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

[AlwaysThere]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

^^ You truly seem to be so personally affected by the fact that some people dislike the History tour. Must you and others continually try to justify yourselves? No one can make a negative/partial comment without you leaping to the defense. For goodness sake, the negativity isn't aimed at you directly. Let us express ourselves, just as we will let you express yourself.

Attendance numbers are not a good reason to support your argument that the History tour was good (though it is quite hilarious that people continually avoid the topic of the performances themselves and keep referencing sales and historical relevancy). Do you really believe that the King of Pop would have any difficulty selling out an arena, whether or not the show was any good?

People get lost in the fact that they were in the presence of Michael Jackson, but hindsight is a beautiful thing.

I've seen first hand testimonials from people in attendance who clearly stated that they enjoyed themselves simply because they got to see their favorite artist, but look back and acknowledge that the performance was less-than-impressive. I'm sure other users have seen them as well.

I've got to tell you guys... this entire discussion regarding Michael's tours is getting exhausting. You bring up points, we counter them with additional points, perpetually. And, as I've stated before, the only reason these conversations start is because you (and certain others) jump to defensive tactics the second anyone says even a marginally-negative comment about the History tour. (Take a look back through this thread; you will see very clearly that's how it almost always begins, even after someone tries to peacefully end it.)

Just leave it be.

 

[Michaels Lover]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

^^ You truly seem to be so personally affected by the fact that some people dislike the History tour.

oh, I am....

Must you and others continually try to justify yourselves? No one can make a negative/partial comment without you leaping to the defense. For goodness sake, the negativity isn't aimed at you directly. Let us express ourselves, just as we will let you express yourself.

I have absolutely no reason to justify myself? justify myself for what? why? how? when? where?
I know it's not aimed at me personally, but it is at Michael...
never said you can't express yourselves lol but I am simply doing the same

Attendance numbers are not a good reason to support your argument that the History tour was good (though it is quite hilarious that people continually avoid the topic of the performances themselves and keep referencing sales and historical relevancy). Do you really believe that the King of Pop would have any difficulty selling out an arena, whether or not the show was any good?

I never said anything about "Attendance numbers". I was talking about the people who kept going to the conerts over and over...even though they've seen it already, some several times, and knew how the show was and everything
I've never avoided the topic of the performances themselves. I've said countless of times how I feel about it, do I have to repeat myself over and over?

I've got to tell you guys... this entire discussion regarding Michael's tours is getting exhausting. You bring up points, we counter them with additional points, perpetually. And, as I've stated before, the only reason these conversations start is because you (and certain others) jump to defensive tactics the second anyone says even a marginally-negative comment about the History tour. (Take a look back through this thread; you will see very clearly that's how it almost always begins, even after someone tries to peacefully end it.).

yeah and? isn't that what a discussion is about? are we not allowed to discuss with you because we like the HIStory tour, and you don't? of course when there's something you don't agree with, you say speak up, isn't that only a natural thing to do? and I haven't seen anyone try to end anything peacefully (or not). like you said, you bring up points, and we bring up points...and it will never end as long as everyone keep doing that. it's not about who did what, and when...that's like saying "I'm better than you" it's kinda childish, because we are all guilty of participating in this discussion

 

[Tony R]

Ticket sales are irrelevant as to how good a tour is as they all get sold well in advance.

I bought tickets to London and Sheffield instantly, but wouldn't have bought them had I known the quality of the show in advance.

Let's face it, 90% of what MJ did 1970-2001 was thoroughly amazing and miles above any artist ever, but occasionally (especially 1996-2001) was well below par. Understandably there were reasons for this but it's still true.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

I know it's not aimed at me personally, but it is at Michael...

It's called legitimate criticism. No one is immune from it. Not even Michael Jackson.

yeah and? isn't that what a discussion is about? are we not allowed to discuss with you because we like the HIStory tour, and you don't? of course when there's something you don't agree with, you say speak up, isn't that only a natural thing to do?

Discussion can only be categorized as such when both parties treat one another in a respectful manner. To be quite forward, certain people have not always been the kindest when expressing their opinions; there is one such member (whom I won't name explicitly) who has frequently picked fights and been generally rude to anyone who didn't share his point of view.

Both sides are guilty of this but it is hands down the History tour enthusiasts who are the worst offenders.

I've actually seen new members of this board post that they're genuinely afraid to post their opinion because they don't want to be yelled at. THAT is a problem, and threads like this are why it happens.

and I haven't seen anyone try to end anything peacefully (or not). like you said, you bring up points, and we bring up points...and it will never end as long as everyone keep doing that. it's not about who did what, and when...that's like saying "I'm better than you" it's kinda childish, because we are all guilty of participating in this discussion

People have actively attempted to reroute the conversation back to a Thriller/History documentary, and then someone pops in quoting an old argumentative post and reignites the entire debacle.

