Latest on MJJC

Invincible a flop, compared to who?

Gottobethere

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
999
Points
0
Location
Ireland
It has always annoyed me when Invicible is refered to as a flop, even in many pro Michael magazines or books they refer to it as a flop but in reality who is it a flop compared to? Sure it didn't reach the heights of thriller but no other album has or ever will reach thriller sales. I was reading an article recently in an Irish paper about the succes of U2 the biggest band in the world now for some time, they had a list of their albums sales and i noticed their last album "no line on the horizon" sold four million copies and their most succesful album "The Joshua Tree" sold 25 million copies. It got me thinking about Invincible and how many copies it sold so i had to check it out. 13 million. How can anybody call that a flop, i haven't once heard U2's NLOTH being called a flop yet Michael sold over 3 times as many copies without any promotion after being out of the industry for almost 6 years. Is it just a case of the media had decided he was finished so when his album came out they were never going to write anything different,

I checked wikipedia and they not have a new chapter on invincible which explains how the album done so well despite all the problems between Michael and sony at the time, it is worth a read for anybody interested in the album.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Jackson
 
Thanks for saying that! It isn't only critics though it's some fans who talk real bad about the album too! Not the sales really, but the songs and I think it's so wrong! I have no issues with the album, I think it's just fine!
 
Invincible's largely referred to as a flop due to US sales being the foucs - 2million is gonna be a flop if that's all they'll mention.

The music was a letdown for me after HIStory though.
 
It never bothers me that Invincible is called a flop because it's hardly like it's an overlooked gem of an album. There's only a handful of tracks on Invincible which are truly worthy of Michael's talent.

Now it DOES bother me when people say he hasn't done anything good since the 80s, when albums like HIStory and Dangerous and the new songs on BOTD are clearly amongst his most creative work.
 
The media has been calling every Michael Jackson album a flop that came after Thriller. They would always say ''Well this MJ album has sold well but compared to Thriller sales it's a flop''

Well if they are gonna think like that then that must mean that every album by every other artist is a flop
 
the real flop is "Blood on the dancefloor, History in the Mix"...

with 3 singles, the album only sold 5 M worldwide and 1 M in the USA

the singles were flop also excepted BOTD in the UK.

BOTD was only top47 in the USA for example.
 
I don't think you should call Blood on the Dance Floor flop. It's remix album - the best selling remix album ever released. Remix albums don't sell as much as "normal" albums.

I think you can really compare it with other artists as well. I'd say that BOTDF was success.

Invincible was a flop compared to Thriller. And why do they compare it to Thriller? Thriller was Michael's most success work ever. That's the reason. For me, Invincible was success and I love the album. But critics compare it to the best work there has been ever made.
 
Evilman said:
I don't think you should call Blood on the Dance Floor flop. It's remix album - the best selling remix album ever released. Remix albums don't sell as much as "normal" albums.

I think you can really compare it with other artists as well. I'd say that BOTDF was success.
Click to expand...

Check the charts for each single from botd...except botd in the uk, they were all flop...
 
BOTDF number 1 in UK and HIStory/Ghosts numer 5 in UK. Is It Scary lacked in promotion and radioplay.

I'd say that BOTDF did fine in UK. I think were many artists that released only one hit single from their full album. Michael did remix album with 5 new songs. Three of them released as single and two of them at top-5 in UK.
 
this is the chart for each single :

botd

Chart (1997)↓ Peak
position↓
Australian Singles Chart 5
Austrian Singles Chart 9
Belgium (Vl) 11
Belgium (Wa) 11
Dutch Singles Chart 7
Finnish Singles Chart 2
French Singles Chart 10
German Singles Chart 5
Italian Singles Chart 10
New Zealand Singles Chart 1
Norwegian Singles Chart 2
Romanian Singles Chart 4
Spanish Singles Chart 1
Swedish Singles Chart 2
Swiss Singles Chart 5
UK Singles Chart 1
Billboard Hot 100 42

ghost/history

Chart (1997) Peak Position
Australian Singles Chart 43
Austrian Singles Chart 36
Belgium (VI) 17
Belgium (Wa) 10
Netherlands Singles Chart 14
Finnish Singles Chart 16
French Singles Chart 26
New Zealand Singles Chart 29
Swedish Singles Chart 12
Swiss Singles Chart 16
UK Singles Chart 5
USA : not released
 
BOTDF has sold 7-8 million, it has a #1 UK single, and is the best selling remix album of all time. I wish I would have flop projects like BOTDF :(

Anyway, I think I might get a lot of flack about this but... I think the songs in BOTDF were more creative than the ones in Invincible.
 
