alphastreet said:

If you don't like this sticky thread, simply don't come here. It's as simple as that. There were complaints of flooding anyways before, so why bring THAT back?

I don't come here. Thats the point.

If we're still afraid of MJ fans flooding,

then honestly my point has already been made about the fanticism...

BabyBeMine said:

[Snip - luv4u]

Why do you keep on coming back?

smoothcriminal12 said:

BabyBeMine said:

[Snip - luv4u]

Why do you keep on coming back?

with an ironic username mind you

[Snip - luv4u]

My reaction after reading thru the last few pages of the thread:

And now its time to move on to a much more important discussion---would Michael have watched this movie? Would he have loved it?

Yeah, I think he would've

Btw, this is most definitely NOT a sexy movie, dont let the video thumbnail fool you

[Edited 3/11/11 8:06am]

GettOffMyLand said:

angel345 said:

Well, it is good to know that you do not believe that all MJ fans are insane. That statement is so old and holds no weight.

I'd be saying something about myself then

WOWWWWWWWWWWWW

Someone is mad and worried that MJ's sticky thread still exist after two years ? woow

There are so much more things in the world to worry about , like things happening in the middle east and japan , Grow the hell up and leave the thread if you don't like it....stupidity.

TonyVanDam said:

Militant said:

Exactly Timmy. Some fans have short memories.

Farrakhan is two-faced and shady as fuck. He snaked out and killed Malcolm, he's intolerant and hateful and people wanna call him a genius?

OFF-TOPIC: Why the hell is some people still thinking that Farrakhan had something to do with the assassination of Malcolm X, despite the fact that there were "double agents" that were playing off both Malcolm AND the Nation Of Islam?!?

BACK ON TOPIC: My memory is still very long Militant. I haven't forgotten about the harsh things that Farrakhan used to say about Michael (BTW, the thing Farrakhan used to say about Prince were a lot worse than what was said about Michael!). But after Michael & Farrakhan talk it out for the first time, Farrakhan's views about Michael change greatly. And when Michael started to have legal trouble and his issue with the music industry (especially Tommy Mottola), Farrakhan was one of a good number of people that defended him.

Now if you want to single out anyone for being two-faced, what about Oprah? Oh hell, at least Farrakhan had Michael's back the whole time when Michael was basically fighting for his life in court facing those (bullshit-ass) child molestation changes. Oprah on the other hand, treated Michael like "guilty until proven innocent" the whole damn time and then waited until AFTER Michael's death to start saying nice things about him like she never said anything wrong.

Granted, I agree with you & Timmy that Farrakhan is no angel. But I feel that Michael & Randy did right by taking their chances with Farrakhan as their ally than freaking two-faced backstabbing Oprah.

Do you know how many people in his lifetime popped a lot of crap about MJ, or even had subjective views because of what the media fed them, but later on changed their views after they got to know him, and yes I do agree that Farrakhan is no angel.

I didn't get to read everything through completely, but I do see familiar arguments sprouting up though.

In reality there are all different types of fans: casuals, hardcores, & elitists are the main categories though. (I'm sure there's many more in between, but I can’t think of what to refer to them as, but the casuals are to the bottom of the spectrum.)

Either way, even if our levels of fandom are different, we are still fans of the same person and/or his art. I don't think any of us should forget that. No matter how 'normal' you consider yourself to be; at the end of the day you are still a ‘fan.’ So much so that you are on an Internet forum of a fansite that is dedicated to what people already perceive to be one the most eccentric entertainers/musicians in popular music. Yet, you are complaining to others who are a fan of another highly eccentric entertainer about how ‘crazy’ they look/seem. I just find it really disappointing when other fans attack other fans about their level of fandom claiming, “They all make us look bad.” Well, the point of the matter is that you are already a ‘fan’ yourself.

It just looks like the pot calling the kettle black imo. Well, whatever. Different strokes for different folks.

What do y'all think of this?

At the end of each take Jackson had nodded and bowed to the audience, turned his back on the stage - an enormous grin on his face - and walked out of frame. This shot would serve as the end of the music video and the moment was loaded with connotations. Jackson turning his back on the stage, and on his audience, was symbolic of his intention to leave the music world behind and embark on a brand new career path. Perhaps smiling with as much relief as happiness, he was also turning his back on his final music video for Sony and, he thought, walking away from the contract that he so desperately wanted out of. In essence, he was turning his back on his old career and walking away from it, ready to follow the dream that had been snatched from him ten years previously. Michael Jackson was finally going to make movies.