 

[Michaels Lover]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

It's called legitimate criticism. No one is immune from it. Not even Michael Jackson.

I know he's not, never said he was...but you are going way beyond that, which is what bothers me....

I've actually seen new members of this board post that they're genuinely afraid to post their opinion because they don't want to be yelled at. THAT is a problem, and threads like this are why it happens.

well, that's sad. but lets face it, message boards are not for the weakhearted. no message board I've ever been on in my whole life, did not have heated discussions like this. in fact, this is nothing compared to other places, which I've experienced things that are much worse. if you are scared to post because of someone who you don't know are gonna say to you over the internet, well, then maybe a message board isn't the right place for you...

People have actively attempted to reroute the conversation back to a Thriller/History documentary, and then someone pops in quoting an old argumentative post and reignites the entire debacle.

:lol: well, yeah....that's the thing about the points again...as long as everyone keeps going, it will never end

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

I know he's not, never said he was...but you are going way beyond that, which is what bothers me....

And that comment, in turn, bothers me.

Opinions can be strong. Certain wording can be considered brute or harsh, but so long as they are an accurate representation of personal feelings, they are appropriate. Nothing I have said about the History tour has been an over exaggeration or unnecessarily worded; it is exactly how I feel. Just because you cannot accept that certain people have such strong opinions does not mean that you have the right to imply to them that they are exceeding any unspoken limitation.

Michael Jackson failed sometimes. Some of the videos/songs/events attributed to his name have been abysmal. Some people genuinely hate them. Get used to it and stop getting up in arms.

well, that's sad. but lets face it, message boards are not for the weakhearted. no message board I've ever been on in my whole life, did not have heated discussions like this. in fact, this is nothing compared to other places, which I've experienced things that are much worse. if you are scared to post because of someone who you don't know are gonna say to you over the internet, well, then maybe a message board isn't the right place for you...

That does not give anyone the right to be unnecessarily rude for no good reason.

 

[fraroc04]

I think that the staging and theatrics for the HIStory tour were the strong point, but the lip syncing is the biggest issue of that entire tour.

Honestly, I'd rather see more Dangerous 1992 footage come out. We already have Bremen released, soon Oslo will be out, I'm hoping that soon we'll see Wembley and Munich surface.

 

[Michaels Lover]

Re: A Possible Third Michael Jackson Documentary

And that comment, in turn, bothers me.

Opinions can be strong. Certain wording can be considered brute or harsh, but so long as they are an accurate representation of personal feelings, they are appropriate. Nothing I have said about the History tour has been an over exaggeration or unnecessarily worded; it is exactly how I feel. Just because you cannot accept that certain people have such strong opinions does not mean that you have the right to imply to them that they are exceeding any unspoken limitation.

that's not what I said, though...and personal feelings and how things really were are 2 different things....but whatever

Michael Jackson failed sometimes. Some of the videos/songs/events attributed to his name have been abysmal. Some people genuinely hate them. Get used to it and stop getting up in arms.

of course he failed. what's that got to do with anything? did I say he didn't? what do you want me to say? I don't think he's like some god or super human who never did anything wrong or failed in his life? but you keep writing to me like I do?

That does not give anyone the right to be unnecessarily rude for no good reason.

who's being unnecessarily rude for no good reason? I've not seen anyone do that

 

[fraroc04]

If I really wanted to get down to brass tacks, I'd play devils advocate and say to myself "If a HIStory tour concert were to get released, which one would it be and which one should it be?" Picking a concert isn't hard seeing as how there is now a grand total of FOURTEEN pro-shot shows to choose from, including the recently leaked November 11th Auckland show and the October 29th Kuala Lumpur show.

 

[AlwaysThere]

who's being unnecessarily rude for no good reason? I've not seen anyone do that

Allow me to answer this question with a direct quote:

personal feelings and how things really were are 2 different things....but whatever

Right there. THAT is unnecessarily rude and condescending. You are being beyond discourteous.

The wording of that post implies that you are under the belief that anyone who dislikes the History tour is incorrect. (If that was not your intent, you should double check your wording before you post.) I am entirely fed up with comments like this.

You are presenting your opinion as fact as if you believe that the History tour was factually excellent. Talent is almost entirely subjective; there is no correct answer to, "Is this good?" Not a single member of this forum is superior to anyone else in terms of personal opinions and who is correct. People have an incapability of calmly and politely engaging in a debate without using language like, "That's not how things really were," as if their opinion is law. It isn't. My opinion is just as disposable as yours at the end of the day.

Again, if I'm way off the mark, you should articulate better. But I have seen post after post that exist in the vein of "That's not how things really were," and it's ridiculous, rude, and not necessary to the conversation. And I would like for it to stop here.

