badujunkie said:

That's where I disagree. YES he had some AMAZING business strategies, up until about 1989...the Beatles catalog...the 'weirdness' card...planting stories in the press...but he didn't realize the monster he was creating. Mike ended up being his own worst PR enemy. All that sleeping in an oxygen chamber/Bubbles/surgery shit ended up setting the stage for more and more folks to BELIEVE the molestation charges. And despise him, personally.

Madonna, on the other hand, always remained her own biggest supporter, champion, and though her narcissism ended up backfiring for awhile, she never went into the territory that would allow some kind of allegation or flimsy accusation be SO damaging, for the rest of her career. As well as he's done since his untimely death, business-wise, there is still a faction of the public that believes MJ was a pedophile, a child molestor, a predator...he would be even MORE beloved, be selling even more records TODAY, had those allegations held less weight with the average, simpleton idiots who believed that bleaching his skin and touching kids were probably one in the same.

[Edited 2/4/11 16:08pm]

I kind of don't understand how you think that not having planted those stories or having that monkey around with him would have helped his case from '93-09. Even without all of those planted stories, there was the big factor of him getting lighter and his nose was getting smaller. All of which he never spoke about until his Oprah interview. I believe that before all that there was already reports/rumors going around that he was taking females hormones to sustain his voice and that he was gay. Weird/kooky stories or not, I still think that the big thing was how he looked. If people think he looks/acts different, they're going to treat him differently. Just ask every single person out-casted in school or just take a look back at history.

Had it not been for the fact that he was physically changing, I really don't think the slam against him would have been as hard, because he would still have, physically, conformed to society's perception of gender and race. Due to the fact that he crossed those lines contributed more significantly, I feel, in the demise of his public image, more specifically in the US. Yet, at the same time, I think that might have helped his legacy since future generations might view things a little differently than many of us.

That's the one of the big things that Madonna didn't have deal with in her life or in her career. Had Madonna slowly transformed into a man during her career I wonder would she had suffered a somewhat similar fate and scorn from society?

Marrk said:

Japha11 said:

I really don't get this. Are we seriously comparing Michael Jackson and Madonna?

All of Michael's albums from OTW to Invincible are at least very good albums. Invincible is a good album.

I don't take Madonna seriously as an artist. "She's done this style, this and this blah blah" She isn't someone who is born with music in her blood (only way I can describe it). She isn't.. REAL!

You see Michael, Prince, Stevie, Marvin. Even Justin Timberlake, Usher, Beyonce. These people are so into music, I just see Madonna as someone I can't take seriously as an artist and musician.. NAAAHH Not very talented. Come on. She's a business woman.

And don't start comparing their vocals and saying 'depends how you receive vocals'. Whut da fuck?! Huh!?! stfu

The thing about Madonna that gets to me is.. OK she might write or co-write stuff, but i see her sat there ticking off lists of hot producers, "Well there's this Orbit/Mirwais guy, he's really hot in dance clubs, Timbaland too in Hip Hop, i must have these guys". makes phonecall, " Hello Timbaland, Madonnna here, Yeah the real Madonna, I've got this song i wrote, you're so awesome. This really could be mutually beneficial. Wanna put some beats to it? yeah? cool."

"OK see you tomorrow"

I never got the impression Mike really did that, it's not like Q was a 'hot' pop music producer. Even in latter years, this Dr Freeze character, never really heard of him = not hot. No Neptunes, No Timbaland. Michaels' finished work is more his own audio 'vision' i feel.

Dr. Freeze was responsible for 'Poison' and Quincy was already well accomplished before he and Michael worked together. I think those of our generation don't quite understand these are people who've been around for awhile, and that's who michael approached rather than flavour of the month, though he's made exceptions like with Teddy Riley in the early 90's and Rodney Jerkins in the late 90's/early 00's

MJ's best is between Off the Wall and Thriller. The highs of thriller were higher then those of OTW but OTW is more consistent

Invincible is actually a better album then given credit for. Yes its a little too long and has maybe 6 songs that shouldnt be there. But the best stuff like "You rock my world" and "whatever happens" is excellent.

