I am just wondering, because people have tons of opinions about him as a person, but when it comes to MJ´s music, usually everyone shuts up. I personally have never met anyone who wouldn´t like MJ´s music at all. They always find at least few songs that they love. And I am just wondering if there´s anyone who would have troubles getting into his music whatsoever. Cause I, for example, do have some artist that - not that I would hate them - but I just can´t get into their music. Like David Bowie. I saw one of his intervies, and he´s cool, but whenever I hear his music, I just can´t get into it even if I wanted. So does anyone feel this way about MJ? (please forget about the man in this topic. Let´s make it just about his music)

Fuuny enough, I used to have that opinion of David Bowie. I loved the guy - a total superstar, but couldn't get into any of his songs (could just about stand Changes, Rebel Rebel and a few others but never really wanted to listen to them). Then when Earthling was released I loved the album, but still couldn't get into anything older.

Now I'm nearly 30 I suddenly find myself appreciating him more! I love Hunky Dory and lots of the other earlier stuff.

I suppose the one band I still can't understand the attraction of at all is Manic Sreet Preachers. Oh, and Morrisey. There's probably some more too...

Anyway back to the topic - no I don't know of anyone who wouldn't like at least one or two MJ songs.
[Edited 2/19/05 10:44am]

I find MJ's voice and style very annoying in most cases -- though, there are a handful of songs that I really like. To each his own, I guess.

I know what u mean. Should be "who hear hates billy jean"?

Absolutely knowone can hate on that song. Overated and overplayed. yes but no hate though.

Mike is unique musically. He cannot even read music. Maybe that is part of the charm?.....

His backing vox has always been superb too. All the multi-layered vocals etc.....

I find that the older I get, the less I like MJ's music. There are maybe 3 or 4 MJ songs I still like, but on the whole, I find his catalog pretty damn cheesy now. When I was younger, though, I did like him a lot.

Good point. The age thing happens with most pop I guess? Even the beatles. All them "girl is pedator" songs Mike does must grate on some people. Mike does them sorta songs the best.

Axchi696 said:

same with me...there's one album of his that holds a place in my heart cuz i grew up listenin to it (got to be there), but most of his stuff i've grown sour on.

Off The Wall is still his best. Thriller is good, Bad was just more of the same and therefore generally boring, Dangerous is listenable. HIStory disc two has about three tracks I like. Invincible was a complete disaster.

Michael has gotten increasingly self-indulgent and boring with age. It's not about the music, any more, and I suppose that's just as well, what with tracks like "2000 Watts" escaping the vaults and wreaking havoc on unsuspecting innocents.
[Edited 2/19/05 12:39pm]

thesexofit said:

Well, not exactly. I still really like a lot of what I grew up on, pop-wise. I still spin George Michael, Janet, Prince, Madonna. I don't know what it is about MJ, but his music is either really "childish" to me, or it's trying too hard to prove that it isn't.

Bare in mind if he released albums every 2 years there would be alot more songs to like and dislike. Mike would sell even more if he did this and gain more critical acclaim. But he will never do that, which is such a shame.

Too much hyperbole and slickness

thesexofit said:

If he had over 5 years to prep Invincible and that's the best he could come up with, you might want to rethink that statement.

thesexofit said:

See, here's where I disagree. I think that part of the reason MJ albums used to sell so well was because they were released so far apart from one another. The man would pull 7, 8, 9 singles from an album over a three year period. He'd promote the hell out of that album and allow the hype to build up. If he'd released albums at Prince's pace, or at Madonna's, he wouldn't have had the opportunity to promote the hell out of Thriller, Bad, or Dangerous. He would've been on to the next project, and that would be the album that was moving the copies in stores.

VoicesCarry said:

It sounds nothing like its predecessors and the song topics (if you don't hastily generalize) are nowhere to be found on "Off The Wall" or "Thriller", either, so I don't see where you're coming from.

Axchi696 said:

Agreed. And considering that his albums recycle so much of his material, style and persona, people would become bored VERY quickly.

squiddyren said:

Bad was explicitly produced to sound like a sequel to Thriller. If you can't hear it, that's not my fault. Sit down with Quincy and have a talk with him about how the album was conceived.

Most everyone I know who owns both albums thinks Bad is just a Thriller rehash.
[Edited 2/19/05 12:48pm]

He did "invincible" in about 1 and a half years i think? He kept scrapping previous songs beforehand and was just very unfocused and lazy.

He "saved" his best songs from a list of over 50! U heard outtakes like "for all time" right? That is an outtake 4 christsake. Bloody good outtake if u ask me and it wasn't even finished? He left this off but put on "heal the world"? Who knows how many good songs he has in his vaults?

