Graycap23 said:

purplesweat said:

Fixed.

The media made his face look like that?

They made you think it was worse than it actually was, that's for sure. They always over exaggerated, used pics from when he was a kid in comparison shots, and never took aging into account.

Obviously he has no or little makeup on in the 09 and the lighting in the 92 one is much softer.

Different hair and lighting, everything else is the same except the vitiligo has taken over completely.

Anyway, what kind of person are you if looks, in Mike's case caused mostly by the same superficial criticism you're showing here (as in a drastic nose job = "off the rails"), get in the way of such mind blowing talent as Michael's?

Timmy84 said:

vainandy said:

Hell, she's an entertainer isn't she. Well, her music is the furthest thing from entertainment so she's got to entertain me some kind of way. Just making her earn her entertainer title.

I thought she would be more of a jokester to you. You know, since she makes you laugh.

She entertains me comically and always has since day one. She looked and acted like a little goodie two shoes black barbie doll cheerleader holding her school books to her her little dried up breasts picking petals off a flower thinking of the blonde haired, blue eyed football captain...."He loves me, he loves me not". Then she had no rhythm whatsoever and couldn't dance worth a damn with those skinny chicken legs of hers. Hell, the girl in the Bruce Springstreen video "Dancing In The Dark" had more rhythm than her.

Then she got booed at the "Soul Train Music Awards". I didn't see it but just imagining that image in my mind is funny as hell. Then all of a sudden, after getting booed by a black audience, the little princess decides to get her a black man. Hell, a little black boy is more like it. She was a grown ass woman just a few years earlier when he and his other group members didn't even have pubic hair yet and were making videos with little girls in ice cream shops.

Then she gets on drugs. My, oh my, how little Snow White had fallen after she got with her little Prince Charming who had recently outgrown his tricycle with training wheels for a learner's permit for a driver's license. She was on them drugs for so many years that there were stories of her staying in her bedroom for days with only her drugs and a vibrator. That's probably the only time she's ever been funky. I bet the cats were lined up outside her bedroom door.

And then came the reality show. Yes, I was a big fan of the reality show and I usually hate reality shows but I loved that one. That was the most entertaining she had ever been in her entire career.

Oh yes honey, she's given me plenty of entertainment throughout the years.

vainandy said:

Timmy84 said:

I thought she would be more of a jokester to you. You know, since she makes you laugh.

She entertains me comically and always has since day one. She looked and acted like a little goodie two shoes black barbie doll cheerleader holding her school books to her her little dried up breasts picking petals off a flower thinking of the blonde haired, blue eyed football captain...."He loves me, he loves me not". Then she had no rhythm whatsoever and couldn't dance worth a damn with those skinny chicken legs of hers. Hell, the girl in the Bruce Springstreen video "Dancing In The Dark" had more rhythm than her.

Then she got booed at the "Soul Train Music Awards". I didn't see it but just imagining that image in my mind is funny as hell. Then all of a sudden, after getting booed by a black audience, the little princess decides to get her a black man. Hell, a little black boy is more like it. She was a grown ass woman just a few years earlier when he and his other group members didn't even have pubic hair yet and were making videos with little girls in ice cream shops.

Then she gets on drugs. My, oh my, how little Snow White had fallen after she got with her little Prince Charming who had recently outgrown his tricycle with training wheels for a learner's permit for a driver's license. She was on them drugs for so many years that there were stories of her staying in her bedroom for days with only her drugs and a vibrator. That's probably the only time she's ever been funky. I bet the cats were lined up outside her bedroom door.

And then came the reality show. Yes, I was a big fan of the reality show and I usually hate reality shows but I loved that one. That was the most entertaining she had ever been in her entire career.

Oh yes honey, she's given me plenty of entertainment throughout the years.

You silly.

Timmy84 said:

vainandy said:

She entertains me comically and always has since day one. She looked and acted like a little goodie two shoes black barbie doll cheerleader holding her school books to her her little dried up breasts picking petals off a flower thinking of the blonde haired, blue eyed football captain...."He loves me, he loves me not". Then she had no rhythm whatsoever and couldn't dance worth a damn with those skinny chicken legs of hers. Hell, the girl in the Bruce Springstreen video "Dancing In The Dark" had more rhythm than her.

Then she got booed at the "Soul Train Music Awards". I didn't see it but just imagining that image in my mind is funny as hell. Then all of a sudden, after getting booed by a black audience, the little princess decides to get her a black man. Hell, a little black boy is more like it. She was a grown ass woman just a few years earlier when he and his other group members didn't even have pubic hair yet and were making videos with little girls in ice cream shops.