History is his weakest album IMO. I'd take songs like whatever happens and you rock my world over anything on history

alphastreet said:

Marrk said:

The thing about Madonna that gets to me is.. OK she might write or co-write stuff, but i see her sat there ticking off lists of hot producers, "Well there's this Orbit/Mirwais guy, he's really hot in dance clubs, Timbaland too in Hip Hop, i must have these guys". makes phonecall, " Hello Timbaland, Madonnna here, Yeah the real Madonna, I've got this song i wrote, you're so awesome. This really could be mutually beneficial. Wanna put some beats to it? yeah? cool."

"OK see you tomorrow"

I never got the impression Mike really did that, it's not like Q was a 'hot' pop music producer. Even in latter years, this Dr Freeze character, never really heard of him = not hot. No Neptunes, No Timbaland. Michaels' finished work is more his own audio 'vision' i feel.

Dr. Freeze was responsible for 'Poison' and Quincy was already well accomplished before he and Michael worked together. I think those of our generation don't quite understand these are people who've been around for awhile, and that's who michael approached rather than flavour of the month, though he's made exceptions like with Teddy Riley in the early 90's and Rodney Jerkins in the late 90's/early 00's

By the time Teddy Riley started working with MJ, he had been established long enough to not be considered "flavor of the month."

MJJstudent said:

my favourite michael albums:

the second half, not the first, 'greatest hits' part. this is the point where michael decided not to care... and i absolutely love him for it. he was letting everyone know where he stood.

i mean, this has got everyone from phillinganes, george duke, patti austin, paulinho da costa, louis johnson... i mean- AWESOMENESS!

i think i am alone in this one... to me, this album is a sign of a maturity that hadn't been there previously- a type of maturity which comes directly with age, and parenthood... you even see some gray hairs. with this album i also felt a sort of resignation, a vision of the end. not necessarily of his life, but of another stage of it. it's a beautiful thing.

this is a severely underrated piece from michael's. it didn't sell well at all, and motown didn't know what to do with him. he handled the ballads beautifully, and you saw with this album (and the period in full beginning here) what was to come from him- he did a lot of the vocal cues we ended up recognizing from him. he was a beautiful swan. holland/dozier/holland return to the fold (with brian holland at the helm), and in my opinion did some of their best work. the musicians take on everything from chicago to barry white to tin pan alley, and michael handles it all beautifully.

dangerous is a pretty close runner up, after these four...

No, you are not alone in your praise of Invincible. I think it was Michael's sexiest, most mature sounding vocals of any album yet. I absolutely love, Butterflies, Whatever Happens, Break of Dawn, Heaven Can Wait. It was Michael as we have never heard him before and I loved/love it. STILL one of my favorite MJ albums of all time.

Unholyalliance said:

SoulAlive said:

I'm a huge fan of Michael but I feel that he didn't allow himself to grow and evolve as an artist the way that Madonna has.'Ray Of Light' was a bold,challenging album for Madonna and it was unlike anything she had ever done.I can't really say the same about most of MJ's post-Thriller work.

I, respectfully, disagree. I do agree that Madonna's Ray Of Light was one of her best albums and it was one of the most adventurous and has been credited to bringing house/electronica to the American pop music scene (as well as being my favorite album from her), but I don't find that MJ's post-Thriller work stagnant. While I do think that he kept to the similar themes in terms of dark/bordering emo subject matter such as paranoia, 'evil women', the eventual expansion to social commentary & etc. I think that he explored a lot in terms of blending genres and his songwriting improved dramatically from when he first started. Especially in his 90s work, it's some of his most diverse. You have the operatic pop of Childhood to the industrial rock of Morphine. Michael Jackson of the Thriller era was not capable of such songwriting as it was not evident in his work at that time.

While you and some others may not have been huge fans of it, doesn't mean that he stayed in one place artistically in the least bit.

