GoldDolphin said:

silverchild said:

So true. I think that was the weakest counterbalance many critics utilized when it came to critiquing the post-Thriller albums. Unfortunately, Michael had fallen victim of that same mentality a little after Bad as well, especially since folks here in the US had fallen a little out of touch with him. I think the crossroads to Michael's career came in '92-'93. Those years changed Michael's career forever. It seemed like Dangerous was taking off so fast and it kind've died slowly, especially during the first molestation allegations. Sad case. Michael's popularity was still big, but his reputation was in a deep decline by that time. Yet as Michael's controversies continued, he was still very popular worldwide from a entertainer standpoint and still achieved tremendous musical success up until 1995-1996.

[Edited 6/20/12 6:37am]

It's really sad what happened to Mike, but I honestly believe that they didn't want to give him as much credit because they knew how much power he could get. (I know it's controversial to say that, but I honestly believe that MJ changed the industry in profound ways and people knew that he was running the show and not the other way round like it usually is in the music industry) He was dangerous because here was an artist (a black artist at that) who had the most selling album of all time and had a bigger impact on the world than the Beatles (and he happened to own one of the largest music catalogue in the world). So of course they were gonna say everything sucked after Thriller, even though sonically Bad is still the main direction most sound engineers go after, it's Bruce Swediens masterpiece and Michaels baby ..

I agree that after the molestion case it changed dramatically in the US, however he got more known in the 90s around the world. The huge statues all over Europe during HIStory prooves that he was still huge and in Asia too. With the end of the Berlin wall and the communist era, countries like Russia & eastern europe were having a Jackson mania because his music had been "illegal" during the 80s (even tho bootlegs and Lps were sold there really expensive in the 80s.) The concerts in Germany & South korea in 1999 that sold out in minutes also show that his popularity hadnt declined contrary to the popular belief people had in the US. It's funny because most of the songs that I remember from Michael in the 90s are all from the HIStory & Blood On The Dancefloor era and I was a baby haha. But they had cans of the HIStory tour and a lot of other things to promote the tour here in europe. In a way I dont think Michael cared about the US after the media turned on him in the late 80s, that's why he was focusing on touring in Japan, South America and Europe instead. He'd lost interest because they were always negative towards him and after all he did to help the industry, he was blacklisted.

Excellent point. Here you had this young black man in his mid-20s, operating media platforms that had never been used before and breaking molds across the border. He was a smart business man and they didn't think he would be able to do it. The aftermath of Off The Wall was a true testament of what he was about to immerse himself into, from a business standpoint. He intimidated them because they didn't believe in Thriller and what that was about to be. They had forgotten that this guy had 15 years in the game already. In that large amount of time, he was learning, observing, and taking notes about marketing and branding. This guy was a child of Motown for god sakes, even though Berry gave him little power. So, they definitely had a strategy of 'making' and 'breaking' Michael's career.

As far as Michael's career after the molestation controversy, he definitely had more of an impact internationally during those years to me. It's clear that Michael wasn't concerned with the US because of the negative reactions from the media and its toll on him, starting with the Victory era. No matter how much attention those albums got (specifically HIStory) in the US, he was breaking them in from an international standpoint. Those albums were selling like hotcakes in those countries.

dag said:

OK, I just got home from work after that MJ lecture.

I have many mixed feelings about it and am not quite sure of what to make of it.

I was personally pleased with my own performance. I was happy with my presentation and I also managed to deliver it to my satisfaction.

Some kids seemed interested, others were for example laughing while we were watching Who's loving you and other performances by the Jackson 5. I don't know what was funny about them.

Some teenagers acted like they couldn't care less and had comments as to why they have to watch it and that they are not interested etc.

When we got to the video with Mike's kids talking about him, I put in even that bit where Paris talks about her passion for reading. When she said that her record is 27 books read in one week, a girl just said "she's lying."

When I got to the end, there were no questions from the kids which could be due to the fact that they didn't care or that I have truly covered everything and they don't know that much about him to have some questions. But my collegue (a music teacher) asked me "And what about Liz Taylor?" I said "well, they were best friends till his death". And she said "And is it true that he wanted to be white to look like her?" She asked me that after we had watched a video about vitiligo taken from Take Two. That proves just how deep the lies about him bleeching the skin are rooted in the public's mind. I was thinking "were you listening?" How do you reply to that in a non-insulting way?

I still am unable to tell how successful my speech was. I was glad there were some who seemed genuinly interested, but you just don't know what to make of some people's reaction. We had to admonish some kids for misbehaving.

I haven't spoken to my collegue to find out as to what she thought of it, but she seemed just a bit depressed because of the way some kids acted and she had to admonish them so that I could continue with my speech, so her attention was a bit scattered. I wonder what she's gonna tell me about it.

Anyways my speech consisted of these videos:

1. a mix of J5 performances including bits from Variety show

2 a video about making music (Mexican deposition, some footage from studio - Barry Gibb stuff etc.), Mike talking about his passion for drawing + some of his drawings

3. vitiligo + plastic surgery (Take Two footage mostly)

4. Chandlers phone take conversaiont about "destroying Mike" with a fan video to "With a Child's Heart which included intersting facts about Mike - Jehovah witnessed, his charigable work, his hobbies etc.)

5. Family video (bits from LMP's Oprah interview and the kid's interview + interview with Debbie Rowe - clips from Take Two)

6. Montage of Michael's videos and best performances (2 Bad, TWYMMF - Grammy performance, Smooth Criminal, Earth Song ending from the Brunei Royal concert, MITM from the Bucarest concert etc.)

Plus I had Power Point presentations about the trials and his death.

Well you should be proud that you did what you said you were gonna say and also because you are telling THE REAL STORY and not a sensational story that will get more attention (I promise kids will listen more if it's all crazy hahaha). I'm sure that those kids that did listen will be the ones that get inspired and tell other friends about Mike and the rest well you can't save everyone from knowing great music haha. I think you did a great job and you showcased his life in a good way it seems. Be happy and your collegue sucks for asking that stupid question. lol.

GoldDolphin said:

dag said:

OK, I just got home from work after that MJ lecture.

I have many mixed feelings about it and am not quite sure of what to make of it.

I was personally pleased with my own performance. I was happy with my presentation and I also managed to deliver it to my satisfaction.

Some kids seemed interested, others were for example laughing while we were watching Who's loving you and other performances by the Jackson 5. I don't know what was funny about them.

Some teenagers acted like they couldn't care less and had comments as to why they have to watch it and that they are not interested etc.

When we got to the video with Mike's kids talking about him, I put in even that bit where Paris talks about her passion for reading. When she said that her record is 27 books read in one week, a girl just said "she's lying."

When I got to the end, there were no questions from the kids which could be due to the fact that they didn't care or that I have truly covered everything and they don't know that much about him to have some questions. But my collegue (a music teacher) asked me "And what about Liz Taylor?" I said "well, they were best friends till his death". And she said "And is it true that he wanted to be white to look like her?" She asked me that after we had watched a video about vitiligo taken from Take Two. That proves just how deep the lies about him bleeching the skin are rooted in the public's mind. I was thinking "were you listening?" How do you reply to that in a non-insulting way?

I still am unable to tell how successful my speech was. I was glad there were some who seemed genuinly interested, but you just don't know what to make of some people's reaction. We had to admonish some kids for misbehaving.

I haven't spoken to my collegue to find out as to what she thought of it, but she seemed just a bit depressed because of the way some kids acted and she had to admonish them so that I could continue with my speech, so her attention was a bit scattered. I wonder what she's gonna tell me about it.

Anyways my speech consisted of these videos:

1. a mix of J5 performances including bits from Variety show

2 a video about making music (Mexican deposition, some footage from studio - Barry Gibb stuff etc.), Mike talking about his passion for drawing + some of his drawings

3. vitiligo + plastic surgery (Take Two footage mostly)

4. Chandlers phone take conversaiont about "destroying Mike" with a fan video to "With a Child's Heart which included intersting facts about Mike - Jehovah witnessed, his charigable work, his hobbies etc.)

