Latest on MJJC

Are some songs of Michael underrated?...

Doggone

Proud Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
1,203
Points
38
Hi guys,

do you guys agree that many songs of MJ were/are still underrated? Songs such as Smooth Criminal which ranked #7... Or Will You Be There %7, Remember The Time #3, In The Closet #6, Give In To Me (even tho GITM wasnt released in the us), Who Is It #14, Jam #26, They Dont Care About Us #30 and Scream #5. All these hits should have been no. 1! OOOH! And let us not forget the hits from the Thriller album such as Thriller #4, PYT #10, Human Nature #7, Wanne Be Startin Something #5! These weren't no. 1 neither! What the hell...

In my opinion many singles are still underrated... Smooth Criminal should have been the 6th number one single from the Bad album. Am I right?

Maybe we should start a campagne for Smooth Criminal or something? :)

Michael holds 13 number one hits on the Billboard Hot 100 chart, while Mariah Carey holds 18, Elvis 18, Beatles 20 and lil' bitch Rihanna tied MJ with her 13th single...
 
You seem to be in the mindset that if a song doesn't reach #1 on the US charts, that means it's 'underrated'. Just because a song doesn't reach #1 doesn't mean it's underrated, and you can't expect EVERY great Michael song to reach #1. Most of those songs still hit #1 else where in the world too. Michael may have gotten less US #1's than other greats such as The Beatles, but it appears that with Michael, people were more interested in buying his albums than buying his singles. Seriously look at his album sales - they were almost always in the TENS of MILLIONS!

If anything I'm kinda surprised that the Thriller singles did so well, people were buying the album... but ALSO the singles? Seriously, 7/9 of the songs on that album reached the TOP TEN, that's simply AMAZING and something you pretty much never see! I wouldn't call any of the songs on Thriller underrated. It's the most popular pop album in history and as such, all of the songs on it are pretty highly regarded. If there's an album that's underrated, it most certainly isn't Thriller.

I'm surprised you actually put Thriller and Smooth Criminal there, yeah it would've been great if they reached #1, but they're some of the most popular and famous pop songs in history. Seriously, Smooth Criminal has sold at least 7,500,000 copies and these days it's regarded as one of the best and most iconic pieces in Michael Jackson's entire discography... how is that underrated?

I'm honestly sort of mixed on the subject of Michael's songs being underrated. I do think some of Michael's most underrated songs have come Post-Dangerous, as by then people were starting to focus on his private life more than his musical career and not giving some of amazing pieces the recognition some of it deserved, but I also feel that his music has still somewhat received decent recognition... like Stranger in Moscow received quite a lot of critical acclaim! Maybe it hasn't received as much acclaim as Thriller or Bad... but many pieces were still received well by critics and general audiences, and still achieved acclaim to some degree none the less (Earth Song, Stranger in Moscow, Ghosts, Will You Be There, Dangerous, You Are Not Alone, Scream etc etc...) :)
 
Yeah, Smooth Criminal would have deserved to be Nr 1 and probably some other songs by Michael too which did not, but I don't think it matters. Eg. in the case of Smooth Criminal - what songs were ahead of it when it was at #7? I guess not all of them (and maybe neither) became iconic and Smooth Criminal is, so time kind of sorted that out. It's a bit weird that such an iconic song wasn't Nr 1, but that kind of thing happens a lot. For example, Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon album was only Nr 1. for one week when it was released. But its longevity is such that today it's one of the best selling albums of all times. Another album that was never Nr 1. is Bob Marley's Legend, but today it's one of the best selling albums of all times. Meanwhile today you have albums those sell 1-1.5 million in their first week and they break all time records for first week's sales all the time but then they drop like a brick and the overall sales of that album stucks at 2 million and never remotely reaches the level of those all time big sellers.
So instant chart success often does not matter that much. Longevity does. Even today. Adele's 21 is the best selling album of the past 10 years or so but it wasn't an instant huge seller. In its first week it sold like 300,000 copies which is good but nothing like what some of the most hyped releases sell in their first week these days (1-1.5 million). Yet at the end of the day Adele's 21 outsold them all - and by a huge margin! It sold 11 million copies so far in the US, while all those artists who sold a million copies in their first week got stuck at 1.5-2 million.

OK, it went off a bit, talking about album sales, but my point is, it's not always chart position that makes a song or an album legendary. I'm sure there are lots of Nr 1s which we don't even remember any more but everyone remembers Smotth Criminal. So does it matter at the end of the day that it wasn't Nr 1?

