bboy87 said:

Timmy84 said:

HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD!!!!

Having TEN CHILDREN was a fucking chore. I mean, just imagine how it must feel putting out ONE CHILD, less TEN! Woman went over probably ten hours in labor giving birth to those kids. Cut her SOME slack on THAT regard.

Exactly

We can talk about the shady shit all the Jacksons have done for the past 40 years and we'd have a list, but at the same time, but that right there didn't make any sense.

smoothcriminal12, I get what you're saying, but come on man

Right!

Swa said:

armpit said:

...Is the MJ estate really talking shit about MJ's mom when....she gave birth to him? Like, seriously?

They need to have some respect and remember their place. If it wasn't for her, the guy who became their eventual meal-ticket, would've never existed.

You talking about the guys at the estate or the family.

For better or worse you have to think and respect the decision that MJ placed these men in charge of the estate, and not his mother, father, or siblings for a reason.

I agree. In the past 2 years I really see why Michael put these Branca and McClain in the positions. I'm all for the family when it comes to when they're in the right (which seems rare these days) and for the history in music, but they DEFINITELY shouldn't be doing any important position in the estate

Swa said:

And onto the music....

Invincible

With a 5 year gap between HiStory and Invincible there was an air of intrigue surrounding the new album. How would it sound? Would there be surprises? Press at the time talked about how much was being spent on the albums production, and interviews suggested a lot more exploration of sounds and rhythm than eventuated on the release. We were told this was MJ going back to his Off The Wall days both in terms of melody and intent. So with Invincible’s release the expectation was high – was Michael going to be able to hold his own in a world of new pop stars, or would his releases start to be relegated to that of an “oldies” act.

Kicking the album off with Unbreakable, the groove stutters and struts along with sounds and structures that matched the current crop of hit makers. Michael’s voice is in fine form, especially in the falsetto lead in to the chorus. Here also for the first time was an exploration of digital cutting of effects on the vocals in smatterings here and there. Though at 6 minutes, the song seems to go along the same trajectory and doesn’t really offer anything new for the listener. Lyrically it feels as though Michael was trying overly hard to prove his worth – something he no longer needed to do.

Heartbreaker at least offered a bit of excitement. The manipulation of the beat has a sense of energy to it that is infectious. If you just listen to the beat, there are little surprises laid all through it, one moment MJ is beat boxing, the next snare drums are being sliced and diced, the next filters are being used to twist and turn it. Maybe a bit of a nod to the grooves Jam and Lewis would lay out for Janet, Heartbreaker really comes into it’s own with the choruses and sublime bridge where Michael’s backing vocals float and weave with ease. Hard hitting, jiggered and abrupt, this was one of the highpoints for the album in terms of the dance-oriented tracks.

Sadly Invincible comes off sounding like more of the same, and almost a brother track to Unbreakable, though with more melodic hooks. Maybe it’s the overly electronic instrumentation on the track, or the sparseness in the arrangement but it ends up being a dance song by the numbers and perhaps suffers from playing too much to the current pop playbook than pushing new territory.

Whilst the album would be criticised for having too many slo-jams on it (especially in the way it was sequenced) it’s often these songs that provide the high points on Invincible. Break of Dawn is a prime example of this. With Michael in more of a laid back mood the song floats out of the speakers and easily seduces the listener. A perfect balance of lead and backing vocals, there’s a depth here to Michael’s vocals that were lacking in the lead up tracks. The musical arrangement also feels more organic and natural. It just goes to show that when Michael wants to get his groove on and drift more into a soul territory few can come close.

Heaven Can Wait is classic r’n’b and Michael delivers like only MJ can. Lush production doesn’t swamp the song but allows Michael’s vocals to come to the fore and be carried by the track. Immediately catchy, the chorus now holds a bittersweet lyric that in today’s world features greater tragedy. One of the stand out tracks it’s no wonder Teddy Riley has plans of re-recording the track for Backstreet.

With it’s one moment comical the next annoying intro with Chris Tucker, You Rock My World see’s Michael hit with a modern MJ classic. Annoyed that Michael fell into the “darkchild” callout at the start of the song, this soon passes as the song’s groove and melody kick in. Sadly what could have been even more blissful arrangement with the use of real strings (and a nice nod back to Don’t Stop) the song relies a little too heavily on synths as its base. But there is no denying that out of all the dance tracks on here, this is the one that has you wanting to the get up the most. Although it doesn’t really offer anything new to his catalogue of hits, it does have a sense of joy in the vocals that are hard to resist.

Taking on Neo-Soul with Butterflies, Michael makes this song soar. With a groove that strolls, the musical arrangement feels more authentic, with horns and percussion punctuating the chorus. Michael’s vocals are amongst some of his best work, especially in the second verse when he goes into the falsetto that has been missing from a lot of his work. Rich and luscious backing vocals keep the choruses warm and just surround the listener. When you compare Michael’s final version with the Floetry demo you see how Michael matches note for note the little runs and adlibs to perfection yet still puts his own little stamp on it.

Sadly post Butterflies is where the album loses its focus and direction.

Speechless, with its pure a capella intro is captivating to begin with then falls into an overblown Disney-esque arrangement that seems to rob the song of the very heart it longs to convey. If it had kept just to a short a Capella song it would have been more captivating – take the first 30 seconds and last 30 seconds, and you have something truly special.

2,000 Watts ends up sounding like a generic cast off from Dangerous era recordings and too gimmicky to be taken seriously with lines such as “you may now apply your 3D glasses”. The mis-step here though is that this song replaced Shout – which was at least more inventive.

You Are My Life is ironically lifeless. With the classic hallmarks of a Babyface song it feels like it is 5 years late in it’s delivery and ends up sounding dated and redundant.

Continuing the media victim theme, Jackson presents Privacy and although edgier than songs such as Tabloid Junkie again it feels like Michael is treading old ground here.

Don’t Walk Away was one of the slow growers of the album. Reminiscent of a Janet ballad (Someday is Tonight springs to mind) Michael shows that he can still sing the heart of out a ballad and give it depth.

One of the increasing problems with Michael’s albums was there was a sense that he was trying to repeat previous success, and Cry is this album’s attempt to reimagine Man In The Mirror. Sadly it doesn’t come close and whilst not a bad song at all, it does make you think too much of MITM and therefore suffers in the comparison.

With his heart on his sleeve, and maybe still trying to sway public opinion, The Lost Children feels even more out of place here than some of the other mis-steps. Again it feels like Michael we have already heard in Heal The World and suffers from the same sappy production.

Thankfully when you are feeling less and less enthused with the album, Whatever Happens comes on. With a duet between vocals and Santana guitar, it is one of the freshest tracks on the album. Sure it's in the blueprint of “get a great guitarist on the track”, but instead of trying to repeat Beat It, Michael explores new territory with this Latin fused track and comes out the winner.

Sadly, the freshness of Whatever Happens doesn’t carry across into Threatened – Michael’s latest take on a Thriller style song. Although not the wisest choice lyrically as Michael paints himself as a threatening beast who preys on sleeping victims, the groove of Threatened is what makes it captivating, and since getting a live airing in This Is It, the song has become more appealing, but part of me wishes the groove had different lyrics, but as it is it feels like Michael is treating old ground.

As his last studio album, Invincible ends up suffering from the weight of it’s own ambition. Overly long, this mixed bag of tricks really fails to continue with the momentum that the first half of the album was building. If it was trimmed down to 9 or 10 songs, then I think the feeling the album leaves you with would be different, and maybe would have been the “come back” album many critics claimed it wasn’t. Sadly this is the last studio album Michael left us, and you can’t help but think if he knew that, this wouldn’t be the note he would have wanted to leave on.

Thank you for this! I read it twice.. it was very interesting!! I agree Invincible, Heartbreaker and Unbreakable all sounded too similar...

I loved Break of Dawn very much I thought they should've released it as a single. I basically loved all slow-tempo songs on this album. Even Cry and The Lost Children....But I agree they should've trimmed down to 10 or maybe 11 songs for this album and that could've made it better...

Swa said:

And onto the music....