5. Family video (bits from LMP's Oprah interview and the kid's interview + interview with Debbie Rowe - clips from Take Two)

6. Montage of Michael's videos and best performances (2 Bad, TWYMMF - Grammy performance, Smooth Criminal, Earth Song ending from the Brunei Royal concert, MITM from the Bucarest concert etc.)

Plus I had Power Point presentations about the trials and his death.

Well you should be proud that you did what you said you were gonna say and also because you are telling THE REAL STORY and not a sensational story that will get more attention (I promise kids will listen more if it's all crazy hahaha). I'm sure that those kids that did listen will be the ones that get inspired and tell other friends about Mike and the rest well you can't save everyone from knowing great music haha. I think you did a great job and you showcased his life in a good way it seems. Be happy and your collegue sucks for asking that stupid question. lol.

I think and hope you're right.

dag said:

OK, I just got home from work after that MJ lecture.

I have many mixed feelings about it and am not quite sure of what to make of it.

I was personally pleased with my own performance. I was happy with my presentation and I also managed to deliver it to my satisfaction.

Some kids seemed interested, others were for example laughing while we were watching Who's loving you and other performances by the Jackson 5. I don't know what was funny about them.

Some teenagers acted like they couldn't care less and had comments as to why they have to watch it and that they are not interested etc.

When we got to the video with Mike's kids talking about him, I put in even that bit where Paris talks about her passion for reading. When she said that her record is 27 books read in one week, a girl just said "she's lying."

When I got to the end, there were no questions from the kids which could be due to the fact that they didn't care or that I have truly covered everything and they don't know that much about him to have some questions. But my collegue (a music teacher) asked me "And what about Liz Taylor?" I said "well, they were best friends till his death". And she said "And is it true that he wanted to be white to look like her?" She asked me that after we had watched a video about vitiligo taken from Take Two. That proves just how deep the lies about him bleeching the skin are rooted in the public's mind. I was thinking "were you listening?" How do you reply to that in a non-insulting way?

I still am unable to tell how successful my speech was. I was glad there were some who seemed genuinly interested, but you just don't know what to make of some people's reaction. We had to admonish some kids for misbehaving.

I haven't spoken to my collegue to find out as to what she thought of it, but she seemed just a bit depressed because of the way some kids acted and she had to admonish them so that I could continue with my speech, so her attention was a bit scattered. I wonder what she's gonna tell me about it.

Anyways my speech consisted of these videos:

1. a mix of J5 performances including bits from Variety show

2 a video about making music (Mexican deposition, some footage from studio - Barry Gibb stuff etc.), Mike talking about his passion for drawing + some of his drawings

3. vitiligo + plastic surgery (Take Two footage mostly)

4. Chandlers phone take conversaiont about "destroying Mike" with a fan video to "With a Child's Heart which included intersting facts about Mike - Jehovah witnessed, his charigable work, his hobbies etc.)

5. Family video (bits from LMP's Oprah interview and the kid's interview + interview with Debbie Rowe - clips from Take Two)

6. Montage of Michael's videos and best performances (2 Bad, TWYMMF - Grammy performance, Smooth Criminal, Earth Song ending from the Brunei Royal concert, MITM from the Bucarest concert etc.)

Plus I had Power Point presentations about the trials and his death.

Sounds like it was a good presentation! You cant change everyones opinion or immaturity. You did your part and thats all you can do. At least they were exposed to a different perspective and the truth.

mjscarousal said:

dag said:

OK, I just got home from work after that MJ lecture.

I have many mixed feelings about it and am not quite sure of what to make of it.

I was personally pleased with my own performance. I was happy with my presentation and I also managed to deliver it to my satisfaction.

Some kids seemed interested, others were for example laughing while we were watching Who's loving you and other performances by the Jackson 5. I don't know what was funny about them.

Some teenagers acted like they couldn't care less and had comments as to why they have to watch it and that they are not interested etc.

When we got to the video with Mike's kids talking about him, I put in even that bit where Paris talks about her passion for reading. When she said that her record is 27 books read in one week, a girl just said "she's lying."

