EVERY fan base has a bunch of nuts. No one fan base is "superior" to another. It's the way it is. But don't generalize thinking that's how all of them act.

Timmy84 said:

EVERY fan base has a bunch of nuts. No one fan base is "superior" to another. It's the way it is. But don't generalize thinking that's how all of them act.

Have to agree. From Elvis fans, to Madonna fans, to Janet fans, to MJ fans, to Beatles fans, etc., over the top fans are on every fan site.

Unholyalliance said:

Free2BMe said:

I have to agree that there are SOME crazy MJ fans; but, fuck have you seen the psychotic Janet and Prince fans? Some of those people make even the craziest MJ fan look sane. Talk about taking the word "stan" to a new level, Janet and Prince fans do just that. Btw, the so-called "laughingstock of all fan communities" probably comes from the fact that MJ fans are so strong in their defense of all of the crap that was thrown at Michael by people who don't know shit and are too damn lazy to find out if what they read is true or not. You can't be a weak ass punk and be a fan of Michael Jackson. You have to be strong enough to stand up to shit from stupid people.

This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This.This. This. This.This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This.This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This. This.

This is what I've been trying to say for some time now. Also, the irony here is that everyone in this thread are still viewed as crazy MJ fanatics. I believe it's the stigma that comes with the fandom.

And now, that shall be in my signature. I completely agree with your sentiment, Free. Well done.

Every fan base has the fans that won't except anything other that the object of their fandom. I came here because I heard it was more balanced than the MJ boards, which I was getting tired of. But even this thread gets a little like that sometimes.

With people like MOL, my suggestion would be to completely ignore it. They are trying to get a rise and as long as they get one, they will keep going for it. Trust me, this is a lesson learnt the hard way on my part as I always used to bite.

You know the strangest fans to me are the ones that say they only listen to that artist. Now that is not a fan, that is a stan. As far as im concerned there is to much music and not enough time for me to soak it all up.

I would love to join in more, but for some reason if I try to post quoting somebody it says I have a saved response or something like that for me to edit and then it just freezes my laptop. I have org noted a mod but no response. Any idea's how I sort this problem out? Thanks in advance.

GettOffMyLand said:

Every fan base has the fans that won't except anything other that the object of their fandom. I came here because I heard it was more balanced than the MJ boards, which I was getting tired of. But even this thread gets a little like that sometimes.

With people like MOL, my suggestion would be to completely ignore it. They are trying to get a rise and as long as they get one, they will keep going for it. Trust me, this is a lesson learnt the hard way on my part as I always used to bite.

You know the strangest fans to me are the ones that say they only listen to that artist. Now that is not a fan, that is a stan. As far as im concerned there is to much music and not enough time for me to soak it all up.

I would love to join in more, but for some reason if I try to post quoting somebody it says I have a saved response or something like that for me to edit and then it just freezes my laptop. I have org noted a mod but no response. Any idea's how I sort this problem out? Thanks in advance.

Penis.

Forest.

Free2BMe said:

Swa said:

Great article here on MJ's career from a Jazz Perspective.

Michael Jackson (1958-200... Jazz Camp

Michael Jackson, for all his considerable talents, never enjoyed a large following among jazz devotees. His songs are rarely covered by jazz bands (although with one very famous exception), and if you raise his name in a discussion with serious jazzistas, they will usually change the topic to his former producer Quincy Jones, whose artistry is more closely aligned with jazz values.

Yet jazz fans are not immune to the appeal of pop. They will embrace a great songwriter like Joni Mitchell; or a pop star who fills his band with jazz players like Sting; or a hitmaker who shows some impressive instrumental chops like Stevie Wonder. But Michael Jackson did not fit easily into any of these categories.

Yet Jackson had a better sense of the changes transforming the entertainment world during the late 20th century than any of these figures. Jazz fans not only should mourn his passing, but perhaps learn from his example, Then as now, formulas were changing, technologies were evolving, and Michael Jackson was the perfect talent to seize the opportunities of this new era.

In particular, the concept of the singer-songwriter so powerful during the 1970s (and whose individualism was very congruent with the jazz sensibility) would collapse as a platform for popular music during the 1980s. The intimacy and nuanced effects of this approach were not well suited to a multimedia age, which wanted something larger and more spectacular. Michael Jackson provided thispanem et circenses spectacle, although in his case it was a spectacle that sometimes continued offstage and in private life.

The arrival of music videos and cable television was almost like a second coming of talking movies. Just as during that earlier age, audiences were attracted to stars who could exploit the full potential of the new medium. A half-century before, movie releases had been marketed for their all singing, all talking, all dancing grandeur. The screen might be smaller at the home entertainment center during the 1980s, but the appetite for powerful visual effects was much the same. A Stevie Wonder or Joni Mitchell, for all their musical talent no doubt deeper than Jackson's when measured in mere sharps and flats were not capable of operating on this level.

In truth, no musical performer of his generation had a more powerful visual impact on the screen than Michael Jackson. He was so dynamic in front of the camera, that the Disney corporation even built a 3D film for its theme parks around him and got Francis Ford Coppola to direct it and George Lucas to serve as executive producer. What a strange turn of events: after all, 3D films had always focused on massive effects, scary or scenic, something on a Grand Canyon type of scale. Now a 3D film was built around a personality?

But Michael Jackson was not just another personality he also operated on a Grand Canyon kind of scale. And I can assure you from the lines I encountered when I went to see Captain EO at Disneyland, that this was a hugely popular attraction. How many films do you know that enjoy a decade-long run? In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the movie has a return engagement in the near future.

