Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Nile Rodgers recounts a touching account of some time he spent with Jackson in the mid-'90s in his autobiography, which is very much worth reading.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

I think the success of Thriller was the beginning of Michael's downfall. Nobody would be able to handle the kind of fame that album brought him. He already had issues, no doubt, but having all that money made him one fucked-up-kid in a worldwide candy-and-toy store. He could afford to do anything his messed-up head told him was the thing to do at the time, no matter what the cost, monetary or otherwise. He made a lot of weird decisions that ordinary people in the world wouldn't be able to dream of making, just because he could afford to make them. And privacy? Once Thriller started selling like it did, there was no way he was ever going to be able to live the life of a normal person, ever again. That man couldn't take a single step from a standing position without a thousand people almost instantly knowing what direction he was heading. He seemed to hate all the publicity, and the fact that he was in the tabloids all the time, but he didn't seem to want to do anything about it. The success of Thriller put a permanent imprint on just about everyone in the world, and in our popular culture, and he was a forever-ten-year-old with a blank check to do whatever he wanted, and as a result, he was surrounded by people who, most likely, just wanted in on the fame and cash, and didn't seem to want to provide him with the tools that a kid needs to get by in a normal world. in my opinion, he was doomed the minute Thriller was released. Did he make good music? Sure. Did he do good things with his money for other people? You bet. But he didn't help the one person that needed it most...himself.

Oh, and one other thing...

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

I don't think he hated publicity. I think he hated bad publicity.

And, I know we've had at least one previous thread about this, but Prince smoked him musically.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

To be fair, Prince smokes 99% of the music industry... musically.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

That's kind of what I meant, but you're right.

Amen to that, brother.

What he said.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Yes, agreed. When it comes to true musical genius, there's Prince, and there's David Bowie, and then there are lots of other talented people.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Rupert Holmes :up:

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

I like Prince and he's great but no he doesn't smoke 99% or even 9% of the music industry. Ridiculous statement.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Ridiculous thread, but we do what we can with what we have to work with, which is an edict to not be mean to Michael.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

You guys know that just because the OP requests something, that doesn't mean we have to listen, right?

And yes, musically Prince does smoke 99% of the music industry, especially as talent becomes less and less of a requirement.

Ok dude! :up:

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

I know, but I can't help but think of the butthurt that arose whenever someone dared say anything against Paul Rodgers+Queen in one of Michael Allred's threads, and I just want everyone to get along...

...for MJ...

...he would want it that way.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Anyway, I've always been fascinated seeing Jackson at work during interviews like this one

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Q2EF-iYpqR8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Right, who's got a boil on his Semprini, then?

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Well, I should probably clarify. There's an expectation that threads (except for obvious joke threads, or half the stuff in otter) will remain civil and on topic. That is a reasonable expectation to have when starting a thread.

But this is a discussion forum. And discussions have more than one side to them. It's not realistic or fair to make a thread about Michael Jackson and request that only positive comments be made. The fact is, Jackson was a controversial figure because of his private life, and that's all fair game. It doesn't matter if the discussion is "official" or "unofficial", it's still a discussion.

Furthermore, people are allowed to post as they like, with some goddamn fucking profanity, without any profanity, as long as they are allowed within the site's rules. The OP can request that people refrain from x, y, or z above and beyond the forum rules, but no one has to abide by that request if they don't want to.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

If anything, that song's a clear confirmation that neither money nor fame can replace inner peace. Joe abused most (if not all) of his sons, and Michael got it worse because he dared to fight back. He lived vicariously through his children, and regularly cheated on Katherine for years. Any child growing up around that would carry tons of emotional and mental damage throughout their life...especially without anyone to truly relate with them. Lisa Marie tried, but Michael's defensiveness stressed her out.

Michael originally played games on the paparazzi, making up stories like the infamous "hyperbaric chamber" piece. The trouble started when tabloids used his own tactics against him, and he lost control. Once they realized that lies sold better than the truth, they stuck with it...and every attempt Michael made for honesty fueled their determination to ruin him.

Its called common decency, which isn't unreasonable to expect in a civilized discussion.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

If Jackson was the one who first spread disinformation, then he shouldn't have been surprised when other people did it too. Does it matter if the lie comes from the artist or from the tabloids in that case?

First, that would be "it's" because it's a contraction of "it is" and not a possessive. Second, you don't get to set the terms of discussions. Discussions are organic things, and the only bounds are the forum rules. Sorry if that's a problem for you, but that's how it is.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Expecting a civilized discussion in here is like asking tigers to eat with forks. The subject of Michael Jackson is a zebra carcass...what the fuck do you think we're gonna do with it?

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Zebra carcass? Well, you can grill it, eat it, wear it, fuck it...

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

There is no one artist that smokes 99% of an entire music industry. I don't care how great he is. Prince ain't that great. If he was he'd still be smoking today and he isn't.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Sounds like a workable song lyric to me. Write it up, boys!

Spoken like a man who hasn't seen Prince live.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

I have seen him live twice actually. I'm not denying his greatness but 99%, please.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

[MJ] It don't matter how we eat it 'cause that zebra skin is black and white! [/MJ]

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

Watching him walk from room to room in his house through binoculars doesn't count.

Re: MICHAEL JACKSON - Unofficial Discussion Thread
 

-rolleyes- You have to be speaking from personal experience to think of something like that.