When I got to the end, there were no questions from the kids which could be due to the fact that they didn't care or that I have truly covered everything and they don't know that much about him to have some questions. But my collegue (a music teacher) asked me "And what about Liz Taylor?" I said "well, they were best friends till his death". And she said "And is it true that he wanted to be white to look like her?" She asked me that after we had watched a video about vitiligo taken from Take Two. That proves just how deep the lies about him bleeching the skin are rooted in the public's mind. I was thinking "were you listening?" How do you reply to that in a non-insulting way?

I still am unable to tell how successful my speech was. I was glad there were some who seemed genuinly interested, but you just don't know what to make of some people's reaction. We had to admonish some kids for misbehaving.

I haven't spoken to my collegue to find out as to what she thought of it, but she seemed just a bit depressed because of the way some kids acted and she had to admonish them so that I could continue with my speech, so her attention was a bit scattered. I wonder what she's gonna tell me about it.

Anyways my speech consisted of these videos:

1. a mix of J5 performances including bits from Variety show

2 a video about making music (Mexican deposition, some footage from studio - Barry Gibb stuff etc.), Mike talking about his passion for drawing + some of his drawings

3. vitiligo + plastic surgery (Take Two footage mostly)

4. Chandlers phone take conversaiont about "destroying Mike" with a fan video to "With a Child's Heart which included intersting facts about Mike - Jehovah witnessed, his charigable work, his hobbies etc.)

5. Family video (bits from LMP's Oprah interview and the kid's interview + interview with Debbie Rowe - clips from Take Two)

6. Montage of Michael's videos and best performances (2 Bad, TWYMMF - Grammy performance, Smooth Criminal, Earth Song ending from the Brunei Royal concert, MITM from the Bucarest concert etc.)

Plus I had Power Point presentations about the trials and his death.

Sounds like it was a good presentation! You cant change everyones opinion or immaturity. You did your part and thats all you can do. At least they were exposed to a different perspective and the truth.

Thanks.

mjscarousal said:

dag said:

OK, I just got home from work after that MJ lecture.

I have many mixed feelings about it and am not quite sure of what to make of it.

I was personally pleased with my own performance. I was happy with my presentation and I also managed to deliver it to my satisfaction.

Some kids seemed interested, others were for example laughing while we were watching Who's loving you and other performances by the Jackson 5. I don't know what was funny about them.

Some teenagers acted like they couldn't care less and had comments as to why they have to watch it and that they are not interested etc.

When we got to the video with Mike's kids talking about him, I put in even that bit where Paris talks about her passion for reading. When she said that her record is 27 books read in one week, a girl just said "she's lying."

When I got to the end, there were no questions from the kids which could be due to the fact that they didn't care or that I have truly covered everything and they don't know that much about him to have some questions. But my collegue (a music teacher) asked me "And what about Liz Taylor?" I said "well, they were best friends till his death". And she said "And is it true that he wanted to be white to look like her?" She asked me that after we had watched a video about vitiligo taken from Take Two. That proves just how deep the lies about him bleeching the skin are rooted in the public's mind. I was thinking "were you listening?" How do you reply to that in a non-insulting way?

I still am unable to tell how successful my speech was. I was glad there were some who seemed genuinly interested, but you just don't know what to make of some people's reaction. We had to admonish some kids for misbehaving.

I haven't spoken to my collegue to find out as to what she thought of it, but she seemed just a bit depressed because of the way some kids acted and she had to admonish them so that I could continue with my speech, so her attention was a bit scattered. I wonder what she's gonna tell me about it.

Anyways my speech consisted of these videos:

1. a mix of J5 performances including bits from Variety show

2 a video about making music (Mexican deposition, some footage from studio - Barry Gibb stuff etc.), Mike talking about his passion for drawing + some of his drawings

3. vitiligo + plastic surgery (Take Two footage mostly)

4. Chandlers phone take conversaiont about "destroying Mike" with a fan video to "With a Child's Heart which included intersting facts about Mike - Jehovah witnessed, his charigable work, his hobbies etc.)

5. Family video (bits from LMP's Oprah interview and the kid's interview + interview with Debbie Rowe - clips from Take Two)

6. Montage of Michael's videos and best performances (2 Bad, TWYMMF - Grammy performance, Smooth Criminal, Earth Song ending from the Brunei Royal concert, MITM from the Bucarest concert etc.)

