What do you think of Michael Jackson the musician, not the man/woman/whatever he is?

Michael is making a smart move working with Will.I.Am from Black Eyed Peas on his new album. Will.I.Am definitely has production skills and can bring a more modern pop/hip hop/r&b feel to Micheal's music. I just hope that the music doesn't overpower his vocals like they did his last album. His last album was so overproduced and was VERY studio heavy that Michaels vocals were pretty much put to the wayside. They need to find a balance to take advantage of Michael's voice...because that's all he's going to have going for him. His image is so tarnished that if his music doesn't far exceed his show then I think this will be his last album.
 
Michael is making a smart move working with Will.I.Am from Black Eyed Peas on his new album. Will.I.Am definitely has production skills and can bring a more modern pop/hip hop/r&b feel to Micheal's music. I just hope that the music doesn't overpower his vocals like they did his last album. His last album was so overproduced and was VERY studio heavy that Michaels vocals were pretty much put to the wayside. They need to find a balance to take advantage of Michael's voice...because that's all he's going to have going for him. His image is so tarnished that if his music doesn't far exceed his show then I think this will be his last album.


I was so disatsified with his last album. He didn't even do his own back up vocals, and there wasn't a single "heehee"' or "owe" or "whooohooo" or "dagnabit baby."
 
I’ve never liked anything that he’s done, back when people didn’t consider him a freak I was too busy listening to Iron Maiden and Black Sabbath.
 
I don't like the way the question was presented. He's very much a man, we all know that. He may or many not a pedophile.
 
I know he may or may not be a pedophile, but the reason for the thread title and question choice is because Michael Jackson is really freaky and really talented at the same time. I'm a huge fan of MJ. I own everyting he's ever released.
 
I don't like the way the question was presented. He's very much a man, we all know that. He may or many not a pedophile.

He had a damn amusement park at his ranch, not to mention all the people who claimed they were molested by him. Seems like a pattern.
 
he's also a very very very rich man.

Regardless, it doesn't reflect his talent at all. Look at Roman Polanski.:o

I know he may or may not be a pedophile, but the reason for the thread title and question choice is because Michael Jackson is really freaky and really talented at the same time. I'm a huge fan of MJ. I own everyting he's ever released.

fair enough
 
He had a damn amusement park at his ranch, not to mention all the people who claimed they were molested by him. Seems like a pattern.

As a huge fan I 'm well versed in the facts of this issue. It's misleading to say "not to mention all the people who claimed."

The last accuser was proven to have falsely accused Michael. They had video tapes, audio tapes, eye witness accounts, credit card receipts used for proving whereabouts, contradictions, back tracking, admissions of lies, and as much evidence as a defendant could possibly want on his side in an accusation of child molestation.

If Michael wasn't so freaky it would have taken the jury 30 seconds to come back with their verdict.

There have been two other people who claimed that while children something happened to him.

One of these claim that as a child while roughousing Michael tickled him and while tickling him, Michael tickled him on the outside of his pants. I really don't think this person was lying, however when reading the transcript of the interview with the investigators it was proven in court that the investigators used the power of suggestion on this kid. He was 11 at the time, being questioned about time he had spent with Michael 5 years prior to that. He totally walked in believing he had never been touched inappropiately and walked out thinking he had been traumotized. he even said this in a later interview. The investigators kept telling the kid over and over again, "yes it happened, it happened. You blocked it out of your memory." and etc.

The first original accuser? That's a different story. There is a very good chance that the first original accuser was abused by Michael Jackson. And Michael does fit the profile for an Arrested Development Pedophile. They are much different than the regular pedophile, and the telling of events by the accuser is consistant with the kind of abuse that kind of pedophile would inflict.

MIchael has the arrested development disorder. That's clear as day. It's emotionally and socially stunting. And a lot of times people with this disorder are only capable of forming a bond with a child. They can't socially connect with adults and have adult like conversation or social skills. They think, talk, and behave like a child, and only want to hang out with kids. Because of this they are only capable of having romantic feelings for children.

However many people with this disorder don't feel sexual attractions for children. They still find them seuxally neutral, but prefer to hang out and be friends with kids, instead of adults.

The normal pedo actually intends to destroy the life of the child. It's their entire motivation for doing it.

The strongest evidence against Michael is the fact that the original accuser gave investigators an accurate description of Vitligo scars on the underside of MJ's penis.

However I can tell you about a birthmark on the left side of a girls' breast, and I never saw that girl's breast. I can also tell you that this guy I know has an 11 inch penis, and I never saw his penis. People talk, and secrets spread throughout circles. It's not that improbable that one out of so many people who know about this, will use this to exploit a rich man. He could have been banging the kids mom, dad, or anybody that knows them.

