mjscarousal said:

DonRants said:

There was another thing I noticed. Right after the section on Quincy Jones they show a lot of candids of Michael working at his home studio Havenhurst. The interesting thing is you can literally see that it is this period, during the making of Bad, that his skin completion changes...drastically. By the time Bad is released his wonderful chcolate completion is gone and his nose is also smaller. Also I see no evidence of Vitiligo, rather his skin looks burnt which would support what Quincy said about Michael changing his complexion through multiple chemical peels.

Take your trash and shove it up your ass. MJ had vitiligo the autospy supported dont bring Quincy old ass senile Jones comments in this discussion over MJs remarkable Bad era

I don't care what any autopsy report says. You foul-mouthed piece of human trash. I suppose you are one of those fools who think MJ only had two nose jobs. Idiot.

DonRants said:

mjscarousal said:

Take your trash and shove it up your ass. MJ had vitiligo the autospy supported dont bring Quincy old ass senile Jones comments in this discussion over MJs remarkable Bad era

I don't care what any autopsy report says. You foul-mouthed piece of human trash. I suppose you are one of those fools who think MJ only had two nose jobs. Idiot.

Your the one thats the fool you wasted your time to come into a thread to bash someone you dont even like. And you need help if you honestly dismiss an autospy report. I HIGHLY doubt them vultures that lives to trash this man would lie about something like that.

SEEK HELP FAST and stop trolling

Dumbass

mjscarousal said:

DonRants said:

I don't care what any autopsy report says. You foul-mouthed piece of human trash. I suppose you are one of those fools who think MJ only had two nose jobs. Idiot.

Your the one thats the fool you wasted your time to come into a thread to bash someone you dont even like. And you need help if you honestly dismiss an autospy report. I HIGHLY doubt them vultures that lives to trash this man would lie about something like that.

SEEK HELP FAST and stop trolling

Dumbass

Why is it bashing to state an obvious observation? Michael skin changed between Captain EQ and Bad..basically two years and in this documentary it shows it. Even if he had Vitiligo, Vitiligo alone is not responsible for his change in complexion. And to state the obvious is bashing?

And how do you know I don't like MJ? I think you are one of those simple minded people who think that liking an artist means they can do no wrong and that you should diefy and even name yourself after him...

I would suggest that you seek help but frankly, I think you would be wasting your money and your Doctors time.

Moron

Timmy84 said:

dag said:

I'd rather see Joseph Vogel than Taraborelli. I just cannot see him as an expert.

[Edited 11/26/12 4:26am]

Taraborelli is to Michael Jackson what David Ritz was to Marvin Gaye.

What was the relationship of these two?

I don't know which idiot fan believes he had 2 nosejobs, do you?

Anyways, he was recording Bad as early as 85/86 too, so basically, after the Victory tour. And he looked paler, like Bad video pale during IJCSLY, not that I watched it thinking about all this stuff, but noticing quickly several times that he looked a little patchy under the sweat and makeup

[Edited 11/27/12 4:43am]

Timmy84 said:

dag said:

I'd rather see Joseph Vogel than Taraborelli. I just cannot see him as an expert.

[Edited 11/26/12 4:26am]

Taraborelli is to Michael Jackson what David Ritz was to Marvin Gaye.

Hell no, not even close. One was a reporter/stalker posing as a confidant, one was an actual friend. David was a friend to Marvin.

DonRants said:

mjscarousal said:

Your the one thats the fool you wasted your time to come into a thread to bash someone you dont even like. And you need help if you honestly dismiss an autospy report. I HIGHLY doubt them vultures that lives to trash this man would lie about something like that.

SEEK HELP FAST and stop trolling

Dumbass

Why is it bashing to state an obvious observation? Michael skin changed between Captain EQ and Bad..basically two years and in this documentary it shows it. Even if he had Vitiligo, Vitiligo alone is not responsible for his change in complexion. And to state the obvious is bashing?

And how do you know I don't like MJ? I think you are one of those simple minded people who think that liking an artist means they can do no wrong and that you should diefy and even name yourself after him...

I would suggest that you seek help but frankly, I think you would be wasting your money and your Doctors time.

Moron

Oh please...

I didnt say anything about a nose job. You came in here and suggested a autospy report was fake But how much if the autospy report that MJ didnt have vitligo you would be waving that in peoples faces. Do us all a favor, SHUT THE FUCK UP, and get over your self. Im sorry that you hoped MJ didnt have Vitilgo and want to delusionally keep telling yourself that but in REALITY thats not true. So I will leave you to your delusions. I dont have time to entertain foolishness and no your the one making yourself look like the moron. I didnt challenge anything about plastic surgery. I only commented on your delusional comment on his autospy being fake because YOU believe he bleached his skin when in reality he had vitiligo.