But it was in the more downsized and compact format of the music video where Michael Jackson crystallized his artistry and built his enormous audience. Here is the core of his legacy, one that you will not be able to appreciate if you simply listen to the compact disks or study the lead sheets.

This is not to dismiss his purely musical talents Jackson's genuine skills as a singer had been clear from his earliest years. And through some strange biological fluke perhaps aided by who-knows-what Jackson retained the childlike quality of his voice even after he reached adulthood. To some degree, he reminded me of Ella Fitzgerald, who also managed to convey a sweet innocence, almost the exact opposite of the sassiness and sultriness around her, and put its stamp on everything she sang. Jackson was the same, and in the midst of a music scene that featured some of the most brazen and push-the-envelope acts in the history of music the Sex Pistols were formed at almost the same moment that the Jackson 5 left Motown he always held on to the ingenuous aura of the child star.

But it was as a dancer that Michael Jackson parlayed his talents into superstardom. It was the moonwalk that killed the singer-songwriters, who stayed hidden behind their pianos and guitars while Jackson strutted the big stage. Youngsters everywhere imitated his steps, not his voice, and even today, his footwork is admired and emulated by countless stars and wannabe stars. (See some example here.)

All of this is foreign to the jazz sensibility. Jazz once had a close relationship with popular dance not coincidentally during its period of greatest financial success. But in the 1980s, jazz had lost this connection. Jazz bands might be able to cover Jackson's tunes (not often, as I noted above I still remember working in a combo where the sidemen rebelled after the leader wanted to play Beat It; he gave up and called another tune); but they could not assimilate the full effect of Michael Jackson, which started with his toes and only gradually arrived at the vocal chords and cerebellum.

Jazz fans did know about Quincy Jones, however. They had known about Jones long before Jackson and the mass audience had discovered him. They would give him much of the credit for Jackson's hits, and certainly he played a key part in the elevation of this pop superstar. Yet Jones's brilliance lay in adapting his techniques to Jackson's inherent strengths and potent charisma and not merely applying some formula he had learned from his jazz days.

The production tricks Jones brought to these hit tracks are fascinating to study. And sometimes daring in bizarre ways. How did Jones ever get the idea of taking little snippets of Jackson squeaking out high notes, and use them as background effects almost like birds chirping on the trees? Then Jones would mix this amalgamation of quasi-ambient sounds with a lead vocal, hypnotic bassline and a very 80s-style rhythmic sensibility. All this was a far cry from what Jones had done with Sinatra and jazz players, but give this man born in 1933 his due for understanding the new sensibility in a a way that no one of his generation could approach.

If you had any doubts that this was the right formula, you merely needed to look at the Billboardcharts. The Jackson-Jones collaborations sold around 200 million albums. The duo eventually parted ways, and Jackson was focused on producing his own music. Yet he never came close to matching the sales of his work with QJ.

Jazz fans might think that this success was driven more by technology (videos, cable TV) than by musical factors. But a close examination of the history of jazz shows that the same marriage of music and technology has driven its own success. The possibility of jazz as an improvised art form with large scale distribution depended on the invention of sound recordings. Benny Goodman's immense success and indeed the whole phenomenon of the Swing Era would not have been possible without the widespread adoption of radios in American households. Without long-playing records there would have been no Kind of Blue or A Love Supreme.

Music and technology have always been interlinked, ever since the first cave dweller figured out how make a bone into a flute, the hide of an animal into a drum. If the jazz world didn't embrace Jackson, it was due to the fact that the technologies he parlayed into fame were those which jazz players were either unable or unwilling to assimilate into their own creative endeavors.

Yet it's clear to me that, two decades after Jackson's biggest hits, the jazz world can still learn from his example. Only nowadays, the stakes from comprehending the symbiotic relationship of music, technology and media are even higher.

This blog entry posted by Ted Gioia

source: http://www.jazz.com/jazz-...erspective

Interesting read. Thanks for posting.

Why always mentioning the sales ? dangerous aproached the sales of bad , i think it has sold a little bit more . intresting article though

^^ Sales were always a factor of MJ's career. I mean when off the wall sold 9 million the critics were saying, he'd never top it. Then Thriller his and we know how that played out. With sales like that it was impossible for him to top it again (impossible for any artist to) and no matter how good the sales for Bad or Dangerous or HiStory were the press loved to point out that his sales were on the decline or no where near Thriller. Of course objectively those albums still sold massive amounts that most artists would love to have to their name and outsold alot of other albums of the same period. Even Invincible with its "modest" multimillion sales was a lot better than most artists at the time - selling a lot more than his 80s contemparies, and his modern counterparts yet the press still wrote it off as a failure.

A fair and balanced article about his sales written back in 2003 can be found here if you're interested in reading it: http://www.smh.com.au/art...85212.html

Swa said:

^^ Sales were always a factor of MJ's career. I mean when off the wall sold 9 million the critics were saying, he'd never top it. Then Thriller his and we know how that played out. With sales like that it was impossible for him to top it again (impossible for any artist to) and no matter how good the sales for Bad or Dangerous or HiStory were the press loved to point out that his sales were on the decline or no where near Thriller. Of course objectively those albums still sold massive amounts that most artists would love to have to their name and outsold alot of other albums of the same period. Even Invincible with its "modest" multimillion sales was a lot better than most artists at the time - selling a lot more than his 80s contemparies, and his modern counterparts yet the press still wrote it off as a failure.