Exactly! Michael's music evolved greatly after Thriller. However, it was the media, public and some of his fans who could never get got past Thriller and the sales of Thriller. EVERYTHING that he released after Thriller was compared to that album. It was as if the public, critics, media and some fans were brain dead and couldn't get past the aura of Thriller. Michael's BEST albums, Dangerous, HIStory, Invincible- were all after Thriller. His subsequent work became more personal, more diverse, more challenging, more eclectic, etc. Of course, SOME couldn't see past Thriller and Off The Wall. Sad.

Free2BMe said:

Unholyalliance said:

I, respectfully, disagree. I do agree that Madonna's Ray Of Light was one of her best albums and it was one of the most adventurous and has been credited to bringing house/electronica to the American pop music scene (as well as being my favorite album from her), but I don't find that MJ's post-Thriller work stagnant. While I do think that he kept to the similar themes in terms of dark/bordering emo subject matter such as paranoia, 'evil women', the eventual expansion to social commentary & etc. I think that he explored a lot in terms of blending genres and his songwriting improved dramatically from when he first started. Especially in his 90s work, it's some of his most diverse. You have the operatic pop of Childhood to the industrial rock of Morphine. Michael Jackson of the Thriller era was not capable of such songwriting as it was not evident in his work at that time.

While you and some others may not have been huge fans of it, doesn't mean that he stayed in one place artistically in the least bit.

Exactly! Michael's music evolved greatly after Thriller. However, it was the media, public and some of his fans who could never get got past Thriller and the sales of Thriller. EVERYTHING that he released after Thriller was compared to that album. It was as if the public, critics, media and some fans were brain dead and couldn't get past the aura of Thriller. Michael's BEST albums, Dangerous, HIStory, Invincible- were all after Thriller. His subsequent work became more personal, more diverse, more challenging, more eclectic, etc. Of course, SOME couldn't see past Thriller and Off The Wall. Sad.

i concur, free... i find his work to be tremendously better after thriller, because he became more about truth and light... or i should say, he was finally able to free himself from the elements which trapped him. i mean, 'another part of me' was the beginning, and 'jam' was the declaration!

Free2BMe said:

MJJstudent said:

my favourite michael albums:

the second half, not the first, 'greatest hits' part. this is the point where michael decided not to care... and i absolutely love him for it. he was letting everyone know where he stood.

i mean, this has got everyone from phillinganes, george duke, patti austin, paulinho da costa, louis johnson... i mean- AWESOMENESS!

i think i am alone in this one... to me, this album is a sign of a maturity that hadn't been there previously- a type of maturity which comes directly with age, and parenthood... you even see some gray hairs. with this album i also felt a sort of resignation, a vision of the end. not necessarily of his life, but of another stage of it. it's a beautiful thing.

this is a severely underrated piece from michael's. it didn't sell well at all, and motown didn't know what to do with him. he handled the ballads beautifully, and you saw with this album (and the period in full beginning here) what was to come from him- he did a lot of the vocal cues we ended up recognizing from him. he was a beautiful swan. holland/dozier/holland return to the fold (with brian holland at the helm), and in my opinion did some of their best work. the musicians take on everything from chicago to barry white to tin pan alley, and michael handles it all beautifully.

dangerous is a pretty close runner up, after these four...

No, you are not alone in your praise of Invincible. I think it was Michael's sexiest, most mature sounding vocals of any album yet. I absolutely love, Butterflies, Whatever Happens, Break of Dawn, Heaven Can Wait. It was Michael as we have never heard him before and I loved/love it. STILL one of my favorite MJ albums of all time.

WOW! i am not alone... my sister used to make fun of me, she said, you're the only person i know who likes that record. she actually predicted that when he transcended, all these people would jump on it... and what happened? all these publications named it 'album of the decade' or something... but i see here, people aren't to into it. i guess you and me are alone in this, free... nice to meet you. the songs you named are amazing.

