To be perfectly honest, comparing MJ to GM is like comparing apples and oranges. And it's not really a fair comparison either.

George and Wham! were partially influenced by Michael's work both solo and with the Jackson 5/Jacksons. George Michael, for one, is a BIG fan of R&B music so Michael's influence was already crept in when he first came out.

Plus in terms of vocal appeal, come on, just because both guys can sing falsetto real good don't mean that they should have a vocal battling contest. Clearly MJ and GM have vocally performed in diverse tastes over the years.

Plus George doesn't like to dance and never considered himself a dancer. Maybe he's more of a mover though. Michael however is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, dancers to walk the face of the earth.

Plus George and Michael are great entertainers in their own way when they each perform live.

One's black and American, another's Greek and from London, one's about to be 50, another already turned 45. One man's biggest seller is "Thriller", the other's "Faith".

They each celebrated a 25th anniversary of some part of their career.

But other than that, not really much of a fair comparison.

MJ is more talented than GM on almost every level if not then every level. MJ has a better voice and was able to hold that voice with the added pressure of perfoming unlike GM who is just not capable of pulling off a show anywhere near the level of MJ. Regarding dated songs, Most MJ songs will never date as they are probably the best songs ever written and you will always hear more of his songs today on radio and mtv than George's. MJ has always out classed GM through his career, he's just had bigger and better songs with vidoes and performances to match

Timmy84 said:

Case closed.



Having said that - based on personal preference - as an arist, I definitely prefer GM. Don't get me wrong, MJ's influence can never be denied... I'm not a HUGE fan - although I love a lot of his songs/albums - but GM resonates with me in a way MJ never will. I just wouldn't ever think to draw comparisons in the first place.

Timmy84 said:

very VERY well said

I don't get why people are saying GM utilises his talent more... the guys done one album in the last ten years... and only four proper studio albums in his entire career.

In terms of being prolific George makes Michael's output look like Prince's.

People are forever comparing MJ to Prince, but GM is definately a better comparison...let me break it down like this...

Young MJ couldn't be touched, vocally. GM was very very good but not
as good.

As a songwriter, I would give the edge to GM...

Todays voice (haven't heard these guys singing lately), but i would venture
to say that GM is sounding better judging from the reviews of his latest concerts. MJ has lost it with all of those nose jobs.

MattyJam said:

Damn! That was harsh! lol

To make a fair judgment, try comparing the two artists on the basis of the talent they both share... near-perfect voices and "good-for-pop-music-standards" songwriting... since we're supposed to discuss talents not who has more songs or "MJ can dance but GM can't" arguments...

When it comes to singing capabilities... I can't compare the two! But songwriting...well:

GM wrote a lot of decent songs, I don't remember that many bad songs in his name... but also nothing "OMG THAT'S JUST FUCKING GROUNDBREAKING" songs lol

MJ did a bunch of those "OMG" songs... a lot of decent songs... and some really bad and embarrassing songs!

In conclusion... I'd say MJ is more special coz I'm a biased fan

At least this battle is original. After over 20 years, the MJ vs Prince battle is tired. Anyway, I love the both. The are both great for their individual accomplishments.

Revolution said:

Good point, lol. But I still stick with what I said.
[Edited 8/17/08 10:51am]

Stymie said:

Michael Jackson isn't just greater to me, but to more people all over the world than George Michael. It's obvious Michael's singing, dancing and songwriting are far superior than that of George Michael's.

But as you have kind of pointed out, we all have different tastes so that is something I respect. We can only agree to disagree. When it comes to singing, that comes down to personal taste and it's harder to compare voices. Personally I think George Michael is has a great voice, but I don't like his phasing of words when he's singing and I don't find his vocals funky.
[Edited 8/17/08 11:58am]

graecophilos said:

Michael Jackson didn't write man Man In The Mirror, but he did write the brilliant Will You Be There. George Michael actually isn't more talented than Michael Jackson.

superspaceboy said:

I don't think the Katrina single would have been very good. Michael's charity single What More Can I give for the 9/11 attack wasn't very good just a re-working of We Are The World.
[Edited 8/17/08 12:01pm]

kash said:

That right, and Michael Jackson is a genius where as George Michael is extremely
talented.
[Edited 8/17/08 12:05pm]
[Edited 8/17/08 12:12pm]

Love them both, but on a quality (not quantity) of the songwriting and singing, I go with GM.

Just read all four pages of this thread in one go, hoping to read one sensible sentence. I didn't find one.

midnightmover said:

Then you obviously can't read.

I've gotta go with Mike, and not just because he's my fave male artist.

I like George a lot but he doesn't shake up his sound enough.
Mike on the other hand is more musically diverse and certainly more daring and playful.
Vocally I have to give Mike the edge as well as he just does more with his voice.
As for dancing? Well... no contest.
So overall I'd say Mike has more natural talent.

Still love me some George, tho.

Cloudbuster said:

Stymie said:

Cloudbuster said:

Maybe I should have said "worthwhile" sentence since the sensible sentences that were here were so obvious they need hardly be stated (they're both talented, MJ's a better dancer, etc.).

Anyway, this thread is wackier than Jacko. Just out of generosity though, I'll solve the riddle for you. As a songwriter, George just about wins even though his catalogue of worthwhile material is small. In every other department it's Michael by a long, long distance. MJ's talent was almost supernatural. Watching him at his best you could almost wonder if he was really of this earth. You never got that from George. He was always just a gay bloke who wrote great songs and sang reasonably well. His songs had much more depth and honesty than Michael's though.

Cloudbuster said:

midnightmover said:

What's that got to do with anything?

Stymie said:

Cloudbuster said:

Not a damn thing.

Cloudbuster said:

A lot, since he always acted like a gay bloke in videos and on stage. MJ's gay too, but he didn't perform gay like George did. His performance style was actually quite aggressive. I'd actually use the word "macho". All the kicks and finger pointing, stamping the ground hard with his foot like he was commanding the earth to move or something. All the energy of the music was translated into his body. His face would often be screwed up like he was about to raise hell. All very assertive, which is one reason why his gayness is still invisible to much of his fanbase. Offstage of course, he was as gay as it got, but watching "Smooth Criminal" or Motown 25 all you saw was just a bad motherfucker. Watching George on the other hand, you just saw a gay British bloke who was trying very hard to compete with his more coordinated peers (Prince, MJ, etc). Go to any gay bar in London and you'll find a thousand who move just like George.
[Edited 8/18/08 6:15am]

I didn't realise sexuality was any indication of how talented a person is.

Thanks for the schooling.

Cloudbuster said:

Cloudbuster said:

I never said it was. You asked a question about a relatively unimportant part of my previous post. I took the time to answer the question. That is all.

It's still got nothing to do with anything at all in this debate.

marnifrances said:

Then ask cloudbuster why he singled it out like it was important. If you read the original quote you'll see the point was not about his gayness, but about his ordinariness.

midnightmover said:

Important enough for you to mention it in the first place, tho'.

Cloudbuster said:

Exactly. And what was the point of calling Michael gay?

Stymie said:

Dunno. I thought this thread was about talent.