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

seeingvoices12 said:

Wow , It's stunning how they fucked up Hollywood tonight , why they sampled Billie jean , those who are handling the man's music deserve to be shot.........

And why are they making videos... Michael was a short film person, not a video guy.! Grr

Militant said:

What do y'all think of this?

At the end of each take Jackson had nodded and bowed to the audience, turned his back on the stage - an enormous grin on his face - and walked out of frame. This shot would serve as the end of the music video and the moment was loaded with connotations. Jackson turning his back on the stage, and on his audience, was symbolic of his intention to leave the music world behind and embark on a brand new career path. Perhaps smiling with as much relief as happiness, he was also turning his back on his final music video for Sony and, he thought, walking away from the contract that he so desperately wanted out of. In essence, he was turning his back on his old career and walking away from it, ready to follow the dream that had been snatched from him ten years previously. Michael Jackson was finally going to make movies.

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

That's quite an interesting theory.

[img:$uid]http://img824.i.../img:$uid]

Militant said:

What do y'all think of this?

At the end of each take Jackson had nodded and bowed to the audience, turned his back on the stage - an enormous grin on his face - and walked out of frame. This shot would serve as the end of the music video and the moment was loaded with connotations. Jackson turning his back on the stage, and on his audience, was symbolic of his intention to leave the music world behind and embark on a brand new career path. Perhaps smiling with as much relief as happiness, he was also turning his back on his final music video for Sony and, he thought, walking away from the contract that he so desperately wanted out of. In essence, he was turning his back on his old career and walking away from it, ready to follow the dream that had been snatched from him ten years previously. Michael Jackson was finally going to make movies.

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

I don't know. Mike always spoke about making films. Maybe it's true. Thanks for posting it. Nice read.

[Edited 3/11/11 12:00pm]

Militant said:

What do y'all think of this?

At the end of each take Jackson had nodded and bowed to the audience, turned his back on the stage - an enormous grin on his face - and walked out of frame. This shot would serve as the end of the music video and the moment was loaded with connotations. Jackson turning his back on the stage, and on his audience, was symbolic of his intention to leave the music world behind and embark on a brand new career path. Perhaps smiling with as much relief as happiness, he was also turning his back on his final music video for Sony and, he thought, walking away from the contract that he so desperately wanted out of. In essence, he was turning his back on his old career and walking away from it, ready to follow the dream that had been snatched from him ten years previously. Michael Jackson was finally going to make movies.

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

Michael Jackson, movie star...

Has a nice ring to it, don't it? I'da totally supported that....

SherryJackson said:

Militant said:

What do y'all think of this?

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

Michael Jackson, movie star...

Has a nice ring to it, don't it? I'da totally supported that....

MJ always had a fantasy of being a movie star but let's face it he wasn't a great actor (he was OK in The Wiz, was MJ in Moonwalker, was bad in MIB2 and Miss Castaway).

As for the point of view on that last scene - I think that's a huge interpretation. It is also likely that he was just happy to be back.

So I was overseas for the past week and man what a load of catching up to do, lol.

This place sure does get crazy some times. Some people seem to deliberately want to stir stuff up.

When you want to talk facts and music I'm here.

TonyVanDam said:

This sample clips is taken from a DVD sermon entitled, The Crucifixion of Michael Jackson. Minister Farrakhan mentions the lyrics to History & They Don't Care About Us.

Wow, truely inspiring. As I'm coming of age (25 now) I realise what an significant impact Michael had on a global level.

Swa said:

SherryJackson said:

Michael Jackson, movie star...

Has a nice ring to it, don't it? I'da totally supported that....

MJ always had a fantasy of being a movie star but let's face it he wasn't a great actor (he was OK in The Wiz, was MJ in Moonwalker, was bad in MIB2 and Miss Castaway).

As for the point of view on that last scene - I think that's a huge interpretation. It is also likely that he was just happy to be back.