Then she gets on drugs. My, oh my, how little Snow White had fallen after she got with her little Prince Charming who had recently outgrown his tricycle with training wheels for a learner's permit for a driver's license. She was on them drugs for so many years that there were stories of her staying in her bedroom for days with only her drugs and a vibrator. That's probably the only time she's ever been funky. I bet the cats were lined up outside her bedroom door.

And then came the reality show. Yes, I was a big fan of the reality show and I usually hate reality shows but I loved that one. That was the most entertaining she had ever been in her entire career.

Oh yes honey, she's given me plenty of entertainment throughout the years.

You silly.

By the way, when is her birthday? Isn't it coming up soon? Remember the birthday thread I did for her a few years ago? See...nobody else remembered her birthday....but I did.

vainandy said:

Timmy84 said:

You silly.

By the way, when is her birthday? Isn't it coming up soon? Remember the birthday thread I did for her a few years ago? See...nobody else remembered her birthday....but I did.

It's a LONG WAY from now. August 9th lol

Timmy84 said:

vainandy said:

By the way, when is her birthday? Isn't it coming up soon? Remember the birthday thread I did for her a few years ago? See...nobody else remembered her birthday....but I did.

It's a LONG WAY from now. August 9th lol

Well hell! I was going to run down to the nursing home and gather up a bunch of senior citizens and throw her another party. They just love "Where Do Broken Hearts Go".

trueiopian said:

I understand. If you read my post I said you can compare the Beatle's compilation to MJ's and the Beatle's still sold more.

If you had read my post you would have seen that I provided no contest to that fact. At all.

trueiopian said:

and I don't care if Madonna's compilation sold more than her studio albums

I actually found the sales data to be kind of relevant in some respects, but for someone who considers studio albums and GH albums to be one in the same thing then I guess the info is useless.

trueiopian said:

According to Soundscan, the Beatles were #2 on the Top 50 best album artist of the 00's. MJ was #22. So what's your excuse for that? MJ passed away in 2009 so I'd expect him to be much higher since you think he's far more widespread.

The Beatles are a lot more popular in the US than MJ is. Actually, rock and country are the two most popular genres in the country. (I do think that he's the most popular black male musical act in the US though.) Also, MJ and the US have had a sort of rocky relationship ever since the BAD era. He just wasn't selling as much in the US anymore as he was in non-domestic markets. Also, Soundscan sales are only for the US and nowhere else. There's no system that can tally worldwide numbers. It takes a lot of work and people have come close, but there's no real definite answers. Though, it is true that MJ isn't really super popular in one particular market. Not at all. It's just that he sells, literally, everywhere.

These are not excuses, by any means. I was just trying to put the situation in perspective. =/

[Edited 1/26/11 21:36pm]

Unholyalliance said:

I actually found the sales data to be kind of relevant in some respects, but for someone who considers studio albums and GH albums to be one in the same thing then I guess the info is useless.

The Beatles are a lot more popular in the US than MJ is. Actually, rock and country are the two most popular genres in the country. (I do think that he's the most popular black male musical act in the US though.) Also, MJ and the US have had a sort of rocky relationship ever since the BAD era. He just wasn't selling as much in the US anymore as he was in non-domestic markets. Also, Soundscan sales are only for the US and nowhere else. There's no system that can tally worldwide numbers. It takes a lot of work and people have come close, but there's no real definite answers. Though, it is true that MJ isn't really super popular in one particular market. Not at all. It's just that he sells, literally, everywhere.

These are not excuses, by any means. I was just trying to put the situation in perspective. =/

Madonna is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Keep up.

I know that Soundscan is for the U.S. only. That's why I posted it in the first place. The Beatles are also more popular than him internationally.

vainandy said:

Timmy84 said:

It's a LONG WAY from now. August 9th lol

Well hell! I was going to run down to the nursing home and gather up a bunch of senior citizens and throw her another party. They just love "Where Do Broken Hearts Go".

trueiopian said:

Madonna is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Keep up.

Not exactly, as she's on this list that OP cited in the beginning of this thread as well and she's quite ahead of the Beatles.

trueiopian said:

The Beatles are also more popular than him internationally.

