
She's coming to the Sprint Center on Oct. 30, a Tuesday. Tickets go on sale at 10 a.m. Monday, March 5, at the box office and via Axs.com and LiveNation.com.
We've searched our clips and can't find that she's ever been to town before. Does anyone here remember her playing KC?
No thanks
Posted by: onthemark | February 07, 2012 at 08:57 AM
Has she ever played in KC before like back when she first came out in the 80s? Just curious and trying to settle a bet.
Posted by: MJ L(M)adonna | February 07, 2012 at 09:03 AM
Didn't the Sprint Center just switch over to another in-house ticketing company? Does Live Nation have this gig due to Madonna's package deal with them? Inquiring minds would like to know.
Posted by: Darrell | February 07, 2012 at 09:17 AM
awesome!
Posted by: l hudd | February 07, 2012 at 09:32 AM
Should be fun anyway.
Posted by: Steve J | February 07, 2012 at 09:34 AM
No, she has never been here...
Posted by: Penny | February 07, 2012 at 09:39 AM
Will M.I.A flip me off?? If so, I'm in. Otherwise, I ain't payin' a fortune to see this overrated phony lip-sync her lame-ass, bargain-basement Disco tunes, while addressing us with her faux-British accent. But hey, knock yourselves out.....
Posted by: Da Woim | February 07, 2012 at 10:02 AM
YESSSSS
Saw her in Chicago back in '08. She sang live and danced for most of the show. An incredible spectacle is on the way to KC and I will most definitely be there.
Posted by: Matthew | February 07, 2012 at 10:06 AM
heh, spectacle.
Posted by: Mike A | February 07, 2012 at 11:08 AM
Do you realize how many shirtless gay men wearing firemen hats are dancing around their living rooms celebrating this news right now?
Posted by: J.G. | February 07, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Bilk everyone early in the year and reep the benefits of the interest. Way to go, Madonna.
Posted by: Bewlay | February 07, 2012 at 11:34 AM
No, I believe you all stand correct. MADONNA has never player our fair city before. Many have speculated she's simply TOO big to play here. I don't EVEN want to imagine HOW co$tly her tickets will be. Might get a bit light-headed.
Posted by: Bubba | February 07, 2012 at 02:15 PM
You know what this means don’t you?
Yep, Halloween is on a Wednesday this year!
Posted by: onthemark | February 07, 2012 at 03:25 PM
OnTheMark, I didn't think of that. October 30, huh? Believe that'll be the two year mark since ROGER WATERS bought his retrospect tour of 'The Wall' to the Sprint Center. Whew! Looks like a lot of people were right about the Sprint Center. ALL the big names will wish to play there.
Posted by: Bubba | February 07, 2012 at 03:53 PM
Bubba, you are correct. It was 10/30/10 when 'The Wall' was at Sprint Center. And what a show that was!
Posted by: onthemark | February 07, 2012 at 04:24 PM
By the time Spingsteen gets back here from his 2009 cancelled concert, no one is going to care.
Posted by: ABC | February 07, 2012 at 05:09 PM
I kinda want to go but man this is gonna cost a lot!
Posted by: Green | February 07, 2012 at 05:59 PM
Madonna has played here before. When they were in middle school, friends of mine had to choose between going to see Level 42 opening for Madonna at Kemper or going to see R.E.M. on the Green tour. And they picked Level 42. They still regret it to this day.
Posted by: -phil. | February 08, 2012 at 07:36 AM
phil, the Madonna/Level 42 tour didn't stop here, per Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who's_That_Girl_World_Tour#Tour_dates
But I know that the REM "Green" tour did stop at Kemper, I was there.
Posted by: Vandelay | February 08, 2012 at 07:44 AM
They must have forced their mom to take them to Chicago or Minneapolis then. Poor guys...
Posted by: -phil. | February 08, 2012 at 09:31 AM
I was also at that REM show back in '89. Robyn Hitchcock & The Egyptians opened the show. No, Madonna has never played here and I find it strange that she's choosing to do so now. She probably looks down on anything even closely resembling her own roots (working-class Michigan). I did read recently that she said that she is aware that the economy is not so great, but for her fans to scrape together the money to see her because she's "worth it." Wow....$375 bucks (or thereabouts) to see someone who is going to do very little singing live and will cover that fact up with a smoke and mirrors show filled with dancing and other glittering visual stimuli. Let's redefine "worth."
Personally, I blame her for the current Fame-Whore/Tabloid Fodder celebrity culture we are bombarded with today, via the likes of Britney Spears, Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, and her clone, Lady Gaga, for starters. For me, Madonna's constant need for attention throughout her career has never matched her talent (if such a thing exists). But when people started playing Madonna up as some kind of feminist icon, when she was never more that a pop star who defined style-over substance, I had to tune her out completely. Well, that and her ridiculous induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame. But hey, her show will likely sell out, she'll make a fortune, and her fans, God bless 'em, will now die happy.
Posted by: Geordan | February 08, 2012 at 11:14 AM
Hey Geordan. While I echo your sentiments exactly, I also realize the whole style over substance pop icon goes back long before Madonna and I hardly hold her responsible. She's just one of a long line of icons who used sex over talent to gain less than deserved notoriety. Think about it. Mae West? Marilyn Monroe? Even Nico for that matter (let's face it, she had no business playing with VU). None of these women were very talented at their craft now were they? But they became pretty famous nonetheless.
Unfortunately, it's always been more about style over substance. That's why Madonna is playing SC for $300 a pop and Chuck Prophet at Davey's for ten bucks.
Posted by: NEW | February 08, 2012 at 11:32 AM
Good post Geordan, hard to disagree. Madonna had the good fortune to come of age along with the advent of MTV and she certainly capitalized on it. I think of her as one of those 'no such thing as bad publicity' types, she grabbed that ball and ran with it.