I was just saying on this site a week or so ago about his adult version of "i'l be there". It is from a pepsi commerial from the early 90's. It is pretty awesome yet another gem not released!

thesexofit said:

Well until this stuff is released we don't have much to talk about, do we? Maybe he has a billion brilliant songs in his repertoire, probably not, though.

VoicesCarry said:

I can't hear it but to each his/her own.

squiddyren said:

I think AllMusic sums it up best:

The downside to a success like Thriller is that it's nearly impossible to follow, but Michael Jackson approached Bad much the same way he approached Thriller — take the basic formula of the predecessor, expand it slightly, and move it outward. This meant that he moved deeper into hard rock, deeper into schmaltzy adult contemporary, deeper into hard dance — essentially taking each portion of Thriller to an extreme, while increasing the quotient of immaculate studiocraft. He wound up with a sleeker, slicker Thriller, which isn't a bad thing, but it's not a rousing success, either. For one thing, the material just isn't as good. Look at the singles: only three can stand alongside album tracks from its predecessor ("Bad," "The Way You Make Me Feel," "I Just Can't Stop Loving You"), another is simply OK ("Smooth Criminal"), with the other two showcasing Jackson at his worst (the saccharine "Man in the Mirror," the misogynistic "Dirty Diana"). Then, there are the album tracks themselves, something that virtually didn't exist on Thriller but bog down Bad not just because they're bad, but because they reveal that Jackson's state of the art is not hip.

Fair I guess. But "man in the morrir" is a track that few can hate as it is just beutiful. "dirty diana" misoginistic? Whatever.....

but yeah i agree that he went for "thriller part 2" basically. I love "speed demon" and "just good friends".....

thesexofit said:

Yet another in the long line of "naughty whores whoring it up with Michael" songs.

And MITM is just schmaltz to the fuckin' max.

So just because some of the song's musical genres are similar it's trying to copy Thriller? Gimme a break.

Sure, if Quincy says it was conceived as a sequel, then it's a sequel, but I don't agree in the least it's a rehash.

Quincy before they made the album: "We need a tougher sound."
[Edited 2/19/05 13:01pm]

squiddyren said:

Well, then you don't agree. Didn't say you had to.

Just that most people think it's a weak follow-up that tries too hard to copy the formula that worked in 1982.

VoicesCarry said:

M'kay.

i heard Mike told Quincy that hard sythns etc and synclaviers (is that right?) is where it was at. Quincy was out of his depth. I think Mike told him how it should sound. Look at the album credits.....

Imagine Quincy after "bad"? He did "back on the block" was had its good moments (where was MJ??) and signed tevin campbell but I think Quincy's time of pop producer was up.

Even Rod Temperton did some average songs for quincy's next big thing siedah garrett's "kiss of life" in 1988. I reckon they were offered to Mike but he turned them down. Some of the songs were good, but they wern't Rod's.....

squiddyren said:

Maybe if MJ didn't try to boil it down to a formula... Rock track, misogynistic track, media's out to get me track, add a duet, discuss problems in the world, throw in a nice little dash of "hee hee's" and there you have it.

To top it all off, the video for Bad was derided as being a knock-off of Beat It. Except, whoops, we'll take out the abandoned warehouse and transplant the video to a parking garage. Zoinks!

thesexofit said:

Probably.

In my opinion, with some exceptions, Michael's basically gone downhill after he fired Q. I know you'll disagree since you love Dangerous, but the New Jack Swing sounds and Teddy Riley were already popularized by other big acts. It was simply an effort to appear 'modern' and 'hip', IMO, just like the albums that succeed Dangerous.
[Edited 2/19/05 13:18pm]
[Edited 2/19/05 13:19pm]

Axchi696 said:

"Billie Jean" and "Dirty Diana" are both groupie songs allegedly based on true stories, but two totally different types of groupies and a totally different sound.

There were no media-bashing or self-help/save-the-world songs on "Off The Wall" or "Thriller". "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'" is said to be about the media but it's not centered around himself like "Leave Me Alone".

And the "Bad" song and video has the same idea of gangs and anti-violence (though expressed far differently), but other than that I see no parallels.

yeah i c that. But if it would of been a Quicny album back in the early 90's it may of sounded like "back on the block"(which was 1989 i think) which was still pop and not newajck. Quincy didn't embrace newjack then and proberly wouldn't of done for "dangerous"? So maybe "dangerous" woulda sounded like "back on the block"? Which is good but not as good as Teddy's sound.

Michael had little choice.....teddy was no Rod, but where did Rod go?

squiddyren said: