uuhson said:

we arent allowed to talk about this documentary here for some reason, we have to take it to some sort of michael jackson sticky in another section.

i thought it was pretty good though

Christ I can't believe how much this place bends to the will of the purple imp. Grow a fucking spine, I hardly think the little shit can stop you from discussing a german docu.

Not directed at you, uuhson, just bumping your quote out a show for mutual respect--I see you've still got me quoted in your sig.

holy shit, the ruler has returned!

TurnItUp said:

Free2BMe said:

Some of you Prince stans forget just one thing. Michael DID beat Prince at the 02. Michael SOLD OUT 50 shows at the 02. The FACT that he did this with NO NEW ALBUM, no FREE album giveaways, NO build-up promotion, no public appearances in YEARS,etc. Just HIM, an announcement of a tour and BAM 50 shows sold-out in a matter of minutes. The bottomline will always be THAT fact. If Michael had lived, I have no doubt that he would have done every show. The way that these shows were spread out over 6 months or more, Michael would have been able to do them. FTR, this was something that Michael had done before with his tours. The BULLSHIT is those who try to deny the FACT that Michael DID sell-out 50 shows. That is a record that NO ONE ELSE has beaten, yet. When or IF it happens, THEN let's come back and talk.

[Edited 12/20/11 16:32pm]

I ain't forgot shit cuz MJ didn't beat shit. There were 50 shows scheduled, but I didn't hear nothin about no 50 sold out shows and even if it was he didn't get to do 1 and even if he had've lived to July of 2009 we still would've had to seen if could've done all 50 shows and then he would've beat Prince's record. NOT! I dont' think he could've done it. He hadn't been keeping himself polished and it was even reported that Michael was livid when AEG added more shows when he initially agreed to do only 10! What up with that?

[Edited 12/21/11 5:54am]

Just to clarify a few things:

Prince still holds the record for most shows played at the 02 with 21 nights.

Michael Jackson holds the record for the most sell out shows SOLD - with 50 concerts.

As to whether or not he could have done the concerts it all comes down to conjecture.

BUT it should be noted that the 50 dates were booked over a 9 month period with Michael scheduled to do two legs of shows - one set of 27 concerts from July - September, then he would take a break from October to December and resume shows in January - March for the remaining 23 shows.

Sadly we will never know if he could, or couldn't pull it off. But based on that schedule it wasn't beyond the realms of possibility.

Great thread! Trying not to get emotionally swept up in it, lol. But um, so yeah ... again, where/how can I see this German documentary?

The whole Bad lp and era was just horrid. I'd given up on MJ until I heard the TEDDY RILEY-produced tracks on Dangerous.

MNIP? Well, at least the rest of the lp is kinda cool.

Swa said:

TurnItUp said:

I ain't forgot shit cuz MJ didn't beat shit. There were 50 shows scheduled, but I didn't hear nothin about no 50 sold out shows and even if it was he didn't get to do 1 and even if he had've lived to July of 2009 we still would've had to seen if could've done all 50 shows and then he would've beat Prince's record. NOT! I dont' think he could've done it. He hadn't been keeping himself polished and it was even reported that Michael was livid when AEG added more shows when he initially agreed to do only 10! What up with that?

[Edited 12/21/11 5:54am]

Just to clarify a few things:

Prince still holds the record for most shows played at the 02 with 21 nights.

Michael Jackson holds the record for the most sell out shows SOLD - with 50 concerts.

As to whether or not he could have done the concerts it all comes down to conjecture.

BUT it should be noted that the 50 dates were booked over a 9 month period with Michael scheduled to do two legs of shows - one set of 27 concerts from July - September, then he would take a break from October to December and resume shows in January - March for the remaining 23 shows.

Sadly we will never know if he could, or couldn't pull it off. But based on that schedule it wasn't beyond the realms of possibility.

Great post! I like how you reiterated the FACT that FIFTY SHOWS were SOLD OUT and that IS a RECORD! All of the biasness in the world can't take away that FACT, no matter how hard the haters try.

soo true, micheal was never a musician. prince is 50 times better and always has been

purplerain14 said:

soo true, micheal was never a musician. prince is 50 times better and always has been

Opinions! It's so wonderful that we can DISAGREE with them.

uuhson said:

crazymouse said:

I'm not downplaying Prince's talend and or denying him being an amazing musician, how could i? But the fact that people here are trying to downplay Mike's talend by saying that because he didn't play any music instrument, which he could but anyway, that meant that he wasn't a musician or shit like that is just stupid. So, again to bring another example. Justin Bieber is a multy instumentalist. That makes him an amazing musician? I don't think so. And personally to be able to come up with melodies only by using your head or by beating things, or using your mouth (beatbox) like Jackson did, that is what i consider a extremely talented person. But like i said everyone have their preferences.

pretty retarded claim here. no one is trying to say that playing an instrument makes you an amazing musician. playing an instrument amazingly makes you an amazing musician

Since Mike's passed I tend to get defensive of my man. But here goes. Musicians who can play amazingly are a dime a dozen, music (I am a pianist) is a wide spectrum of talents and abilities and with an artist of Michael's calibre musicianship is pretty trivial. His true gifts were as an arranger, composer, producer, I'm still amazed when I hear his demo tracks pre-production, he was a creative force who was firmly in Prince's or anyone's league. Music is a funny thing, there are a billion guys who can play all the styles, riffs, scales but have no creativity and cannot write a song, Jerry Lee Lewis for example could revamp a song brilliantly and fill it with thousands of extra notes during it's course but he could hardly write a song, I can't explain why but music is like that. Irving Berlin, one of the great songwriters, could barely play at all and even then wrote and played exclusively on the black keys of the piano. Playing an instrument well is overrated by some people, all it takes is some talent and a lot of time which is the reason there are so many big headed musicians out here who think they are so brilliant. It's different to be an artist, Elvis was an artist although he could scarcely play more than 4 chords on guitar, Sinatra was an artist even though he never played a thing or wrote a not, now when it comes to michael everyone wants to downplay his greatness, but if you doubt just go listen to his stuff for awhile, the man was one of the best songwriters in the business, he was truly gifted at something not just any musician can do, you ad that to all his stage, singing, and pioneering in video work and you have quite a significant artist.

Free2BMe said:

TurnItUp said:

He couldn't beat Prince out of a paperbag even if the tragic events hadn't have happened. Michael stopped touring after 1997 after that got lazy. Kids or no kids, it don't matter. Madonna had children too (biogically) and she still toured. 2004 both Prince and Madonna the other two 80's icons had the top 2 tours and here is Michael starting the year off with his concert of standing on top of an SUV in trouble AGAIN for child molestation charges AGAIN. He was sued in 2000 for pulling out of some millenium concerts, Prince has been trouble for pulling out of a couple of shows before, but he is ALWAYS performing. I doubt MJ would've been able to do 10 shows. The fans were lucky they could even get one. He could've beat him. BULLSHIT!

Some of you Prince stans forget just one thing. Michael DID beat Prince at the 02. Michael SOLD OUT 50 shows at the 02. The FACT that he did this with NO NEW ALBUM, no FREE album giveaways, NO build-up promotion, no public appearances in YEARS,etc. Just HIM, an announcement of a tour and BAM 50 shows sold-out in a matter of minutes. The bottomline will always be THAT fact. If Michael had lived, I have no doubt that he would have done every show. The way that these shows were spread out over 6 months or more, Michael would have been able to do them. FTR, this was something that Michael had done before with his tours. The BULLSHIT is those who try to deny the FACT that Michael DID sell-out 50 shows. That is a record that NO ONE ELSE has beaten, yet. When or IF it happens, THEN let's come back and talk.

[Edited 12/20/11 16:32pm]

Well, when he hadn't been on the stage doin' shit in about 10-15 years, what would you expect? And sure, Prince released an album for free then (as far as your publicity claim), but he pretty much ignored it and so did the public. So yeah, MJ sold out 50 shows. Who's to say Prince couldn't have sold out 50 shows himself if he wanted to keep performing there for over 6+ months, like the plan was for Mike? Hell, Mike didn't even wanna do the 50 shows there himself, but his "people" were the ones who were pushing for more and more and more.

I'm, by ALL means, not some Prince apologist (as ANYONE on these forums will tell you), but this whole MJ was whoopin' Prince's ass or Prince was whoopin' MJ's ass bullshit gets annoying hella quick. It's okay to joke about it and shit, but you muhfuckas get TOO wrapped up into the shit.

Free2BMe said:

Swa said:

Just to clarify a few things:

Prince still holds the record for most shows played at the 02 with 21 nights.

Michael Jackson holds the record for the most sell out shows SOLD - with 50 concerts.

As to whether or not he could have done the concerts it all comes down to conjecture.

BUT it should be noted that the 50 dates were booked over a 9 month period with Michael scheduled to do two legs of shows - one set of 27 concerts from July - September, then he would take a break from October to December and resume shows in January - March for the remaining 23 shows.

Sadly we will never know if he could, or couldn't pull it off. But based on that schedule it wasn't beyond the realms of possibility.

Great post! I like how you reiterated the FACT that FIFTY SHOWS were SOLD OUT and that IS a RECORD! All of the biasness in the world can't take away that FACT, no matter how hard the haters try.

It was a record that didn't happen. Just like the record he never made after Invincible. Hater or not.

[Edited 12/22/11 10:52am]

purplerain14 said:

soo true, micheal was never a musician. prince is 50 times better and always has been

The best most intellegent comment on this tread.

TurnItUp said:

purplerain14 said:

soo true, micheal was never a musician. prince is 50 times better and always has been

The best most intellegent comment on this tread.

ya right, what does that make of all the thousands upon thousands of losers who live in their mommies basements and can play fantastically, (believe me they are all over the place). Are they 50 times better than Michael too? How, in what way? Musicianship is meaningless in terms of 1. Artistry 2. Commerciality. The best at either rarely are above mediocre in musicianship. You think a Dylan? An Ellington? An Elvis became great because they could play? Ok.

petes2 said:

TurnItUp said:

The best most intellegent comment on this tread.

ya right, what does that make of all the thousands upon thousands of losers who live in their mommies basements and can play fantastically, (believe me they are all over the place). Are they 50 times better than Michael too? How, in what way? Musicianship is meaningless in terms of 1. Artistry 2. Commerciality. The best at either rarely are above mediocre in musicianship. You think a Dylan? An Ellington? An Elvis became great because they could play? Ok.

anyone have an idea what this even means?

Guys.

Singers are musicians too.

alexnvrmnd777 said:

Free2BMe said:

Some of you Prince stans forget just one thing. Michael DID beat Prince at the 02. Michael SOLD OUT 50 shows at the 02. The FACT that he did this with NO NEW ALBUM, no FREE album giveaways, NO build-up promotion, no public appearances in YEARS,etc. Just HIM, an announcement of a tour and BAM 50 shows sold-out in a matter of minutes. The bottomline will always be THAT fact. If Michael had lived, I have no doubt that he would have done every show. The way that these shows were spread out over 6 months or more, Michael would have been able to do them. FTR, this was something that Michael had done before with his tours. The BULLSHIT is those who try to deny the FACT that Michael DID sell-out 50 shows. That is a record that NO ONE ELSE has beaten, yet. When or IF it happens, THEN let's come back and talk.

[Edited 12/20/11 16:32pm]

Well, when he hadn't been on the stage doin' shit in about 10-15 years, what would you expect? And sure, Prince released an album for free then (as far as your publicity claim), but he pretty much ignored it and so did the public. So yeah, MJ sold out 50 shows. Who's to say Prince couldn't have sold out 50 shows himself if he wanted to keep performing there for over 6+ months, like the plan was for Mike? Hell, Mike didn't even wanna do the 50 shows there himself, but his "people" were the ones who were pushing for more and more and more.

I'm, by ALL means, not some Prince apologist (as ANYONE on these forums will tell you), but this whole MJ was whoopin' Prince's ass or Prince was whoopin' MJ's ass bullshit gets annoying hella quick. It's okay to joke about it and shit, but you muhfuckas get TOO wrapped up into the shit.

BULLSHIT! There is no way in hell that Michael would have done 50 shows if he had not wanted to. Don't believe the crap that you hear from the Jacksons or other self-serving idiots.There was no fucking way that ANYONE could have forced Michael to do those shows if he had not wanted to do them.Btw, Michael didn't sell out those shows because he hadn't been on the stage for 10+ years. He sold them out because we was MICHAEL JACKSON. Let's be real about that. There ae many artists who have not been on the stage in 20 + years and could NOT do what Michael did with only a ten minute press conference to announce that tour. FTR, the fact that Michael sold out 50 shows had shit to do with the fact that he was stretching the show out over 6 months. The shows sold out in minutes BEFORE the schedule plan was even thought of. The scheduling was done AFTER the shows sold out. So, let's not use that as an excuse as to why Michael's shows sold out or that Prince could have done the same thing. Btw, I do agree that "you muhfuckas get TOO wrapped up into the shit."