A fair and balanced article about his sales written back in 2003 can be found here if you're interested in reading it: http://www.smh.com.au/art...85212.html

I wouldn't describe that article as fair and balanced.

For a start Rodney Jerkins has said Invincible didn't cost anywhere near the ludicrous sum reported. And Sony sure as hell didn't spend $50m on promotion. They didn't even advertise the album during his 30th anniversary concerts which were staged shortly before Invincible's release!

Then after just two single releases the project was dropped.

$50m my freakin' ass.

Also, why was Number Ones described as "yet another greatest hits package" when it was only the second compilation of his Epic material?

No, not fair and balanced at all.

scatwoman said:

Swa said:

^^ Sales were always a factor of MJ's career. I mean when off the wall sold 9 million the critics were saying, he'd never top it. Then Thriller his and we know how that played out. With sales like that it was impossible for him to top it again (impossible for any artist to) and no matter how good the sales for Bad or Dangerous or HiStory were the press loved to point out that his sales were on the decline or no where near Thriller. Of course objectively those albums still sold massive amounts that most artists would love to have to their name and outsold alot of other albums of the same period. Even Invincible with its "modest" multimillion sales was a lot better than most artists at the time - selling a lot more than his 80s contemparies, and his modern counterparts yet the press still wrote it off as a failure.

A fair and balanced article about his sales written back in 2003 can be found here if you're interested in reading it: http://www.smh.com.au/art...85212.html

I wouldn't describe that article as fair and balanced.

For a start Rodney Jerkins has said Invincible didn't cost anywhere near the ludicrous sum reported. And Sony sure as hell didn't spend $50m on promotion. They didn't even advertise the album during his 30th anniversary concerts which were staged shortly before Invincible's release!

Then after just two single releases the project was dropped.

$50m my freakin' ass.

Also, why was Number Ones described as "yet another greatest hits package" when it was only the second compilation of his Epic material?

No, not fair and balanced at all.

Well I suggested fair and balanced in that it put the sales in perspective - and the somewhat unfair comparison Michael always received on the sales side of things.

Also technically Sony released 3 singles off Invincible - You Rock My World, Cry, and Butterflies (which was released in February of 2002).

Also Invincible was released October 30, and the 30th Anniversary Concert didn't air until late November - but yes Sony should have run ads during the telecast - they did here in Australia.

Also Number Ones wasn't the second greatest hits package of his Epic Material.

There was HiStory (Disc 1) in 1996, then it was repackaged again as The Greatest Hits (History Disc 1 repackaged) in 2001. It might be a technicality but it was the third in line.

As for Sony's accounting of the cost of Invincible and the promotions I don't believe either figure - by that stage it was all a PR shitfight between Song and MJ with those figures reported to paint Michael as the petulant artist who had no right to complain.

I just felt the article made an honest assessment of the sales issue that Michael faced and how it was unfair to compare sales of other albums to that of Thriller. As it stated, most artists would have been happy with the couple of million Invincible sold.

But each to their own.

Timmy84 said:

EVERY fan base has a bunch of nuts. No one fan base is "superior" to another. It's the way it is. But don't generalize thinking that's how all of them act.

I'm a big 'music person'. Over the years I've hung out in a LOT of different fan communities, so I'm fully aware that every fan community has a that 'nutso' segment, I expect that and it isn't new to me.

But, whereas in other fan communities it's like 10-15 percent of the population that is batshit crazy, I swear it's more like 50-60 percent of the MJ fan community that is off their rocker. I think it has something to do with MJ's really eccentric public persona, that it attracted alot of REALLY unstable people.

I started out being new to the internet on MJ forums in 2001 and 2002. Then got a moderator positon in 2003/2004 and PR. believe me when i say the MJ community is cra-zay. Had to get a way from all that. Prince also has his share of crazyness fans and Janet as well.

Frankly also been to Stevie Wonder fanboards or Motown boards I find Those to have the most sane and objective people, probably has to do with Stevie's own kind positive and laid back position and him being respected by everyone and their momma.

armpit said:

Timmy84 said:

EVERY fan base has a bunch of nuts. No one fan base is "superior" to another. It's the way it is. But don't generalize thinking that's how all of them act.

I'm a big 'music person'. Over the years I've hung out in a LOT of different fan communities, so I'm fully aware that every fan community has a that 'nutso' segment, I expect that and it isn't new to me.

But, whereas in other fan communities it's like 10-15 percent of the population that is batshit crazy, I swear it's more like 50-60 percent of the MJ fan community that is off their rocker. I think it has something to do with MJ's really eccentric public persona, that it attracted alot of REALLY unstable people.

The only forums that i have visited quite often is the org, the KOP board and one local board so I am not gonna say who has the craziest fans and truly I don't care. Why should I bother with crazy people. I ignore them. And I have to say that I have also met some truly incredible people because they were MJ fans.

I am not sure if Mike's eccentric public persona has attracted some unstable people. I am not a psychologist and I don't dare to generalize like that cause I hate when people do it. I can't imagine though that clinging to someone so weird in most people's eyes can help you with your stability. I think you have to be quite stable to be able to stay a fan when things about your hero are sometimes so difficult to handle and people do make certain conclusions about you based on the fact that you support someone so weird. As someone already said, it ain't easy being an MJ fan and how could you handle that if you were unstable (this exludes all those imitators that I can't stand, but all the superstars have their imitators, there are many Elvises etc., so this is not limited to MJ fan community). To me being unstable is going with the flow, not having your own opinion etc.

armpit said:

I'm a big 'music person'. Over the years I've hung out in a LOT of different fan communities, so I'm fully aware that every fan community has a that 'nutso' segment, I expect that and it isn't new to me.