And yes, Michael was more an albums artist than a singles artist. It's always his albums those were those mega huge sellers, not his singles. Still he had 13 Nr 1s which is fantastic from an albums artist.
 
invincible is underrated. radio stations ignore it, that sux.
 
respect77 said:
Yeah, Smooth Criminal would have deserved to be Nr 1 and probably some other songs by Michael too which did not, but I don't think it matters. Eg. in the case of Smooth Criminal - what songs were ahead of it when it was at #7? I guess not all of them (and maybe neither) became iconic and Smooth Criminal is, so time kind of sorted that out. It's a bit weird that such an iconic song wasn't Nr 1, but that kind of thing happens a lot. For example, Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon album was only Nr 1. for one week when it was released. But its longevity is such that today it's one of the best selling albums of all times. Another album that was never Nr 1. is Bob Marley's Legend, but today it's one of the best selling albums of all times. Meanwhile today you have albums those sell 1-1.5 million in their first week and they break all time records for first week's sales all the time but then they drop like a brick and the overall sales of that album stucks at 2 million and never remotely reaches the level of those all time big sellers.
So instant chart success often does not matter that much. Longevity does. Even today. Adele's 21 is the best selling album of the past 10 years or so but it wasn't an instant huge seller. In its first week it sold like 300,000 copies which is good but nothing like what some of the most hyped releases sell in their first week these days (1-1.5 million). Yet at the end of the day Adele's 21 outsold them all - and by a huge margin! It sold 11 million copies so far in the US, while all those artists who sold a million copies in their first week got stuck at 1.5-2 million.

OK, it went off a bit, talking about album sales, but my point is, it's not always chart position that makes a song or an album legendary. I'm sure there are lots of Nr 1s which we don't even remember any more but everyone remembers Smotth Criminal. So does it matter at the end of the day that it wasn't Nr 1?

And yes, Michael was more an albums artist than a singles artist. It's always his albums those were those mega huge sellers, not his singles. Still he had 13 Nr 1s which is fantastic from an albums artist.
Click to expand...

I think you're but still it would be great if SC was number one. Michael has still the best selling album of all time and no other artist can beat that! And the thing you said about Michael being more an album artist, that's soooo true. Michael had 5 number 1 albums, dunno if Off The Wall, was number 1. Couldn't find it.
And Michael has many other records that other artists dont have...
 
DanGerouS- said:
invincible is underrated. radio stations ignore it, that sux.
Click to expand...

Invincible needed better singles. As much as I like You Rock My World I don't think it was a good choice for the first single . Unbreakable would have been the better choice
 
I think you guys listed the ones I think of. I think the ones that I think are underrated people still know those are Michael's songs. That's why I like the Cirque shows. They can use the songs not well known or not as popular and give it new life and make people aware of.
 
marebear said:
That's why I like the Cirque shows. They can use the songs not well known or not as popular and give it new life and make people aware of.
Click to expand...

Yeah! I also recall during the intermission (and before the show) they were playing a few of his songs that most people hadn't heard, such as Heartbreaker, which is pretty cool!
 
Blood On The Dance Floor is underrated. Most of the time that album is completely skipped over cause people just look at it as a remix album but those first 5 songs are some of Michael's most brilliant work
 
analogue said:
Blood On The Dance Floor is underrated. Most of the time that album is completely skipped over cause people just look at it as a remix album but those first 5 songs are some of Michael's most brilliant work
Click to expand...

I remember the first time I heard the opening introduction of Blood on the Dance Floor.

Absolute pure bliss ^_^

(Still is ;))
 
Last edited:
Personally, I think that almost all of MJ's Motown solo material (save a few songs like "Ben" and "Rockin Robin, for instance) is pretty much unknown in the public eye. I know that "One Day in Your Life" went to #1 in the UK, but is virtually unrecognized here in the USA. Not to mention, there are plenty of hidden gems on those albums where young Michael sounds absolutely fantastic, even when he's in the middle of going through puberty.
 
Blood On The Dance Floor would have been brilliant as an EP, those remixes were totally unnecessary but I agree, it's underrated. Another album outrageously underrated is HIStory, most critics said You Are Not Alone was the best song and I thought, are they f*cking kidding me!? :doh: That album far better than Michael's work with Q by a landslide.

It's true Invincible was better than many albums done at that time but I didn't like it because it wasn't him, he relied on too many people for compositions. He composed most of the songs on his previous records from the 90's and those are masterpieces.
 
I always think of BOTDF as an EP, I never listen to the remixes, but I absolutely love the original tracks. I think it should have been released as an EP or Michael should have made another 5-6 songs and make it a brand new album. This way many people just didn't know what to make of it. But I think the original material on it is very underrated. Critics at the time trashed it and it's ridiculous looking back - especially when the same critic praised something like the Spice Girls to high heavens... The bias against MJ was just ridiculous post Dangerous (post allegations, basically).
 
Well here it goes, 2Bad is an underrated classic! That song is the epitome of Michael. It has everything, Rhythm,Melody,harmonies,intricate structure,Superb Vocal. My fav song,(along with Stranger In Moscow), from History.
 
I've been listening to Invincible a bit more just lately and Break of Dawn, Speechless, Don't Walk Away and Threatened have all reignited the power Invincible has. Theres a rawness about Don't Walk Away, I would love to have heard MJ sing this live and acoustic. Just Michael, a few instruments when needed and not too many in the audience.
 
respect77 said:
I always think of BOTDF as an EP, I never listen to the remixes, but I absolutely love the original tracks. I think it should have been released as an EP or Michael should have made another 5-6 songs and make it a brand new album. This way many people just didn't know what to make of it. But I think the original material on it is very underrated. Critics at the time trashed it and it's ridiculous looking back - especially when the same critic praised something like the Spice Girls to high heavens... The bias against MJ was just ridiculous post Dangerous (post allegations, basically).
Click to expand...

