Tommy Mottola talks about Michael Jackson in his book Hitmaker - Comprehensive summary

[bluetopez]

A Q and A with Mottola? Why? He will say the same things he said in his book. Pointing the finger at Michael and that he was the guy who said NO to him. -_- About 911 and the effect it had on Invincible, that's hard to believe when Jay-Z quickly took the number one spot with his new record, selling more copies in it's first week then Invincible did from what I recall. I'm sorry but seems like to me from the beginning Sony and Mottola just didn't care for Invincible not letting MJ pick his first Single and on. It's important for the artist to have a say too, especially someone like MJ who had been around since childhood and knows what works for him.

 

[Kingofpop4ever3000]

If some people were talking in Michael's ears against Sony, that's not his fault, in my opinion. I'm sure that he believed he could trust the word of the people around him at the time. There might have been things that Michael didn't know that would probably have made him feel differently about Mattola had he been able to find out before that Sony protest mess started. But I can't blame Michael for being angry about some situations if people he thought he could trust were putting ideas in his head about certain other people working against him.

 

[ivy]

There never was any question in my mind, then or now, that all of Michael’s intentions were loving and good, and that he was a kind soul.”

That's an interesting thing to say coming from him... If you had never done Michael wrong and he went and called you a racist devil in front of the whole world, would you call him loving and kind? I would think he's a very mean person to attack me like that for no reason. So this quote right there tells me Michael didn't lie. If Tommy Mottola really had never done him wrong, he wouldn't call Michael a nice person. Mottola knows what he did and he knows he deserved Michael's backlash.

Perhaps it's me but I thought that was a reference to the molestation accusations and how Mottola didn't believe them at all.

You can have an argument with a person but that doesn't mean you will believe all the negative accusations about them. Or you can have a difference of opinion with a person but that doesn't mean that you are required to hate them.

also Mottola continues to say as he believed Michael to be a kind person , they never expected protests or accusations coming from him and they were shocked when it happened.

 

[Hess]

1991


Tommy Mottola: “Anybody who punctured the balloons that Michael blew up around him was not around Michael Jackson very long. In other words, if you said no to Michael one time because it was the right thing to do, you’d be gone.”

I actually think this might be correct!

Tommy Mottola: “But there was virtually nobody around Michael who could speak truth to him because he was Michael Jackson, King of Pop, and he was writing the checks. He surrounded himself with people who said yes simply to be around him or because they were cashing his checks. Michael, what would you like? Michael, how would you like that? Michael, we can do this. Michael, of course we can do that. Yes, Michael. Yes, Michael. Yes, Michael, yes. That put me in somewhat of a unique position. I was in charge of Sony Music— and Sony was writing his checks. I didn’t confront him very often. But I might have been the only person in the world who was able to say “I don’t think that’s right” to Michael Jackson. From the beginning, part of him resented that, but mostly he respected that.”

And this could very easilly be true too!

Tommy Mottola : “When you are used to hearing “Yes, Michael, yes, Michael, yes, Michael, yes,” from everybody who is around you, it must be unbearable to hear, “No, Michael, we cannot and will not put millions more into the promotion of this album.” Sales had completely stalled, and that was after we had already spent a global marketing budget of more than $ 25 million.”

I think MJ did not like to hear "NO!" - With MJ it was his way or the high-way. So many pepole wanted to be around him, so he choose those who said yes and agreed with him.

I do not like TM, and I think he could have done more to help promote Invincible, but still - it is a buisness and if it would cost more to promote than the income the promotion would generate it is very logic not to do so.

I think there most have been going something on behind the scenes we do not know about. - Maybe we will never get to know the truth.

 

[ivy]

A Q and A with Mottola? Why? He will say the same things he said in his book.

we do a lot of Q&A's with the authors of the recent books. It's not a matter of "they will say the same thing", it's a matter of "do we have more questions we want to ask? do we want to learn more specifics? and even do we want to challenge some stuff they wrote?

For example in this thread there is an ongoing discussion about the single selection, if you believe that's a topic that we want to learn more about a Q&A will be a good idea.

Of course if there's no interest in the answers or if there are nothing left to ask, it'll be a waste of time to pursue a Q&A.

 

[144000]

I don't understand why some fans think Unbreakable would have been a bitter first single.
The song may have strong lyrics and power... but its not a good song musically, its an album filler.
Heartbreaker, Cry, Whatever Happens for example... are much better songs.
Anyway, just my 2 cents on this... sorry for the off topic.

maybe i'm wrong but i don't think you're off topic, here. I think a song can hit people in the heart and make them want to buy it for many different reasons. Sometimes..a song can get to someone just by the lyric alone..even if the music isn't up to their standard, because the lyric hits home too hard for the music to matter. Other times, the music is so slammin that the lyric doesn't matter. other times it's everything. sometimes it's the producer. I think it's a case by case basis. For example, you didn't slam every aspect of Unbreakable. You disapprove of some aspects but approve of others. For me, It only takes one of those aspects to hit me hard enough in some songs i bought. If you think Unbreakable has strong lyrics and power, then, maybe it will reach someone on those aspects alone.

I can go back to the Bad album. when I first heard it, i thought TWYMMF was the album's weakest song, because I thought I had heard that beat many times before in my life. I never imagined Michael would copy an overused beat. I actually found myself..i don't want to use the word, because I'm unaccustomed to using it with Michael..but..uhm....disappointed.
But then, MJ's voice....the way he sang the song...after a few weeks, I was unable to resist the song. Then he added the video. So..I now consider the song right up there with everything else he ever did. Yet, still, today, I think the beat is overused. But, somehow, with Michael doing it..it's...different. But that's the power of Michael. I don't know that anybody else could have that musical effect on me. That's the effect that makes it possible IMO for Michael to make a less effective musical track (IMO) such as The Lost Children, work for me. I play it the least of the songs..but...if i were to hear it on the radio..i'd listen to it to the end, because..it's Michael. And it's not like I NEVER listen to the song if I happen by it. I don't have it in my iTunes player..but if i heard the song, I would not skip it, because...it's Michael. To me..that alone should have been what Mottola should have been thinking about. How many people do you know started coming up with a cliche, because they were so sure of Michael. 'if he sung the phone book, people would buy it."? Frankly, to this day, that cliche seems appropriate, from what I see on MJ fansites.

Everybody thinks the Beatles Catalogue is automatic gold..including Michael. It's the holy grail apparently, to everybody. But, in my view there are some stinkers in the Beatles repertoire..and i'm not the only one to think that...although there are some gems.
So...sometimes, a big name is enough. And can I say..Michael's name was as big as the Beatles? Yes..I can say that. Perhaps bigger, considering the real estate involved.

 

[Gaz]

A Q and A with Mottola? Why? He will say the same things he said in his book. Pointing the finger at Michael and that he was the guy who said NO to him. -_- About 911 and the effect it had on Invincible, that's hard to believe when Jay-Z quickly took the number one spot with his new record, selling more copies in it's first week then Invincible did from what I recall. I'm sorry but seems like to me from the beginning Sony and Mottola just didn't care for Invincible not letting MJ pick his first Single and on. It's important for the artist to have a say too, especially someone like MJ who had been around since childhood and knows what works for him.

So what's the alternative, let him have his stage without us even trying to challenge what he depicts as what happens, seems a bit one sided if you ask me.

 

[Gaz]

we do a lot of Q&A's with the authors of the recent books. It's not a matter of "they will say the same thing", it's a matter of "do we have more questions we want to ask? do we want to learn more specifics? and even do we want to challenge some stuff they wrote?

For example in this thread there is an ongoing discussion about the single selection, if you believe that's a topic that we want to learn more about a Q&A will be a good idea.

Of course if there's no interest in the answers or if there are nothing left to ask, it'll be a waste of time to pursue a Q&A.

Very well said Ivy, seems others need to realise we need to have that ability to question what they are saying rather than stay quiet which in all will only make what they say seem more factual, if we don't get the answers we try to get at least we tried, we are fans of Michael we must in all our efforts try to get that little extra we need to be sure those who were a part of Michael's life are in fact telling the truth.

 

[144000]

I have my evidence that Mottolla is a liar, though. The moment that he called Michael delusional that was it. That was when I realized that Mottolla never supported, doesn't support, nor ever will support Michael. He is a hypocrite, because he was attracted to the rich superstar, just like all the others he accuses of being attracted to the rich superstar, to see what was in it for Motolla, alone.
I don't care who you are, whether or not you believe what you are saying is the truth, once you call me delusional you don't support any aspect of my being. You don't respect my way of thinking, you don't respect how i brush my teeth, talk, look or anything else. Let's face it, there are others who looked at Michael and automatically thought he couldn't have the intellectual chops of a great executive. They would go as far as simply saying he didn't LOOK like an intellectual person. And that would be enough for them. Delusional is not a word you apply to someone you respect. If anyone in here called anyone else in here 'delusional' enough times, I'd bet there'd be trouble for the perpetrator.
I agree with questioning Mottolla, but I have my conclusions already, and I don't feel ashamed to say that.

Michael was not really a confrontational person. How much you wanna bet I'm wrong on that?

There's an aspect of him I could relate to. I'm non confrontational IRL. And once, a person said something to me, that, in retrospect, was probably right. They told me that I let people walk all over me. At the time, I denied it. The people that walked all over me smell just like Mottola. Exactly like him. All his antics remind me of those people. I can't be alone in this thinking.

 

[marebear]

Michael wasn't a confrontational person. He never put people down publically. For him to do what he did something made him very angry. It was the complete opposite of what he would do. To me it was very serious to Michael. I think we can ask Tommy questions. It won't hurt if he was willing to answer them. I might not believe him but I can see what his answers are.

 

[8701girl]

I have my evidence that Mottolla is a liar, though. The moment that he called Michael delusional that was it. That was when I realized that Mottolla never supported, doesn't support, nor ever will support Michael. He is a hypocrite, because he was attracted to the rich superstar, just like all the others he accuses of being attracted to the rich superstar, to see what was in it for Motolla, alone.
I don't care who you are, whether or not you believe what you are saying is the truth, once you call me delusional you don't support any aspect of my being. You don't respect my way of thinking, you don't respect how i brush my teeth, talk, look or anything else. Let's face it, there are others who looked at Michael and automatically thought he couldn't have the intellectual chops of a great executive. They would go as far as simply saying he didn't LOOK like an intellectual person. And that would be enough for them. Delusional is not a word you apply to someone you respect. If anyone in here called anyone else in here 'delusional' enough times, I'd bet there'd be trouble for the perpetrator.
I agree with questioning Mottolla, but I have my conclusions already, and I don't feel ashamed to say that.

Michael was not really a confrontational person. How much you wanna bet I'm wrong on that?

There's an aspect of him I could relate to. I'm non confrontational IRL. And once, a person said something to me, that, in retrospect, was probably right. They told me that I let people walk all over me. At the time, I denied it. The people that walked all over me smell just like Mottola. Exactly like him. All his antics remind me of those people. I can't be alone in this thinking.

Excatly u cant call someone delusional and say u respect them at the same time, it just doesn't make sense.

 

[bluetopez]

So what's the alternative, let him have his stage without us even trying to challenge what he depicts as what happens, seems a bit one sided if you ask me.

Very well said Ivy, seems others need to realise we need to have that ability to question what they are saying rather than stay quiet which in all will only make what they say seem more factual, if we don't get the answers we try to get at least we tried, we are fans of Michael we must in all our efforts try to get that little extra we need to be sure those who were a part of Michael's life are in fact telling the truth.

Okay I get what u and IVY are saying and it's fine to dig deeper with other questions, so it isn't a bad idea. But, all I was tryin to say is it seems like Mottola mind is set in how he viewed MJ and the issues they had. For example like what 144,000 said about him callin MJ delusional. So for that I can't really expect anything better from him. So I'm not against any Q and A's in general, I love them and always try and participant in them actually. But, just wasn't happy with Mottola gettin one because I feel as though he will still say similar things? And by the way we were ask for our thoughts on the matter weren't we?!

