Talk:I Love L.A.

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

Nondescript[edit]

Another aspect of "I Love L.A." - the streets named in the song not only span L.A.'s ethnic and class lines, but are also widely regarded as being nondescript and uninteresting. The joke was probably lost on non-locals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.53.179 (talkcontribs) 17:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do NOT interpret the lyrics you supercilious pretentious sophomorons. Don't you realise that 98% of the human population is smarter than you and didn't enjoy the "advantages" of growing up in your window-licker culture?

Chart position[edit]

Anybody know what chart position it reached in the U.S.? It didn't merit a mention on the All Music Guide, but it seems like it must have charted somewhere based on the radio play alone. --GentlemanGhost 02:20, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure about "everywhere," but for the Billboard Hot 100 at the time the song was released, radio play alone couldn't make a song chart. Also, I believe I've read that the song didn't chart; it just got a lot of airplay over the decades in L.A. and in L.A.-based productions (movies, TV, etc.), so many people got the impression that it did. I don't have a source for that, but I've never seen one to the contrary. On a similar note, I don't think that "You've Got a Friend in Me" charted; once again, a song "everyone knows" didn't chart (or so it would appear). Calbaer 05:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! It crossed my mind when VH1 was replaying their "One Hit Wonder" series. It didn't seem possible that "Short People" charted, but "I Love L.A." didn't. But it's beginning to look like that's the case. Good catch on the Billboard chart, I forgot that radio play was not a factor in those days. --GentlemanGhost 11:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree that "I Love L.A." is a celebratory song[edit]

Various Mayors of L.A. will agree that, "I Love L.A." is a celebratory song, but I'm not sure that others do. As noted above, the streets mentioned in the song are some of the least notable and nondescript ones available.

  • Wilshire Blvd spans much the same territory as Santa Monica Blvd and has a significantly higher prestige to those who live or work the corridors the two streets span.
  • Similarly, Ventura Blvd has more cachet than Victory Blvd.
  • Likewise, 3rd Street or Beverly Blvd are of greater interest to Angelinos than 6th street.

Randy Newman is well known for contrary lyrics:

Finally, a mini-biography at answers.com suggests that, "I Love L.A. [is] a parody of shallow yuppie culture that was misinterpreted and became an anthem for '80s greed."

Consequently, I think the adjective, "celebratory" should be removed, unless someone can offer supporting evidence from the composer. 76.201.140.181 (talk) 06:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think either "celebratory" should be removed, or the sentence "notwithstanding the song's primary message" should be removed. They absolutely cannot both be true. I made an edit yesterday that I think resolved the issue perfectly, but it was reverted. Rather than start a battle, I'll say it here. Remove "celebratory" and leave the sentence without an adjective in its place. Change the later paragraph to "Notwithstanding the arguably satiric message of the song." It's clean, readable, acknowledges the minor controversy over Newman's sincerity, and eliminates the grating contradiction currently on this page.12.54.84.193 (talk) 17:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaand it looks like I confused a browser cache issue with a revert. Sorry!12.54.84.193 (talk) 17:01, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rilo Kiley's I Love L.A.[edit]

Los Angeles Indie band Rilo Kiley has a different song entitled "I Love L. A." It is not on any album but was performed live several times in 2007. Lyrics may be found here (commercial site): http://www.actionext.com/names_r/rilo_kiley_lyrics/i_love_la.html. While not as famous as Randy Newman's song, perhaps a disambiguation is appropriate. Winstoncharlton (talk) 22:48, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]