I have no real interest in her music (although I thought 'Ray Of Light' was pretty catchy) but I have to give her props for her longevity. Not many women singer/entertainers who emerged as flavor of the month pop stars who are still out there shaking it in their 50's.
Posted by: onthemark | February 08, 2012 at 12:28 PM
I don't know, I kind of like Madonna although not near enough to buy a record or pay for one of her concerts.
I was on record during her Lucky Star days that she'd totally be a flash in the pan, but she proved me and countless others wrong and I sort of respect her for that. She also won me over as a very casual fan with some decent pop hits over the years. Again, not enough to go see her, but I'm not turning the dial when I hear "Live To Tell" either.
Posted by: pellboy | February 08, 2012 at 12:46 PM
I don't know. It's just that Madonna seems to have endured due to her constant self-promotion, more than anything else. I have nothing against ephemeral pop hits (Damn you, Foster The People, and your catchy song!), but I never really heard anything in Madonna's music to like, personally. To each his/her own. Perhaps I just couldn't get past the fact that it was more HER than her music that was off-putting to me. When Madonna arrived on the scene, Joan Jett was generally everything I was looking for in a female artist. She looked cool and she rocked. Madonna, for me, did not. Joan worked hard and toured her ass off. Madonna did not.
....Anyway, have you ever heard any of Nico's solo work, NEW? "The Marble Index" is mesmerizing (though not for everybody), and I liked her short-lived contributions to The Velvet Underground. But yeah, Madonna is just one in a long line of female stars that people will likely be discussing long after she's gone. Anyway, one female icon I'd like to see hit KC this year is Patti Smith. She has an album coming out this year that probably won't get much fanfare, and if she tours, she won't be playing the Megadomes of the world, but put her on a stage with guitarist Lenny Kaye backing her and you'll surely see an example of substance-over-style....for about a tenth of what a Madonna ticket will cost you.
Posted by: Geordan | February 08, 2012 at 01:27 PM
$375 for a MADONNA ticket? Well, I did attend BRITNEY SPEARS in 2009 - got a ticket for $60 but that was upstairs. Believe that they had BRITNEY tix - DAY of show mind you left over at the door - floor for $125 and pit-like tickets for $500 each.
MADONNA'S asking price is what likely maybe kept the promoters [I'm 2nd guessing] from booking her in Kansas City prior to now. Promoters aren't STUPID! They don't want to loose their shirt. STONES are supposed to tour this year - them + U2 could likely sponge that kind of money from area concert goers. Bubba said it.
Posted by: Bubba | February 08, 2012 at 01:45 PM
Geez, Geordan. Don't even get me started on PSG. Simply the best band out of the 70s NY punk scene. Period.
Has she ever come through KC. I know she hasn't during my 10 years in the area.
Posted by: NEW | February 08, 2012 at 02:08 PM
Sorry, I got sidetracked by the mention of Joan Jett...
Posted by: onthemark | February 08, 2012 at 02:13 PM
Hmmmmmmm I cant decide who (whom)(which)(witch?) I would rather have give me a spanking or see in concert...... hmmmmmm...... decisions decisions incisions?
Ok, after much thought, I have psotualted that I would rather have Madonna give me a spanking and go see Joan Jett in concert.... unless of course I could have Joan give me a spanking and then see her in concert afterwards(or before) unless of course... no hold on a moment... hmmmmmm... maybe it depends on which one would rather give me a spanking.... then of course....
It is such a good good monkey, why do you insist on spanking it so much?
Posted by: Fabio | February 08, 2012 at 03:35 PM
We should never complain again about high ticket prices for a concert after seeing the prices for the 2012 All-Star Game!
Posted by: Steve J | February 09, 2012 at 04:28 AM
Wow, Fabio/DT.....that was just sad. Seek help. If not for us, do it for yourself. Seriously.
Posted by: Bayton Zwich | February 09, 2012 at 10:55 AM
I see tickets (I guess for resell) priced at $1000 on the Kauffman stadium. I wonder what face value is for them?
I know(think) Super Bowl tickets have been over $1500 face for a long time, it is that is mostly a tax deductable business expnense for a corporate schmooze fest.
If I had my choice I would rather see the MLB All-Star game any day than the Super Bowl, esp at Kaufmann, but a Thousand Dollars makes it "a 1%er event" not meant for the peasants, "KINGS ONLY" need apply.
hey Bayton, get a sense of humor, or get a spanking.
Posted by: Fabio | February 09, 2012 at 03:24 PM
Seriously.......Get help, Fabio. My sense of humor is just fine. It's just that nobody here finds you even remotely funny, DT. Never have.
Posted by: Bayton Zwich | February 10, 2012 at 08:33 AM
Never thought I would find myself defending DT, but I must say that I have laughed at some of his postings. Then again, I get a kick out of strange and bizarre stuff, so it could just be me...
Posted by: onthemark | February 10, 2012 at 11:22 AM
:)
btw-Many many studies have indicated that it is more normal to want to be spanked by Joan Jett, than not.....
Sooo if someone does not "get it"... then oh well, maybe whne they get older, or learn more about her.
OH JOANY!!!!! I want her to wear her spikey pants when she spanks me. She is the baddest ass woman in rock and roll.... she has been spanking crowds since she was 15.
Do you want her to touch you there?
YEAH!! OH YEAH!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XELpxApT8Kc
PPS
MAINLY....I WANT JOAN TO COME BACK TO KC, its been a long time, been a long time, Been a long lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely, lonely time....
Posted by: Fabio | February 10, 2012 at 03:37 PM