SoftSkarlettLovisa said:

Yes, I am referring to MJ's albums Dangerous and HIStory. You have to admit, the 1990s had some interesting music (maybe not as amazing as 1980s music but still distinct and iconic). I guess it does depend on one's musical preferences. I believe Michael really poured his soul into HISTORY, particularly in Childhood and Stranger In Moscow. People say Michael's music was not good from Dangerous onwards, but I disagree.

I disagree - I say Michael's music was bad from "Bad".

I say this as someone who watched the Jacksons on TV and really liked "Off the Wall" before "Bad" and "Rhythm Nation 1814" after it.

I guess it was the mismatch between MJ and the characters he tried to portray from it being cool and OK to be a sexual predator or being an unconvincing street thug in a way that made Thriller and West Side Story look closer to reality. Obviously as I like Prince, Bowie etc, I have no problem with artists playing a part but, post "Thriller", to me MJ was not convincing.

I don't know where anyone legitimately believed MJ made shit music after Bad, but I don't buy that it was even a thing.

Dangerous is my favorite MJ album. The first side is a lot of New Jack Swing, which is fine for what it is. It doesn't necessarily sound dated because it goes beyond just being another NJS record. I cut "Heal The World" out of my playlist.

The second side is the gold. It goes from deep R&B cuts (Who Is It), pop (Black or White), rock n' roll (Give Into Me), ballads (Gone Too Soon), gospel (Keep The Faith, Will You Be There), and classic MJ (Dangerous). It's just such a great album within an album, really. Side 2 if 40 minutes. That's an LP right there.

The new songs on Blood On The Dance Floor are just excellent. The title track is one of my top 3 MJ songs. It slaps, hard. "Morphine" is so moody, I love it. "Your dog's a bitch, baby!" hahaha

HIStory is a bit more hit n' miss, but not terrible. Some of the remixes are better (Stranger in Moscow, for me). It gets a little messy near the end, but stuff like "Little Susie" and "Smile" are great enders.

[Edited 5/29/23 20:43pm]

TrivialPursuit said:

I don't know where anyone legitimately beliefed MJ made shit music after Bad, but I don't buy that it was even a thing.

It does not matter what you "beliefed" or what you buy as a thing. There are people who legitimately don't like MJ after Bad.

It is a simple and well established fact that musical tastes vary from person to person and often for inexplicable reasons. Just as with Prince (and every other musician ever), people can be fans of different songs and eras and dislike other songs or eras by that same artist.

IanRG said:

It does not matter what you believed or what you buy as a thing. There are people who legitimately don't like MJ after Bad.

That doesn't mean the songs were less than stellar.

Because if we're talking about a shit show, Bad is the epitome of that. The songs were great. I was obsessed with the record.

But then I later learned that they were sped up to fit on the album. (Or whatever other stupid reason.) When you hear the actual tempo versions, it's a game changer. The mood shifts a bit. It feels less produced, and stands as good MJ songs. But the sped up version, plus all the "7" remix edit" type versions that were quietly replaced on later pressings made it a bungle of mistakes.

The irony in that is that MJ said they set out to make a perfect record.

TrivialPursuit said:

IanRG said:

It does not matter what you believed or what you buy as a thing. There are people who legitimately don't like MJ after Bad.

That doesn't mean the songs were less than stellar.

Because if we're talking about a shit show, Bad is the epitome of that. The songs were great. I was obsessed with the record.

But then I later learned that they were sped up to fit on the album. (Or whatever other stupid reason.) When you hear the actual tempo versions, it's a game changer. The mood shifts a bit. It feels less produced, and stands as good MJ songs. But the sped up version, plus all the "7" remix edit" type versions that were quietly replaced on later pressings made it a bungle of mistakes.

The irony in that is that MJ said they set out to make a perfect record.

Actually, it literally does mean that, to listener who thinks it is shit, it is less than stellar.