Invincible

With a 5 year gap between HiStory and Invincible there was an air of intrigue surrounding the new album. How would it sound? Would there be surprises? Press at the time talked about how much was being spent on the albums production, and interviews suggested a lot more exploration of sounds and rhythm than eventuated on the release. We were told this was MJ going back to his Off The Wall days both in terms of melody and intent. So with Invincible’s release the expectation was high – was Michael going to be able to hold his own in a world of new pop stars, or would his releases start to be relegated to that of an “oldies” act.

Kicking the album off with Unbreakable, the groove stutters and struts along with sounds and structures that matched the current crop of hit makers. Michael’s voice is in fine form, especially in the falsetto lead in to the chorus. Here also for the first time was an exploration of digital cutting of effects on the vocals in smatterings here and there. Though at 6 minutes, the song seems to go along the same trajectory and doesn’t really offer anything new for the listener. Lyrically it feels as though Michael was trying overly hard to prove his worth – something he no longer needed to do.

Heartbreaker at least offered a bit of excitement. The manipulation of the beat has a sense of energy to it that is infectious. If you just listen to the beat, there are little surprises laid all through it, one moment MJ is beat boxing, the next snare drums are being sliced and diced, the next filters are being used to twist and turn it. Maybe a bit of a nod to the grooves Jam and Lewis would lay out for Janet, Heartbreaker really comes into it’s own with the choruses and sublime bridge where Michael’s backing vocals float and weave with ease. Hard hitting, jiggered and abrupt, this was one of the highpoints for the album in terms of the dance-oriented tracks.

Sadly Invincible comes off sounding like more of the same, and almost a brother track to Unbreakable, though with more melodic hooks. Maybe it’s the overly electronic instrumentation on the track, or the sparseness in the arrangement but it ends up being a dance song by the numbers and perhaps suffers from playing too much to the current pop playbook than pushing new territory.

Whilst the album would be criticised for having too many slo-jams on it (especially in the way it was sequenced) it’s often these songs that provide the high points on Invincible. Break of Dawn is a prime example of this. With Michael in more of a laid back mood the song floats out of the speakers and easily seduces the listener. A perfect balance of lead and backing vocals, there’s a depth here to Michael’s vocals that were lacking in the lead up tracks. The musical arrangement also feels more organic and natural. It just goes to show that when Michael wants to get his groove on and drift more into a soul territory few can come close.

Heaven Can Wait is classic r’n’b and Michael delivers like only MJ can. Lush production doesn’t swamp the song but allows Michael’s vocals to come to the fore and be carried by the track. Immediately catchy, the chorus now holds a bittersweet lyric that in today’s world features greater tragedy. One of the stand out tracks it’s no wonder Teddy Riley has plans of re-recording the track for Backstreet.

With it’s one moment comical the next annoying intro with Chris Tucker, You Rock My World see’s Michael hit with a modern MJ classic. Annoyed that Michael fell into the “darkchild” callout at the start of the song, this soon passes as the song’s groove and melody kick in. Sadly what could have been even more blissful arrangement with the use of real strings (and a nice nod back to Don’t Stop) the song relies a little too heavily on synths as its base. But there is no denying that out of all the dance tracks on here, this is the one that has you wanting to the get up the most. Although it doesn’t really offer anything new to his catalogue of hits, it does have a sense of joy in the vocals that are hard to resist.

Taking on Neo-Soul with Butterflies, Michael makes this song soar. With a groove that strolls, the musical arrangement feels more authentic, with horns and percussion punctuating the chorus. Michael’s vocals are amongst some of his best work, especially in the second verse when he goes into the falsetto that has been missing from a lot of his work. Rich and luscious backing vocals keep the choruses warm and just surround the listener. When you compare Michael’s final version with the Floetry demo you see how Michael matches note for note the little runs and adlibs to perfection yet still puts his own little stamp on it.

Sadly post Butterflies is where the album loses its focus and direction.

Speechless, with its pure a capella intro is captivating to begin with then falls into an overblown Disney-esque arrangement that seems to rob the song of the very heart it longs to convey. If it had kept just to a short a Capella song it would have been more captivating – take the first 30 seconds and last 30 seconds, and you have something truly special.

