Advanced Search Beta »
Basic Search Fields
The Grammy Awards: Season 48
User Score
5.2 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 9 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 9
  2. Mixed: 3 out of 9
  3. Negative: 3 out of 9

Review this tv show

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

view
per page
  1. Martin
    Feb 10, 2006
    10
    AWESOME Kelly is the best
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  2. GaborA
    Feb 11, 2006
    1
    The Grammy's now more than ever are a flat out embarrasment. If I was a popular musician with talent(theoretical mind you) I would refuse a reward from this pathetic collection of awards.When 90 percent of nominees cant name a note you know we're no longer award artist with talent but fads and trend entertainers.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  3. grammy
    Feb 11, 2006
    6
    pros: the performances cons: mariah carey wasnt shown once getting an award, award selection was not that great
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  4. MikeR
    Feb 14, 2006
    5
    First, as usual the awards were abysmal. I'm sorry, Mariah Carey is terrible and U2's latest was uninspired, arguably their worst. Having said that, the show was okay, but the harder they tried, they bigger they flopped. Paul McCartney's set was surprisingly good, especially for "Helter Skelter," but Linkin Park doesn't deserve to share the same stage as Jay-Z or Paul, and "Yesterday" was the WORST possible choice for a hip-hop mash-up. Then there's Sly's tribute - except for John Legend and maybe Perry's guitar work, most of those artists butchered Sly's music, and when Sly came out, he was terrible. Couldn't hear him half the time, barely played anything worthy, and instead of the great return it was hyped to be, it was a mere oddity. The special fx with Gorillaz and Madonna walking around them was cool, but that was a fleeting moment since Gorillaz virtually disappeared ten seconds into Madonna's performance. Springsteen was good, Kanye West was very entertaining, intentionally and unintentionally so (why does he care about winning so much? The Grammy Award is a joke.) Coldplay was mediocre. U2 was mediocre, but at least Mary J. Blige blew the roof off the place. Clarkson and Carey did the usual histrionic goop that the Grammys kiss up too. Could've been much worse, could've been a lot better.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  5. AndyH
    Feb 15, 2006
    10
    I enjoyed the show. The highlight for me was Christina Aguilera's performance with Herbie Hancock. This girl just keeps getting better. Kelly Clarkson was also on top form, as was Bruce Springstein. Macca was a big surprise, he actually put on a good show for once. But Joss Stone was completely wasted on the botched Sly tribute. Still, all in all, a superb show.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
prev next
Page:
  • 1

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
56 out of 100

Mixed or average reviews - based on 4 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 4
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 4
  3. Negative: 1 out of 4
  1. Boston Globe
    Reviewed by: Matthew Gilbert
    30
    The show strained to create oh-so-legendary moments. Alas, most of the efforts were as unsteady as Chris Martin's voice.
    Read full review
  2. The Hollywood Reporter
    Reviewed by: Barry Garron
    60
    The sameness of the format detracted from the excitement inherent in any awards broadcast.
    Read full review
  3. Los Angeles Times
    Reviewed by: Robert Lloyd
    70
    It was, on the whole, a very good show that emphasized performances.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »