HIStory Tour Discussion - Should it be released? [Merged]

[CodaBroda]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

Coduscus, I have no issue with the History tour. You may have not read the posts/pages before your post but, the majority of hard-core fans have already explained why the tank in particular is cringe-worthy and embarrassing which does not make the History tour worthy of a theatrical release. Plus, there are other artists whose staging after the History tour were much more pleasing to the majority.

I personally do not rank Michael's tours. I enjoyed them all.

My apologies, I haven't read through the thread, I'm usually pretty good about doing that. Never knew that people weren't fans of the tank, I always loved the tank lol, can definitely see why there would be hate for it though.

 

[Galactus123]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

I think the tank is kind of awesome but I always skip the crying part after it.

 

[barbee0715]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

My apologies, I haven't read through the thread, I'm usually pretty good about doing that. Never knew that people weren't fans of the tank, I always loved the tank lol, can definitely see why there would be hate for it though.

I don't think there was Hate for the tank, specifically. There was hate for the opinion that the theatricality of the tank excused the lip synching on the tour. A tank does not make for a great LIVE tour.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

My apologies, I haven't read through the thread, I'm usually pretty good about doing that. Never knew that people weren't fans of the tank, I always loved the tank lol, can definitely see why there would be hate for it though.

There is no hate, only we have seen the tank being brought up a number of times as an argument for the HIStory tour as some massively impressive stuff which supposedly should make up for the lip-syncing. So it kind of became a symbol by now. LOL. And some of us made the argument that it does not make up for the lack of live singing to us. And I personally don't think HIStory tour is that impressive in terms of theatrics either. I mean there are shows by other artists with a lot more elaborate theatrics, stage, lights etc. I don't think anyone would go crazy, especially now in 2015, for that tank and other props on that tour. People have seen lot more impressive stages and theatrics. Michael's strength is not really in that IMO, but in his own talent. And because of that his representation on the big screen as a live artist should be a show where his actual singing-dancing talent is shown in its full glory.

 

[Themidwestcowboy]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

I like the Bad Tour ending for Man in the Mirror more but the jet back ending is amazing though. Also the lean in Smooth Criminal wasn't necessary. When I watch the Bad Tour performance I don't wish that the lean was there too.

I feel the lean was very necessary! I mean come on the lean is an iconic moment in the short film. It would be like performing thriller without the choreoagraphy or like beat it in victory tour without the dance routine. Smooth Criminal from the Bad Tour just recycled the same dance choreography twice and that, in my humble opinion, was just a bit lazy. Either way I have always preferred Dangerous over any other solo tour. Captures the entirety of MJ artistry.

As for the live tank in HIStory, sure now it looks a little bit silly but imagine being there and all of a sudden a hugee tank comes up on stage, I would have frickin lost it!

There is nothing wrong with the "tell me what about it" ending but come on this is a man that always wanted more and bigger. Esecially for a song like Earth Song, it has to end on a high note. To be honest I think I actually would have enjoyed a big finale like the tank more than I would have enjoyed him singing the ad libs. I think a lot of you would have enjoyed the theatrics and special effects more if he sung more on that tour. Because of the heavy lip synching the greater elements gets overshadowed or completely disregarded.

I'm kinda torn because I really love the HIStory tour but all your arguments are very valid and does not fall on deaf ears. If it was up to me I would make them scrap the entire idea of a 3D cinema project. 1, because 3D is so incredibly overrated it's ridiculous. Can't really accurately describe my disdain for 3D, it just makes my head and eyes hurt. 2, They had an amazing run with This Is It, both on the box office and with the general reception of the project. I tip my hat off to them for TII, a good, well documented concert film, now let's move on. They still have other ventures they could be entering in, bring us some exciting new projects not controversial stuff. I don't know if we're being too harsh on the estate but I swear every time they announce something it has a controversial aspect. Whether it's the MICHAEL album with the Cascios songs or Vision with poorly transferred negatives or Bad25 with a DVD sourced from a almost decayed VHS, or XSCAPE only having 2 new unheard songs. And now, all though not officially confirmed, a HIStory show on theater. Good god, can't we have one project without some negative controversy attached to it?

One thing is for sure though, MJ needs to be represented at his absolute peak. They should merge together all of his solo tours and make a movie called "The Michael Jackson Experience" start it off with Jam and then WBSS, HH, APOM from Bad tour Then Smooth Criminal from the History Tour, IJCSLY & SOOML from Dangerous, J5 medley from History, RWY, Human Nature & Dirty Diana from Bad, Thriller from Dangerous etc etc. just wrote that out of the top of my head, it should be more well thought out and encompass the best of all the tours. Eh maybe I'm just too tired lol.

 

[Tygger]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

Coducus, no worries. As you can see, one of the majority is always available to explain why you should not be of the opinion that the History tour should have a theatrical release and how the tour presents a rather negative reflection of Michael as an artist in their view. I personally enjoy the tank and the History tour and I will continue to enjoy both.

 

[HIStoric]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

People are making out that the estate releasing Michael's final tour, is comparable to the Cascio tracks that were shipped almost 3 million times? Get over yourselves.

Zakk... what are you on about? No-one's comparing this to the Cascio tracks (even went back 8 pages and couldn't even find the word 'Cascio' mentioned on any page).

You say standing there for 5 minutes is talented? Really? That is just simply and completely WRONG.

TBH I think standing there completely still, no shaking or slight movement whatsoever, with literally tens of thousands of people screaming at you for a solid minute or two does take some talent.

It's certainly a better opening than the HIStory tour. You have a CGI opening (which I explained a few pages back will just be another point of controversy) followed by a ship coming out of the ground amidst some smoke. I dunno how it looked or felt in real life but on screen, the effect of it popping out of the stage doesn't translate that well. I can't remember ever going WOAH! to it personally.

I remember once many years ago I had some friends over and I popped on the Dangerous at Bucharest DVD and we watched the first 15-20 minutes of it. My friends (who aren't really MJ fans) still remember to this day how crazy it was (I asked them a month or so ago), seeing all these fans go crazy and faint over Michael when all he was doing was literally just standing there. Not only that but it also just shows off how much of an effect Michael's mere presence had on people, just how big he was back then. In this case, simple was better.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

AlwaysThere... You say standing there for 5 minutes is talented? Really? That is just simply and completely WRONG.

When did I say that? I said that the fact that Michael can rile up an audience for five solid minutes without doing a single thing is a perfect indicator of his appeal as an artist; it has nothing to do with talent. I can't think of a single artist who could excite people for extended periods of time by simply standing there - not Timberlake or Bruno Mars or anybody. It's the appeal of Michael Jackson.

The majority of hard-core fans have already explained why the tank in particular is cringe-worthy and embarrassing which does not make the History tour worthy of a theatrical release.

The tank segment has nothing to do with why most of us don't want to see the History tour released to theaters.

 

[Tygger]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

The tank segment has nothing to do with why most of us don't want to see the History tour released to theaters.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

I really don't know how to respond to that. I'm not sure if you legitimately think that any of us are saying, "The History tour has a tank segment in it? Ew! Screw the rest of the show, I don't want it released solely because of that!" or if you're being entirely sarcastic.

Difficult to tell. You've played the straight man for a while. Legitimately curious.

 

[Tygger]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

AlwaysThere, a poor attempt at levity, eh?

I am very aware why the majority believes as they do. It was explained to me and any other who did not hold the same view countless times.

 

[HIStory]

TBH I think standing there completely still, no shaking or slight movement whatsoever, with literally tens of thousands of people screaming at you for a solid minute or two does take some talent.

It's certainly a better opening than the HIStory tour. You have a CGI opening (which I explained a few pages back will just be another point of controversy) followed by a ship coming out of the ground amidst some smoke. I dunno how it looked or felt in real life but on screen, the effect of it popping out of the stage doesn't translate that well. I can't remember ever going WOAH! to it personally.

I remember once many years ago I had some friends over and I popped on the Dangerous at Bucharest DVD and we watched the first 15-20 minutes of it. My friends (who aren't really MJ fans) still remember to this day how crazy it was (I asked them a month or so ago), seeing all these fans go crazy and faint over Michael when all he was doing was literally just standing there. Not only that but it also just shows off how much of an effect Michael's mere presence had on people, just how big he was back then. In this case, simple was better.

From the country band The Band Perry:

“Michael Jackson’s one of my very favorite performers of all time,” said Kimberly Perry of The Band Perry. “And actually, when we get ready to put together an ACM or a CMA Awards performance, we start by looking for Michael Jackson videos. We are always intensely inspired by his dancing but also just his presence onstage.
“You know our performance for ‘Done’ at the ACMs [in 2013]? There was this Michael video where he was starting his show, and he popped on to the stage somehow and just stood there. Now, we stood there for like five seconds for dramatic effect [during the ACM performance], but he stood there for about a minute. And the crowd was just roaring.”
“I think it got louder actually,” Neil Perry added.
“I think he’s so cool because he crossed all genre boundaries, national/international boundaries, race boundaries. Everybody was in love with this guy,” Kimberly concluded. “Just a phenomenal entertainer.”

http://www.cmt.com/news/1731142/cmt-all-time-top-40-michael-jackson/

That entry was epic. The same cannot be said about the HIStory entry. That's just a special effect that is very dated by now. Michael's charisma and stage presence however never gets dated.

 

[innuendo141]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

People are making out that the estate releasing Michael's final tour, is comparable to the Cascio tracks that were shipped almost 3 million times? Get over yourselves.

What in the name of Christ are you on about? I'd recommend reading previous posts before you make a ridiculous comment like that.

With regards to the issue of the tank, this was brought up in earlier pages because some people were stating that because of the production and theatrics this concert is perfect for release, whereas some of us disagreed with this because we felt that an impressive performance with impressive singing and dancing should be more important than highlighting an impressive budget. As an adult the tank part is kind of cheesy but it is by no means a deal breaker, because I will never forget seeing it come on stage in Dublin as a 10 year old.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

If I may I would like to change the course of this conversation temporarily. For the time being let's completely drop the idea of theatrics.

Let's focus on Michael's performance. After all this is the primary reason people will want to go to see the concerts, correct? I highly doubt anyone entering the theater is only looking forward to the spaceship introduction or the disappearing act in "Thriller". The performance is the deciding factor as to whether a theatrical concert release will see success or failure based on word of mouth.

Pro-History people tend to revert to pointing out the show's effects and theatrics. As innuendo said above, a high budget does not automatically ensure a quality product, as human history has proven many times before (and will continue to prove in the future).

That being said, this is the primary reason why I don't want the History tour to be put in theaters. His entire stage personality was missing; there was no energy or excitement or thrill. (And no, his age is not a factor whatsoever.) I saw a more honest representation of Michael Jackson during the Who's Bad tribute show. Some might call this comment ridiculous, but as far as I'm concerned the majority of the History tour shows was Michael Jackson and his backup vocalists miming decade-old vocals, giving half-assed dance performances (only parts of "Billie Jean" impress me) where his dancers actually outdo him at times, and putting forward special effects that make the show feel entirely dated and unimpressive. (And that again is where his previous tours shine - they didn't put much focus into effects as they did performance, which is why they still feel current.)

This is not a direct shot at anyone in particular, nor am I judging anyone for legitimately enjoying the tour. And I'm sure those of you will despise reading further posts from me due to such harsh criticism. But I wouldn't be a Michael Jackson fan if I blindly accepted everything he did. This is a point in his career in which I believe he could have done so much better, and I have no shame in pointing it out.

AlwaysThere, a poor attempt at levity, eh?

I am very aware why the majority believes as they do. It was explained to me and any other who did not hold the same view countless times.

Not at all; it was a legitimate question. If you truly are as aware as you claim then you wouldn't have made a post in which you make the ridiculous assumption that the tank sequence is a factor in our disapproval of a History tour theatrical release. (Or at least that's what the post I quoted implied.)

 

[Tony R]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

^ that's true. From the whole show, only parts of Billie Jean impressed me and the dance to SIM.