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

Derek1984 said:

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

I just find it too ridiculous to be true. While Mike may have been eccentric, I doubt he was crazy. I think having vitiligo must have been very traumatizing for him knowing how sensitive he was about his appearance.

Derek1984 said:

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

man can not be more popular than it was during the MJ Thriller. it's just not possible.
His skin became lighter since 1984, he was at the peak of fame already.
so even if he did something deliberately to his skin (please be tolerant), I do not think that the matter is in popularity.

LiLi1992 said:

Derek1984 said:

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

man can not be more popular than it was during the MJ Thriller. it's just not possible.
His skin became lighter since 1984, he was at the peak of fame already.
so even if he did something deliberately to his skin (please be tolerant), I do not think that the matter is in popularity.

But I'm talking even more popular. Legendary like Elvis. I don't want to make this into a race thing though. But for every album, he took on a new appearance. Like it was an art form.

Derek1984 said:

But I'm talking even more popular. Legendary like Elvis. I don't want to make this into a race thing though. But for every album, he took on a new appearance. Like it was an art form.

I think that no one has ever been as popular as Michael at the peak of his career. Outside of the U.S. and the UK Elvis was never a huge star.

The new album - new look .... maybe! It is good that he released only 6 ...
Beatles always changed hairstyle for the new album, Michael decided to go further and change its physical nature?

Derek1984 said:

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

A few years ago, I would have whole heartedly agreed with this statement. But, based on all the evidence that has surfaced only after his death, it is obvious that Michael had only two choices:

1. receive painful vitiligo treatments to even out the color of his patchy skin or

2. Appear in public with patches of white in certain areas of his hands & face.

According to the book: My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man, by Frank Cascio... Frank witnessed Michael undergoing several of these treatments, with the one remaining factor still present in his life: Michael was concerned about people being overly critical of his appearance. (Which, while on the subject, what do the real fans think of this book? I consider myself a casual fan, loved the J5, the Jacksons and Bad is my favorite MJ album, but I didn't follow him much after the 90's. So I would love to know how much of this book is factual and if the real MJ fans can agree with this book.) Because anyone with an ounce of common sense can tell, that Michael was still scarred from the criticism he received as a teen, just for his normal, teenage acne. So much so, that he converted to being a vegetarian for a while, to help clear it up.

No offense, but I have to point this out: Why would one of the world's most popular artist, who has sold millions upon millions of albums, think that changing his skin color would help him be more popular and sell more albums? It just doesn't add up.

[Edited 11/27/12 8:51am]

LovesexyIsThe1 said:

Derek1984 said:

While Michael's physical appearence is irrelevent, it's also fascinating because of the drastic change it took. There is no doubt he suffered from vitiligo. This was proven in the autopsy. But I wonder if by choice, he helped himself become more white. What I mean is, I wonder if he thought if he was white, he'd be more popular and sell more albums. The thought seems ridiculous, but can't be ruled out.

A few years ago, I would have whole heartedly agreed with this statement. But, based on all the evidence that has surfaced only after his death, it is obvious that Michael had only two choices:

1. receive painful vitiligo treatments to even out the color of his patchy skin or

2. Appear in public with patches of white in certain areas of his hands & face.

According to the book: My Friend Michael: An Ordinary Friendship with an Extraordinary Man, by Frank Cascio... Frank witnessed Michael undergoing several of these treatments, with the one remaining factor still present in his life: Michael was concerned about people being overly critical of his appearance. (Which, while on the subject, what do the real fans think of this book? I consider myself a casual fan, loved the J5, the Jacksons and Bad is my favorite MJ album, but I didn't follow him much after the 90's. So I would love to know how much of this book is factual and if the real MJ fans can agree with this book.) Because anyone with an ounce of common sense can tell, that Michael was still scarred from the criticism he received as a teen, just for his normal, teenage acne. So much so, that he converted to being a vegetarian for a while, to help clear it up.

No offense, but I have to point this out: Why would one of the world's most popular artist, who has sold millions upon millions of albums, think that changing his skin color would help him be more popular and sell more albums? It just doesn't add up.