[Edited 12/24/11 2:43am]

TurnItUp said:

Free2BMe said:

Great post! I like how you reiterated the FACT that FIFTY SHOWS were SOLD OUT and that IS a RECORD! All of the biasness in the world can't take away that FACT, no matter how hard the haters try.

It was a record that didn't happen. Just like the record he never made after Invincible. Hater or not.

[Edited 12/22/11 10:52am]

Sorry, Boo; BUT, the record DID happen. The sad thing is that Michael didn't live to do those shows. That doesn't change the FACT that he SOLD-OUT 50 shows at the 02 arena. Let's be fair and not change the rules to fit YOUR theory. Hater or not.

[Edited 12/24/11 2:45am]

I remembered it well . Prince didn't like the vibe to "Your butt is mine". That's what it is all about

.

[Edited 12/24/11 13:30pm]

Are you serious? First time I've heard that. I doubt Prince got heavy into drugs, and honestly he always did let the power go to his head and did strange shit. Prince cannot handle things being out of his control, it brings out his arrested developemnt, bratty side, that's what all the wierdness was about. By the 90's he was still good inspite of the many detractors here, his concession to hip hop was not something many of us liked but hip hop was such a huge force, no one could ignore it. He should have yes, but no one else has either. Hell, even Springsteen has tried to spruce up his sound with hip hop.

uuhson said:

petes2 said:

ya right, what does that make of all the thousands upon thousands of losers who live in their mommies basements and can play fantastically, (believe me they are all over the place). Are they 50 times better than Michael too? How, in what way? Musicianship is meaningless in terms of 1. Artistry 2. Commerciality. The best at either rarely are above mediocre in musicianship. You think a Dylan? An Ellington? An Elvis became great because they could play? Ok.

anyone have an idea what this even means?

you know i read it a couple of times and i can honestly say no

petes2 said:

ya right, what does that make of all the thousands upon thousands of losers who live in their mommies basements and can play fantastically, (believe me they are all over the place). Are they 50 times better than Michael too? How, in what way? Musicianship is meaningless in terms of 1. Artistry 2. Commerciality. The best at either rarely are above mediocre in musicianship. You think a Dylan? An Ellington? An Elvis became great because they could play? Ok.

petes2 said:

uuhson said:

pretty retarded claim here. no one is trying to say that playing an instrument makes you an amazing musician. playing an instrument amazingly makes you an amazing musician

Since Mike's passed I tend to get defensive of my man. But here goes. Musicians who can play amazingly are a dime a dozen, music (I am a pianist) is a wide spectrum of talents and abilities and with an artist of Michael's calibre musicianship is pretty trivial. His true gifts were as an arranger, composer, producer, I'm still amazed when I hear his demo tracks pre-production, he was a creative force who was firmly in Prince's or anyone's league. Music is a funny thing, there are a billion guys who can play all the styles, riffs, scales but have no creativity and cannot write a song, Jerry Lee Lewis for example could revamp a song brilliantly and fill it with thousands of extra notes during it's course but he could hardly write a song, I can't explain why but music is like that. Irving Berlin, one of the great songwriters, could barely play at all and even then wrote and played exclusively on the black keys of the piano. Playing an instrument well is overrated by some people, all it takes is some talent and a lot of time which is the reason there are so many big headed musicians out here who think they are so brilliant. It's different to be an artist, Elvis was an artist although he could scarcely play more than 4 chords on guitar, Sinatra was an artist even though he never played a thing or wrote a not, now when it comes to michael everyone wants to downplay his greatness, but if you doubt just go listen to his stuff for awhile, the man was one of the best songwriters in the business, he was truly gifted at something not just any musician can do, you ad that to all his stage, singing, and pioneering in video work and you have quite a significant artist.

Again:

ComputerBlueSpain said:

Let's be realistic here: there is NO competition as some people are trying to convey. Michael is NO match for Prince. Just to think that I used to be an enormous MJ fan...!

The reality is that Michael, apart from dancing and singing, is untalented. But, then again, I'll give him credit for having been probably the greatest dancer in mainstream music industry and, until the Bad tour, a fantastic singer. Apart from that, however, there is no more Michael Jackson. He is non-existent, as a talent, in any other area. To any of this opinion's critic: can you, as an adult, listen to the post-OTW work with a straight face? After OTW, his act was nothing more than childish, ridiculous and laughable while Prince became better and better.