There is no intrinsic measure of musical "stellarness". Everyone has their own definition and they are all based on personal preferences, biases, experiences, prejudices etc. Not one single one of these opinions is illegitimate, not one of these opinions is more legitimate. My opinion is that MJ went bad with Bad. This was before it was found out to tweaked as above (of which I was not aware). That this is my opinion has no impact on people that love Bad or hate it for different reasons or even the same reasons.

For me it was the mismatch between the MJ I grew up with and how he developed up to and peaked with Thriller but then he could not handle his success, and so, that was it. To me he became a parody of himself. Musically he was out parodied by Weird Al, but his life, thereafter, had too many questions.

I always thought it was so funny, his tough guy musical persona with all those macho album titles. Very distracting from the music, almost counterproductive.

StrangeButTrue said:

I was so disappointed when I played the Bad record for the first time. It has not dated well imo. I like the videos from Bad than the actual songs themselves....lol. Dangerous was the first cd I ever bought and I was blown away. His best work since Thriller, imo. The new songs on History I like better than most on Bad.

"Earth Song" is absolutely EPIC. Not just the musical production, emotion & performance.

It goes beyond all that stuff!

IanRG said:

Actually, it literally does mean that, to listener who thinks it is shit, it is less than stellar.

"You're right."

nayroo2002 said:

"Earth Song" is absolutely EPIC. Not just the musical production, emotion & performance.

It goes beyond all that stuff!

It really is. You think it's gonna be sappy when it starts, but the build up is eye opening. I remember reading the lyrics back then. It was just crazy to hear him talk about this:

Something about that part hit hard back then. It always stuck with me.

TrivialPursuit said:

That doesn't mean the songs were less than stellar

IanRG said:

Actually, it literally does mean that, to listener who thinks it is shit, it is less than stellar.

TrivialPursuit said:

You're right.

Agreed, you comment was bunkum - but it should go without saying.

ShellyMcG said:

StrangeButTrue said:

I always thought it was so funny, his tough guy musical persona with all those macho album titles. Very distracting from the music, almost counterproductive.

You know, I've never actually thought about that. He had album titles like "Bad", "Dangerous", and "Invincible". Like he was some sort of badass or something . It doesn't detract from the quality of the actual music though. His personal life put me off listening to his music until only recently but I'm glad I persevered and got over that initial hang-up though because he did have some truly great songs. Despite his contradictory persona.

Ahh, the great moral dilemma: Can you look past an artist's wrongs to just admire their art?

As a former Jackson and Depp fan, in this case, I cannot. Yet I understand that no artist is perfect and that artists need to be seen as products of their time, circumstances and with the same failings and frailies as the rest of us.

There are three responses:

1 Deny or ignore what the artist did. I hope I don't ever do this.

2 Accept but include your knowledge of these failings and how they affected generally those closest to them with how that artist's creations affect you, me and others. This is what I try to do with people like Hendrix.

3 Reject the artist because of what they did.

IanRG said:

ShellyMcG said:

I like a lot of Dangerous and History. Not every song is a winner but overall, I think both albums are pretty damn good. I also love that song "Blood On The Dancefloor" and the Invincible album is another really good post 80s MJ album. I know it's ridiculous to compare Prince and Michael Jackson and that they were two completely different artists and all the rest of it. But one thing they both have in common is that they continued to make really good music after their commercial prime was over which is unfortunately underappreciated even by some their own fans.

Quoting the bolded as that pretty much sums up my sentiments. Dangerous may be my fav MJJ album but I still like a lot of History and Invincible.

*

Regarding some of the other comments that I've read about Bad- I think that Bad's a dope album that's aged very well. Recently played the whole thing from start to finish and was amazed by how cohesive the joint was, how great almost every song was, and the production and lyrical content of joints like Speed Demon and Smooth Criminal.

*

Word to the King of Pop.

Mj made some good music throughout his career.

Gooddoctor23 said:

Mj made some good music throughout his career.

Where were you when this thread started? Because this is the succinct answer.

Not a super duper fan but I prefer his 90s work to his 80s work. HIStory is absolutely his best album. The 5 new tracks on Blood on the Dancefloor are some of his absolutely best material.