2,000 Watts ends up sounding like a generic cast off from Dangerous era recordings and too gimmicky to be taken seriously with lines such as “you may now apply your 3D glasses”. The mis-step here though is that this song replaced Shout – which was at least more inventive.

You Are My Life is ironically lifeless. With the classic hallmarks of a Babyface song it feels like it is 5 years late in it’s delivery and ends up sounding dated and redundant.

Continuing the media victim theme, Jackson presents Privacy and although edgier than songs such as Tabloid Junkie again it feels like Michael is treading old ground here.

Don’t Walk Away was one of the slow growers of the album. Reminiscent of a Janet ballad (Someday is Tonight springs to mind) Michael shows that he can still sing the heart of out a ballad and give it depth.

One of the increasing problems with Michael’s albums was there was a sense that he was trying to repeat previous success, and Cry is this album’s attempt to reimagine Man In The Mirror. Sadly it doesn’t come close and whilst not a bad song at all, it does make you think too much of MITM and therefore suffers in the comparison.

With his heart on his sleeve, and maybe still trying to sway public opinion, The Lost Children feels even more out of place here than some of the other mis-steps. Again it feels like Michael we have already heard in Heal The World and suffers from the same sappy production.

Thankfully when you are feeling less and less enthused with the album, Whatever Happens comes on. With a duet between vocals and Santana guitar, it is one of the freshest tracks on the album. Sure it's in the blueprint of “get a great guitarist on the track”, but instead of trying to repeat Beat It, Michael explores new territory with this Latin fused track and comes out the winner.

Sadly, the freshness of Whatever Happens doesn’t carry across into Threatened – Michael’s latest take on a Thriller style song. Although not the wisest choice lyrically as Michael paints himself as a threatening beast who preys on sleeping victims, the groove of Threatened is what makes it captivating, and since getting a live airing in This Is It, the song has become more appealing, but part of me wishes the groove had different lyrics, but as it is it feels like Michael is treating old ground.

As his last studio album, Invincible ends up suffering from the weight of it’s own ambition. Overly long, this mixed bag of tricks really fails to continue with the momentum that the first half of the album was building. If it was trimmed down to 9 or 10 songs, then I think the feeling the album leaves you with would be different, and maybe would have been the “come back” album many critics claimed it wasn’t. Sadly this is the last studio album Michael left us, and you can’t help but think if he knew that, this wouldn’t be the note he would have wanted to leave on.

I have to be the only person who didn't like Break Of Dawn but loved Cry.

[Edited 4/12/11 16:46pm]

Timmy84 said:

smoothcriminal12 said:

All she did was fuck and push him out of her vag, it's not like it was much work.

HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD!!!!

Having TEN CHILDREN was a fucking chore. I mean, just imagine how it must feel putting out ONE CHILD, less TEN! Woman went over probably ten hours in labor giving birth to those kids. Cut her SOME slack on THAT regard.

LOL y'all know I was just joking, right? .

smoothcriminal12 said:

Timmy84 said:

HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD!!!!

Having TEN CHILDREN was a fucking chore. I mean, just imagine how it must feel putting out ONE CHILD, less TEN! Woman went over probably ten hours in labor giving birth to those kids. Cut her SOME slack on THAT regard.

LOL y'all know I was just joking, right? .

Had me all overly sensitive.

bboy87 said:

Hey you guys, I'm a finalist on the Jam Of The Day facebook page's weekly giveaway. If the song I picked get the most likes, I win a Xbox 360, Kinect, and Michael Jackson The Experience

I picked Heartbreak Hotel by The Jacksons

http://www.facebook.com/pages/JAM-of-the-Day/122962084411238

be sure to "like" the page and then like my song pick

I WANT THAT XBOX!

Done! Hope I'm not to late

And so the shadyness continues....

Katherine Jackson: The De...s a FRAUD!

4/12/2011 5:05 PM PDT by TMZ Staff

Katherine Jackson is furious about a declaration filed with the court -- purportedly signed by her -- in which she attacks the Executors of the Michael Jackson Estate. TMZ has learned ... Katherine insists she never signed that declaration.



TMZ reported this morning ... a declaration filed in the Estate's lawsuit against the Heal the World Foundation makes shocking allegations against John Branca, calling him a thief.

