Is it too late to re-release Do What You Want (Gaga's version)

[Cherry Blues 396]

1 hour ago, JohnPokerface said:

There is a special place in hell for the person that suggested adding R Kelly on it 

DJ White Shadow suggested it. 

[SleepingSun 1,431]

[gagzus 23,409]

He legally has credits on any version of the song so even if she did it again he’d still make money off it.

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,915]

4 minutes ago, gagzus said:

He legally has credits on any version of the song so even if she did it again he’d still make money off it.

He wouldn’t tho. His royalties now go to his victims, so the only conflict here is the optics of rehashing the discourse surrounding the song.

[nATAH 57,263]

re record it with bruno mars with anti rkelly pr

easy

[DESTROY UR DISEASE 20,345]

6 minutes ago, nATAH said:

re record it with bruno mars

[VelvetVenus 182]

she’ll never touch this song again

r kelly’s version is fantastic, but solo version is great too

she should’ve replaced to the solo version as soon as she deleted the featured one

now it is too late and will draw attention to it

[Chromanne 2,628]

4 hours ago, nATAH said:

re record it with bruno mars with anti rkelly pr

easy

Do What You Want With A Smile 

[RAMROD 117,240]

Yes. Cos the song already attached to that guy too. It is the known main version. If she re-release it, there will be conversations about that old tired shxt again. It's better for her to distance herself from it indefinitely 

[HotLikeMexico 6,628]

It’s too late sadly. Such a shame too because it’s probably one of her best songs and it’s forever ruined because of a poor choice for a collaborator. 

[RochesterJoannster 4,049]

Imagine how horrible a situation like this must be for an artist where their only hit is with R Kelly. 
 

Not a problem for Gaga. Although DWUW was a decent hit, it was small enough compared to her hits before and after that it doesn’t even make a gap to delete it. It just makes it fit the narrative that the three “pink” albums all have one hit song.

[Controversiaga 16,299]

Absolutely too late.

R Kelly or not, there is no redeeming a song with the lyrics “do what u want with my body, do what you want, don’t stop, let’s party” 

[Ladle Ghoulash 53,915]

18 minutes ago, Controversiaga said:

R Kelly or not, there is no redeeming a song with the lyrics “do what u want with my body, do what you want, don’t stop, let’s party” 

I mean, the discomfort of the lyrics is literally the point lol. It’s a commentary on the way the media objectifies celebs.

[Helxig 45,424]

Well obviously it is

1. That's a song from 13 years ago when she was in a completely different place in life. A place she clearly doesn't want to revisit and brings her dark memories

2. Why would she ever release something that, with a quick Google, search ties her to R Kelly? Why would she open herself back up to that criticism and all the headlines that would come along with it?

3. The song is good but it's not SO good that it needs to be released

 

It's best that song just stays in the past. All the darkness and controversy do not need to be unburied and brought to the forefront

[Helxig 45,424]

5 hours ago, Controversiaga said:

Absolutely too late.

R Kelly or not, there is no redeeming a song with the lyrics “do what u want with my body, do what you want, don’t stop, let’s party” 

Aside from wishing R Kelly was NEVER involved, I also wish she added "world" in there throughout the song too. I get that she wanted the double entendre, but the political statement about how celebrities are treated by the public only makes sense at the very end when she says "do what you want with me, what you want with my body world". She needed that wordplay to payoff at the start, and throughout the song, so it could read right. I think she was pushing the controversial aspect of it too much and ended up decentring the actual meaning of the song, which kind cheapened it and did a disservice to a great song with an important message

Edited yesterday at 09:42 AM by Helxig