 

[144000]

Okay I get what u and IVY are saying and it's fine to dig deeper with other questions, so it isn't a bad idea. But, all I was tryin to say is it seems like Mottola mind is set in how he viewed MJ and the issues they had. For example like what 144,000 said about him callin MJ delusional. So for that I can't really expect anything better from him. So I'm not against any Q and A's in general, I love them and always try and participant in them actually. But, just wasn't happy with Mottola gettin one because I feel as though he will still say similar things? And by the way we were ask for our thoughts on the matter weren't we?!

totally agree. And, the one thing I have said that i can repeat more than I hear Psy, but I never get tired of what I say here. As long as Mottolla is framing this in a book for money, I can shoot a million holes in it, on that alone. I'm just glad there are fans here who are getting info from the book for us to read for free. I'm glad we're deep in the info age, where we can basically read the book without paying for it. I just hope, Gaz, that Mottolla doesn't charge you, or any of us for the Q and A, although I believe it's too late, because of the book for money. The guy's already got a parachute. He needs to find a way to make money outside of this 'project'. But for me, it's already too late to respect him. But, by all means, I'm all for questioning him.

 

[Gaz]

Michael wasn't a confrontational person. He never put people down publically. For him to do what he did something made him very angry. It was the complete opposite of what he would do. To me it was very serious to Michael. I think we can ask Tommy questions. It won't hurt if he was willing to answer them. I might not believe him but I can see what his answers are.

With all due respect I really don't know how you can categorically say and speak on behalf of what Michael was and wasn't we all knew he was a stern business man, we all knew he was very clued up when it came to the essentials of his life surely that in itself comes with an element of being confrontational. for me and I have been in this MJ world for many years spoken to him met him on many occasions yet I could never ever say what he was and wasn't like when it got down to the real nitty gritty of his personal and professional business world/life.

 

[AliCat]

Rolling Stone magazine gave "Invincible" 3 out of 5 star's, on December 6, 2001. Which is why Tommy Mottola is saying that "Invincible" wasn't selling all that well, as Michael expected it too. It was the reality of the situation back then and Michael felt he needed to create a controversy for the publicity of it all. I think that's why Michael did create a fire storm, only thing is most people weren't paying much attention, at least Michael tried, even if Tommy doesn't agree with Michael's decision-making possibilities!

By James Hunter
December 6, 2001
Near the end of michael Jackson's first album of new material since 1995 is an exceptional song titled "Whatever Happens." Jackson, singing in the third person with a jagged intensity, narrates the story of a couple trapped in an unnamed threatening situation: "Whatever happens," they tell each other, "don't let go of my hand." The music is Latin-based, a deep brew of Jeremy Lubbock's strings and Carlos Santana's guitar. Jackson and producer Teddy Riley make something really handsome and smart: They allow you to concentrate on the track's momentous rhythms, Santana's passionate interjections and Lubbock's wonderfully arranged symphonic sweeps.

Unfortunately, "Whatever Happens" is not the rule on Invincible. There's little story-telling or transforming music on frantic songs such as "Threatened," in which Jackson assigns supernatural powers to himself, and "Privacy," where he's a besieged celebrity battling media invasions and inaccuracies, and "The Lost Children," a theater piece in which Jackson insists on singing about imperiled kids. Instead, we're placed squarely in Michael Jacksonland, a bizarre place where every sparkling street is computer-generated, every edifice is larger than life and every song is full of grandiose desperation. It's an excruciatingly self-referential place, worsened further by its namesake's unmatched controversies and weirdnesses, plus the inevitable march of pop time.

"With all that I've been through," he swears at the beginning of "Unbreakable," "I'm still around." The track's title may be unconvincing, but producer Rodney Jerkins does give six of the album's sixteen tracks a fleet, durable R&B minimalism. On "You Rock My World," Jackson and Jerkins recall the singer's work with Quincy Jones by way of finely sculpted and exquisitely voiced rhythm tracks and vibrating vocal harmonies. But Jackson is merely treading water on generic tracks such as "Heartbreaker" and "2000 Watts" (co-produced by Riley).