But, whereas in other fan communities it's like 10-15 percent of the population that is batshit crazy, I swear it's more like 50-60 percent of the MJ fan community that is off their rocker. I think it has something to do with MJ's really eccentric public persona, that it attracted alot of REALLY unstable people.

I feel that most people label the MJ fandom as 'nutso,' because:

1. They are fans of someone who was/is mostly regarded as someone was off their rocker and/or freak already.

2. When you are knowledgable about something that you are very passionate about, it looks weird.

3. When you get defensive about something you are knowledgable and passionate about it looks crazy.

4. When you get defensive and are knowledgable as well as passionate about someone who is/was regarded as off their rocker/freak already, you look like a lunatic.

No matter how hard you try to seperate yourself from it, that pretty much applies to a lot of us in here.

NMuzakNSoul said:

I started out being new to the internet on MJ forums in 2001 and 2002. Then got a moderator positon in 2003/2004 and PR. believe me when i say the MJ community is cra-zay. Had to get a way from all that. Prince also has his share of crazyness fans and Janet as well.

Frankly also been to Stevie Wonder fanboards or Motown boards I find Those to have the most sane and objective people, probably has to do with Stevie's own kind positive and laid back position and him being respected by everyone and their momma.

See, it is easy being viewed as sane when you support someone as non-controversial as Stevie.

[Edited 6/8/11 9:15am]

dag said:

NMuzakNSoul said:

I started out being new to the internet on MJ forums in 2001 and 2002. Then got a moderator positon in 2003/2004 and PR. believe me when i say the MJ community is cra-zay. Had to get a way from all that. Prince also has his share of crazyness fans and Janet as well.

Frankly also been to Stevie Wonder fanboards or Motown boards I find Those to have the most sane and objective people, probably has to do with Stevie's own kind positive and laid back position and him being respected by everyone and their momma.

See, it is easy being viewed as sane when you support someone as non-controversial as Stevie.

[Edited 6/8/11 9:15am]

I so agree with both. It's hard being an MJ fan when almost everybody thinks he's nothing but a creepy weirdo (at least before he died), and not being defensive of the man...forget Prince fans, MJ fans constantly had to deal with Beatles, Elvis, Eminem fans...And because MJ is the most controversial person ever in music history there's just so much bullshit that comes with that's not relavent to art at all

But I've noticed there are a lot of MJ fans who don't really have broad music knowledge or music taste, such as myself....because well, MJ probably has more international fans than anyone, and most of them didn't really grow up with western popular music. I'm definitely more interested in dancing in general than music...and grew up listening to mostly classical music...so I think AFTER I got to know MJ, I got a chance to listen to Stevie Wonder, James Brown, Motown...old school albums...

[Edited 6/8/11 9:36am]

armpit said:

Timmy84 said:

EVERY fan base has a bunch of nuts. No one fan base is "superior" to another. It's the way it is. But don't generalize thinking that's how all of them act.

I'm a big 'music person'. Over the years I've hung out in a LOT of different fan communities, so I'm fully aware that every fan community has a that 'nutso' segment, I expect that and it isn't new to me.

But, whereas in other fan communities it's like 10-15 percent of the population that is batshit crazy, I swear it's more like 50-60 percent of the MJ fan community that is off their rocker. I think it has something to do with MJ's really eccentric public persona, that it attracted alot of REALLY unstable people.

Oh gosh, I'd love to be known as batshit crazy MJ fanatic and beyond! Maybe I already am but lol. I mean all my friends know how much I love MJ so why not go reeeaal crazy online lol maybe I should go around start claiming that I'm Blanket's biological mum or something even though I was 12 when he was born lol

Swa said:

Michael Artwork - A life in images and allusions.

As promised here are some of the minute references to Michael in the album artwork. It's probably best to get your copy of the artwork out to spot them all. I'll do my best to have this make sense.

1. Bottom Left (BL) Picture of Joseph and Katherine with family sprouting. The image is wrapped by a belt - a sign of the strong disciplinarian that would have an effect on Michael.

2. Broken Guitar string that kicked off the formation of J5.

3. J5 MiniVan and Steel Town Records.

4. Apollo statue that the Jackson 5 dance on his arm.

5. Jackson 5 - Diana Ross Presents the Jackson 5 image - has a bubble that features an apple box that Michael used to stand on to reach the mic heights in recordings.

6. Behind Apollo is a school book, a rose (Ms Rose Fine) and velvet curtains to depict Michael's education and schooling (that of the stage).

7. Above the book is a swing with a rat on it - depicting Michael's childhood was spent in the studio recording - alluding to Ben (the rat also blows a bubblegum bubble - bubblegum pop).

8. A bubble near the J5 image has cartoon MJ in it.

9. There's a depiction of Going Places with epic record label behind MJ.

10. The Scarecrow from The Wiz - has a hawk on his shoulder to depict MJ being a hawk in the studio when he worked with Quincy.

11. OTW MJ has a glow around him depicting his inner fire.

12. To the right of the Scarecrow is Can You Feel It MJ with hands up to Quincy - showing the collaboration between the two.