[Edited 11/27/12 8:51am]

Thank you. It feels sometimes that people wanna believe the craziest stuff just because it concerns the alleged freak MJ who they believe to be capable of anything even though it just makes no sense at all. It's unbelievable that people are doubting something as ordinary and rational as MJ being ill that was proven by an autopsy and be convinced of something as crazy as him bleaching his skin for even crazier reasons, be it wanting to sell more or wanting to look white, especially when he was at that time the BIGGEST thing in the universe EVER while being a BLACK artist! It seems that the less something makes sense, the more probable it seems to be tru in MJ's case.

[Edited 11/27/12 9:10am]

dag said:

Timmy84 said:

Taraborelli is to Michael Jackson what David Ritz was to Marvin Gaye.

What was the relationship of these two?

They were "friends" or something. David had made a review of Marvin's "Here, My Dear" album on Rolling Stone when everyone was trashing it as "bizarre" and Marvin read the article and got David's number and called him because he knew he had just worked with Ray Charles on his autobiography and he wanted David to work on his so they met up and started having interviews for it. I guess in David's mind, Marvin and him were friends because Marvin was "an engaging cat". It was around this time that Marvin's life was falling apart from the IRS, drugs and his marital strifes and the interviews became sporadic once Marvin moved to Maui and then to London and Belgium. When David found Marvin's whereabouts in Belgium, Marvin had told Freddy Couseart not to let him visit him while he was working on "Midnight Love" but David found him anyway. According to Marvin's friends, they didn't consider David nothing more than a reviewer and a (possible) hanger-on to Marvin and said he made up that story of Marvin asking David to write some of the lyrics to "Sexual Healing" (David claimed Marvin told him to write a poem because David had been concerned about Marvin's unhealthy sexual appetite - David allegedly saw comic books Marvin had of S&M art in Europe). But Marvin's brother and several of his friends, including Gordon Banks, who worked on Midnight Love, disputed his claims for years. Despite this, David wanted part lyrical contribution to SH and sued Marvin for a ridiculous $15 million. Marvin III settled the thing for less than that after Marvin's death in 1984. Ever since David released his biography on Marvin ("Divided Soul"), he's been called the Marvin Gaye expert but I seriously doubt he really knew Marvin. He became a pest. Similar to what J. Randy Taraborelli had been for Michael.

By the way, bringing up Elvis again, Elvis was indeed globally popular everywhere (though he never toured outside the U.S. except for Canada and his military trips to Germany) but the times in which Elvis was popular and Michael was popular were completely different.

Anyway, moving on...

I need this DVD in my life!

This doc should have been shown unedited in it's original form, & commercial free to get the full experience. It shouldn't have been pared down for network tv, shown after a cartoon and then a sitcom. Some deal should've been made with a cable network to show it as it was meant to be viewed. What they aired was chopped and screwed. The full piece was so much more, in my opinion. Again, I am so glad that I was able to view it in it's entirety (twice) during it's limited run in theaters. Worth every penny.

Hahaha chopped and screwed. Nah the audio would've been lowered to make it screwed. RIP to DJ Screw. haha

Timmy84 said:

Hahaha chopped and screwed. Nah the audio would've been lowered to make it screwed. RIP to DJ Screw. haha

yeah, RIP

Timmy84 said:

By the way, bringing up Elvis again, Elvis was indeed globally popular everywhere (though he never toured outside the U.S. except for Canada and his military trips to Germany) but the times in which Elvis was popular and Michael was popular were completely different.

Anyway, moving on...

It's kind of ironic he married Lisa Marie though...

Timmy84 said:

By the way, bringing up Elvis again, Elvis was indeed globally popular everywhere (though he never toured outside the U.S. except for Canada and his military trips to Germany) but the times in which Elvis was popular and Michael was popular were completely different.

Anyway, moving on...

Elvis was not as big as Michael was outside of America during Elvis peak..

Maybe after Elvis passed he became global but he wasnt more global during his peak than Michael.

Derek1984 said:

Timmy84 said:

By the way, bringing up Elvis again, Elvis was indeed globally popular everywhere (though he never toured outside the U.S. except for Canada and his military trips to Germany) but the times in which Elvis was popular and Michael was popular were completely different.

Anyway, moving on...

It's kind of ironic he married Lisa Marie though...

