think it's quite the marketing nightmare it's being made out to be. As we've discussed in previous posts back-and-forth, a major marketing campaign using the album title has not been restricted due to the name and on late-night talk show performances the host readily uses the album name when introducing her. Purchasing music these days is very easy to do alone and in secret, so I just don't see it heavily impacting sales. If someone wants the album they'll probably buy it and if they're insecure about the name, they can go to self-checkout, download on iTunes, or order offline. Lots of avenues to avoid people seeing what you buy these days...

I think the only downside of the title is that it is a bit cheesy and if she was going to have a title track, I believe there were better to choose from (though the title track is probably my 4th fave off the album). So, I'd agree that it's not my favorite album title, but when I first heard it I honestly didn't have an opinion one way or another. AKA it didn't phase me. I didn't realize how hated it was until I got on this site and read. Haha.

But Madonna's isn't as raunchy. Showing the lower half of you is one thing. Showing the lower half accompanied by a pull down of the waistband and trailing fingers above it is quite another. And Erotica was raunchy but it wasn't a ridiculous word nor was the cover art explicit. Yes, it sold well, but for 1992, such sales were a flop for someone as big as Madonna and it was her lowest selling album at the time and is still one of her lowest sellers to date. And there were serious taboos about it back then, especially with her Sex book accompanying it and her other forays into p0rn at the time.

Yes, you can sure buy a lot of things in secret now but it's the want to do these things when such a title and cover art is putting you off that's the problem. A lot of people shut off when something to do with a first impression seems a bit off. AP likely turned off a lot of people because they didn't know what it meant and weren't interested in finding out. Most people nowadays just abandon that which they don't understand/appreciate immediately. And I'm sorry but I just see a title like this and find it too silly to take seriously. Before actually listening to it, I thought it referred to female pubic hair (like the term 'lady garden') until I heard the title track and I thought: "Oh, that kind of lady wood...in a way, that's even worse." I think it's such a juvenile way to describe female sexual feelings. But I'm an album reviewer, so I was obliged to listen to it. But if I was a casual music listener, I probably wouldn't. Just letting you know how non-fans are viewing it. As a fan, you're obviously not phased as much by stuff like this but it turns the rest of us off.

[Zombie 1,218]

On 4/11/2016 at 5:10 PM, Brodinsky said:

Joanne

Britney Jean

MDNA

4

Thank You & Title (her basicness is infinite)

Lotus

i really like MDNA as a title D: i think is super kewl