13. There is a bubble with forceps - plastic surgery.

14. Behind the Thriller zombies is a hint of a film reel depicting MJ's pioneering of the short film music video.

15. Left of Billie Jean MJ is a bubble with a grammy.

16. Motown 25 MJ is standing over shattered glass showing his break from the group and the fracturing of his relationships.

17. Moon and spaceship - Moonwalk, MTV, ET.

18. Orbiting around the main MJ are bubbles with his fedora, aviators, and glove in it plus walk of fame star. There is also a cluster of bubbles depicting MJ and his 3 kids.

19. Gloved hand over his heart - showing his humanitarian efforts - the royalty garb a nod to KOP.

20 Butterfly - metamorphoses and Butterflies.

21. Cameras near the Leave Me Alone section depict the press. The dogs to the right of MJ and just under the rollercoaster depict the hounding he received and also his once friendly relationship with the press. Two dogs hold a newspaper, one holds torn underpants - biting MJ in the ass.

22. Goldfish with a crown - life in a goldfish bowl.

23. BAD video montage - songs represented include Bad, TWYMMF, SC, SD, LMA, and MITM (Mj's reflection in the baroque mirror). Leave Me Alone also shows MJ with his hands raised as he, Bubble and Muscles plunge down the rollercoaster - showing michael's love of fun and fearlessness.

24. Popcorn in bubble - love of movies and pop.

25. MJ on throne with busts of his 3 kids - supersoaker in hand. The throne has an apple (Applehead) and a chessboard on it.

26. Midget - is actually a mini MJ.

27. Bubbles is the one blowing the bubbles that swirl around the image.

28. The Dangerous album cover mask has images of the tracks in it - Pharoh and Neffertiti from RTT, Angles placing a bandage on a cracked earth - HTT, MJ and Naomi Campbell from ITC, a growling jaguar from BoW, and MJ in rocketman suit standing on Jaguar.

29. Fruit on velvet pillow and golden fence - 3 fruit represent his kids.

30. Women - one's face is obscured by long black hair - Blanket's mother.

31. Oaktree and snakes next to the women - Neverland ranch and the snakes that infiltrated his life.

32. Burning money with MJ's face on it - showed his earnings but also his lavish spending.

33. Beetle on one of the $100 notes - MJ buying the Beatles catalogue.

34. Golden Mallet in Bubble - MJ's trials - and the high cost they took.

35. Bahrain Skyline - above the burning money.

36. Angel and Michael - World - Children - said to represent MJ's message - Will You Be There to save the world?

37. This is it Silhouette - classic pose but with a twist. MJ's hand is over his heart depicting his passing, the TII stage is empty as he would never take the stage in 02, and the pointing hand points back over his career and achievements.

38. Burning tabloids - in MJ's death all the tabloid gossip seemed irrelevant.

39. Bursting bubble - Michael's death.

40. Peter Pan - obvious.

41. Shooting Star - MJ blazing the trail.

42. An empty throne above the mountain of stars - there will never be another to sit in the throne.

Obviously there are many more images - there are 65 different scenes and MJ appears 50 times either literally or symbolically - i just tried to cover off the little things that aren't obvious.

BTW these are not my references but taken from the book that came with the art print by Kadir Nelson.

It's made me appreciate more the artwork that I first felt was that great as a "new album" cover.

cooool....thanks!!

Emancipation89 said:

forget Prince fans, MJ fans constantly had to deal with Beatles, Elvis, Eminem fans...And because MJ is the most controversial person ever in music history there's just so much bullshit that comes

Oh god, dont' even get my started on that. Especially Beatles and Elvis fans. Sometimes I think it's because one side sees the other as a threat. Especially when they call MJ the biggest selling solo artist of all time and here comes the Elvis party claiming X, Y, and Z. Or when Beatles fans claim that Fab 4 invented modern music. Take a look at this one:

http://www.straightgangst...e-beatles/

To a large degree, it depends on which end of “influence” you’re talking about–musical, or more broadly pop-cultural? The Beatles had better songs, and were endlessly more inventive musicians. MJ was a perfect storm of charisma, visual spectacle, and great music, and was arguably more of a pop culture force than the Beatles (who, we always have to remember, are propped up amazingly by Baby Boomer nostalgia).

However, it must be said that MJ wouldn’t have been able to be what he was without the Beatles doing it first. There wouldn’t have been a Motown 25 audience without the Beatles Ed Sullivan audience first. It’s easy to forget, but the Beatles were the first “boy band”, and most likely Berry Gordy’s inspiration for the J5 themselves. They also solidified (if not invented) a lot more pop/rock staples (the middle-8, the 4-man band, writing their own songs, freely mixing genres, making the studio an instrument, arguably being there for the invention of the music video and the “rockumentary”).

MJ did a hell of a lot, and he was the last of his kind. But the Beatles got there first. It’s probably fair to make the claim that MJ’s audience was bigger than the Beatles because the record industry was about 1000 times bigger than it was in the 60s, too. I love both of them, but by a hair, I have to give it to the Beatles. Fun, though!