I realized, a long time ago, Prince was much better than MJ when I did this; I had "The most beautiful girl in the world", "Batdance", "Cream", "My Name Is Prince", "Alphabet street" and some PR hits on my mp3 but never listened to it. I was a huge MJ fan and was listening to Bad and Dirty Diana on my mp3. I then, for some reason, changed to Prince's music. The distance between the quality was so unmistakeble, so unmaskable that it hit me. I changed to "Bad" again and realized how ridiculous it sounded. Not to mention the video. From then on, I came to my senses: Michael Jacksons (at least the one post-OTW) is for children, for Justin Bieber's fans while Prince is the real deal.

With Michael, you get controversy after controversy each day that passes. One day his family is trying to scam you, the other a scandal bursts. In the middle of this, some mediocre and cheese songs pop up. With Prince one gets music.

Like Wendy said: "Michael is Disney."

What in the hell are you talking about??!! Michael Jackson was and will be one of the greatest entertainers of all time, PERIOD. Not because I say so, but because it IS SO! Michael Jackson had an amazing voice with incredible range! Many think he didn't play any instruments, but he did play the piano. He could dance, sing and do it all. Michael Jackson had universal appeal! He was loved by the young and old, of every race. You cannot be so ignorant as to not recognize MJ's status as an icon and true legend!! He's prolific and he was the #1 most charitable celebrity of all time!!! What planet do you live on???!!!

Having said that about Michael Jackson....

Prince is the superior lyricist, musician and artist. Prince doesn't have the level of universal appeal that MJ did. Prince's albums and shows haven't achieved the numbers and haven't made the amount of money that Michael Jackson has. Prince is enormously prolific...he has 10's of thousands of songs that have been exclusively written by Prince and recorded by Prince, playing virtually all the instruments. Those songs are just sitting his "vault," waiting to be released. There is more completed tracks in his vault than we've heard in all his albums combined. That alone makes Prince a phenom and genius. Prince is MORE of an pure artist than Michael Jackson. Prince follows his artistic and creative instincts, current musical fads and trends be damned. Prince dared to be obscene, controversial and irreverent. And then Prince dares to talk about God as well.

Probably the biggest difference between Prince and Michael Jackson is that Prince dared to be private and really limited access to his private life. Prince doesn't fall for the media machine hype. As a result, Prince has been able to ration his appearances and press releases to always keep fans chomping at the bit for more.

Michael Jackson was way too open and accessible and the public ate him alive for it. Michael Jackson had personal insecurities that lead him to rely upon the media machine for love and for feelings of acceptance. Michael Jackson was almost tormented by his talent and fame. He died trying to relive those incredible days of popularity.

Michael Jackson vs Prince...for me, it's Prince.

I gotta say....the Chris Rock interview with Prince was the funniest shit I've ever seen!!! Prince is more annimated than I've ever seen!!

Chris Rock brings up Prince turning down MJ's invitation to do the "Bad" video with him.

Prince supposes he'd be Wesley Snipes' character, a gang member or thug, and says, laughing, "Now you run that video in your mind!"

Prince says, "The first line in that song is.. "Your butt is mine..." (Shows a clip of "Bad" video)

Prince says, "Now who singin dat to who? Cuz he show ain't singin dat to me! And I sho aint singin dat to you! So right there we gotta problem" (Prince is shaking his finger and movin that neck like a sister!)

I LOVE THIS!!! PRINCE JOKING IT'S HILLARIOUS AND PRICELESS!!!!

The joke back in the day about Michael Jackson was: Whoever thought Prince would turn out to be the "normal one"??!!

Seriously...GOOGLE it!!!!

[Edited 12/30/11 0:30am]

Silly how all these conversations turn into the equivalent of an Apple vs. PC debate.

What I find most interesting is that the reputation and reality is a bit swapped. Michael Jackson is known as a showman, where Prince is thought of as this serious musician, but MJ probably had more of an exposure, and education to classics, while Prince could sit in an audience and command attention. Keep in mind, many of Prince's influences were contemporaries with the Jacksons, so in theory, we're talking a different league. Speaking of different leagues, few people could sit down with Liza Minelli and talk shop, or recognize the reason to, you know? He was a good musical director, and front man, but he could never write songs, and do session work as a hit maker the way Prince did.

The other thing is Prince played with sexuality, on purpose, where MJ struggled with it, and tried to butch himself up at times. Prince would try to reinvent himself, where I think MJ couldn't get past his signature white socks and fedora. He got locked into this schtick, while Prince could go out and just play love songs, or become a live artist jamming at after parties. Everything MJ did was choreographed, everything he recorded had to be mass market... he would have never performed a Prince song in the middle of one of his shows, the way Prince has paid tribute to MJ.