Plus I had Power Point presentations about the trials and his death.

Sounds like it was a good presentation! You cant change everyones opinion or immaturity. You did your part and thats all you can do. At least they were exposed to a different perspective and the truth.

Sounds like it was a good presentation dag!

http://blogs.abc.net.au/w...ntity.html

??

NaughtyKitty said:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/w...ntity.html

??

NaughtyKitty said:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/w...ntity.html

??

Michael did look black in the beginning though.

NaughtyKitty said:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/w...ntity.html

??

I don't get it...

silverchild said:

GoldDolphin said:

It's really sad what happened to Mike, but I honestly believe that they didn't want to give him as much credit because they knew how much power he could get. (I know it's controversial to say that, but I honestly believe that MJ changed the industry in profound ways and people knew that he was running the show and not the other way round like it usually is in the music industry) He was dangerous because here was an artist (a black artist at that) who had the most selling album of all time and had a bigger impact on the world than the Beatles (and he happened to own one of the largest music catalogue in the world). So of course they were gonna say everything sucked after Thriller, even though sonically Bad is still the main direction most sound engineers go after, it's Bruce Swediens masterpiece and Michaels baby ..

I agree that after the molestion case it changed dramatically in the US, however he got more known in the 90s around the world. The huge statues all over Europe during HIStory prooves that he was still huge and in Asia too. With the end of the Berlin wall and the communist era, countries like Russia & eastern europe were having a Jackson mania because his music had been "illegal" during the 80s (even tho bootlegs and Lps were sold there really expensive in the 80s.) The concerts in Germany & South korea in 1999 that sold out in minutes also show that his popularity hadnt declined contrary to the popular belief people had in the US. It's funny because most of the songs that I remember from Michael in the 90s are all from the HIStory & Blood On The Dancefloor era and I was a baby haha. But they had cans of the HIStory tour and a lot of other things to promote the tour here in europe. In a way I dont think Michael cared about the US after the media turned on him in the late 80s, that's why he was focusing on touring in Japan, South America and Europe instead. He'd lost interest because they were always negative towards him and after all he did to help the industry, he was blacklisted.

Excellent point. Here you had this young black man in his mid-20s, operating media platforms that had never been used before and breaking molds across the border. He was a smart business man and they didn't think he would be able to do it. The aftermath of Off The Wall was a true testament of what he was about to immerse himself into, from a business standpoint. He intimidated them because they didn't believe in Thriller and what that was about to be. They had forgotten that this guy had 15 years in the game already. In that large amount of time, he was learning, observing, and taking notes about marketing and branding. This guy was a child of Motown for god sakes, even though Berry gave him little power. So, they definitely had a strategy of 'making' and 'breaking' Michael's career.

As far as Michael's career after the molestation controversy, he definitely had more of an impact internationally during those years to me. It's clear that Michael wasn't concerned with the US because of the negative reactions from the media and its toll on him, starting with the Victory era. No matter how much attention those albums got (specifically HIStory) in the US, he was breaking them in from an international standpoint. Those albums were selling like hotcakes in those countries.

Yes exactly. I always say that too, he grew up watching people like Berry Gordy and other high profile people in the industry and yet somehow they didn't think he was smart or something? lol. He was extremly smart and he learned from the best, but he was less shady than Gordy lol.

It's interesting you mention the Victory era, hmm... I think that he was starting to get bad press during those years but not because of his music or persona which he got in the late 80s with BAD (lets just remember that almost every critic thought Bad was a weak album at the time and then they changed their mind lol Also his nosejob and skin color). He was respected by his peers and the public till 1992 in the US, but since Dangerous wasnt as "revolutionary" people thought Michael had lost his appeal in the US. Espcially since Dangerous lost appeal to Nirvanas -Nevermind that was the voice of generation X. I think in years to come, people will look at both Dangerous & HIStory and respect it more because the concept of those albums define the 90s in so many ways, sonically, visually, musically but also because it transcends the 90s. When you listen to Dangerous & HIStory you have that feeling of "realness" of the 90s which wasnt the case of the 80s which was a kinda plastic landscape when it comes to mainstream music. You feel the agony, frustration in the generation of the 90s yet there's a sense of naivety which is also reflected in Michaels music, which is exactly what a great artist does. Truly inspirational.