MJJstudent said:

Free2BMe said:

No, you are not alone in your praise of Invincible. I think it was Michael's sexiest, most mature sounding vocals of any album yet. I absolutely love, Butterflies, Whatever Happens, Break of Dawn, Heaven Can Wait. It was Michael as we have never heard him before and I loved/love it. STILL one of my favorite MJ albums of all time.

WOW! i am not alone... my sister used to make fun of me, she said, you're the only person i know who likes that record. she actually predicted that when he transcended, all these people would jump on it... and what happened? all these publications named it 'album of the decade' or something... but i see here, people aren't to into it. i guess you and me are alone in this, free... nice to meet you. the songs you named are amazing.

There are plenty of us here who are into it (or at least parts of it). I like Invincible as an album -- warts and all -- but I like every other MJ album more.

idc about Madge but Mike's best is Bad (least amount of filler for me) and worst...Blood On The Dancefloor.

Oh and lol @ ppl who still think MJ planted stories within the media. Any evidence? The man was haunted from day one by the media, what makes any sane person think he'd turn around and work with them? The man who wore a jacket saying "Don't spend your cash on that filthy tabloid trash" and basically used the HIStory album as a "Fuck you" to them, is not someone who would also plant weird stories about himself, therefore adding to his own personal torment/pain.

You are not the only ones that like Invincible, I was playing it constantly for the first 2 years it was out or something like that as well. I was saying Bad, Dangerous and Invincible were his 3 best. And I loved playing it alongside his motown stuff, solo and with the brothers, and the Jacksons epic albums. I was into pop/rock mj way more before Invincible, but Invincible made me appreciation soulful/r&b mj though I always loved both. I love switching between the two as well.

I remember there was an album of the year Billboard poll too in 2002 and we fans spammed it and made Invincible win at 90 percent or something like that

[Edited 2/6/11 7:44am]

purplesweat said:

Oh and lol @ ppl who still think MJ planted stories within the media. Any evidence? The man was haunted from day one by the media, what makes any sane person think he'd turn around and work with them? The man who wore a jacket saying "Don't spend your cash on that filthy tabloid trash" and basically used the HIStory album as a "Fuck you" to them, is not someone who would also plant weird stories about himself, therefore adding to his own personal torment/pain.

i had to read that like 7 times and i still don't follow

purplesweat said:

again rules and regulations only apply to certain people!

badujunkie said:

purplesweat said:

Oh and lol @ ppl who still think MJ planted stories within the media. Any evidence? The man was haunted from day one by the media, what makes any sane person think he'd turn around and work with them? The man who wore a jacket saying "Don't spend your cash on that filthy tabloid trash" and basically used the HIStory album as a "Fuck you" to them, is not someone who would also plant weird stories about himself, therefore adding to his own personal torment/pain.

i had to read that like 7 times and i still don't follow

What's not to get? Someone who despises the media doesn't also secretly work with them to "seem mysterious". Michael didn't need to create publicity any way, he had the talent and was always more focused on that anyway. This is the man who didn't care if the media reported on his charity work, so long as he got out there and helped people. Him turning around and calling up The Sun or some publication to deliberately damage his own image just doesn't add up. His last name is Jackson not Kardashian

It's sad that if the media repeats something enough, even fans with good intentions will still believe what they're told about him. All it is is the media attempting to pass the blame of how they destroyed the worlds greatest talent's reputation onto him. They're too gutless to even own up to that.

But michael is a prankster, isn't it prankster like to say something like "i could talk about the elephant man's bones and they would believe it" and BOOM! I could see him doing it, but I don't know if it's really true or not though Randy J. Taborelli implies it...and can be full of shit too.

purplesweat said:

badujunkie said:

i had to read that like 7 times and i still don't follow

What's not to get? Someone who despises the media doesn't also secretly work with them to "seem mysterious". Michael didn't need to create publicity any way, he had the talent and was always more focused on that anyway. This is the man who didn't care if the media reported on his charity work, so long as he got out there and helped people. Him turning around and calling up The Sun or some publication to deliberately damage his own image just doesn't add up. His last name is Jackson not Kardashian

It's sad that if the media repeats something enough, even fans with good intentions will still believe what they're told about him. All it is is the media attempting to pass the blame of how they destroyed the worlds greatest talent's reputation onto him. They're too gutless to even own up to that.

okay... we must remember that michael ws a keen follower of people like h.p. barnum. h.p. barnum was an extreme manipulator. it's no secret that michael planted some of those stories in the earlier part of his career. michael has actually acknowledged this in earlier interviews, particularly from the 1980s. he did so much as put his sisters up on his games. this was the brilliance of michael. instead of speaking directly to the press, he'd get either his sisters or frank dileo to do it.

check some of those interviews (print and audio) from the late 70s and early 80s. he totally acknowledges how he manipulated the media. he manipulated the media BECAUSE he despised media. i think what he did was brilliant. i have interviews where he acknowledged (in his own michael way) that he was the one to plant the hyperbaric chamber and elephant man stories. it's also acknowledged that his people created the whole 'king of pop' thing.

unfortunately, a lot of this stuff backfired on him, and it got to far, to the point where he didn't have control of what the press said. when he met up with uri geller, i think this was a true beginning of the end, in relation to this aspect of himself. i am not sure why people are so opposed to michael manipulating the media to say things. i think that is the ultimate double cross. a pure stroke of brilliance on his part. he was the last of his kind to master it, because he was the last of his kind to exist before the state of how media was presented changed. he learned from berry gordy, david copperfield, his father, h.p. barnum and so many others how to manipulate media to great affect.

this shows you how gullible those who run media organizations are. people who run them rarely to never never fact check. michael saw this, ever since he was a child. the press kits from motown were the biggest forms of manipulation ever. michael saw how much power this could bring.

that vid... er... 'short film' of 'leave me alone'? that is PURE h.p. barnum. pure marketing brilliance.

michael openly acknowledged that his lack of interviews contributed to his mistique. because the press could create more stories about him. he also never denied some of those stories. he knew the key to one's career disintegrating was overexposure.

i love michael (and consider him to be the greatest teacher who ever lived), but he isn't GOD. and he's lied many times in his lifetime. it's impossible to believe everything he's said. i look at him this way... it's similar to that tony montana quote: "i always tell the truth, even when i lie." i believe this is representative of michael. even when he lied, he kept it real. he didn't lie just to lie. that's pretty easy to tell. it was all part of the presentation. to tell all those lies was to acknowledge the fabrication of 'michael jackson, (tm)'. what people didn't want was the real person. they wanted the fabrication. this is why i say what i say about him, in relation to that quote. very rarely did michael present his 'real' self to people. because his 'real' self would break the illusion of the perception.

michael was trying to teach people and collectively, we did not listen. or we refused to hear him.

i happen to be one of those people who did NOT believe the stories printed about him, but i also acknowledge the brilliance in the stories being planted by either him or his people. i mean, even the lie he told bashir, that (a. he was dating the woman who is blanket's mother (and that she was black), then 20 minutes later in the program that (b. he did not know her at all. THIS, good people, is part of the brilliance of michael jackson. i can't think of one person who publicly called him out on that lie. and still, people are fighting over who the mother is.

complete brilliance.

this is just my opinion, it belongs to no one else, as far as i know... thanks.

hhhhdmt said:

MJ's best is between Off the Wall and Thriller. The highs of thriller were higher then those of OTW but OTW is more consistent

Invincible is actually a better album then given credit for. Yes its a little too long and has maybe 6 songs that shouldnt be there. But the best stuff like "You rock my world" and "whatever happens" is excellent.

History is his weakest album IMO. I'd take songs like whatever happens and you rock my world over anything on history

hee hee... i LOVE HIStory! that is his artistic moment of truth there... he was just telling you what was going on in his world, and beyond. i think this work is much better than thriller. i appreciate how he got outside of 'girl let's dance/i wanna love you' mode, and started speaking about socio-political issues. this is the michael i love the most. so after thriller is when i believe his art improved.

alphastreet said:

You are not the only ones that like Invincible, I was playing it constantly for the first 2 years it was out or something like that as well. I was saying Bad, Dangerous and Invincible were his 3 best. And I loved playing it alongside his motown stuff, solo and with the brothers, and the Jacksons epic albums. I was into pop/rock mj way more before Invincible, but Invincible made me appreciation soulful/r&b mj though I always loved both. I love switching between the two as well.

I remember there was an album of the year Billboard poll too in 2002 and we fans spammed it and made Invincible win at 90 percent or something like that

[Edited 2/6/11 7:44am]

WOW!

MJJstudent said:

alphastreet said:

You are not the only ones that like Invincible, I was playing it constantly for the first 2 years it was out or something like that as well. I was saying Bad, Dangerous and Invincible were his 3 best. And I loved playing it alongside his motown stuff, solo and with the brothers, and the Jacksons epic albums. I was into pop/rock mj way more before Invincible, but Invincible made me appreciation soulful/r&b mj though I always loved both. I love switching between the two as well.

I remember there was an album of the year Billboard poll too in 2002 and we fans spammed it and made Invincible win at 90 percent or something like that

[Edited 2/6/11 7:44am]

WOW!

yeah and I remember Butterflies being mentioned often on year end R&B Billboard charts, as it was #2 for 5 weeks on the r&b charts

I really believe that if there were no Sony issues, it would have done as well as Dangerous, even if it didn't end up selling the exact same amount in the end and just under it.

alphastreet said:

But michael is a prankster, isn't it prankster like to say something like "i could talk about the elephant man's bones and they would believe it" and BOOM! I could see him doing it, but I don't know if it's really true or not though Randy J. Taborelli implies it...and can be full of shit too.

exactly... i already wrote a pretty long response to the comments somewhere on here... michael has already acknowledged that those stories were planted. i have to dig through the interviews i have. a lot of what taraborelli states in his books can actually be traced... but some of it is dramatic fabrication. some of the manipulative interviews michael did were actually WITH tarraborelli, so i think he would know a little bit of something with how michael manipulated media in his favor. i really am not sure why people don't wanna believe michael is not capable of being manipulative. i mean, he learned from the best.

alphastreet said:

MJJstudent said:

WOW!

yeah and I remember Butterflies being mentioned often on year end R&B Billboard charts, as it was #2 for 5 weeks on the r&b charts

I really believe that if there were no Sony issues, it would have done as well as Dangerous, even if it didn't end up selling the exact same amount in the end and just under it.

yeah, they stopped promotion because michael wanted out on the contract. and sony wasn't having it. they wanted ATV.

nhersey1 said:

again rules and regulations only apply to certain people!

huh? i am confused by this one, actually, hee hee...

I'm foggy right now, I can't remember when Michael "told " Randy this, but a lot of fans like to say he only talked to Randy in the late 70's through that interview mentioned in the book where he gets Janet to "transcribe" for him. And I heard he read the first magic & the madness and "approved" it though fans think he didn't really read it.

I wish Michael didn't tell Sony he's leaving just before the album, it would have been smart to wait till after the promo. Madonna made the same mistake with Warner brothers for the Hard Candy album, cause IMO there are some promising tracks on there. It's like self-sabotage. I have a good example. My friend just got promoted to another position at her job she's been at for over a year, but she wants to leave the country this spring and take a year or two off. She decided not to tell them right now in case she sabotages not getting the job back later on without proving herself first, and to wait closer to the date.

Marrk said:

Japha11 said:

I really don't get this. Are we seriously comparing Michael Jackson and Madonna?

All of Michael's albums from OTW to Invincible are at least very good albums. Invincible is a good album.

I don't take Madonna seriously as an artist. "She's done this style, this and this blah blah" She isn't someone who is born with music in her blood (only way I can describe it). She isn't.. REAL!

You see Michael, Prince, Stevie, Marvin. Even Justin Timberlake, Usher, Beyonce. These people are so into music, I just see Madonna as someone I can't take seriously as an artist and musician.. NAAAHH Not very talented. Come on. She's a business woman.

And don't start comparing their vocals and saying 'depends how you receive vocals'. Whut da fuck?! Huh!?! stfu

The thing about Madonna that gets to me is.. OK she might write or co-write stuff, but i see her sat there ticking off lists of hot producers, "Well there's this Orbit/Mirwais guy, he's really hot in dance clubs, Timbaland too in Hip Hop, i must have these guys". makes phonecall, " Hello Timbaland, Madonnna here, Yeah the real Madonna, I've got this song i wrote, you're so awesome. This really could be mutually beneficial. Wanna put some beats to it? yeah? cool."

"OK see you tomorrow"

I never got the impression Mike really did that, it's not like Q was a 'hot' pop music producer. Even in latter years, this Dr Freeze character, never really heard of him = not hot. No Neptunes, No Timbaland. Michaels' finished work is more his own audio 'vision' i feel.

Tootttaalllyy agree!! She just moves with trends and what's fashionable. Making music for her is not like it is for Michael, Prince, Stevie... these people ARE MUSIC. There's such a big difference. Respect to Madonna for her acheivements, business etc... but leave it there. She's rather talentless.

alphastreet said:

I'm foggy right now, I can't remember when Michael "told " Randy this, but a lot of fans like to say he only talked to Randy in the late 70's through that interview mentioned in the book where he gets Janet to "transcribe" for him. And I heard he read the first magic & the madness and "approved" it though fans think he didn't really read it.

I wish Michael didn't tell Sony he's leaving just before the album, it would have been smart to wait till after the promo. Madonna made the same mistake with Warner brothers for the Hard Candy album, cause IMO there are some promising tracks on there. It's like self-sabotage. I have a good example. My friend just got promoted to another position at her job she's been at for over a year, but she wants to leave the country this spring and take a year or two off. She decided not to tell them right now in case she sabotages not getting the job back later on without proving herself first, and to wait closer to the date.

your friend better be really careful, because those things slip out, and her job may be at risk... i do know people this happened to.

there is audio i did hear in the early 80s, when michael got la toya to do the interview for him. someone was actually putting the cassette up for bid on ebay, and put an audio link up. i have seen print interviews like this, but the audio is amazing, just to hear how he manipulated the media.

i was not in michaels' shoes, so i can't say what led him to wanting to end his contract before the major promotion. i know a lot of artists do it though. just from researching michael's relationship with sony in the past though, i have to say i kind of see where he is coming from. perhaps he thought it would have been like 1991 though, when he was negotiating the sony deal, and they were trying to keep him (because he was lucrative).

he saw how times have changed. his goal was to gain the full rights to his music back. and there was a clause in the contract he was not familiar with, that he wasn't getting the rights back until some years later. then ensued a long battle between sony and michael. people want to emphasize the mottola thing, but it was the parent japanese company giving orders to the u.s. division.

michael was there for the whole thing; for the change from CBS to sony; for yetnikoff getting kicked out, to mottola weaseling his way in. also from looking at his history with sony, i don't think they would have put that much promotion into the invincible album anyways, and michael knew this. so he wanted out. sony would not fund the MSG concerts he did. they wanted him to do a tour for the album, and he did not want to. so david guest funded those shows. sony would not fund 'what more can i give'- that benifit for families of the 2001 victims...

i maintain that ATV was a huge factor in the battle between michael and sony. he maintained for years that he would be murdered due to these contracts. as michael owed money to sony, i believe they did as much as they could to NOT promote his career, so they could further take percentages from ATV. michael did not want to do this, so he kept taking out loans from bank of america, etc.

i think this is largely what this whole posthumous album thing is about. how sony leaked the album themselves, how they put the fake songs, how mottola's on tv talking about how he's the gatekeeper for michael's music... i think this is all intentional. the estate made this huge ridiculous deal with sony, and sony wants to make sure the estate fails. i am not a fan of those who run the estate either, but that's a different conversation.

and tarabborelli actually saw michael in the later years... they just didn't have the in-depth interview like in the past; but they did run into each other in more recent times. i haven't heard to much about michael reading raraborreli's book, but i think he read a lot more about himself than he let on. he was extremely self-conscious, and did want to know what people were saying about him. why wouldn't he?

i try not to have too many conversations with a lot of the fan base; i get too much grief from them due to my views, and because i choose not to insist he is perfect. i love the man, but i am gonna call him out on some things if i feel the need to do that.