It's fascinating that they interacted at all really. What should have happened, is after Janet's record, MJ should have paid Prince anything he wanted to produce a record for him.

treehouse said:

Silly how all these conversations turn into the equivalent of an Apple vs. PC debate.

What I find most interesting is that the reputation and reality is a bit swapped. Michael Jackson is known as a showman, where Prince is thought of as this serious musician, but MJ probably had more of an exposure, and education to classics, while Prince could sit in an audience and command attention. Keep in mind, many of Prince's influences were contemporaries with the Jacksons, so in theory, we're talking a different league. Speaking of different leagues, few people could sit down with Liza Minelli and talk shop, or recognize the reason to, you know? He was a good musical director, and front man, but he could never write songs, and do session work as a hit maker the way Prince did.

The other thing is Prince played with sexuality, on purpose, where MJ struggled with it, and tried to butch himself up at times. Prince would try to reinvent himself, where I think MJ couldn't get past his signature white socks and fedora. He got locked into this schtick, while Prince could go out and just play love songs, or become a live artist jamming at after parties. Everything MJ did was choreographed, everything he recorded had to be mass market... he would have never performed a Prince song in the middle of one of his shows, the way Prince has paid tribute to MJ.

It's fascinating that they interacted at all really. What should have happened, is after Janet's record, MJ should have paid Prince anything he wanted to produce a record for him.

You bring up a few valid points but are way off base on others. Any artist of Michael's stature usually is unfairly judged as an artist because of the scope of their commercial success. The fact is, Mike was a first rate songwriter from the start, Off The Walls best songs were his, were nearly the same in demo form or the crucial components were there, before Quincy Jones added his polish (and it was only polish). Note that Michaels songs on Off the Wall were the most remembered and loved although Quincy had access to top songwriters like Ron Temperton and Paul McCartney who both had songs on the album. What was Mike at the time, 19? 20? Prince's first album was full of good musicianship but I never liked a song on it. Of course he improved rapidly after as we all know, which brings us to another point. I firmly believe both artists inspired the other. Would Prince have dared to do a Purple Rain without Michael's Thriller? Would he have improved his dancing so dramatically in so short a time if he hadn't been made a fool of when Mike called him onstage to Dance with JB? I don't think so. I believe we have to judge any artist of Michaels or Elvis' fame with forgiveness in our hearts because the circumstances of living like that are inhuman beyond what any of us mere mortals can comprehend. Prince learned this on the Purple Rain tour when he describes after being on the grueling tour for months and he's backstage and one of the handlers bangs a guitar on his face and cuts him, Prince says "I lost it" and that was the moment he decided to back away from further commercial success, what we got afterward were the intentionally alienating ATWIAD, Parade and Sott. And it had the desired effect, those albums didn't sell that well and despite revisionist history, Mike was still more popular with the kids, bboys during the 88 era than Prince was. And Mike never lost his lust to climb to a higher mountain. Prince looked at the mass success and ran, Mike was obsessed with it. Mike made mistakes, lots of them, he got lost like Elvis did and like a lot of artists do but in his prime he was something to see and a helluva artist

[Edited 12/31/11 13:25pm]

petes2 said:

Would Prince have dared to do a Purple Rain without Michael's Thriller? Would he have improved his dancing so dramatically in so short a time if he hadn't been made a fool of when Mike called him onstage to Dance with JB?

Huh?

Where'd you get the idea that Prince ran from the spotlight after Purple Rain? He participated in 3 more films after that. Their failures weren't intentional.

Michael on the other hand lost respect after Thriller.

Thriller came out just before 1983. Prince released Purple Rain in the summer of 1984 featuring recordings from a live show that happened in August of 1983.

That's less than 9 months between Thrillers release and Purple Rain's conception and first public exposure, and according to Prince's manager at the time, he was working on the concept as early as 1982 while touring for 1999. Maybe you should give Prince credit for inspiring MJ with 1999?

When Prince joined MJ and James onstage, he DANCED mored than he played, and he was already in Purple Rain mode.

Prince was certainly inspired and maybe influenced ....you can see you When Doves Cry was easier to release as a single after Billie Jean's succes .... but to say Prince wouldn't have "dared" to make Purple Rain?.... on a Prince fan forum? No way.

[Edited 12/31/11 15:13pm]

[Edited 12/31/11 15:16pm]

Michael on the other hand lost respect after Thriller.

Kindly elaborate.