ShellyMcG said:

With Jackson there is always going to be a seed of doubt about whether he did what he was accused of. And, right or wrong, I don't think I can ever fully put that out of my mind when I listen to his music. My cousin is one of those "hardcore" fans who absolutely refuses to acknowledge the possibility he was guilty. I wish I could do that but I can't. So there are some songs I find hard to listen to. There are some songs I absolutely will not listen to. But mostly, I find that I can appreciate the rest of his music for what it is and push these other things to the back of my mind. So I guess I fall into the 2nd category of the 3 you listed. I don't believe Johnny Depp did anything wrong though but that's a conversation for another day and another forum

If it's any consolation there's likely a pile of artists/writers/creators you enjoy on the daily with a whoooooole mess of amoral skeletons dead-bolted to their respective closets that you might never learn the vile, depraved details of.


When "cancel culture" started I thought the lessen that society was ultimately going to glean is that our entertainers are innately flawed, kinda like human beings in general who'da figured, but it's actually gone the opposite where stans now quadruple-down on declaring their favs as benevelent human beings who wouldn't hurt a fly. Heck, a year ago even a guy like Ezra Miller had stans working overtime to obscure any bad PR.

I probably had a leg-up over others perceptions of artists at an early age because I saw a rerun of Growing Pains when I was like 5 or 6 before I ever cared about any of that. The plot was the kid in the show worshipped some rock star, his dad got him tickets, got to go backstage to meet him, found out he was like the biggest douchebag, cheating on his wife in the open with minors, throwing shit at employees, calling the kid a shithead, you know. Just the worst rock star ever. Kid gets home, tears all his posters off the wall, throws his records in the trash. Gets real emotional.

Then Alan Thicke busts out his OG knowledge for the youngin, spits straight facts for the viewing audience at home. Hey man, just cause the guy sucks doesn't mean you can't still get something from the art that benefits you, that makes you better for it, enhances your life even if the person who made is shit.


Just go ahead and assume everyone who has created every piece of art you love and cherish is a depraved monster and suddenly one alleged potential hypothetical monster won't stir your emotions any more than obscured discreet monster in hiding. With great power comes great corruption and depravity. Philip Zimbardo's 1971 Stanford prison experiment is applicable to virtually every facet of society, i.e. Jimmy Savile.

[Edited 6/3/23 21:05pm]

WhisperingDandelions said:

"morphine"

that's all I'm sayin' today

ShellyMcG said:

It's probably true that most artists have done or said something that could get them cancelled if the wider public were aware of it but that's just it, we're not aware of it. For artists like Michael Jackson, his supposed wrongdoings were so public that it's almost impossible to think about him without thinking about things other than his music. I don't get most of the references that you're making but I know you're not wrong in what you're saying. But at the same time I'd prefer to live in ignorance than know all the evils my favourite artists have done.

What wrongdoings were so public? His aquittal from the second accusations trial? Which was clearly extortion, with testimony from like 30-40 other celebs who didn't even know MJ that this family tried to con them for money years prior echoing the same sentiment.

The leaked tape of the father of the first accuser saying he's gonna destroy MJ if he doesn't give him what he wants? Carrie Fischer saying the same accusers' dad used to be her Hollywood drug dealer and would routinely talk about how he was going to exort MJ before he did when they were both blasted?

It just seems like you're being willfully dramatic and obtuse just for the sake of clutching pearls.

His tracks literally have zero pathos or foreboding darkness until years after he was accused, and even then it was more of a sad sack depressive kind of pathos. "Morphine" being a great example.... likewise, if you're actually doing what you like to always remind us of what he's accused of, you get addicted to genseng or cialis something, not a drug that's gonna zonk you out.

Propofol and morphine. Drugs that you'd pick if you literally want to sleep through the rest of life, almost like you're escaping a reality that's too painful, which was always Elizabeth Taylor's explanation of how he got addicted, he didn't want to be fully conscious of a world that almost unanimously believed him to be the devil incarnate.

And you don't stop at 1-3 victims, it's a friggin' disorder. I like Indian food and I've had more than 3 plates, come on now. You said you like pizza. You had more than 3 slices in your life? Would investigators be unable to find evidence that you've had a single slice in your lifetime?


