Michael Jackson Dead
Jun 28, 2009 at 2:09 AM Post #166 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Are you deliberately trying to start a flame war?

--Jerome


Actually no. There were many key individuals behind the scenes that made MJ the star that most people perceive. MJ's true claim to fame was really his eccentricity and the ability to frivously throw money around to benefit himself and make problems go away. It was his weirdness and questionable ethics that enabled him to stay in the spotlight long after his music career pretty much ended in the late 80's, early 90's.

But I too have enjoyed the odd MJ song or two.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 2:24 AM Post #167 of 213
Uh huh. So in other words that would be a "yes."
rolleyes.gif


I don't own a single Michael Jackson album and I can't really say that I am a fan. But when I watch videos such as Don't Stop 'Till You Get Enough and Billie Jean I see the artist bringing his joy, passion, charisma, and enormous talents to his art. I agree that support from the likes of Quincy Jones and John Landis most certainly had an impact...but that's what good producers and directors are supposed to do. Were it not for the considerable talents of the artist himself, we wouldn't even be having this discussion because no one would even remember the name Michael Jackson.

You are entitled to your opinion, but it is so out of touch with reality that had Jackson not just passed away a few days ago it probably would have given most of us here a helluva good belly laugh.

I'm out.

--Jerome
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 2:29 AM Post #168 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by Signal2Noise /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Actually no. There were many key individuals behind the scenes that made MJ the star that most people perceive.


That's true with any entertainer. It's true with any successful person. Nobody can do everything by themeselves. You need a supporting cast.

That being said, it may be possible to "puppet" one's way to a hit album, but not to the best selling album of all time. Credit has to go to the recording artist.

You can question the praise being heaped on Michael Jackson because of his strange behavior, suspiscion of molesting children or drug addiction, but you cannot question his talent.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 2:38 AM Post #169 of 213
It's probably not worth mentioning that his two biggest hits, namely Billie Jean and Beat it, were songs penned by him and him alone...
Oh, and he co-wrote this little thingie from the distant 80's called We are the world. A minor and confidential hit in its time, too.

...'ny questions?
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 5:32 AM Post #170 of 213
Geez, i just read some of post in THIS topic ...

Whats wrong with You people ?

If You dont understand what MJ was - why posting THIS kind of posts a see here .. You dont like him, Good - keep going ...

If you cant show respect - do do the same ...


He was, and he IS a KING OF POP ...




Quote:

Originally Posted by Signal2Noise /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Erm the 'talent' was actually provided by:

Quincy Jones (music)
John Landis (video)
Michael Peters (choreography)
Lawyers (to make the allegations disappear)

MJ was just a plastic puppet.



Tell me this is a joke, right ?


By the way, i buy yesterday 3 MJ CDs i found in store, just for collection, and to my kid got it!
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 8:32 AM Post #171 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by Signal2Noise /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Actually no. There were many key individuals behind the scenes that made MJ the star that most people perceive.


You are quite right in citing Quincy Jones, surely one of the greatest pop music producers ever. His role, I think, was similar to that of George Martin's role with the Beatles. They were both master musicians who helped the artists they worked with to realize their ideas. They also contributed enough of their own ideas to deserve to be considered collaborators rather than mere technicians.

However, both George Martin and Quincy Jones produced many other artists, none of whom ever got within shouting distance of the Beatles or Michael Jackson artistically (America, anyone?). Go back and look at the composer credits; Jackson wrote a substantial proportion of his own material, including many of his best tunes. And when it came time to lay down the vocals, it was him and him alone on the mic. Quincy Jones may have advised him on how best to deploy his gifts, but the sound came from Michael Jackson and no one else.

Same goes for Michael Peters. I'm sure he coreographed the routines, and his vision gave shape to much of what you saw in the videos. But Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire worked with choreographers, too. Michael Jackson brought with him an entire vocabulary of moves that still resonate with dancers of every stripe. A choreographer can only do so much, and when push comes to shove, he certainly can't make an average dancer into a genius. Michael's moves were brilliant, original, and his own.

Jon Landis? Ummm...not so much. A good technician maybe, but not on the list of my 50 favorite directors. He didn't make Michael Jacskson, Michael Jackson made him. He was lucky to have the opportunity, and he made the most of it.

The lawyers? They had not a blessed thing to do with his art, which is what we are supposed to be discussing in this thread.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 2:24 PM Post #172 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by DrBenway /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You are quite right in citing Quincy Jones, surely one of the greatest pop music producers ever. His role, I think, was similar to that of George Martin's role with the Beatles. They were both master musicians who helped the artists they worked with to realize their ideas. They also contributed enough of their own ideas to deserve to be considered collaborators rather than mere technicians.

However, both George Martin and Quincy Jones produced many other artists, none of whom ever got within shouting distance of the Beatles or Michael Jackson artistically (America, anyone?). Go back and look at the composer credits; Jackson wrote a substantial proportion of his own material, including many of his best tunes. And when it came time to lay down the vocals, it was him and him alone on the mic. Quincy Jones may have advised him on how best to deploy his gifts, but the sound came from Michael Jackson and no one else.

Same goes for Michael Peters. I'm sure he coreographed the routines, and his vision gave shape to much of what you saw in the videos. But Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire worked with choreographers, too. Michael Jackson brought with him an entire vocabulary of moves that still resonate with dancers of every stripe. A choreographer can only do so much, and when push comes to shove, he certainly can't make an average dancer into a genius. Michael's moves were brilliant, original, and his own.