But Katherine's lawyer, Adam Streisand, tells TMZ, "Mrs. Jackson categorically denies signing any statement to the court that makes accusations against the executors of any wrongdoing with respect to her son or his estate."

Streisand adds, "She did not and would not make any such statements about the executors." And Streisand says, Katherine told him, "These are not my words."

Check out the signature on the declaration in question, dated April 6, 2011, and compare it to Katherine's signature from a legal doc on February 3, 2010.



As for the Heal the World Foundation lawyer -- Edgar Pease -- who filed the declaration in question, he tells TMZ someone from the Foundation faxed Katherine's manager the final copy of the document and it was then sent on to Pease with the signature in question.

Pease says if the signature is a fraud, "Heads will roll."

UPDATE: Pease just called us back to say Trent Jackson -- Joe Jackson's nephew and Katherine's caregiver -- told him he personally saw Katherine sign the declaration. But sources connected with the Estate say the declaration is suspicious, because the last page ONLY contains the signature, without any accompanying text. In other words, someone could have inserted the signature into a declaration Katherine never saw or approved.

From the LeslieMJHu blog:

Michael Jackson Estate vs. Melissa Johnson - Updates

POSTED BY LESLIEMJHU AT 11:52 AM

http://lesliemjhu.blogspo...lissa.html

[Edited 4/12/11 18:55pm]

mookie said:

Swa said:

And onto the music....

I have to be the only person who didn't like Break Of Dawn but loved Cry.

[Edited 4/12/11 16:46pm]

That is the great thing about music - what one likes and loves others may not enjoy as much. By sharing what you love or don't about a song, can inform others and make them listen with new ears.

Cry isn't a bad song, I just felt it had been done - and if Michael wanted a MITM part 3 then I wished he had pushed it a bit more. Case in point - Will You Be There although gospel doesn't sound like a MITM copy, where as for me Cry does.

NaughtyKitty said:

And so the shadyness continues....

Katherine Jackson: The De...s a FRAUD!

4/12/2011 5:05 PM PDT by TMZ Staff

Katherine Jackson is furious about a declaration filed with the court -- purportedly signed by her -- in which she attacks the Executors of the Michael Jackson Estate. TMZ has learned ... Katherine insists she never signed that declaration.



TMZ reported this morning ... a declaration filed in the Estate's lawsuit against the Heal the World Foundation makes shocking allegations against John Branca, calling him a thief.

But Katherine's lawyer, Adam Streisand, tells TMZ, "Mrs. Jackson categorically denies signing any statement to the court that makes accusations against the executors of any wrongdoing with respect to her son or his estate."

Streisand adds, "She did not and would not make any such statements about the executors." And Streisand says, Katherine told him, "These are not my words."

Check out the signature on the declaration in question, dated April 6, 2011, and compare it to Katherine's signature from a legal doc on February 3, 2010.



As for the Heal the World Foundation lawyer -- Edgar Pease -- who filed the declaration in question, he tells TMZ someone from the Foundation faxed Katherine's manager the final copy of the document and it was then sent on to Pease with the signature in question.

Pease says if the signature is a fraud, "Heads will roll."

UPDATE: Pease just called us back to say Trent Jackson -- Joe Jackson's nephew and Katherine's caregiver -- told him he personally saw Katherine sign the declaration. But sources connected with the Estate say the declaration is suspicious, because the last page ONLY contains the signature, without any accompanying text. In other words, someone could have inserted the signature into a declaration Katherine never saw or approved.

I bet Howard signed it...

Timmy84 said:

NaughtyKitty said:

And so the shadyness continues....

Katherine Jackson: The De...s a FRAUD!

4/12/2011 5:05 PM PDT by TMZ Staff

Katherine Jackson is furious about a declaration filed with the court -- purportedly signed by her -- in which she attacks the Executors of the Michael Jackson Estate. TMZ has learned ... Katherine insists she never signed that declaration.



TMZ reported this morning ... a declaration filed in the Estate's lawsuit against the Heal the World Foundation makes shocking allegations against John Branca, calling him a thief.