Timmy84 said:

NaughtyKitty said:

http://blogs.abc.net.au/w...ntity.html

??

I don't get it...

Neither do I

Gunsnhalen said:

Pretty funny review of moonwalker which i actually got to play a few times as youngin

Anyone else play it?

I still have both versions of the games.

There was also a version that was more based on the movie scenes (including having to find the rabbit outfit) for the Amiga 500, plus the Megadrive version.

Still part of my collection.

NaughtyKitty said:

Timmy84 said:

I don't get it...

Neither do I

I can shed some light. It is a story about the Aboriginal people in Australia and their search for identity. In Australia, after many years of colonisation, many Aboriginals who are mixed race are seen by many as an either or situation. Thus many lighter skinned Aboriginals are showcasing that their identity is Aboriginal - thus despite the changing colour of his skin Michael Jackson was and will always be a "black" - his identity was steeped in being black.

Hope that helps.

I came to work today and one of the boys from the 8. grade came to me and told me that he spoke with everyone in their class and that they all loved my presentation. I told him that it didnť look like that, but he said they did. I had first lesson with them today and they had additional questions regarding the shoe for the lean in Smooth Criminal. They said that was cool.

I went to ask my collegue if she had spoken to them: I suspected that maybe she had told them off for misbehaving and that that was just their reaction to her telling them off, but she said she hadn't spoken to them after the presentation. I was kinda shocked to hear that from him cause most of them surely did not act as if they liked it.

[Edited 6/21/12 6:04am]

silverchild said:

Cloudbuster said:

Because it was a Michael Jackson album. Everything post Thriller was considered a failure.

So true. I think that was the weakest counterbalance many critics utilized when it came to critiquing the post-Thriller albums. Unfortunately, Michael had fallen victim of that same mentality a little after Bad as well, especially since folks here in the US had fallen a little out of touch with him. I think the crossroads to Michael's career came in '92-'93. Those years changed Michael's career forever. It seemed like Dangerous was taking off so fast and it kind've died slowly, especially during the first molestation allegations. Sad case. Michael's popularity was still big, but his reputation was in a deep decline by that time. Yet as Michael's controversies continued, he was still very popular worldwide from a entertainer standpoint and still achieved tremendous musical success up until 1995-1996.

I'd argue that he had tremendous musical success until the end. Let's not deny that Invincible was a global #1 that sold millions.

In just two months it had sold 5.4m, a figure not to be sniffed at.

Had Sony done their job of pushing the album properly it could have sold a lot more, but because his contract was shortly up for renewal, and due to a conflict of interests, he had the option of signing with a different label taking a huge percentage of Sony's publishing with him (smart business man that he was). Sony weren't happy about that and therefore bailed on their promotional duties.

In fact, going further back, Sony did little to promote any of Mike's work in the US after You Are Not Alone became the first single to enter Billboard at the top position. Why? He obviously still had an audience in America, the world's biggest music market, but at that point they pretty much gave up on him.

It's no wonder he wanted out.

Spelling edit.

[Edited 6/21/12 8:30am]

Even tho this is about Justin Bieber the bolded part caught my attention:

London, June 21 — Teen sensation Justin Bieber's "Die in Your Arms" is inspired by Michael Jackson, after he worked with the his producer Rodney Jerkins.

Jerkins, who produced Jackson's "You Rock My World", made Bieber watch a video to get him into the right mindset before recording, reports contactmusic.com.

"Before I got in the booth, Rodney showed me this hour-long video of Michael footage, never been seen before. It's Michael's personality, him in the booth dancing. It's some really special stuff.

"So me seeing that, going in there and being inspired and working with Rodney, who worked with Michael - it was incredible," the 18-year-old said.

Bieber also assured fans he is a real musician rather than a manufactured pop star, and has an hands-on role with all of his tracks.