THE WORLD UNITES ON NEW MICHAEL JACKSON VIDEO "BEHIND THE MASK"

http://www.michaeljackson...n-20110608

scatwoman said:

Swa said:

^^ Sales were always a factor of MJ's career. I mean when off the wall sold 9 million the critics were saying, he'd never top it. Then Thriller his and we know how that played out. With sales like that it was impossible for him to top it again (impossible for any artist to) and no matter how good the sales for Bad or Dangerous or HiStory were the press loved to point out that his sales were on the decline or no where near Thriller. Of course objectively those albums still sold massive amounts that most artists would love to have to their name and outsold alot of other albums of the same period. Even Invincible with its "modest" multimillion sales was a lot better than most artists at the time - selling a lot more than his 80s contemparies, and his modern counterparts yet the press still wrote it off as a failure.

A fair and balanced article about his sales written back in 2003 can be found here if you're interested in reading it: http://www.smh.com.au/art...85212.html

I wouldn't describe that article as fair and balanced.

For a start Rodney Jerkins has said Invincible didn't cost anywhere near the ludicrous sum reported. And Sony sure as hell didn't spend $50m on promotion. They didn't even advertise the album during his 30th anniversary concerts which were staged shortly before Invincible's release!

Then after just two single releases the project was dropped.

$50m my freakin' ass.

Also, why was Number Ones described as "yet another greatest hits package" when it was only the second compilation of his Epic material?

No, not fair and balanced at all.

Thank you for pointing out what I have been trying to tell people for years.

Emancipation89 said:

armpit said:

I'm a big 'music person'. Over the years I've hung out in a LOT of different fan communities, so I'm fully aware that every fan community has a that 'nutso' segment, I expect that and it isn't new to me.

But, whereas in other fan communities it's like 10-15 percent of the population that is batshit crazy, I swear it's more like 50-60 percent of the MJ fan community that is off their rocker. I think it has something to do with MJ's really eccentric public persona, that it attracted alot of REALLY unstable people.

Oh gosh, I'd love to be known as batshit crazy MJ fanatic and beyond! Maybe I already am but lol. I mean all my friends know how much I love MJ so why not go reeeaal crazy online lol maybe I should go around start claiming that I'm Blanket's biological mum or something even though I was 12 when he was born lol

I am one of those proud MJ fans who doesn't give a shit if someone claims that I am a "fanatic" or not. IF being a "fanatic" means defending my favorite artist against bullshit, media manipulation, lies and other crap then so be it. If being a "fanatic" means that I don't have to agree with other artists' fans perception of what Michael is, should be or whatever, then so be it. All of this "objective" shit pisses the hell out of me because all of these so-called "objective" fans are about as objective as my left toe. Damn, I am so glad AND proud that Michael "walked to a different beat than anyone else". It made/makes him STILL the most interesting artist in the history of entertainment, IMO. As I have stated in another post, being a MJ fan means you really have to be strong as hell to put up with the shit that is thrown at Michael AND at his fans. You can NOT be weak and be a fan of Michael's. You can't worry about what others say about you. You certainly can't be intimidated about what others think of you. Being a MJ fan is not for the weak and timid. Either you are up to it or not and that's the bottomline.

NaughtyKitty said:

THE WORLD UNITES ON NEW MICHAEL JACKSON VIDEO "BEHIND THE MASK"

Groundbreaking “Crowdsourced” Video to Debut on June 14th on Facebook.com/MichaelJackson

New York, NY – This spring, the Estate of Michael Jackson and Sony Music gave everyone around the world the opportunity to be a part of Michael Jackson’s video legacy with The Behind the Mask Project. This groundbreaking, global online casting call prompted people in all corners of the planet who love Michael Jackson’s music to shoot, upload and submit their own unique performances for inclusion in the video; the project elicited an unprecedented response from 103 countries in the world. And on June 14th, The Behind the Mask Project will be unveiled on www.Facebook.com/MichaelJackson.

Led by the creative team at @radical.media and acclaimed director Dennis Liu,
The Behind the Mask Project launched in March 2011 with a state of the art website http://behindthemask.michaeljackson.com loaded with simple tools that defined the different roles one could play. Upon entering the site, users selected an action like playing an instrument, singing a lyric, acting out a crowd reaction or demonstrating a classic MJ dance move. Then, using the site’s split-screen template, contributors were able to shoot their move right on the website or with their web cam and upload the clip at the precise time it occurred in the video.

Dennis Liu comments, “This has been the most exciting and fun project I think I've ever been involved in. It's been such a privilege, and was incredibly moving to see so many people from all over the world join as one, their creative voices, dance and musical talents bound together by Michael Jackson’s spirit and incomparable artistry. We received submissions from the Sahara Desert to Venice Beach, from mountaintops to suburban backyards, with some shots featuring well over one hundred people apiece. All who participated delivered brilliantly.”

After submissions poured in from all over the globe they were carefully edited down by the director to the best 1600 submissions (including 50 kids and 36 animals). On June 14th, the 35 million Facebook fans of Michael Jackson will get the first look at this landmark video. New fans can log on to www.Facebook/MichaelJackson and click “Like” to view the video.

Technology journalist Natali Morris comments, “Michael Jackson was crowdsourcing his videos before crowdsourcing even existed. This project is a perfect way to honor his connection with his fans.”

The song “Behind the Mask” is a critic and fan favorite from MICHAEL – the unique collection of songs featuring Michael’s performances completed posthumously and released in December by the Michael Jackson Estate and Sony Music. MICHAELwas the #1 global album upon its release in December and has shipped over 3 million units worldwide making it one of the biggest albums of 2010. The album’s success continues to underscore Michael’s importance as a global icon and superstar, transcending cultures and languages.