Jon Landis? Ummm...not so much. A good technician maybe, but not on the list of my 50 favorite directors. He didn't make Michael Jacskson, Michael Jackson made him. He was lucky to have the opportunity, and he made the most of it.

The lawyers? They had not a blessed thing to do with his art, which is what we are supposed to be discussing in this thread.


I'm glad somebody else took the time to pick apart that guy's uninspired, unfair, inaccurate argument and exposed it for what it was! Seriously does my head in how ppl don't assess or analyse their arguments and how valid they are, seemingly too much at all, before voicing them/writing/posting them! The narrow-mindedness of some ppl is truly pathetic- yes, worthy of pity- to see. Very well countered Dr Benway!
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 4:24 PM Post #173 of 213
We are not haters, narrowminded, or pathetic. I would like to see a poll of how many posters in this thread have children. There are alot of weaknesses in a person I can forgive and overlook. When it comes to crimes against children, all the talent in the world does not cancel these acts out. He was never found guilty but he paid enough money to hush one accusation and had a team of lawyers to get enough evidence to be aquitted of the others.
As I said at the beginning, I am not a hater. As a father, I view things differently. I respect your opinion and have not called any poster a name for their opinions.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 4:45 PM Post #174 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by ronnielee54 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We are not haters, narrowminded, or pathetic. I would like to see a poll of how many posters in this thread have children. There are alot of weaknesses in a person I can forgive and overlook. When it comes to crimes against children, all the talent in the world does not cancel these acts out. He was never found guilty but he paid enough money to hush one accusation and had a team of lawyers to get enough evidence to be aquitted of the others.
As I said at the beginning, I am not a hater. As a father, I view things differently. I respect your opinion and have not called any poster a name for their opinions.


I also respect your stance and views and feelings on the man, as a whole, taking into account his flaws and/or potential criminality. However, I wasn't critiquing the other Headfier on those bases was I? I was only criticising Signal2Noise's argument that Michael Jackson had no talent and was a 'plastic puppet', which I believe totally false and unfounded. I was agreeing with Jsaliga, erikzen, Zaroff, Dr Benway and others on THIS issue alone, the point being debated, and congratulating Dr Benway on countering/seeing through Signal2Noise's argument so astutely. That's all. My criticism of narrowmindedness and/or of one being worthy of pity was only in relation to someone who forms opinions, views, arguments, judgements, conclusions in such unsubstantiated fashion; those who are too quick to form (erroneous, inaccurate) judgements, in other words. Apologies if I offended you but please review what I said and realise that I was only criticising on the bases explained above.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 4:53 PM Post #175 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by ronnielee54 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We are not haters, narrowminded, or pathetic. I would like to see a poll of how many posters in this thread have children. There are alot of weaknesses in a person I can forgive and overlook. When it comes to crimes against children, all the talent in the world does not cancel these acts out. He was never found guilty but he paid enough money to hush one accusation and had a team of lawyers to get enough evidence to be aquitted of the others.
As I said at the beginning, I am not a hater. As a father, I view things differently. I respect your opinion and have not called any poster a name for their opinions.


I'm a father too, but I am also capable of separating Jackson's artistic accomplishments from his very controversial public life. You, for reasons I don't care to know, are unable or unwilling to do that.

Why is it such a problem for you to remain silent now that you have made your position clear in the several posts that you have already made in this thread? Usually you only need to look at who is posting the most to a thread to find those who are trying to kick up some dust. You are at top of the list. Why not give it a rest, be respectful of your fellow head-fiers, and let others be heard? We already know how you feel, and repeating it over and over again doesn't add anything to what you have already said. It only serves to distrupt the flow of the topic.

--Jerome
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 5:09 PM Post #176 of 213
Quote:

Originally Posted by jsaliga /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm a father too, but I am also capable of separating Jackson's artistic accomplishments from his very controversial public life. You, for reasons I don't care to know, are unable or unwilling to do that.

Why is it such a problem for you to remain silent now that you have made your position clear in the several posts that you have already made in this thread? Usually you only need to look at who is posting the most to a thread to find those who are trying to kick up some dust. You are at top of the list. Why not give it a rest, be respectful of your fellow head-fiers, and let others be heard? We already know how you feel, and repeating it over and over again doesn't add anything to what you have already said. It only serves to distrupt the flow of the topic.

--Jerome


Agreed. You do need to be able to distinguish between the artist and the man/his life outside the music to be able to form fair judgements of him on either basis or on him as a whole. If you have already stated how you feel several times and are, at this point, repeating yourself, Jsaliga's right, you should stop contributing to the thread at this point (with the same feelings, thoughts etc) as it's adding nothing new and is/will become tiresome and irritating to others and, hence, you will recieve criticism-abuse for it, naturally.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 5:55 PM Post #177 of 213
While I appreciate and respect the views all the replies and attempts at invalidating my initial 'plastic puppet' comment I stand by my statements. After all, forums are all about open discussion and opinion. As an analogy, I wonder when news comes that Mike Tyson died will people flock together to mourn the loss of a great boxer despite being an accused rapist and borderline cannibal? He was just a programmed killing machine.

Oh well. To each their own. As I am sure most will be pleased, this is all I'll have to say on the subject. Peace.
 
Jun 28, 2009 at 6:55 PM Post #179 of 213
Quote:

he paid enough money to hush one accusation


This is a reason I'm a little skeptical of the accusations myself. As a father of two, there isn't enough hush money in the world.

Yeah, I'll take your money AND you're going to jail. Any questions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top