There's nothing more amusing than when people post 'facts' that they have no means of actually proving or have never been proven in the first place. Please do go on. =)

musicjunky318 said:

10. Paul Newman
9. Princess Diana
8. The Beatles
7. Oprah Winfrey
6. Muhammad Ali
5. Michael Jackson
4. Marilyn Monroe
3. Frank Sinatra
2. Madonna
1. Elvis

http://www.nydailynews.co...years.html

Thoughts?

yeah, you forgot bob dylan

Unholyalliance said:

Not exactly, as she's on this list that OP cited in the beginning of this thread as well and she's quite ahead of the Beatles.

There's nothing more amusing than when people post 'facts' that they have no means of actually proving or have never been proven in the first place. Please do go on. =)

Once again, Madonna is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. We're talking about the Beatles and MJ. Keep up.

and there's nothing more amusing than people who side step Poor you. I don't need to post facts. The Beatles ARE far more popular internationally and you know this. Check their stats It eclipses MJ's.

trueiopian said:

MickyDolenz said:

I'm black, and the Fabs were one of the first groups I liked. I even have Magical Mystery Tour (their Graffiti Bridge) on DVD. I used to have it on videotape before that. Also, if blacks don't care about the group, how come so many of them covered Beatle songs?

Michael Jackson included!

I'm sure the same people that think the Beatles made little impact on black people/music are the same ones that think Bob Dylan made little impact too.

[Edited 1/26/11 19:47pm]

awesome post....

nhersey1 said:

musicjunky318 said:

10. Paul Newman
9. Princess Diana
8. The Beatles
7. Oprah Winfrey
6. Muhammad Ali
5. Michael Jackson
4. Marilyn Monroe
3. Frank Sinatra
2. Madonna
1. Elvis

http://www.nydailynews.co...years.html

Thoughts?

yeah, you forgot bob dylan

Not me. The nydailynews.

Graycap23 said:

In my world:

Bruce Lee

James Brown

Prince

Magic Johnson

Halle Berry

Michael Jackson

Al Pacino

Michael Jordan

Malcolm X

Muhammed Ali

in my world al pacino is the 2nd most gorgeous guy on the planet

musicjunky318 said:

nhersey1 said:

yeah, you forgot bob dylan

Not me. The nydailynews.

phew...

nydailynews people are idiots...lol

vainandy said:

trueiopian said:

That's like asking them Luther Vandross or Johnny Cash?

It's not a matter of who they like more, it's a matter of who they are more knowledgeable of and more aware of. Like I said in an earlier post, don't ask them who they like better, ask them to simply list some songs from both Michael Jackson and The Beatles. They don't even have to like the songs, all they have to do is list the songs. That will show you who they have been more exposed to or who they have even cared to be exposed to more. I guarantee you, they could name more Michael Jackson songs than they could name Beatles songs and that goes for a lot of white people also. The 1980s made Michael Jackson huge and whether you liked him or not, you definately knew who he was and you sure as hell couldn't escape his songs because they absolutely wore them out on the radio and video channels for years. The media has worn the damn "Thriller" album out so much that I could care less if I ever hear half of it again.

Being a bigger pop culture icon does not mean that person or artist is more talented than any other person or artist. I think that's why Beatles fans get so bent out of shape when people list folks like Michael Jackson above them. They are definately more talented than Michael Jackson but the list is not rated on talent, it's rated on pop culture. Hell, you have pop culture icons these days that are reality TV show stars who have absolutely no talent whatsoever. And why the hell is someone like Paris Hilton a celebrity anyway? The bitch doesn't sing, dance, act, rap, draw, paint, etc. She has no talent whatsoever and is not an entertainer of any genre but yet she's a pop culture icon these days and a big one.

seriously

last year our students were dancing to Thriller and a teacher had no idea it was Michael Jackson or the title of the song....The teacher is in his 50s and knows about lots of music.... just sayin'

my mother is chaka khan... and she would never let me date Michael because i was too young...

trueiopian said:

The Beatles are far more widespread than MJ.

Stop acting like a child and face the music!

You're just Mad that Seanman speaks the truth , MJ was, is and will always be more widespeard than the beatles.....No one knows a heck about the beatles for instance in the middle east and majority parts of africa.....

I think this is the truth you have to deal with Miss trueiopain , so deal with it

This thread is a dead-end already

!!!

trueiopian said:

I don't need to post facts.

That's because you have none to post.

[img:$uid]http://i.imgur.com/dQ7QJ.jpg[/img:$uid]

[Edited 1/27/11 4:52am]

The thread should remained opened, the org is dead without those kind of threads , a good debate is always good

musicjunky318 said:

seeingvoices12 said:

On what planet? Polyphemus?