But Katherine's lawyer, Adam Streisand, tells TMZ, "Mrs. Jackson categorically denies signing any statement to the court that makes accusations against the executors of any wrongdoing with respect to her son or his estate."

Streisand adds, "She did not and would not make any such statements about the executors." And Streisand says, Katherine told him, "These are not my words."

Check out the signature on the declaration in question, dated April 6, 2011, and compare it to Katherine's signature from a legal doc on February 3, 2010.



As for the Heal the World Foundation lawyer -- Edgar Pease -- who filed the declaration in question, he tells TMZ someone from the Foundation faxed Katherine's manager the final copy of the document and it was then sent on to Pease with the signature in question.

Pease says if the signature is a fraud, "Heads will roll."

UPDATE: Pease just called us back to say Trent Jackson -- Joe Jackson's nephew and Katherine's caregiver -- told him he personally saw Katherine sign the declaration. But sources connected with the Estate say the declaration is suspicious, because the last page ONLY contains the signature, without any accompanying text. In other words, someone could have inserted the signature into a declaration Katherine never saw or approved.

I bet Howard signed it...

OH SOOKIE SOOKIE NAH!

bboy87 said:

Timmy84 said:

I bet Howard signed it...

OH SOOKIE SOOKIE NAH!

Well only 1 of 2 things could have happened. Either she didnt sign the dec. and her signature was forged by someone else, or she did sign the dec. and she (her publicist) is denying that she signed and claiming its a fraud. This document was filed a week ago. TMZ posts the document today and within hours Katherine claims its not her signature

Swa said:

That is the great thing about music - what one likes and loves others may not enjoy as much. By sharing what you love or don't about a song, can inform others and make them listen with new ears.

Cry isn't a bad song, I just felt it had been done - and if Michael wanted a MITM part 3 then I wished he had pushed it a bit more. Case in point - Will You Be There although gospel doesn't sound like a MITM copy, where as for me Cry does.

This is exactly why I love visiting sites. I love reading other people's opinions on things. Even though I love Cry I totally understand what you're saying above.

Timmy84 said:

I bet Howard signed it...

And watch he'll still be kept around.

mookie said:

Timmy84 said:

I bet Howard signed it...

And watch he'll still be kept around.

If he did I'm sure it was "in the best interest of Katherine".

lmao

[Edited 4/12/11 22:05pm]

Swa said:

mookie said:

I have to be the only person who didn't like Break Of Dawn but loved Cry.

[Edited 4/12/11 16:46pm]

That is the great thing about music - what one likes and loves others may not enjoy as much. By sharing what you love or don't about a song, can inform others and make them listen with new ears.

Cry isn't a bad song, I just felt it had been done - and if Michael wanted a MITM part 3 then I wished he had pushed it a bit more. Case in point - Will You Be There although gospel doesn't sound like a MITM copy, where as for me Cry does.

If he wanted a MITM part 3 or another inspirational song then he should have not had R.Kelly write it. At all. Then again, I severely hate R.Kelly's work unless he's singing about something sex related. I think that is when his talents truly shine.

As for me, as I have said before, I think Break of Dawn is kind of meh, but I really like The Lost Children, Threatened, 2000 Watts, You Rock My World, and Heaven Can Wait. Unbreakable is cool too. The only songs I really skip on that album are Cry and Don't Walk Away, which is pretty good considering the sheer amount of songs on it.

bboy87 said:

Timmy84 said:

HOLD HOLD HOLD HOLD!!!!

Having TEN CHILDREN was a fucking chore. I mean, just imagine how it must feel putting out ONE CHILD, less TEN! Woman went over probably ten hours in labor giving birth to those kids. Cut her SOME slack on THAT regard.

Exactly

We can talk about the shady shit all the Jacksons have done for the past 40 years and we'd have a list, but at the same time, but that right there didn't make any sense.

smoothcriminal12, I get what you're saying, but come on man

I don't care what anyone says about MJ's mother, he trusted her very very much , I find what the estate is doing is really fuckin shady , and the fact that they let those fake cascios songs to be released as they are MJ says alot , alot ........

bboy87 said:

Swa said:

You talking about the guys at the estate or the family.

