Long live the King of Pop

billyworld99

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
2,021
Points
0
Article by: JON BREAM , Star Tribune
Updated: March 25, 2012 - 9:05 AM

In death, Michael Jackson's shattered career was reborn - including the country's No. 1 tour, coming to town this week

10jackson0325+copy.jpg



We saw the funeral. We saw the posthumous movie "This Is It." We saw the manslaughter trial of his doctor.

The King of Pop may be dead, but he is coming to an arena near you. "Michael Jackson: The Immortal World Tour" is the No. 1 tour in the music business right now, grossing more than $1 million a night -- doing bigger business per city than current outings by Kanye West/Jay-Z, Bob Seger and Brad Paisley.

Even though it's sort of a Michael Jackson concert without Michael, what Cirque du Soleil's "Immortal" -- which lands at Target Center Tuesday and Wednesday -- underscores is that Jackson remains immensely popular nearly three years after he overdosed.

"He was strangely reborn as a pop star with his death," said filmmaker and culture critic Nelson George, who has written two books on Jackson.

The pop icon certainly has been boffo box office of late. In October, when Forbes last calculated the income of dead musicians, Jackson was the runaway winner, having grossed $170 million in the previous year. Elvis Presley ranked second with a mere $55 million.

Since Jackson's death on June 25, 2009, at age 50, his estate has pulled in more than half a billion dollars, including $60 million upfront for the movie "This Is It" and $250 million for a 10-project record deal with Sony, according to Forbes.

"Michael is Elvis," said George. "In terms of iconography of cult Americana, Michael is replacing Elvis in so many different ways."

For one, Jackson is taking over for Presley in Las Vegas, where the rock 'n' roll king reigned for decades. Cirque du Soleil has announced the December closing of its "Viva Elvis" show after less than two years in Vegas and the opening of a resident production of "Immortal" there in 2013 to complement its Beatles' show, "Love," which opened in 2006, and the touring "Immortal."

Because he didn't tour in the United States between 1988 and his death, "Immortal" has become something of a surrogate Jackson tour.

"You cannot ever replace Michael," said Jackie Jackson, second oldest member of the Jackson 5.

But Jackie said that his brother always wanted to work with Cirque du Soleil so, of course, the Jacksons cooperated on "Immortal," which features Michael's voice on more than three dozen songs.

Directed and written by Jamie King -- Madonna's longtime collaborator -- the show doesn't follow a story arc, per se, but rather jumps around chronologically and features images of Jackson's career from his bejeweled glove to Bubbles the chimpanzee.

Big abroad

The 1990s were not kind to Jackson, especially in the States. To be sure, he scored hits, including the chart-topping "You Are Not Alone" and "Scream," a duet with his sister, Janet. But he was rocked by negative headlines, including allegations of child molestation, that made him a concert attraction non grata.

Except abroad. On two separate tours -- to support the "Dangerous" and "HIStory" albums -- he performed in Europe, Africa, Asia, the Middle East, Oceania, South America and Mexico. The only U.S. venue was Hawaii. All the concerts were sold out.

"He's truly a global icon," said choreographer/dancer Travis Payne, who worked with Jackson from 1992 to 2009 and collaborated on "Immortal." "You could just feel a definite tonal shift in the way that he was perceived and received in all parts of the world."

After experiencing teen stardom with the Jackson 5 in the 1970s, Jackson became a solo sensation in the 1980s, peaking with "Thriller," which became the best-selling album of all time (29 million sold in the States alone) and led to a then-record seven Grammys.

"He came of age artistically at a time when his art could be presented in a multimedia way," said Joe Vogel, a Huffington Post critic who wrote the 2011 book "Man in the Music: The Creative Life and Work of Michael Jackson."

"We don't just hear the songs. There's the visual representation. There's the music videos. There's the dances. There's the iconography. There's the costumes. There's this whole web of things that we associate with Michael Jackson. People can relate to it in all those different ways. It's very multi-sensory."

It wasn't just those big-budget music videos with wow-inducing visual effects that hooked fans. While Elvis rocked and the Beatles made us sing along, Michael made us dance. He may have recorded more enduring dance tunes -- from the Jackson 5's "I Want You Back" to his own "Billie Jean" -- than any other pop figure.

Emil Campbell, who used to be a Jackson impersonator in a Las Vegas revue, still turns to Jackson songs with his popular Twin Cities show band the R Factor whenever he wants to be starting something on the dance floor.

"His music just makes you want to move," said Campbell, who has been performing Michael's music professionally for four decades.

But Michael didn't just do ance tunes.


"There's a depth and a range to his catalog," Vogel said. "He has ballads, he has protest songs, he has anthems, he has dance music. He did gospel, he did R&B, he did pop, he did hip-hop. It's not a traditional pop catalog where all the songs are love and relationships."

As inventive as his music may have been rhythmically and sonically, it was clearly mainstream and had mass appeal.

"It was clean and wholesome. It wasn't nasty music," explained singer Campbell. "You didn't have to worry about who is in the room. Your grandma could listen to it."