Also ironic:

Elvis had a chimp (Skeeter); Michael had a chimp (Bubbles)

Elvis had a sleepover with Priscilla, Michael had sleepovers

Elvis had a ranch (Circle G), Michael of course had a ranch (Neverland)

Elvis dealt with a cheating manager (Colonel Parker), Michael dealt with cheating managers (including his own father)

Elvis had a prescription pill problem (mainly speed, Quaaludes and codeine), Michael had a prescription pill problem (Demerol in the '90s)

Elvis died in the midst of a concert tour, Michael died in the midst of a concert tour

Elvis had nasal surgery, Michael had nasal surgery

Elvis dominated the 1950s in the same way Michael dominated the 1980s

Elvis' "Jailhouse Rock" is in the National Film Registry, Michael's "Thriller" is in the National Film Registry

Elvis had a doctor who didn't treat him well and led to death (Dr. Nick), Michael had his doctor (Conrad Murray)

Elvis left behind an underage child (Lisa), Michael left behind three underage children (Mike, Jr., Paris & Prince Michael II or Blanket)

----

There were a lot of similarities between the media-christened "kings of pop".

LiLi1992 said:

Derek1984 said:

But I'm talking even more popular. Legendary like Elvis. I don't want to make this into a race thing though. But for every album, he took on a new appearance. Like it was an art form.

I think that no one has ever been as popular as Michael at the peak of his career. Outside of the U.S. and the UK Elvis was never a huge star.

The new album - new look .... maybe! It is good that he released only 6 ...
Beatles always changed hairstyle for the new album, Michael decided to go further and change its physical nature?

This is a FACT

^ No it's not.

But agree to disagree.

mjscarousal said:

LiLi1992 said:

I think that no one has ever been as popular as Michael at the peak of his career. Outside of the U.S. and the UK Elvis was never a huge star.

The new album - new look .... maybe! It is good that he released only 6 ...
Beatles always changed hairstyle for the new album, Michael decided to go further and change its physical nature?

This is a FACT

I mean Elvis during his lifetime ...
not now!
He was huge in the U.S. and huge in the UK and Canada, but it was not a huge international star. This was due, of course, first of all with the information field in the 50's and 60's, it was not so global. Latin America, Asia, Africa, and even in Europe, many people first heard of him in 1977
Times have changed.

^ He was real popular in Australia, New Zealand and Japan though. He also was real popular with music lovers in West Germany, Switzerland and Belgium. He just didn't tour there, which gives an inclination he wasn't so popular but he was. In fact he and Bill Haley were considered global phenomenons in those places. There also wasn't as many global charts in Elvis' time. Only the UK, Australia, Switzerland, West Germany, Italy and France and he had a top ten hit or number-one hit in those countries. Similar to the Beatles when they became popular. When Michael finally emerged, the world was evolving and more music charts and sales were being brought to countries that hadn't before been visible, like in Russia and Turkey and India. Like I said, it was a really different time when Elvis was popular and at the time it was fair to say he was globally recognized. When he died, lots of people from around the world publicly gave condolences to Elvis in the same way that would be given to John Lennon when he died three years afterwards and MJ 29 years after that.

DonRants said:

mjscarousal said:

Take your trash and shove it up your ass. MJ had vitiligo the autospy supported dont bring Quincy old ass senile Jones comments in this discussion over MJs remarkable Bad era

I don't care what any autopsy report says. You foul-mouthed piece of human trash. I suppose you are one of those fools who think MJ only had two nose jobs. Idiot.

The problem is that you're not looking at the evidence. MJ also suffered from lupus hence the redness in his face, so with the vitiligo combined it looked very uneven! He looked like that even in the Thriller era. His skin color was never the same in the 80s because of the different diseases he had.

Forget the charts, this is a very volatile category.
55-60% of the sales records of Elvis in the U.S.!
----------------------
is a debatable question, but when I think of global artists, it is in this order: 1) The Beatles 2) MJ 3) Madonna 4) Elvis.

Okay! Let each one remain with his opinion, which is based on personal experiences and observations.

Timmy84 said:

^ No it's not.

But agree to disagree.

Yes it is.

I am speaking in terms of when Elvis was ALIVE DURING his PEAK and DURING HIS PEAK he was NO WHERE near as internationally popular as MJ was during his PEAK.

I think we do have to agree to disagree.

Nobody is suggesting Elvis was not popular but Thriller mania 80s MJ was definitly more widely known outside of America than Elvis was during his peak.

We are talking peaks, were not talking about currently

LiLi1992 said:

mjscarousal said:

This is a FACT

I mean Elvis during his lifetime ...
not now!
He was huge in the U.S. and huge in the UK and Canada, but it was not a huge international star. This was due, of course, first of all with the information field in the 50's and 60's, it was not so global. Latin America, Asia, Africa, and even in Europe, many people first heard of him in 1977
Times have changed.

I know