And you act like putting on an MJ record is like putting on an R. Kelly record where he's literally singing shit like "age ain't nothing but a number" and singing to girls "it seems like you'e ready" over a rauncy sex beat, literal music videos with a pack of teenage girls dancing around him like a harem. Like MJ albums are this onslaught of uncomfortable lyrics and chilling, dark vibe that can't help but steer your mind to the accusations. Give me a break.

If his tracks had an ounce of the boogeyman qualities you believe them to have those early albums might actually enter my Top 100.

[Edited 6/4/23 15:20pm]

WhisperingDandelions said:

WhisperingDandelions said:

ShellyMcG said:

It's probably true that most artists have done or said something that could get them cancelled if the wider public were aware of it but that's just it, we're not aware of it. For artists like Michael Jackson, his supposed wrongdoings were so public that it's almost impossible to think about him without thinking about things other than his music. I don't get most of the references that you're making but I know you're not wrong in what you're saying. But at the same time I'd prefer to live in ignorance than know all the evils my favourite artists have done.

What wrongdoings were so public? His aquittal from the second accusations trial? Which was clearly extortion, with testimony from like 30-40 other celebs who didn't even know MJ that this family tried to con them for money years prior echoing the same sentiment.

The leaked tape of the father of the first accuser saying he's gonna destroy MJ if he doesn't give him what he wants? Carrie Fischer saying the same accusers' dad used to be her Hollywood drug dealer and would routinely talk about how he was going to exort MJ before he did when they were both blasted?

It just seems like you're being willfully dramatic and obtuse just for the sake of clutching pearls.

His tracks literally have zero pathos or foreboding darkness until years after he was accused, and even then it was more of a sad sack depressive kind of pathos. "Morphine" being a great example.... likewise, if you're actually doing what you like to always remind us of what he's accused of, you get addicted to genseng or cialis something, not a drug that's gonna zonk you out.

Propofol and morphine. Drugs that you'd pick if you literally want to sleep through the rest of life, almost like you're escaping a reality that's too painful, which was always Elizabeth Taylor's explanation of how he got addicted, he didn't want to be fully conscious of a world that almost unanimously believed him to be the devil incarnate.

And you don't stop at 1-3 victims, it's a friggin' disorder. I like Indian food and I've had more than 3 plates, come on now. You said you like pizza. You had more than 3 slices in your life? Would investigators be unable to find evidence that you've had a single slice in your lifetime?


And you act like putting on an MJ record is like putting on an R. Kelly record where he's literally singing shit like "age ain't nothing but a number" and singing to girls "it seems like you'e ready" over a rauncy sex beat, literal music videos with a pack of teenage girls dancing around him like a harem. Like MJ albums are this onslaught of uncomfortable lyrics and chilling, dark vibe that can't help but steer your mind to the accusations. Give me a break.

If his tracks had an ounce of the boogeyman qualities you believe them to have those early albums might actually enter my Top 100.

[Edited 6/4/23 15:20pm]

And that is a perfect type 1 response.

The person who abused me as a child was acquitted twice. His initial charges for these two cases were only about his abuse of 1 person. He lacked wealth, celebrity, the best lawyers, etc. However, he did have friends in politics etc as well as people who attacked the house of police investigator. His defense was to attack and discredit the accuser. However, without MJ's resources, the 3rd and 4th cases involved more than 50 children and he died in prison.

SoftSkarlettLovisa said:

Yes, I am referring to MJ's albums Dangerous and HIStory. You have to admit, the 1990s in general had some interesting music (maybe not as amazing as 1980s music but still distinct and iconic). I guess it does depend on one's musical preferences. I believe Michael really poured his soul into HISTORY, particularly in Childhood and Stranger In Moscow. People say Michael's music was not good from Dangerous onwards, but I disagree. [Edited 5/29/23 7:54am]

Nah, but you're an idiot pretending to be the only one thinking he made great music in the 90s. He made great music in all his career.