But what may have been the strongest magnet for Michael was the way he made you feel when he was onstage.

"He was the ultimate performer," said superfan Emily Clifford, 24, of Minneapolis, who regularly wears leather jackets like those her idol wore in the "Thriller" video and on the cover of his album "Bad."

Yes, he tried to be bad, but, as Clifford puts it, "he had the ability to have androgynous sex appeal that was both innocent and addicting." With that image, that dancing and 16 No. 1 songs, he became a demographic dream -- the first pop star to truly transcend race, genres, generations and geography in his appeal.

Dark side disappeared

Death obliterated the dark side of Jackson -- the child-abuse allegations, the plastic-surgery misadventures, the curious marriages -- and the masses focused on why we appreciated him in first place.

Released four months after his death, "This Is It" -- the highest-grossing concert movie ever, with $261 million -- was a crucial component in restoring his reputation. After years of his reclusiveness, the documentary showed the world what few had seen before: Michael as a person, his humanity and creativity in full view of the cameras. He taught moves to dancers, shared ideas with the show's director and created sounds with his mouth and fingers to instruct his musicians.

"He'd take as much time as was needed to get it right," choreographer Payne said of Jackson's creative process. "It was always about trying to top the last idea. That didn't necessarily mean bigger. It definitely meant different. It needed to have some surprise element. He wanted [the dancing] to be entertaining enough that it catches people's eye but simple enough that they want to get up and do it."

The movie chronicles the preparation for Jackson's ballyhooed comeback This Is It show -- 50 nights at London's O2 Arena in 2009-10 -- that never happened. Thus, for younger fans who never experienced Jackson in concert, this "Immortal" tour is it.

Matt Webster, 28, of Minneapolis, has a $175 ticket for Target Center. Actually, he had plans to see Jackson live for the first time in London three years ago.

"He was the coolest guy in the whole world," said Webster, who, at age 5 or 6, started break-dancing to his parents' cassette of the "Bad" album. "I was looking at paying $800 to scalpers for a This Is It ticket in London. Now, if you can't have Michael, you might as well have the most grandiose tribute to him. Cirque du Soleil is the one thing that can do him justice. I'm super-pumped."



King vs. King
Jackson's estate out-earned Elvis' by more than 3 to 1 last year, according to Forbes magazine, which ranked the top earners among dead pop stars:
1. Michael Jackson: $170 million

2. Elvis Presley: $55 million

3. John Lennon:$12 million

4. Jimi Hendrix: $7 million

5. George Harrison: $6 million

Source: Forbes, Oct. 2010-Oct. 2011


http://www.startribune.com/entertainment/music/143974986.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue
 
Shattered career? yeah cause selling out fifty shows is so shattered. gotta keep the brainwashing going havnt they. bankers. someone email that fool
 
And HE DID NOT OVERDOSE!!!!! OVERDOSE makes him sound to be an addict, which HE WAS NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Murray overdosed him. ie homicide. Pointless b.s article
 
Michael's comeback started before he died. He sold out 50 concerts just like that. His career wasn't shattered. The comments from Vogel and Payne are fine but the person writing the article I don't appreciate some of the little comments and words used.
 
No one in the media can ever write about, or talk about Michael without being sarcastic or slipping in some kind of shade at him.
 
that man knows MJ was killed and was a victim of a homicide yet he says 'he overdosed' MJ didn't overdose, Murray killed him and the writer of that article knows that.
 
And HE DID NOT OVERDOSE!!!!! OVERDOSE makes him sound to be an addict, which HE WAS NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Murray overdosed him. ie homicide. Pointless b.s article
The author did address early on that it was manslaughter that was cause of Michaels death as you can see below.
We saw the funeral. We saw the posthumous movie "This Is It." We saw the manslaughter trial of his doctor.
Over all the article was Very Positive toward Michael. Minus the comment his career was shattered before his death. I think that was probably a misconception on the authors parts and not meant in a vindictive way. It is very evident the authors intent was to write a positive article as you can see in the main content/ body of the article. If his intent was to be negative, he would have used negative comments from Michael detractors, but he didn't. I was not happy about the darkside mentioned . But in reality those things did overshadow MJ career in the media. Not through his own fault.

The writers commentary doesn't over shadow all the great and positive aspects of Michael's career mentioned here. It's over all positive of just how GREAT MJ was on a global scale. I liked the article for the most part and don't want to totally dismiss over a misconception on the authors part. I was very proud of what was said here about Michael from his fans and piers.
 
It's actually a very good and fair article. And Joe Vogel did a tremendous thing with his book. He's changing the narrative.
 
The author did address early on that it was manslaughter that was cause of Michaels death as you can see below.

Saying that we all saw the manslaughter trial isn't trhe same as saying that Michael was killed! It's like saying that there was a trial, but I'm not sure I believe it was the doctor's fault. And if later on he even goes as far to say that he overdosed, it's indeed very negative of him and it does make him a liar!
 