Marrk said:

The thing about Madonna that gets to me is.. OK she might write or co-write stuff, but i see her sat there ticking off lists of hot producers, "Well there's this Orbit/Mirwais guy, he's really hot in dance clubs, Timbaland too in Hip Hop, i must have these guys". makes phonecall, " Hello Timbaland, Madonnna here, Yeah the real Madonna, I've got this song i wrote, you're so awesome. This really could be mutually beneficial. Wanna put some beats to it? yeah? cool."

"OK see you tomorrow"

I never got the impression Mike really did that, it's not like Q was a 'hot' pop music producer. Even in latter years, this Dr Freeze character, never really heard of him = not hot. No Neptunes, No Timbaland. Michaels' finished work is more his own audio 'vision' i feel.

lol..I gotta disagree with much of what you said

Michael Jackson most certainly worked with "hot" producers throughout his entire career.I don't know how old you are but I can tell you that Quincy Jones was definitely a "hot" producer when Michael began working with him.By the time Michael went into the studio to record the 'Thriller' album,Quincy was arguably the hottest producer in all of pop music.You mentioned Dr. Freeze,but what about Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis,R.Kelly,Rodney Jerkins,Teddy Riley,Babyface and several other hot producers that Michael worked with after Quincy? During the recording of 'Invincible,he also recorded songs with Lauryn Hill,The Neptunes,Wyclef,Timbaland and Missy,and basically anyone else who was 'hot' during that time period (1998-2001).

I always got the impression that,when he was preparing a new album,Michael would look at the Billboard charts,see what is selling,and make a few phone calls He even recorded a song with 50 Cent...lol...I bet that Michael didn't even like the music of 50 Cent.He just wanted to work with whomever is popular.He has always been this way.Go back and watch the "Liberian Girl" video.He always liked to surround himself with popular people.Listen to the spoken part at the end of "Whatever Happens".That's his way of bragging "I got Carlos Santana on my album"...lol...before 'Supernatural' (which sold millions and won 8 Grammys),Michael never even expressed an interest in Santana.

Now,Madonna has done this throughout her career too,but she's done several albums with unknown,under-the-radar producers too.Patrick Leonard wasn't exactly a household name when she worked with him in the 80s.Ditto for William Orbit (Ray Of Light),Mirwais (Music,American Life) and Stuart Price (Confessions On A Dancefloor).Some of these guys only became popular after working with her.The last album 'Hard Candy' was an obvious attempt to be "commercial" but she doesn't do albums like that all the time.

MrSmoketoomuch said:

SoulAlive said:

I just feel that he stayed with the same type of sound for too long: a hard,driving R&B dance sound.The uptempo songs on 'Invincible' are stale and formulaic and didn't take him into any new directions.It's basically the same sound we heard on 'HIStory' and 'Blood On The Dancefloor'.While he was doing these albums,Madonna was doing things like 'Evita','Ray Of Light'....blending acoustic rock and electronica on 'American Life',making a retro dance album aimed at the dancefloor ('Confessions') and then finally going back to an R&B sound on 'Hard Candy'.Michael was such an amazingly talented artist but I think he was struck in his comfort zone for too long.....afraid to take chances and try different beats and sounds.

but variety doesn't instantly mean it's better. people like Stevie Wonder or EW&F always sticked to their home genre (Secret Life of Plants may be seen as the only exception... but we know how that ended...)

No,it doesn't.But I think you can branch out,try new things,experiement and still create some amazing music.