JayCrawford said:

hollywood0024 said:

JayCrawford said:

Madonna has been a pop culture icon since the 80s... (Adding fuel to the fire).

purplethunder3121 said:

(Adding fuel to the fire).

hollywood0024 said:

purplethunder3121 said:

hollywood0024 said:

MickyDolenz said:

hollywood0024 said:

RJOrion said:

hollywood0024 said:

Madonna is better than Donna Summer. .

Madonna isnt/wasnt better than Donna Summer at anything...in any way

Madonna can't lick dirt from Donnas boots. haha Madonna can be better than Donna only if they change names and Donna goes by Madonna :

Off The Wall
Thriller

Bad
Dangerous
History
Invincible
Blood on the dancefloor

^^Isn't HIStory an even longer album than Dangerous? Dangerous is 1 CD and HIStory is 2 CDs or 3 records.

CAL3 said:

1) THRILLER - I can hardly be objective as it was my first album that so ever bought (that wasn’t a kiddie thing like The Chipmunks or some novelty thing), but I still listen to it to this day. And I cannot find anything at all to fault it for. . 2) BAD - hasn’t aged as well as its predecessor but wow, what a set of tunes. I wish the Stevie duet was better (arguably the weakest link). . 3) OFF THE WALL - a few generic cuts (those last two make for an anticlimax), but on any given day I could easily flip this with the #2 spot. . 4) HISTORY - big drop off here... a mess of an album, but a highly interesting mess. “Stranger in Moscow” betters any individual track on the #5 entry. Mawkish “Childhood” and the cover of “Smile” help rank this somewhat, but the seething rage of other tracks more than compensates. . 5) DANGEROUS - dated, overlong, not enough iconic moments (and even its most iconic one - “Black or White” - is marred by that stupid sketch at the beginning), and even though I already said this, it bears repeating — it’s too long! . 6) INVINCIBLE - “Butterflies” is peak-level awesome, and “You Rock My World” is a solid cut, but most of this album borders on unlistenable. The Rod Serling bit is beyond embarrassing. . I don’t count Blood on the Dancefloor and can’t understand why anyone does. It’s an EP padded out with a bunch of remixes. I’d sooner count DESTINY and TRIUMPH - they’re like 85% MJ lead vocals and both good records (heck, I’d gladly rank them above the lowest ones here, quite easily.)

What's embarassing about the Rod Serling rap on Threatened?

MattyJam said:

MickyDolenz said:

CAL3 said:

You count the greatest-hits portion as part of History? . I don’t. Not sure why anyone would.

Yes. The album is titled HIStory: Past, Present, & Future Book 1. If it didn't count, it wouldn't be there. The 1st CD has been released separately in the US, the new songs part hasn't. It was priced as a double CD, not a single and the word "past" is in the title. So it counts

FasterThan67 said:

alphastreet said:

It’s never too late, start with goin places, Destiny and triumph

Those are group albums though

MickyDolenz said:

alphastreet said:

That’s ok Also music & me is worth checking out, the only solo album of young mjs I care for, couldn’t get into the others

A lot of people don't know that Jackie had a solo album in 1973, but Motown didn't put much promotion into it. Similar to Mike & Jermaine albums from that period, on a few of the songs you can clearly hear the brothers singing on them. Tito recorded a solo album at Motown that was never released.

MickyDolenz said:

CAL3 said:

RODSERLING said:

Thats because MJ s voice changed and sounded broken. Motown clearly didn't know what to do with it, and 1973 was a terrible year for the J5 and solo career. So they put upfront the other brothers instead ( see the terrible Get It Together or Live in Japan!). 1973 is the year where MJ tried to find a new voice, since he lost his powerful former one.

Jermaine's first solo album came out in 1972. Anyway they were going to push Jackie as a sex symbol for young adult women since he was in his early 20s in 1973. Mike & Marlon were too young for that, they still had the teenybopper audience.

MickyDolenz said: