Jump to content

Talk:Addicted to Love (song)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

B-Side

[edit]

The B-Side on the American 45" single with the video photo sleeve has the B-side 'Let's Fall In Love To Night'.

Weird Al Yankovic Parody

[edit]

I made a change to reflect the 2 different ways that Weird Al parodied this song. In the video for UHF, he did a parody of the style of the video. He later did a parody of the song itself called "Addicted To Spuds" (There was no video made for this song). 72.161.165.250 22:07, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SNL

[edit]

There was a Saturday Night Live sketch parodying the video (about how the black-clad women are like members of a rigidly conformist cult, but one of them actually wants to be an individual); I think Palmer himself might have been involved... AnonMoos 12:58, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 07:25, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also parodied in "What the Bleep"

[edit]

I don't know if the article needs a reference to EVERY parody, but the original sound recording is used in the movie What the Bleep Do We Know? with these animated "cell" beings dancing and playing guitars just like the women in the original video. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 170.215.105.143 (talk) 15:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Video: Palmer was not filmed with the backing band - source needed

[edit]

I can find no reliable source stating that Robert Palmer was filmed separately from his “backing band”. If you watch the video you can clearly see shadows from Palmer and his microphone stand on the ladies behind. Also technology in 1985 was not able to merge two separately filmed segments without seeing the slightest glitch. Plus the fact that this was never revealed until a few year ago makes me believe this is actually an Urban legend . I would like to see a source for this and if none are found this part will be removed. Bigar 16:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the reference; please add again if a source is found. Bigar 11:38, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Palmer himself stated in an interview shortly before his death that he never met the girls from the video.88.104.231.6 (talk) 12:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't mean anything... he needn't have met them to have been filmed at the same time. They could have been on set when he came on to do the lip-sync, or vice-versa. This also could have been a bit of hyperbole, in reaction to people thinking they were all his girlfriends. This was actually suggested in the video for the album's title track, and he was obviously filmed at the same time as the two models in that video. Whether they were two of the same ones from the "Addicted..." video is debatable, but it seems likely. MaxVolume (talk) 19:54, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Addicted To Love '97

[edit]

Why is there no mention of the re-recording of this song for "The Very Best of Robert Palmer"? I don't know if the entire track was re-recorded or just the vocals, but I have what appears to be the new version on a compilation called "PURE '80s - #1s" (although they don't point out that it's the 1997 version, and even list the production year as 1985). If anyone has specifics on the newer version, please add it to the article. MaxVolume (talk) 20:12, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable sentence...

[edit]

"Palmer met Taylor when they were both members of supergroup The Power Station."

They didn't meet until they were in a band together? That doesn't seem right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.35.135.136 (talk) 05:13, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

photo doesn't belong

[edit]

Jeez, get the joke, people. The photographer's description was a joke... "premonition" and "eminent" make it quite clear that the photo was taken BEFORE the song was released. In fact, since it was a "bicentennial performance", the photo was taken TEN YEARS before Addicted To Love, so he was clearly NOT performing that song. Did anyone notice "bicentennial" or did someone actually think our country was established in 1786? Perhaps someone thought it was the Roxy or Palmer himself that turned 200 years old that day, but if so, I assure you that neither is the case. Could someone please remove the photo... the only link between it and the song this article is about is a photographer's joke that some clueless editor didn't get. Puh-leeze. MaxVolume (talk) 22:16, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Return Of Bruno Parody

[edit]

I added the Return Of Bruno entry to the parodies section. I'm sure it could be worded/described better but I think it's a valid entry.

The only citation that I can list is at about 25.10 of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiqUGtzGSws — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.110.189.206 (talk) 03:42, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Four minutes v. six minutes

[edit]

>The most commonly heard version runs about four minutes, but the album version runs a little over six minutes.

Is the four minute version the one that was played on the radio? And if so, maybe this could be rewritten: "The version released for commercial radio play is about four minutes long; the album version runs a little over six minutes."

Also, doesn't anyone here know the exact times for these? I have the version that was released by Island Records on "The Island Story (Disc 1)" and it is 3.58 mins. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 04:04, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Addicted to Love (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Addicted to Love (song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]