ASIS said:
BOTDF has sold 7-8 million, it has a #1 UK single, and is the best selling remix album of all time. I wish I would have flop projects like BOTDF :(

Anyway, I think I might get a lot of flack about this but... I think the songs in BOTDF were more creative than the ones in Invincible.
Click to expand...

- it's no more than 5 or 6 M now
-this "best sellin remix" title is fake. It was promoted by normal titles like botd or ghosts...it was only promoted by one remix "history"...so we can't talk about best selling remix album
- I disagree...Unbreakable, threatened or 2000 watts are also creative tracks
 
loka said:
- it's no more than 5 or 6 M now
-this "best sellin remix" title is fake. It was promoted by normal titles like botd or ghosts...it was only promoted by one remix "history"...so we can't talk about best selling remix album
- I disagree...Unbreakable, threatened or 2000 watts are also creative tracks
Click to expand...

oh... so Madonna's celebration is NOT a collection album because it was promoted by a new track?

And i don't know where to get the real data, but this is the first time I've heard it selling only at 6 Million. Where did you get your sources?

I don't see what's so creative about those titles but hey to each his own I guess..
 
I read somewhere last year BOTDF sold more than 10 million ablums and became the best selling remix album. now we had 5/6million or 7/8million figure. I am so confused about those numbers. same to Invincible, some said it sold 13million, some said 10million. :unsure:
 
I love Invincible very very much. And it always upsets me when it get bashed, especially when it's done by fans. So thank you for this thread!
 
I have no idea why people are concerned with stuff like this. What difference does it makes what a record has sold? That should only be a concern to the record company who's making the money from it. That's the problem with music (and other entertainment such as movies) today, people with this McDonald's/Coca Cola attitude towards statistics and numbers. Music is supposed to bring enjoyment, so all of this emphasis on baseball card type statistics doesn't make any sense to me. Music isn't supposed to be a race. There's whole threads here with people arguing about who sold what, and whether the numbers are accurate or not. None of it is accurate, it's just numbers put out there by the record companies.
 
DuranDuran said:
I have no idea why people are concerned with stuff like this. What difference does it makes what a record has sold? That should only be a concern to the record company who's making the money from it. That's the problem with music (and other entertainment such as movies) today, people with this McDonald's/Coca Cola attitude towards statistics and numbers. Music is supposed to bring enjoyment, so all of this emphasis on baseball card type statistics doesn't make any sense to me. Music isn't supposed to be a race. There's whole threads here with people arguing about who sold what, and whether the numbers are accurate or not. None of it is accurate, it's just numbers put out there by the record companies.
Click to expand...

It's a bit more than that. As much as people love the art there are always some that love the artist as well. They love to see him/her achieve the impossible, to be a role model for them. So it sucks to hear stuff like "he fell from his throne" and whatnot. That's why people are so obsessed with record sales, they WANT to know the real story.

Personally, i'm not bothered by it. I love it when I see people screaming at a concert, I like reading and watching biographies, and I like talking about sales.

I know at the end of the day nothing significant will ever be produced... but then again nothing ever does in forums regardless of the topic.
 
ASIS said:
It's a bit more than that. As much as people love the art there are always some that love the artist as well. They love to see him/her achieve the impossible, to be a role model for them. So it sucks to hear stuff like "he fell from his throne" and whatnot. That's why people are so obsessed with record sales, they WANT to know the real story.

Personally, i'm not bothered by it. I love it when I see people screaming at a concert, I like reading and watching biographies, and I like talking about sales.

I know at the end of the day nothing significant will ever be produced... but then again nothing ever does in forums regardless of the topic.
Click to expand...
My mom's favorite singer is Sam Cooke, but she doesn't go around trying to find out how many records he sold or how many hits he had or whether he wrote his songs. She doesn't care about that, she just enjoys Sam's singing. I don't care about all of that "King of Pop", "King of Rock N Roll", Queen of Soul" titles. It doesn't mean anything. I just enjoy music. If you've seen my threads (or not :D), many of them are about obscure acts that sold little or don't get radio play and so no one looks at them because they're not a name brand. The general public doesn't really listen to music, they just listen to whatever is marketed to them by a radio conglomerate that gets payola from the record company. Sales doesn't equal quality, a record company with a lot of money can promote just about anything and make it sell, and they always have.
 
Roosje said:
Is it scary was a single??
You hear something new everyday...
Click to expand...

No. It was planned, but did chart at Number 10 in South Africa on radio airplay in October 97.

BOTDF sold 7million worldwide at the time and did brilliantly on the Euro Club and Dance charts as well. SIM remix was No1 for 9 weeks.
 