I disagree. I think Michael had the ability to be a great actor. The Wiz was more than just OK to me..but you're missing the performances he's given in his music videos. The short films...Thriller, Bad, Ghosts....I thought he did a great job in those.

Militant said:

What do y'all think of this?

At the end of each take Jackson had nodded and bowed to the audience, turned his back on the stage - an enormous grin on his face - and walked out of frame. This shot would serve as the end of the music video and the moment was loaded with connotations. Jackson turning his back on the stage, and on his audience, was symbolic of his intention to leave the music world behind and embark on a brand new career path. Perhaps smiling with as much relief as happiness, he was also turning his back on his final music video for Sony and, he thought, walking away from the contract that he so desperately wanted out of. In essence, he was turning his back on his old career and walking away from it, ready to follow the dream that had been snatched from him ten years previously. Michael Jackson was finally going to make movies.

It's from this really great article about the making of the "One More Chance" video. The full article here is worth a read - http://www.sawfnews.com/E...65831.aspx - but I'd like to hear thoughts on this.

this is from the charles thomson piece... yeah, i thought all four parts were actually good hen i read it. and for me anyway, more reason why i am not financially supporting sony. i think it's funny how they are putting out 'hollywood' tonight' in the way they apparently did (i haven't seen the video; i refuse to) and getting fan involvement to do 'behind the mask'.

again, the output sony has outside of the states is much better. (remember all those 'king of pop' collections outside of the states when he turned 50?) the u.s. division apparently doesn't care.

Unholyalliance said:

I didn't get to read everything through completely, but I do see familiar arguments sprouting up though.

In reality there are all different types of fans: casuals, hardcores, & elitists are the main categories though. (I'm sure there's many more in between, but I can’t think of what to refer to them as, but the casuals are to the bottom of the spectrum.)

Either way, even if our levels of fandom are different, we are still fans of the same person and/or his art. I don't think any of us should forget that. No matter how 'normal' you consider yourself to be; at the end of the day you are still a ‘fan.’ So much so that you are on an Internet forum of a fansite that is dedicated to what people already perceive to be one the most eccentric entertainers/musicians in popular music. Yet, you are complaining to others who are a fan of another highly eccentric entertainer about how ‘crazy’ they look/seem. I just find it really disappointing when other fans attack other fans about their level of fandom claiming, “They all make us look bad.” Well, the point of the matter is that you are already a ‘fan’ yourself.

It just looks like the pot calling the kettle black imo. Well, whatever. Different strokes for different folks.

you make great points.

I think it's safe to say we won't be hearing from BabyBeMine no mores....

SherryJackson said:

I think it's safe to say we won't be hearing from BabyBeMine no mores....

I'd say, judging from the snips.

Timmy84 said:

SherryJackson said:

I think it's safe to say we won't be hearing from BabyBeMine no mores....

I'd say, judging from the snips.

Good riddance to bad blubber I say...

I swear, my monocle dropped into my champagne several times just reading his damn posts!

SherryJackson said:

Timmy84 said:

I'd say, judging from the snips.

Good riddance to bad blubber I say...

I swear, my monocle dropped into my champagne several times just reading his damn posts!

Timmy84 said:

i LOVE this song! i wish it were actually ON the 'bad' album. it's one of my favourites he did, in terms of the love/romantic stuff.

SherryJackson said:

Swa said:

MJ always had a fantasy of being a movie star but let's face it he wasn't a great actor (he was OK in The Wiz, was MJ in Moonwalker, was bad in MIB2 and Miss Castaway).

As for the point of view on that last scene - I think that's a huge interpretation. It is also likely that he was just happy to be back.

I disagree. I think Michael had the ability to be a great actor. The Wiz was more than just OK to me..but you're missing the performances he's given in his music videos. The short films...Thriller, Bad, Ghosts....I thought he did a great job in those.

I see your point Sherry on the short films.

I would have liked to see where Michael could have gone as an actor playing a real meaty role, but from what I have read of Michael he probably would have stayed safe in musical style roles.

I think there was probably greater scope for him as a movie producer. Sadly we'll never know.

Question - is the girl in Hollywood Tonight the same girl who was one of the finalist dancers in TII? (not either of the girl's selected - but in the final selection scene they close in on a brunette in a bowler hat - wonder if it is her.)