Dennis Liu is an award-winning digital filmmaker at @radical.media. Dennis quickly made a name for himself winning awards for clients that include Apple and Microsoft and being honored in the renowned "Saatchi & Saatchi New Directors Showcase". @radical.media is a global transmedia company that creates some of the world's most innovative content and the home to @radical.media design+digital. @radical.media's award-winning projects include the Academy Award®-winning documentary “The Fog of War”; the Grammy®-winning “Concert for George”; the Independent Spirit Award-winning “Metallica: Some Kind of Monster”; the award-winning digital experience “The Wilderness Downtown” for Google Creative Lab and Arcade Fire; the Grammy-nominated “The Johnny Cash Project”; the Emmy® and Golden Globe®-winning pilot episode of the hit series “Mad Men”; the Emmy®-winning “10 Days That Unexpectedly Changed America” for the History Channel; and five seasons of the critically acclaimed Sundance Channel series “Iconoclasts,” among others.

www.Facebook/MichaelJackson
Twitter @michaeljackson #MJBehindtheMask
www.MichaelJackson.com

http://www.michaeljackson...n-20110608

Can't wait to see this.

Free2BMe said:

I am one of those proud MJ fans who doesn't give a shit if someone claims that I am a "fanatic" or not. IF being a "fanatic" means defending my favorite artist against bullshit, media manipulation, lies and other crap then so be it. If being a "fanatic" means that I don't have to agree with other artists' fans perception of what Michael is, should be or whatever, then so be it. All of this "objective" shit pisses the hell out of me because all of these so-called "objective" fans are about as objective as my left toe. Damn, I am so glad AND proud that Michael "walked to a different beat than anyone else". It made/makes him STILL the most interesting artist in the history of entertainment, IMO. As I have stated in another post, being a MJ fan means you really have to be strong as hell to put up with the shit that is thrown at Michael AND at his fans. You can NOT be weak and be a fan of Michael's. You can't worry about what others say about you. You certainly can't be intimidated about what others think of you. Being a MJ fan is not for the weak and timid. Either you are up to it or not and that's the bottomline.

[img:$uid]http://i.imgur.com/ay96z.png[/img:$uid]

NaughtyKitty said:

THE WORLD UNITES ON NEW MICHAEL JACKSON VIDEO "BEHIND THE MASK"

Groundbreaking “Crowdsourced” Video to Debut on June 14th on Facebook.com/MichaelJackson

New York, NY – This spring, the Estate of Michael Jackson and Sony Music gave everyone around the world the opportunity to be a part of Michael Jackson’s video legacy with The Behind the Mask Project. This groundbreaking, global online casting call prompted people in all corners of the planet who love Michael Jackson’s music to shoot, upload and submit their own unique performances for inclusion in the video; the project elicited an unprecedented response from 103 countries in the world. And on June 14th, The Behind the Mask Project will be unveiled on www.Facebook.com/MichaelJackson.

Led by the creative team at @radical.media and acclaimed director Dennis Liu,
The Behind the Mask Project launched in March 2011 with a state of the art website http://behindthemask.michaeljackson.com loaded with simple tools that defined the different roles one could play. Upon entering the site, users selected an action like playing an instrument, singing a lyric, acting out a crowd reaction or demonstrating a classic MJ dance move. Then, using the site’s split-screen template, contributors were able to shoot their move right on the website or with their web cam and upload the clip at the precise time it occurred in the video.

Dennis Liu comments, “This has been the most exciting and fun project I think I've ever been involved in. It's been such a privilege, and was incredibly moving to see so many people from all over the world join as one, their creative voices, dance and musical talents bound together by Michael Jackson’s spirit and incomparable artistry. We received submissions from the Sahara Desert to Venice Beach, from mountaintops to suburban backyards, with some shots featuring well over one hundred people apiece. All who participated delivered brilliantly.”

After submissions poured in from all over the globe they were carefully edited down by the director to the best 1600 submissions (including 50 kids and 36 animals). On June 14th, the 35 million Facebook fans of Michael Jackson will get the first look at this landmark video. New fans can log on to www.Facebook/MichaelJackson and click “Like” to view the video.

Technology journalist Natali Morris comments, “Michael Jackson was crowdsourcing his videos before crowdsourcing even existed. This project is a perfect way to honor his connection with his fans.”

The song “Behind the Mask” is a critic and fan favorite from MICHAEL – the unique collection of songs featuring Michael’s performances completed posthumously and released in December by the Michael Jackson Estate and Sony Music. MICHAELwas the #1 global album upon its release in December and has shipped over 3 million units worldwide making it one of the biggest albums of 2010. The album’s success continues to underscore Michael’s importance as a global icon and superstar, transcending cultures and languages.

Dennis Liu is an award-winning digital filmmaker at @radical.media. Dennis quickly made a name for himself winning awards for clients that include Apple and Microsoft and being honored in the renowned "Saatchi & Saatchi New Directors Showcase". @radical.media is a global transmedia company that creates some of the world's most innovative content and the home to @radical.media design digital. @radical.media's award-winning projects include the Academy Award®-winning documentary “The Fog of War”; the Grammy®-winning “Concert for George”; the Independent Spirit Award-winning “Metallica: Some Kind of Monster”; the award-winning digital experience “The Wilderness Downtown” for Google Creative Lab and Arcade Fire; the Grammy-nominated “The Johnny Cash Project”; the Emmy® and Golden Globe®-winning pilot episode of the hit series “Mad Men”; the Emmy®-winning “10 Days That Unexpectedly Changed America” for the History Channel; and five seasons of the critically acclaimed Sundance Channel series “Iconoclasts,” among others.

www.Facebook/MichaelJackson
Twitter @michaeljackson #MJBehindtheMask
www.MichaelJackson.com

http://www.michaeljackson...n-20110608

Can't wait to see this.