For better or worse you have to think and respect the decision that MJ placed these men in charge of the estate, and not his mother, father, or siblings for a reason.

I agree. In the past 2 years I really see why Michael put these Branca and McClain in the positions. I'm all for the family when it comes to when they're in the right (which seems rare these days) and for the history in music, but they DEFINITELY shouldn't be doing any important position in the estate

LOL...but things change when the tragedy actually happens, things will never be the same once the star dies , people change when they see money.

seeingvoices12 said:

bboy87 said:

Exactly

We can talk about the shady shit all the Jacksons have done for the past 40 years and we'd have a list, but at the same time, but that right there didn't make any sense.

smoothcriminal12, I get what you're saying, but come on man

I don't care what anyone says about MJ's mother, he trusted her very very much , I find what the estate is doing is really fuckin shady , and the fact that they let those fake cascios songs to be released as they are MJ says alot , alot ........

You can't really trust either one. Here you have a mother who is hooking up with shady ass people, which is, probably, the reason why MJ seperated his business with the family and then you have the estate who is letting fake ass songs pass off as MJ and whatever else.

It's like deciding between a douchebag or a turd sandwich.

Unholyalliance said:

seeingvoices12 said:

I don't care what anyone says about MJ's mother, he trusted her very very much , I find what the estate is doing is really fuckin shady , and the fact that they let those fake cascios songs to be released as they are MJ says alot , alot ........

You can't really trust either one. Here you have a mother who is hooking up with shady ass people, which is, probably, the reason why MJ seperated his business with the family and then you have the estate who is letting fake ass songs pass off as MJ and whatever else.

It's like deciding between a douchebag or a turd sandwich.

Exactly and again I gotta shake my head at Michael's family. Like I'm sure they MEAN well but the way they're doing it is not really cool IMHO.

bboy87 said:

Swa said:

You talking about the guys at the estate or the family.

For better or worse you have to think and respect the decision that MJ placed these men in charge of the estate, and not his mother, father, or siblings for a reason.

I agree. In the past 2 years I really see why Michael put these Branca and McClain in the positions. I'm all for the family when it comes to when they're in the right (which seems rare these days) and for the history in music, but they DEFINITELY shouldn't be doing any important position in the estate

I don't give a shit.

That's his mom, they should always respect her.

I'm talking specifically about whoever the sad fucks are who run the estate and thought it was okay to publically mock and demean the man's mom like that.

Like I said - she's the reason why he existed, she fed him and wiped his own ass before he could even do it himself. For them to turn around and then attack her when honestly - them cashing in off of her son's estate is probably the only thing keeping them fed themselves is incredibly fucked up to me.

Me thinks MJ should've left his estate to better people.

mjforever said:

Thank you for this!

armpit said:

Me thinks MJ should've left his estate to better people.

That's like trying to get someone to create a biopic with actual good acting and scenes that weren't fictionalized for Hollywood/biopic subject's own personal interest.

Michael hardly trusted ANYONE. Even those in his family. He obviously wasn't prepared to die. Death of a famous person is more tricky than some think.

James Brown's estate is a good example.

PETA wants a Neverland animal sanctuary

Animal rights organization urges Michael Jackson's children to turn the 2,800-acre property into a 'community park and center for animals.'

Mon, Apr 11 2011 at 4:30 PM EST

4 Comments

Splash News

Should Michael Jackson's iconic Neverland Ranch be reborn has an animal refuge and rehabilitation center?

PETA is backing the idea and has sent a letter to Prince Michael Jackson and Paris Jackson urging them to act. They are rumored to be interested in the idea.

“We are writing because it has come to our attention that you hope to one day turn your father’s Neverland Ranch into a community park and center for animals,” PETA representative Michelle Cho writes. “We encourage you to call for this vast refuge to be turned into a true wildlife sanctuary where animals can be properly taken care of instead of a zoo, where people are encouraged to gawk at imprisoned animals in the name of profit.”

A couple weeks ago, I wrote over on Ecorazzi how Colony Capital, part owner of the 2,800-acre estate, is currently in the process of renovating the neglected property.