 

[Michaels Lover]

Allow me to answer this question with a direct quote:

Right there. THAT is unnecessarily rude and condescending. You are being beyond discourteous.

The wording of that post implies that you are under the belief that anyone who dislikes the History tour is incorrect. (If that was not your intent, you should double check your wording before you post.) I am entirely fed up with comments like this.

Again, if I'm way off the mark, you should articulate better. But I have seen post after post that exist in the vein of "That's not how things really were," and it's ridiculous, rude, and not necessary to the conversation. And I would like for it to stop here.

no...no...no...not at all what I'm saying. well, I am not very good at explaining things, especially in english since it's not my first language. and I'm very often being misunderstood, which is also happening post after post here. and maybe my wording could be better, but I'm doing my best. and I have absolutely no intention of being rude, if that's how I come across, that, as well, is a big misunderstanding. trust me! I did NOT write that, or anything else for that matter, to be rude!! I have absolutely no reason to be unnecessarily rude, whatsoever. That is not why I'm here

You are presenting your opinion as fact

no I'm not!! I never said that!!

The wording of that post implies that you are under the belief that anyone who dislikes the History tour is incorrect. (If that was not your intent, you should double check your wording before you post.)

it was certainly NOT my intent!!! that is not my belief!!!

 

[AlwaysThere]

^^ That being the case, I apologize for any straightforwardness. That's simply how the post came off.

 

[Michaels Lover]

If I really wanted to get down to brass tacks, I'd play devils advocate and say to myself "If a HIStory tour concert were to get released, which one would it be and which one should it be?" Picking a concert isn't hard seeing as how there is now a grand total of FOURTEEN pro-shot shows to choose from, including the recently leaked November 11th Auckland show and the October 29th Kuala Lumpur show.

Well, if I could choose I would choose any other than the ones we have

 

[Michaels Lover]

^^ That being the case, I apologize for any straightforwardness. That's simply how the post came off.

Let's just move on...

 

[fraroc04]

I can understand why people don't want Munich 1997 because his voice during WBSS, J5, and I'll Be There is very rough, but when it comes to the dancing...I don't know, there really wasn't anything wrong except for a few screw ups here and there like forgetting to toe stand after the moonwalk and spin.

I'd honestly say that Dangerous 1993 had much more glaring mistakes, such as for the Billie Jean in Buenos Aries 1993, Michael moonwalked for way too long and ended up missing his cue to spin and toe stand and he had to suddenly cut off the moonwalk to sing "she said I am the one". The poster (I forgot their username, sorry ) that said they never want Dangerous 1993 to be formally released on DVD, I agree with them. Michael was on total autopilot those shows, he cut out a huge chunk of the setlist, including one of his greatest hits, because of the sheer amount of stress he was enduring and on top of that, you knew he didn't want to perform. He wanted to defend himself against people falsely accusing him of diddling children.

I'd even go as far as to say that the true reason why he chose to settle out of court in 1993 instead of fighting it and winning it is because he was basically forced to prepare for the Dangerous tour 1993 leg. In that case, T-Mez was totally right, the Dangerous tour needed to be put on hold so he could fight the accusations and win.

 

[HIStoric]

They shouldn't even question releasing any Dangerous show from the date he was first accused. Not fair on Michael.

 

[#MJforever57]

I can understand why people don't want Munich 1997 because his voice during WBSS, J5, and I'll Be There is very rough, but when it comes to the dancing...I don't know, there really wasn't anything wrong except for a few screw ups here and there like forgetting to toe stand after the moonwalk and spin.

I'd honestly say that Dangerous 1993 had much more glaring mistakes, such as for the Billie Jean in Buenos Aries 1993, Michael moonwalked for way too long and ended up missing his cue to spin and toe stand and he had to suddenly cut off the moonwalk to sing "she said I am the one". The poster (I forgot their username, sorry ) that said they never want Dangerous 1993 to be formally released on DVD, I agree with them. Michael was on total autopilot those shows, he cut out a huge chunk of the setlist, including one of his greatest hits, because of the sheer amount of stress he was enduring and on top of that, you knew he didn't want to perform. He wanted to defend himself against people falsely accusing him of diddling children.

I'd even go as far as to say that the true reason why he chose to settle out of court in 1993 instead of fighting it and winning it is because he was basically forced to prepare for the Dangerous tour 1993 leg. In that case, T-Mez was totally right, the Dangerous tour needed to be put on hold so he could fight the accusations and win.

In the bold i agree with you 100% that is what Michael want to do and he did not get the chance too.

 

[Michaels Lover]

how was he "forced"?

 

[analogue]

how was he "forced"?

Probably under contract

 

[Gatesy2006]

No no no.

 

[fraroc04]

Out of the fourteen pro-shot HIStory tour shows, which one do you like the most and the least?