Free2BMe said:

Emancipation89 said:

Oh gosh, I'd love to be known as batshit crazy MJ fanatic and beyond! Maybe I already am but lol. I mean all my friends know how much I love MJ so why not go reeeaal crazy online lol maybe I should go around start claiming that I'm Blanket's biological mum or something even though I was 12 when he was born lol

I am one of those proud MJ fans who doesn't give a shit if someone claims that I am a "fanatic" or not. IF being a "fanatic" means defending my favorite artist against bullshit, media manipulation, lies and other crap then so be it. If being a "fanatic" means that I don't have to agree with other artists' fans perception of what Michael is, should be or whatever, then so be it. All of this "objective" shit pisses the hell out of me because all of these so-called "objective" fans are about as objective as my left toe. Damn, I am so glad AND proud that Michael "walked to a different beat than anyone else". It made/makes him STILL the most interesting artist in the history of entertainment, IMO. As I have stated in another post, being a MJ fan means you really have to be strong as hell to put up with the shit that is thrown at Michael AND at his fans. You can NOT be weak and be a fan of Michael's. You can't worry about what others say about you. You certainly can't be intimidated about what others think of you. Being a MJ fan is not for the weak and timid. Either you are up to it or not and that's the bottomline.

dag said:

The King of Dance

Does anyone know where the footage beginning at around 2:17 is from?

[Edited 6/6/11 13:41pm]

Amazing, just amazing. I knew that Michael could tap dance; however, I never knew that he could do it to THIS extent. Thank you so much to the person who posted this clip. This man, MJ, could do anything that he set his mind to-Pure Genius!

Swa said:

scatwoman said:

I wouldn't describe that article as fair and balanced.

For a start Rodney Jerkins has said Invincible didn't cost anywhere near the ludicrous sum reported. And Sony sure as hell didn't spend $50m on promotion. They didn't even advertise the album during his 30th anniversary concerts which were staged shortly before Invincible's release!

Then after just two single releases the project was dropped.

$50m my freakin' ass.

Also, why was Number Ones described as "yet another greatest hits package" when it was only the second compilation of his Epic material?

No, not fair and balanced at all.

Well I suggested fair and balanced in that it put the sales in perspective - and the somewhat unfair comparison Michael always received on the sales side of things.

Also technically Sony released 3 singles off Invincible - You Rock My World, Cry, and Butterflies (which was released in February of 2002).

Also Invincible was released October 30, and the 30th Anniversary Concert didn't air until late November - but yes Sony should have run ads during the telecast - they did here in Australia.

Also Number Ones wasn't the second greatest hits package of his Epic Material.

There was HiStory (Disc 1) in 1996, then it was repackaged again as The Greatest Hits (History Disc 1 repackaged) in 2001. It might be a technicality but it was the third in line.

As for Sony's accounting of the cost of Invincible and the promotions I don't believe either figure - by that stage it was all a PR shitfight between Song and MJ with those figures reported to paint Michael as the petulant artist who had no right to complain.

I just felt the article made an honest assessment of the sales issue that Michael faced and how it was unfair to compare sales of other albums to that of Thriller. As it stated, most artists would have been happy with the couple of million Invincible sold.

But each to their own.

Thanks for the corrections. I had actually forgotten when the anniversary concerts were aired, but certainly Sony screwed up by not advertising Invincible at the most convenient opportunity.

Greatest Hits vol. 1... meh, whatever. It's a straight re-issue of History Disc 1 so doesn't qualify as a new compilation. It was a pointless release. Sony knew it, the fans knew it and its lack of success speaks for itself.

Butterflies was never an official single, simply a US radio hit. At least You Rock My World and Cry had both retail release (though not in the US) and a video. The fact that the public couldn't even purchase You Rock My World on any format at the peak of its popularity in the US indicates just how little Sony cared about MJ at this point of his career. Billboard commentators said that due to their popularity on radio both YRMW and Butterflies could have topped the US chart had they been released to retail. As far as I'm concerned Sony wanted the album to fail before it even got out of the door.

$50m on promotion? Suuuuure...

^ Exactly. Michael wasn't bluffing when he said they were preventing him from success. It was obvious had things been different with Michael and Sony and they had gotten along, YRMW would've been #1 easily in the U.S.

Timmy84 said:

^ Exactly. Michael wasn't bluffing when he said they were preventing him from success. It was obvious had things been different with Michael and Sony and they had gotten along, YRMW would've been #1 easily in the U.S.

Free2BMe said:

dag said:

The King of Dance

Does anyone know where the footage beginning at around 2:17 is from?

[Edited 6/6/11 13:41pm]

Amazing, just amazing. I knew that Michael could tap dance; however, I never knew that he could do it to THIS extent. Thank you so much to the person who posted this clip. This man, MJ, could do anything that he set his mind to-Pure Genius!

I'm amazed there are MJJ fans that haven't seen this stuff before. It's a pity this era gets neglected, or seems to.

I'm probably lonely on this but i'm of the opinion he was a far better dancer back then. Just more fluid, natural and loose. I'd take this over anything he choreographed after the BAD era.