Saying that we all saw the manslaughter trial isn't trhe same as saying that Michael was killed! It's like saying that there was a trial, but I'm not sure I believe it was the doctor's fault. And if later on he even goes as far to say that he overdosed, it's indeed very negative of him and it does make him a liar!
I dont think he is trying to say that at all. This is what you yourself read into it.. that he was trying to say that.
The title and the overall content of this article shows he was NOT trying to be negative. Now he may not be informed or knowledgeable as fans but I think you are being too judgmental of his intentions, by calling him a liar.

Stating Michael overdosed is not lying. Michael did overdose on drugs. Now it may have been short sighteed for him not to go into all the details here and I understand your concern. But he did mention the manslaughter trial in which most every on is aware of the finding of that trial (That doctor Murray was found guilty of overdosing Michael ) I feel in this instance to call him a liar is way to judgemental and unfair. If you put things in context you can see his motive wasn't to make a negative article on MJ. It is very evident the man wasn't trying to lie about Michael to make him look bad. We can see His whole article was about how great Michael was regardless of the problems he faced. He just didn't address the overdose in detail. WHY ?? That wasn't the focus of the article. The focus on how great and brilliant Michaels talent and career was.

Maybe he should have been more detailed but I don't think he stated it that way as a deliberate dig at Michael. He seems to admire him. Other wise his article would be negative if it was his intention to harm. Please Billie Jean 78 try looking at the whole story in context to see the mans intention. I also wish they wouldnt state it in that manner. But I dont see this as a deliberate attempt to lie or cause harm. It's an oversight not to go into detail. Maybe we should give him the benefit of doubt of his motive being he wrote so may nice things about Michael. If you cant see it that way, that fine too its your opinion. Mine just differs
 
A shattered career. yeah defo not trying to be negative there. agendas written all over it. like those reporters who continualky push agendas about mjs skin when the truth is out there but tbey refuse to acknowledge it because it goes against their agenda. its called re writting history like they did with the trial or articles about whitney that put mjs name in there to try and say mj was like her.
 
I dont think he is trying to say that at all. This is what you yourself read into it.. that he was trying to say that.
The title and the overall content of this article shows he was NOT trying to be negative. Now he may not be informed or knowledgeable as fans but I think you are being too judgmental of his intentions, by calling him a liar.

I kind of developped a zero tolerance principle since Michael died and I become nervous when someone spreads untruth about Michael. Maybe it was not done deliberately, maybe he was just being ignorant, but ignorance can hurt as well!

I react the same way when someone says he fondled kids. Maybe that person didn't mean any harm, maybe he was just quoting someone else. However that doesn't make it any less of a lie, 'cause it still misrepresents who Michael was!
 
Guys, Michael did overdose...Conrad Murray killed him by pumping him with propofol

Medical Dictionary Definition

Drug Overdose Definition

A drug overdose is the accidental or intentional use of a drug or medicine in an amount that is higher than is normally used.

People can overdose on over the counter meds.... Overdose isn't just about illegal drugs. Over - Dosage happens with common meds. MJ's happened with propofol
 
Guys, Michael did overdose...Conrad Murray killed him by pumping him with propofol

Medical Dictionary Definition
No offense, but he did NOT overdose! Intentional use of a drug in a higher amount, I get it. But Michael did not take propofol on his own, Murray gave it to him. You could say that Murray overdosed Michael, but I'm not sure if that is the correct use of the word.
 
I agree with elusive and billy jean, the language the author used to describe how mj died was just wrong and language is important as it just perpetuates yet another false myth about mj. 'He overdosed' definitely suggests he did it himself like elvis, maralyn, amy etc. It's not even neutral like 'he died of an overdose'. He wasn't reckless, on a road to self-destruction - he had a $5,000 a night doctor meant to be monitoring him to prevent the very situation that arose. Why did we bother with that trial if we're just going to have articles saying he overdosed?- it's not fair on him or his children to have this view accepted. He died of an overdose administered by his doctor - that's all that's needed, no detailed medical knowledge required.

Yes, he tried to be bad, but, as Clifford puts it, "he had the ability to have androgynous sex appeal that was both innocent and addicting." With that image, that dancing and 16 No. 1 songs, he became a demographic dream -- the first pop star to truly transcend race, genres, generations and geography in his appeal.

Well i suppose acceptance that mj had sex appeal is a step forward, but they can lose the andogynous - the refusal of msm to acknowledge that women of all races found mj sexy is v telling. I did like the quote -' the first pop star to truly transcend race, genres, generations and geog in his appeal' - but if you think about it he is the only popstar to do this, i can't think of anyone else .
 
Last edited:
I understand but it doesn't take much just to say that Michael died because his doctor failed him. His doctor gave him a drug to sleep and then walked away. To me the way people say how he died feels like they are blaming him. That's how I feel sometimes.
 
Even after MJ's passing, it still hurts to see the obvious agenda pushing.
 
Even after MJ's passing, it still hurts to see the obvious agenda pushing.


of course it does... that is why we have to remain strong. Murray is in jail and he has a conviction on his record and he has lost his license to practice medicine. He was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in the death of MJ. Nothing the media can do can change that. Mike didn't kill himself, Murray killed him.
 
Back
Top