The music business is rougher than the movie business. In film you get noticed in a small role, even in a movie that bombs. But in records you better have that hit or else it's 'See you later.'
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There just is exponentially more money in the movie business than in the music business. As a result there are more people involved in the creative process.
If there is a good musical reason, I think it might draw more attention and sell, though it is not guaranteed. To make a record without a musical reason, you have to either be a pop star who sells automatically or just be lucky.
All movies, when they're about the music business, tend to have a bit of a wide latitude in terms of how things really were.
It's more important for me to have a good record with good music and be part of a movie that's good and where the music is used in a really great way. That's the important thing. The other stuff you want to say about it, I don't care.
It is immensely enjoyable to work for an album because there's a lot more creative freedom. In films sometimes, all that the makers care about is making the music commercially appealing.
You know, the record business is much different than being artist on stage.
The music's job is to get the audience so involved that they forget how the movie turns out.
Recording a song for a film doesn't take much time; it's hardly an hour's job, but concerts are constant, and so is travelling, so I've to take time out to work on my albums because I'm passionate about creating my own music. When you love something dearly, you set your priorities accordingly.
Usually music is used to hide a film's problems.
Recorded music is more a marketing tool than a revenue source.
No opposing quotes found.