DuranDuran said:
My mom's favorite singer is Sam Cooke, but she doesn't go around trying to find out how many records he sold or how many hits he had or whether he wrote his songs. She doesn't care about that, she just enjoys Sam's singing. I don't care about all of that "King of Pop", "King of Rock N Roll", Queen of Soul" titles. It doesn't mean anything. I just enjoy music. If you've seen my threads (or not :D), many of them are about obscure acts that sold little or don't get radio play and so no one looks at them because they're not a name brand. The general public doesn't really listen to music, they just listen to whatever is marketed to them by a radio conglomerate that gets payola from the record company. Sales doesn't equal quality, a record company with a lot of money can promote just about anything and make it sell, and they always have.
Click to expand...

As i've already said. Not everyone is in love with the artist per se, but a small fraction is. I don't think discussing and sharing that certain love should be frowned upon. You don't get it, and to an extent I can relate to that. I really don't like, nor do I care for, the term King of Pop at all because it doesn't accurately depict MJ. I don't care whether BOTDF or Vince performed poorly or vise versa. However, I enjoy these kinds of threads for reasons unexplained, and evidently, so do many people. A lot of people like the concept of charts and want their favorite artist to dominate it. I don't get why sports fans can cheer for their favorite team and want them to always be on top without much critique, but god forbid if anyone shared the same passion for other mediums.

I do agree that charts and sales get too much attention sometimes, but it never really bothered me to be honest.
 
These albums are only considered flops because they don't sell according to the artists standard. So if MJ isn't moving 20 - 30 million units per album like usual, the album will be deemed a flop.
 
But, it's still unfair because the music industry more then 20yrs ago like when thriller came out was not the same like is is now or when invincible came out! So for critics to compare is ignorant and misleading!
 
ASIS said:
Not everyone is in love with the artist per se, but a small fraction is.
Click to expand...
What does liking a performer has to do with talking about their sales volume? That has nothing to do with the music they released. I'm not into statistics, so there is no such thing as a flop to me. I like many acts that never even went gold, that doesn't make me like their music any less. Going by the logic of flopping, then Bob Marley & Jimi Hendrix are "flops". They didn't really sell that much when they were alive. They mainly became really popular after they died. This idea of records being in a race is one of the reasons why all of this soundalike generic music is popular now. They're only concerned about debuting at number one and selling ringtones.
 
Sell and demand has a lot to do with things nowadays. Thriller made thismore real.
 
loka said:
the real flop is "Blood on the dancefloor, History in the Mix"...

with 3 singles, the album only sold 5 M worldwide and 1 M in the USA

the singles were flop also excepted BOTD in the UK.

BOTD was only top47 in the USA for example.
Click to expand...
There was only one single from BOTDF in the USA. After the BOTDF single was released, the next single in the USA was Stranger in Moscow(which was almost a year after it was released in the rest of the world).
 
DuranDuran said:
What does liking a performer has to do with talking about their sales volume? That has nothing to do with the music they released. I'm not into statistics, so there is no such thing as a flop to me. I like many acts that never even went gold, that doesn't make me like their music any less. Going by the logic of flopping, then Bob Marley & Jimi Hendrix are "flops". They didn't really sell that much when they were alive. They mainly became really popular after they died. This idea of records being in a race is one of the reasons why all of this soundalike generic music is popular now. They're only concerned about debuting at number one and selling ringtones.
Click to expand...

I didn't phrase it right, what I meant by loving the artist is loving the IDEA of the artist, they like seeing a successful figure. And they always want him/her to be the absolute best.
 
MattyJam said:
It never bothers me that Invincible is called a flop because it's hardly like it's an overlooked gem of an album. There's only a handful of tracks on Invincible which are truly worthy of Michael's talent.

Now it DOES bother me when people say he hasn't done anything good since the 80s, when albums like HIStory and Dangerous and the new songs on BOTD are clearly amongst his most creative work.
Click to expand...

It's not a flop. More disappointing than anything to find he'd gone futuristic, and us realising it just didn't work.

I was a bit disappointed but over time come to like some of the more traditional-sounding cuts (Butterflies, Heaven Can Wait and Whatever Happens) but it can't really compare as a flop to anything else he'd or anyone else had done at the time, but it can compare as a disappointment to his earlier records.

A lot of people seem to have lost faith in him after HIStory - some of the reviews at the time focused more on the man than the music and HIStory plays into that - but saying he had no decent releases after Bad? No way.
 
if Invincible was a flop, then it was the first flop to chart at number 1 in its first weeks, around the world, and garner an mtv interview, mentioning that, with Carson Daly interviewing Michael.

no flop here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top