The strongest evidence on his side? From 1993 to 2003 he had access to thousands of children, yet not even one of them claim they were abused. That is extremely inconsistent with the behavior pattern of a pedophile.
 
but then there is the art books with pictures of naked boys. That's pretty incriminating, yet not proof, because of the fact that on his property he had over 10,000 books on various subjects.
 
but then there is the art books with pictures of naked boys. That's pretty incriminating, yet not proof, because of the fact that on his property he had over 10,000 books on various subjects.

So? Do you think that pedophiles only have books on naked boys?
 
lol, I started to thinking back to the South Park episode. You're ignorant. You're just ignorant. hahahahahahaa
 
So? Do you think that pedophiles only have books on naked boys?


No what I meant was that if a person has 10,000 books on various subjects you could probably accuse them of anything under the sun, and then find a book relative to that subject.

He just has a lot of books on various topics. He even has his own library on his property. The book wasn't pornographic or even illegal, but it is creepy.
 
No what I meant was that if a person has 10,000 books on various subjects you could probably accuse them of anything under the sun, and then find a book relative to that subject.

He just has a lot of books on various topics. He even has his own library on his property. The book wasn't pornographic or even illegal, but it is creepy.

That’s a hell of a coincidence to have a book filled with pictures of naked boys as you’re under investigation for molesting little boys.
 
That’s a hell of a coincidence to have a book filled with pictures of naked boys as you’re under investigation for molesting little boys.
I'm not saying it isn't evidence that supports the abuse claims, I was just saying that it wasn't proof. It is evidence, and it would be a coincedence, but it's not like an astronomical coincedence, because of the fact that he has over 10,000 books.

You coudl accuse him of being a terrorist and then probably find a book on Jihad.
or if you were to accuse him of being a cannabilistic serial killer you would probably find a book on disecting people on his property.

Or you could accuse him of bieng a master chef, and chances are there is a book on how to make fancy cakes on his property.

He just has so many books on everything. The book he had was considered an art book. Many photogrpahers shoot naked people, and it's not intended to be sexual. And these books were that kind of book. They weren't like children in sex poses or anything like that.

However it's not unreasonable to expect a person to say "hey I don't want that kind of book on my property" and he was aware of the book, because a fan had sent it to him, and he keeps most gifts sent to him by fans, and he even wrote an inscription on the inside cover talking about the joy on the kids faces as they play, so he definitely knew the book was there.

The book is definitely evidence against him.
 
Music would just be so boring without Michael's incredible vocals.

then he went ahead and kicked dancing's ass.

Man's a pure legend no matter what.
 
Music would just be so boring without Michael's incredible vocals.

then he went ahead and kicked dancing's ass.

Man's a pure legend no matter what.


Hahahaha! That was awesome! I love the way you put that.
 
Very good musician/Dancer.I've never heard a Michael Jackson album though.
 
He is among the most talented, easily. I mostly listen to the 80s station on Sirius and I love it when one of his songs come on. I wouldn't call him THE most talented when you have people such as Sinatra, the Beatles, Elvis, etc but he is certainly up there with them. It is ashame what he did to himself.
 
He is among the most talented, easily. I mostly listen to the 80s station on Sirius and I love it when one of his songs come on. I wouldn't call him THE most talented when you have people such as Sinatra, the Beatles, Elvis, etc but he is certainly up there with them. It is ashame what he did to himself.

Even though Elvis was talented I wouldn't say he is more talented than Micahel. Vocally speaking MJ performs much more difficult note combinations, and he has a much wider range. He's got several voices that can be performed in the male vocal range, and several that can be performed in the female range. And he's not just in those ranges. He's all over those ranges with 4 octaves.

And dancing and performing wise would be like comparing rib eye to road kill. Elvis can move, but his moves aren't like difficult or jaw dropping. Even at his own concerts Michael can make the crowd go silent when he goes into the robot.

Michael is one of the best vocalists, and dancing wise he's just the best. Music video wise he is the best. and when it comes to song writing, even though he's not one of the best, he's still extremely good.

Sinatra,Beatles, and Elvis dont' don't have all those "one of the best" titles in so many different categories.
 
Very good musician/Dancer.I've never heard a Michael Jackson album though.

I recommend you download Who is it and listen to it from beginning to end without interruption. Then you should rent or buy the following DVDs. History Volume 1
History Volume 2
Ghosts

There are a couple more with a little bit to offer for die hard fans, but those three are the ones every person should check out. Amazing art in there.
 
I'd put him up there as top, take a look at every artist (pop, RnB) and there is a Michael Jackson influence. Usher, Justin and even Ne-Yo are highly influenced by him that some of their stuff is old. Music videos wouldn't be what they are today if it wasn't for Michael and even Janet to a certain extent. 'Off The Wall' and 'Thriller' could make an impact on today's market.
 
His quirkiness notwithstanding, I think he's brilliant. And a living legend.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,612
Messages
21,771,832
Members
45,610
Latest member
kimcity
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"