The Beatles are MUCH MUCH bigger than Michael. It's not even up for debate.

The Beatles have sold at least 350 million albums worldwide. Do you know who number 2 is?

MJ... with about 200 million before he died. I guess its shot up to about 230 now.

Do you know how large a gap that is? He will never ever catch up. He was never going to. You're attacking the wrong people here. Elvis is the one who isn't as big they make him out to be. The Beatles are a juggernaut, both in fame and sales full stop. They're big everywhere- not just in the US/UK. Look it up. The Beatles are every bit as international as Michael was. A group that broke up 40 years ago are the best selling group in the last decade. If that's not proof enough, then I don't know what is.

If u want to argue, do it with with Madonna, Prince, and Elvis fans. You can win those arguments easily.

Don't come at The Beatles.

Now you It's not about who sold more...

350 million albums ? check the sales, the majority of those sales if they are accurate are from the U.S , UK and parts of europe, especially the U.S

and I'm not attacking anyone at all, both elvis and the beatles didn't reach MJ globaly , sorry but this is the FACT , I'm a beatles fan , but MJ was capable to reach places and parts of the world that beatles could'nt reach , is that so hard to understand ? some delusional people will say otherwise because of their hidden agenda but they have to deal with it, MJ (R.I.P) was capable to reach everywhere

[img:$uid]http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/148448ad-14bf-40fa-8bfe-2dae18f5410c.jpg[/img:$uid]

I would've included the Lolcats on this list. They revolutionized the way cats are viewed.

DEAD at seeingvoices and his failed impersonation of misdiscover

Unholyalliance said:

trueiopian said:

I don't need to post facts.

That's because you have none to post.

I have plenty to post but I won't waste my time pulling up stats on them. You and I both know that the Beatles success eclispes MJ's. But your standom is clouding your senses A pity.

Timmy84 said:

MickyDolenz said:

Sesame Street

Now THAT'S a pop culture icon!

Yeah, many countries have their own local made version of the show. There's a good book about the problems the show with getting funded when it was first created by Joan Cooney, including having a "ghetto" set and the multi-racial cast. I can't think of the title right now. Before Sesame Street, children shows were 'whitebread' like Bozo the Clown and the Micky Mouse Club. Trivia: an unknown young Luther Vandross was part of a choir that appeared on a few of the early episodes.

MickyDolenz said:

Timmy84 said:

Now THAT'S a pop culture icon!

Yeah, many countries have their own local made version of the show. There's a good book about the problems the show with getting funded when it was first created by Joan Cooney, including having a "ghetto" set and the multi-racial cast. I can't think of the title right now. Before Sesame Street, children shows were 'whitebread' like Bozo the Clown and the Micky Mouse Club. Trivia: an unknown young Luther Vandross was part of a choir that appeared on a few of the early episodes.

At 18 nonetheless.

seeingvoices12 said:

The thread should remained opened, the org is dead without those kind of threads , a good debate is always good

musicjunky318 said:

On what planet? Polyphemus?

The Beatles are MUCH MUCH bigger than Michael. It's not even up for debate.

The Beatles have sold at least 350 million albums worldwide. Do you know who number 2 is?

MJ... with about 200 million before he died. I guess its shot up to about 230 now.

Do you know how large a gap that is? He will never ever catch up. He was never going to. You're attacking the wrong people here. Elvis is the one who isn't as big they make him out to be. The Beatles are a juggernaut, both in fame and sales full stop. They're big everywhere- not just in the US/UK. Look it up. The Beatles are every bit as international as Michael was. A group that broke up 40 years ago are the best selling group in the last decade. If that's not proof enough, then I don't know what is.

If u want to argue, do it with with Madonna, Prince, and Elvis fans. You can win those arguments easily.

Don't come at The Beatles.

Now you It's not about who sold more...

350 million albums ? check the sales, the majority of those sales if they are accurate are from the U.S , UK and parts of europe, especially the U.S

and I'm not attacking anyone at all, both elvis and the beatles didn't reach MJ globaly , sorry but this is the FACT , I'm a beatles fan , but MJ was capable to reach places and parts of the world that beatles could'nt reach , is that so hard to understand ? some delusional people will say otherwise because of their hidden agenda but they have to deal with it, MJ (R.I.P) was capable to reach everywhere

If somebody has 10 stacks of pens in one corner and another person owns 20, wouldn't we all agree that the latter has more supply?

I don't get whenever it's a Michael vs Beatles debate MJ floons try to convince everybody that sales don't matter even though they're the first ones to bring his receipts to the forefront when it's a Michael vs. anyone else battle. I wonder why. If they eclipse him in every market except those detectable in Africa, what else would you call it? It's common sense.

They've outdone him. The Beatles play second fiddle to nobody. MJ is next in line but he still concedes #1 to them.

[Edited 1/27/11 11:38am]

musicjunky318 said:

seeingvoices12 said:

The thread should remained opened, the org is dead without those kind of threads , a good debate is always good

Now you It's not about who sold more...

350 million albums ? check the sales, the majority of those sales if they are accurate are from the U.S , UK and parts of europe, especially the U.S

and I'm not attacking anyone at all, both elvis and the beatles didn't reach MJ globaly , sorry but this is the FACT , I'm a beatles fan , but MJ was capable to reach places and parts of the world that beatles could'nt reach , is that so hard to understand ? some delusional people will say otherwise because of their hidden agenda but they have to deal with it, MJ (R.I.P) was capable to reach everywhere

If somebody has 10 stacks of pens in one corner and another person owns 20, wouldn't we all agree that the latter has more supply?

I don't get whenever it's a Michael vs Beatles debate MJ floons try to convince everybody that sales don't matter even though they're the first ones to bring his receipts to the forefront when it's a Michael vs. anyone else battle. I wonder why. If they eclipse him in every market except those detectable in Africa, what else would you call it? It's common sense.

They've outdone him. The Beatles play second fiddle to nobody. MJ is next in line but he still concedes #1 to them.

[Edited 1/27/11 11:38am]

You just don't seem to get it. I, for one, am no MJ "floon", but I am not naive to say that his POP ICON STATUS is second to The Beatles. You keep bringing up sales, but sales have nothing to do with the impact an act has made on pop culture. Sales just show how many folks bought your record. When I see little kids dressing up in bowl-haircut wigs and suits, or hear people in the 'hood singing "Can't Buy Me Love", or when I see grown men and women STILL boo-hooing over Paul McCartney's latest announced tour (which they don't), then and only then will I think The Beatles have reached Michael's plateau of pop icon. Until then, they're numero dos.

SEANMAN said:

musicjunky318 said:

If somebody has 10 stacks of pens in one corner and another person owns 20, wouldn't we all agree that the latter has more supply?

I don't get whenever it's a Michael vs Beatles debate MJ floons try to convince everybody that sales don't matter even though they're the first ones to bring his receipts to the forefront when it's a Michael vs. anyone else battle. I wonder why. If they eclipse him in every market except those detectable in Africa, what else would you call it? It's common sense.

They've outdone him. The Beatles play second fiddle to nobody. MJ is next in line but he still concedes #1 to them.

[Edited 1/27/11 11:38am]

You just don't seem to get it. I, for one, am no MJ "floon", but I am not naive to say that his POP ICON STATUS is second to The Beatles. You keep bringing up sales, but sales have nothing to do with the impact an act has made on pop culture. Sales just show how many folks bought your record. When I see little kids dressing up in bowl-haircut wigs and suits, or hear people in the 'hood singing "Can't Buy Me Love", or when I see grown men and women STILL boo-hooing over Paul McCartney's latest announced tour (which they don't), then and only then will I think The Beatles have reached Michael's plateau of pop icon. Until then, they're numero dos.

So by that logic my Britney eclipses the Beatles too then right? Cause I've seen the schoolgirl outfit, the snake, the Toxic flesh-diamond suit, and the stipper-pole black-haired get-up for Halloween several times.

SEANMAN said:

You just don't seem to get it. I, for one, am no MJ "floon", but I am not naive to say that his POP ICON STATUS is second to The Beatles. You keep bringing up sales, but sales have nothing to do with the impact an act has made on pop culture. Sales just show how many folks bought your record. When I see little kids dressing up in bowl-haircut wigs and suits, or hear people in the 'hood singing "Can't Buy Me Love", or when I see grown men and women STILL boo-hooing over Paul McCartney's latest announced tour (which they don't), then and only then will I think The Beatles have reached Michael's plateau of pop icon. Until then, they're numero dos.

James Brown doesn't have the huge sales or mainstream popularity, but in a musical sense, he probably is more of an influence than both the Fabs and the Gloved One put together.