It is ridiculous. And there was bias against MJ for Dangerous as well. Remember when Rolling Stone gave the Dangerous album a 2 star review and Madonna's Hard Candy album a 4 star review?
 
Last edited:
I feel some tracks I really like are quite underrated by a large portion of the fanbase, like Burn This Disco Out, Speed Demon and Can't Let Her Get Away (generally prime candidates on the 'least liked track of the album' lists). Though I shouldn't call it underrated, as it's really just a matter of differing tastes.

More generally, I think both the general public and also a sizeable portion of the fanbase tend to ignore the Jacksons' albums and Michael's solo stuff at Motown (especially the Forever Michael album). Imo these are great, great records that do not get their just due.

analogue said:
And Off The Wall isn't underrated now a days. In fact it's probably his most praised album after Thriller within the media
Click to expand...
Yeah, OTW and Thriller are always heralded as his 'great' albums in the traditional music journalism circles. Bad gets less, but still some credit too. Very often the appreciation for these albums is accompanied by overstating the contributions of Quincy Jones. I am not one of those fans who thinks Quincy was unimportant - I think he was very important during that phase of Michael's career and I think their partnership brought out the best in both at the time - but it is frustrating to see how little credit Michael is given. I have met several people who are really into music and love Michael's stuff, but were completely surprised when I told them he wrote most of the material on these albums. They thought Quincy and the songwriters he worked with did most of it.

respect77 said:
I always think of BOTDF as an EP, I never listen to the remixes, but I absolutely love the original tracks. I think it should have been released as an EP or Michael should have made another 5-6 songs and make it a brand new album. This way many people just didn't know what to make of it. But I think the original material on it is very underrated. Critics at the time trashed it and it's ridiculous looking back - especially when the same critic praised something like the Spice Girls to high heavens... The bias against MJ was just ridiculous post Dangerous (post allegations, basically).
Click to expand...
I agree! BOTDF is Michael at his best. I can see how the format, with the majority of the tracks being remixes, might have detracted from the original material, but those original tracks deserved to get a lot more attention. Shame it was not simpy released as an EP, as Michael originally wanted.
 
analogue said:
It is ridiculous. And there was bias against MJ for Dangerous as well. Remember when Rolling Stone gave the Dangerous album a 2 star review and Madonna's Hard Candy album a 4 star review?
Click to expand...

Yes, but that was I think in their 2004 album guide (and I think that's what they still use on their website). When it was released they gave it 4 stars, so what made them re-evaluate it? The 2003 allegations? How did they suddenly make Dangerous worse? But yeah, it's ridiculous to give Dangerous two stars in an album guide that gives something like Hard Candy four stars.
 
SoCav said:
More generally, I think both the general public and also a sizeable portion of the fanbase tend to ignore the Jacksons' albums and Michael's solo stuff at Motown (especially the Forever Michael album). Imo these are great, great records that do not get their just due.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. With all the talk about how Invincible is underrated or BOTDF is underrated but they are at least valued within the fan base, but a lof Jacksons stuff and J5 stuff and Motown solo MJ stuff is ignored by the fanbase, which is sad. Triumph for example is a fantastic album, IMO it's up there with Michael's solo albums and is a VERY Michael album too - he wrote as many songs on it as he did on his solo albums! To a lesser extent but the same with Destiny. And even with albums where he did not yet have creative control - how could something like Come and Get It: The Rare Pearls not get the fanbase more excited? I just don't get it, but then I'm someone who's interested in everything from J5 to solo adult career.
 
I'm gonna play devil's advocate here and say that I think that Invincible is overrated within the fanbase. It's a good album, but I don't think it comes anywhere close to Michael's previous albums but because of the lack of album sales (compared to his previous albums) and medicore reviews fans hype the album up to be better than what it really is to make up for that. Is Invincible a good album? Yes it is, but I do think it's Michael's weakest album.

If i were to rate Invincible out of a 5 star rating I would give it 3 stars
 
Under rated songs to me just off the top of my head:

Give Into Me
Why You Wanna Trip On Me
Tabloid Junkie
Earth Song (In the US at least)
History
Break Of Dawn
Butterlfies
Whatever Happens

Along with older Jackson5/jacksons era songs, and some Ultimate Collection songs that in my opinion could have been used.
Baby Be Mine
The Lady In My Life
 
I can't speak for anyone but myself, why don't I like most of the material released in the Motown years? Because the Motown people used the same formula over and over again, it was innovative at the beginning but after a decade doing the same, it's not appealing anymore. It's undeniable there are underestimated or hidden gems like Music And Me, One Day In Your Life but Berry Gordy didn't let Michael, neither his brother be artistically. That's why The Jackson albums with CBS were better musically.
 
To be honest I never really cared for The Jackson 5. They did have some really good songs but most of the time nothing really wowed me. I'm a bigger fan of The Jackson's and Michael's solo work
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top