“Our plans have been to work to restore it to its original greatness,” CEO Tom Barrack told Bloomberg TV. “The place is amazing. It has not only the beautiful spirit and softness of Michael, but a legacy of a thousand years of Indian culture that had transacted upon it. We have just been restoring it, renovating it.”

He added that Colony is simply waiting to see what Jackson's children intend for the property before moving forward.

PETA wants to provide a bit of a push, adding in their letter some resources for the Jackson children to explore.

"The best way to gain a realistic understanding of everything that is involved in operating a sanctuary is by familiarizing yourself with the Standards of Excellence established by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries and by visiting existing sanctuaries, such as Save the Chimps in Florida and the Performing Animal Welfare Society's wildlife sanctuaries in California," writes Cho.

She adds, "We encourage you to review these resources and begin planning for the eventual transformation of Neverland Ranch into a sanctuary similar in nature to that of its namesake — a place where to animals can escape from their former lives of abuse and neglect."

What would you like to see Neverland become?

I don't see Neverland turning into anything without Michael's permission. Yeah MJ left back in 2005, but I'm sure part of him would've never wanted anything "done" to this place

ali23 said:

PETA wants a Neverland animal sanctuary

Animal rights organization urges Michael Jackson's children to turn the 2,800-acre property into a 'community park and center for animals.'

ali23 said:

PETA wants a Neverland animal sanctuary

Animal rights organization urges Michael Jackson's children to turn the 2,800-acre property into a 'community park and center for animals.'

Mon, Apr 11 2011 at 4:30 PM EST

4 Comments

Splash News

Should Michael Jackson's iconic Neverland Ranch be reborn has an animal refuge and rehabilitation center?

PETA is backing the idea and has sent a letter to Prince Michael Jackson and Paris Jackson urging them to act. They are rumored to be interested in the idea.

“We are writing because it has come to our attention that you hope to one day turn your father’s Neverland Ranch into a community park and center for animals,” PETA representative Michelle Cho writes. “We encourage you to call for this vast refuge to be turned into a true wildlife sanctuary where animals can be properly taken care of instead of a zoo, where people are encouraged to gawk at imprisoned animals in the name of profit.”

A couple weeks ago, I wrote over on Ecorazzi how Colony Capital, part owner of the 2,800-acre estate, is currently in the process of renovating the neglected property.

“Our plans have been to work to restore it to its original greatness,” CEO Tom Barrack told Bloomberg TV. “The place is amazing. It has not only the beautiful spirit and softness of Michael, but a legacy of a thousand years of Indian culture that had transacted upon it. We have just been restoring it, renovating it.”

He added that Colony is simply waiting to see what Jackson's children intend for the property before moving forward.

PETA wants to provide a bit of a push, adding in their letter some resources for the Jackson children to explore.

"The best way to gain a realistic understanding of everything that is involved in operating a sanctuary is by familiarizing yourself with the Standards of Excellence established by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries and by visiting existing sanctuaries, such as Save the Chimps in Florida and the Performing Animal Welfare Society's wildlife sanctuaries in California," writes Cho.

She adds, "We encourage you to review these resources and begin planning for the eventual transformation of Neverland Ranch into a sanctuary similar in nature to that of its namesake — a place where to animals can escape from their former lives of abuse and neglect."

What would you like to see Neverland become?

I think that would be nice.

ViintageJunkiie said:

I don't see Neverland turning into anything without Michael's permission. Yeah MJ left back in 2005, but I'm sure part of him would've never wanted anything "done" to this place

ali23 said:

PETA wants a Neverland animal sanctuary

Animal rights organization urges Michael Jackson's children to turn the 2,800-acre property into a 'community park and center for animals.'

Yeah I don't know what they're gonna do to that place.

bboy87 said:

Swa said:

You talking about the guys at the estate or the family.

For better or worse you have to think and respect the decision that MJ placed these men in charge of the estate, and not his mother, father, or siblings for a reason.

I agree. In the past 2 years I really see why Michael put these Branca and McClain in the positions. I'm all for the family when it comes to when they're in the right (which seems rare these days) and for the history in music, but they DEFINITELY shouldn't be doing any important position in the estate

The question is did he or didn't he put these two in the positions. So many contradictions.