Not to labour the point, but for someone who was at all three tours, I can still remember the tangible disappointment and embarrassment I felt standing in the audience as the show progressed.

Maybe Michael Jackson fans can justify lip syncing and rehashing these routines but music fans cannot.

 

[HIStoric]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

but for someone who was at all three tours

Wow, I'm jealous...

 

[Tygger]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

AlwaysThere, no worries, that is how you interpreted my post and my humor remains. It is no more ridiculous than your assumption that those with an opposing view "tend to revert to pointing out the show's effects and theatrics" as if to enjoy such is a step backwards.

Maybe you and others believe that a distaste for the History tour is such a complicated emotion that it is beyond the average comprehension which is why you and others may feel you have to repeat your stance countless times whenever someone disagrees.

I assure you, there is nothing complicated about your opposing view and as it is the majority view in this thread, there is support for it. Because of that support, there is no need for so much repetition but, I am sure there is so much more to come.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

Not to labour the point, but for someone who was at all three tours, I can still remember the tangible disappointment and embarrassment I felt standing in the audience as the show progressed.

*fails to contain jealousy*

 

[TheManinTheMirror]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

Not no...but HECK no.

 

[sharon007]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

It should be released on DVD as fans would buy it. Although it if was on in Theatres non fans would get to see Michaels talents. I think the quality of the performance would be much better than This Is It as Michael was saving himself for the main show.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

Oddly enough, I would personally say that the 2009 rehearsal footage underlined exactly why the 1996/7 tour was so disappointing.

There were jaw dropping moments plastered all over the This Is It film when it comes to the performance Michael gave. His voice was in fine shape even at fifty years old - "I Just Can't Stop Loving You" was downright phenomenal. I never saw that sort of vigor and excitement during the History tour. It had some nice flashing lights but that's about it.

 

[Antwort]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

There were jaw dropping moments plastered all over the This Is It film when it comes to the performance Michael gave. His voice was in fine shape even at fifty years old - "I Just Can't Stop Loving You" was downright phenomenal. I never saw that sort of vigor and excitement during the History tour. It had some nice flashing lights but that's about it.

I definitely agree about the vigor and the splendor of some TII moments, especially the Just can't stop loving you one.

As far as the main debate of the thread I'm not even goin' to go anywhere near it. My own experience with the HIStory tour is just that, mine and I'd prefer it if it remained that way. Its artistic merits (or lack thereof) are secondary considerations for me. And before anyone asks then why even post in the thread I best better get going.

 

[analogue]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

When I watch This Is It, I see the same happiness and passion for performing that Michael had back during the BAD and Dangerous Tour days. Look at how happy he looked performing They Don't Care About Us. I haven't seen him that happy performing in years

 

[Hess]

Re: Should HIStory Tour be released to cinemas?

He really did look so very happy to get back on stage !

 

[mj_frenzy]

One exception, for example, is the first line during “Thriller” in Auckland (1996).

[video=youtube;t6zUNDyEmbk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6zUNDyEmbk[/video]

 

[SoCav]

Re: The exceptions of live vocals during HIStory World Tour

Dangerous in Ostend:

Scream in Brunei:

 

[mj_frenzy]

Another exception, for example, is the last line during “The Way You Make Feel” in Amsterdam (30.9.1996).

[video=youtube;GgTig8din4w]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgTig8din4w[/video]

 

[analogue]

Re: The exceptions of live vocals during HIStory World Tour

Beat It was sung live at Sydney 1996

 

[mj_frenzy]

Scream in Brunei:

[video=youtube;wsIAOdzdvHU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsIAOdzdvHU[/video]

“Scream” would have been a totally different song with live vocals.

Although I was aware of that, thanks for the upload.

Beat It was sung live at Sydney 1996

[video=youtube;Ji9_EO9STJc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji9_EO9STJc[/video]

I doubt if it was just a technical reason for those live vocals of “Beat It” because MJ seemed to enjoy singing fully live (although the show was coming to the end). Nice performance, too.

 

[analogue]

Re: The exceptions of live vocals during HIStory World Tour

I think that Michael would have preferred to sing more songs live if he could. But sadly he couldn't because of voice problems