"I was very involved in the process, I played instruments, produced, wrote, so I want people to know it's not all hype. I want people to know I've been working hard on my music. Focus on the music. Don't think I'm just this product pushed out there. I work hard, and music is really important to me," he said.

http://india.nydailynews....by-jackson

I wanna see that footage!

[Edited 6/21/12 8:40am]

dag said:

I came to work today and one of the boys from the 8. grade came to me and told me that he spoke with everyone in their class and that they all loved my presentation.

[Edited 6/21/12 6:04am]

Awesome

Cloudbuster said:

I'd argue that he had tremendous musical success until the end. Let's not deny that Invincible was a global #1 that sold millions.

In just two months it had sold 5.4m, a figure not to be sniffed at.

I think it fair to say that from 1982 to 1993 MJ was the biggest star in the world, then he was one of the biggest stars (up to about 1999.), Then it was more of a nostalgic act, which most people thought of as a former idol.
Although sales of the album-collection "number one" in 2004, especially in England (about 1.4 million per year) and selling tickets to his concerts in 2009 showed that he will never be completely destroyed, hе was too big a star for that.

LiLi1992 said:

Cloudbuster said:

I'd argue that he had tremendous musical success until the end. Let's not deny that Invincible was a global #1 that sold millions.

In just two months it had sold 5.4m, a figure not to be sniffed at.

Then it was more of a nostalgic act, which most people thought of as a former idol.

I blame it more on him not doing anything at all, tbh. He was the biggest up until the end, just not the "hottest", if you know what I mean.

[Edited 6/21/12 12:47pm]

LiLi1992 said:

Cloudbuster said:

I'd argue that he had tremendous musical success until the end. Let's not deny that Invincible was a global #1 that sold millions.

In just two months it had sold 5.4m, a figure not to be sniffed at.

I think it fair to say that from 1982 to 1993 MJ was the biggest star in the world, then he was one of the biggest stars (up to about 1999.), Then it was more of a nostalgic act, which most people thought of as a former idol.
Although sales of the album-collection "number one" in 2004, especially in England (about 1.4 million per year) and selling tickets to his concerts in 2009 showed that he will never be completely destroyed, hе was too big a star for that.

"Nostalgia acts" don't sell millions of copies of their latest works.

Cloudbuster said:

LiLi1992 said:

I think it fair to say that from 1982 to 1993 MJ was the biggest star in the world, then he was one of the biggest stars (up to about 1999.), Then it was more of a nostalgic act, which most people thought of as a former idol.
Although sales of the album-collection "number one" in 2004, especially in England (about 1.4 million per year) and selling tickets to his concerts in 2009 showed that he will never be completely destroyed, hе was too big a star for that.

"Nostalgia acts" don't sell millions of copies of their latest works.

Agree!

Michael was ALWAYS a big star. His image tarnished but he was always a big star. A Nostalgia act can not SELL OUT 50 concerts at a damn 20,000 capacity Arena. NO OTHER act could sell out 50 Arena shows, NONE

smoothcriminal12 said:

LiLi1992 said:

Then it was more of a nostalgic act, which most people thought of as a former idol.

I blame it more on him not doing anything at all, tbh. We was the biggest up until the end, just not the "hottest", if you know what I mean.

Agree with this, He wasnt doing anything musically to be considered the hottest at the moment. Saling out 50 Arena shows though is pretty fuckin hot if you ask me. NO other artist could OR can do that.

Cloudbuster said:

silverchild said:

So true. I think that was the weakest counterbalance many critics utilized when it came to critiquing the post-Thriller albums. Unfortunately, Michael had fallen victim of that same mentality a little after Bad as well, especially since folks here in the US had fallen a little out of touch with him. I think the crossroads to Michael's career came in '92-'93. Those years changed Michael's career forever. It seemed like Dangerous was taking off so fast and it kind've died slowly, especially during the first molestation allegations. Sad case. Michael's popularity was still big, but his reputation was in a deep decline by that time. Yet as Michael's controversies continued, he was still very popular worldwide from a entertainer standpoint and still achieved tremendous musical success up until 1995-1996.

I'd argue that he had tremendous musical success until the end. Let's not deny that Invincible was a global #1 that sold millions.

In just two months it had sold 5.4m, a figure not to be sniffed at.