Whether you love the HIStory tour or hate it, one thing is for certain. It's the most documented tour in Michael Jackson's history.
while the Bad tour has about 5 1/2 pro shot shows (two Tokyo shows, Yokohama, Osaka, half of Brisbane, and Wembley) The Dangerous tour has about 4, soon to be 5 (Oslo, Bremen, Bucharest, Mexico City, and Buenos Aries) The HIStory tour has fourteen pro-shot concerts. And in case you aren't aware of all of them...


1. Bucharest September 14th, 1996
2. Tunis October 7th, 1996
3. Seoul October 14th, 1996
4. Kuala Lumpur October 27th, 1996
5. Kuala Lumpur October 29th, 1996 (recently leaked)
6. Auckland November 9th, 1996
7. Auckland November 11th, 1996 (recently leaked)
8. Sydney November 18th, 1996 (partial concert)
9. Manila December 8th, 1996
10. Brunei December 31st 1996-January 1st 1997
11. Munich July 4th, 1997
12. Copenhagen August 14th, 1997
13. Gothenburg August 16th, 1997
14. Helsinki August 26th, 1997


In my honest opinion, the best HIStory tour concert is Bucharest 1996. I think Michael was really tight here, the dancing was really good, I think that it had the best performances of Smooth Criminal and Earth Song of the entire tour. Also you had the full setlist with The Way You Make Me Feel, the Off The Wall medley, and the Come Together/DS medley. Also, rare red Thriller jacket and red Come Together/DS jacket in a pro-shot concert is always a plus! I think it's a shame that although I think it's the best one out of the pro-shot concerts, it had the worst video and audio quality. The video is pretty fuzzy and the audio is pretty muffled and I have no idea why, but why have the Bucharest 1992 crowd shots and screams? You can hear that same guy from the 1992 concert whistling in the 1996 performance almost literally every song.

The worst...I really gotta say is either Gothenburg or Helsinki. Both those concerts, Michael's dancing really wasn't nearly as energetic as it was in the first leg of the tour. Especially during Smooth Criminal and Black Or White. Michael must have been going through some serious ankle pain because in both those shows, Michael barely leaned at all during Smooth Criminal and was the first time that I think the backup dancers out-danced him. Also, Helsinki saw all the "special songs" completely cut out. No TWYMMF, no Off The Wall medley, no Come Together/DS, and no Blood On The Dance Floor. Gothenburg at least had BOTDF as a part of the set.

 

[Graf]

Re: Out of the fourteen pro-shot HIStory tour shows, which one do you like the most and the least?

My opinions may change after I rewatch some of them, but at the moment:

The one I like most, I would say Auckland November 9th, 1996 show...Check out his superspin during scream

For the The least...Well, I would agree with you on Helsinki just based on the fact that there aren't any of the "special songs" as you call them. It's still a good show overall though.

It would be great to have all these shows in Munich quality, that's for sure.

 

[CarleyMJ]

I want to have the DVD.

 

[AlwaysThere]

Re: Out of the fourteen pro-shot HIStory tour shows, which one do you like the most and the least?

If I truly had to pick an absolute best I would be inclined to go with the OP and say Bucharest. Dancing isn't half bad and the vocals are probably the strongest of any concert I've seen thus far.

Worst? Munich without a single doubt.

 

[analogue]

Bucharest also has the red Thriller jacket. A minor thing, but I enjoyed that.

My top 3 HIStory Tour shows would be (In no order)
Bucharest
Brunei (Not the Royal show)
Kula Lumpur

 

[HIStoric]

If they were going to release this (which I really don't want personally), it'd probably be best if they edited the best parts of various concerts together. If Michael gives bad vocals in a song where he dances great, they could do their best to dub him over with another concert's take or even from a demo or something. If there's a line or two in a song they're struggling to sync up with another performances vocal take and nothing they try works well, they can insert the new take anyway then cut away to the audience or a band member/back up dancer.

 

[innuendo141]

Well, I love the HIStory Tour. For nostaligic and entertainment reasons.

We have a Bad show, we have a Dangerous show. Chances of us getting another one of either are very slim.

I'd like a HIStory concert for my collection.

Dublin please.

 

[analogue]

Well, I love the HIStory Tour. For nostaligic and entertainment reasons.

We have a Bad show, we have a Dangerous show. Chances of us getting another one of either are very slim.

I'd like a HIStory concert for my collection.

Dublin please.

I'm sure you're reasons for choosing Dublin aren't selfish at all lol

 

[innuendo141]

I'm sure you're reasons for choosing Dublin aren't selfish at all lol

Of course not. I would never expect the camera to zoom in to find me in my seat way at the back either. I'm sure they know my seat number.

 

[8701girl]

Can't remember if I posted in this thread but there's only one answer to the title of this thread: ....

HELL YEH!!!!!!