Had Sony done their job of pushing the album properly it could have sold a lot more, but because his contract was shortly up for renewal, and due to a conflict of interests, he had the option of signing with a different label taking a huge percentage of Sony's publishing with him (smart business man that he was). Sony weren't happy about that and therefore bailed on their promotional duties.

In fact, going further back, Sony did little to promote any of Mike's work in the US after You Are Not Alone became the first single to enter Billboard at the top position. Why? He obviously still had an audience in America, the world's biggest music market, but at that point they pretty much gave up on him.

It's no wonder he wanted out.

Spelling edit.

[Edited 6/21/12 8:30am]

They blacklisted him here in the US, starting in 1992...

[Edited 6/21/12 14:08pm]

silverchild said:

They blacklisted him here in the US, starting in 1992...

Yeah, he was a "freak" by then. Not a human being that was clearly damaged by fame and circumstance, just a "freak".

Not that I'm saying you're wrong, silverchild, but if he was blackballed as you say, how come he was still making top ten hits into 2001?

I'm with smooth about this, but then again I can get why he didn't wanna continue his career like that because of his kids. It's tough.

Timmy84 said:

Not that I'm saying you're wrong, silverchild, but if he was blackballed as you say, how come he was still making top ten hits into 2001?

You gotta admit that by 2001 there had been a near 15 year media crusade to undermine his achievements and smear his character. His every movement was attacked, his music disparaged and he was reduced to nothing but a caricature which inevitably he was forced to become.

He was "strange", and so were his fans as far as the wider world was concerned. He was an object of ridicule with very few willing to understand what had happened to him and why.

And this was reflected at radio, particulary in the US by the mid nineties. He was still having hits pretty much everywhere else in the world but US radio tuned him out. And the UK "news" papers were especially hostile by that point, the only thing he was worth by then was a good ol' fashioned rubbernecking, uncooth species that we are.

They wanted him ruined and they got their wish. It became embarrassing to be a Michael Jackson fan. "Oh my God! You like HIM?!!"

His work still garnered sales and airplay but there had been a steady decline post Bad with "crazy" Michael stories taking precendence over any value his music may have had.

You've only gotta remind yourself of the shit that was said about him by many here on the org prior to his death to know that this is true.

Cloudbuster said:

Timmy84 said:

Not that I'm saying you're wrong, silverchild, but if he was blackballed as you say, how come he was still making top ten hits into 2001?

You gotta admit that by 2001 there had been a near 15 year media crusade to undermine his achievements and smear his character. His every movement was attacked, his music disparaged and he was reduced to nothing but a caricature which inevitably he was forced to become.

He was "strange", and so were his fans as far as the wider world was concerned. He was an object of ridicule with very few willing to understand what had happened to him and why.

And this was reflected at radio, particulary in the US by the mid nineties. He was still having hits pretty much everywhere else in the world but US radio tuned him out. And the UK "news" papers were especially hostile by that point, the only thing he was worth by then was a good ol' fashioned rubbernecking, uncooth species that we are.

They wanted him ruined and they got their wish. It became embarrassing to be a Michael Jackson fan. "Oh my God! You like HIM?!!"

His work still garnered sales and airplay but there had been a steady decline post Bad with "crazy" Michael stories taking precendence over any value his music may have had.

You've only gotta remind yourself of the shit that was said about him by many here on the org prior to his death to know that this is true.

Oh no I agree with that. But that's how the media is.

Timmy84 said:

Not that I'm saying you're wrong, silverchild, but if he was blackballed as you say, how come he was still making top ten hits into 2001?

I'm with smooth about this, but then again I can get why he didn't wanna continue his career like that because of his kids. It's tough.

That is a true point. I guess I'm talking about overall impact. Michael was already considered an icon by 1979 onward. That never changed, but by the 90s, his appeal kind've declined across the board. Some of it was due to Michael's playful tactics with the media, but alot of it was about Sony and what they were trying to do here to further manipulate Michael. Even though those singles and album sales were hitting strong, something was off...

Timmy84 said:

Oh no I agree with that. But that's how the media is.

They make you and break you. Scum, aren't they.