Invincible lavishes time on ballads. They range from Los Angeles smooth ("You Are My Life," done with a terribly off Babyface) to the odd ("Butterflies"). Best of the bunch are "Don't Walk Away," uncut Riley-produced heartbreak soul, and "Cry," where co-producer R. Kelly more or less succeeds with the kind of life-affirming number Jackson will never (and should never) quite desert. But he does need to leave Michael Jacksonland, that place where every sign points back to the spectacle of himself. Whether he will remains unclear.
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/invincible-20011206#ixzz2JVymBBBk

 

[Gaz]

totally agree. And, the one thing I have said that i can repeat more than I hear Psy, but I never get tired of what I say here. As long as Mottolla is framing this in a book for money, I can shoot a million holes in it, on that alone. I'm just glad there are fans here who are getting info from the book for us to read for free. I'm glad we're deep in the info age, where we can basically read the book without paying for it. I just hope, Gaz, that Mottolla doesn't charge you, or any of us for the Q and A, although I believe it's too late, because of the book for money. The guy's already got a parachute. He needs to find a way to make money outside of this 'project'. But for me, it's already too late to respect him. But, by all means, I'm all for questioning him.

Mottlolla charge, over my dead body lol

However there is a fact here, he is speaking of his time with Michael, yet Michael is not here to say hang on Mottolla that did not happen, mate your full of Bull.

My final words are, do you want Mottolla to have the final word, or do we at least try to refute what he is saying for the record in public.

I am willing to pursue this, but support is need or I will leave it be.

 

[bluetopez]

^Yes, I support it now. All though his thoughts on MJ being delusional won't change, it be interesting to see if he dares to answer all other questions the same.

 

[jrsfan]

Me thinks a Q&A is in order here, Michael is not here to refute argue what TM is saying but we have been around long enough to see everything that happened so its on us to ask those all important question's.

Let me know your thoughts on this guys.

I think a Q&A would be great!

I am sure Mottola will be doing alot of pr for his book so will be asked about Michael wherever he goes.

 

[Aquarius]

"Tommy Mottola: “I remained quiet at the time and took the high road, which as chairman was the road to take, because it made no sense to respond to such outrageous and ridiculous accusations. But here’s the bottom line on this: we were in the business of selling music. Sony had spent more than $ 30 million in recording costs and another $ 25 million in marketing costs, and put the full force of the company in motion to promote that album. But despite all of that, people just didn’t want to buy it.”

The bolded doesn't make sense to me. Usually when someone, especially someone with Michael stature, speaks publicly bad about a company a spokesperson of the company comes forward with an statement. I think his road as a chairman was to have someone to speak in favor of the company he was working for.

 

[Petrarose]

Further he did not take the high road ^^. If I remember correctly, at that time, the major papers in New York had responses from TM saying that the record was not selling, and giving the allegations as one of the reasons. Of course we know that papers can misquote, but TM did not say he was misquoted in the press. Now he is acting as though he remained quiet. He may not have lashed out at Michael publicly, but his comments came out in the papers, and I am sure the reporters called him and asked him to comment. Basically Invincible was sabotaged by TM's policies, the reporters who sided with TM, & the reporters/critics who trashed it in the media.

 

[bluetopez]

Pff..As if he didn't make any phones calls! -_- Having his supporters like certain whipped artists and his buddy Sharpton talking on his behalf is hardly taken the high road, is it?! It was just a different tragedy TM used!

 

[144000]

With all due respect I really don't know how you can categorically say and speak on behalf of what Michael was and wasn't we all knew he was a stern business man, we all knew he was very clued up when it came to the essentials of his life surely that in itself comes with an element of being confrontational. for me and I have been in this MJ world for many years spoken to him met him on many occasions yet I could never ever say what he was and wasn't like when it got down to the real nitty gritty of his personal and professional business world/life.

yes. i can stand corrected on that. i agree with that. I suppose the fact that most people in entertainment if they hear barbs put at them they respond back in a way that causes so much drama. Michael said things when he had to, but he gave off the impression that there was no drama. i guess all i see is a guy in the most positive terms compared to other entertainers. i agree that doesn't mean he wasn't stern. in fact Motolla being gone because he couldn't tow the line suggests a very strong Michael. but..it's true. I didn't know him. As a public radio announcer said, after MJ passed..'Michael, we never knew ye.' Bottom line is, I'm impressed by Michael and not impressed by Mottolla. Certainly I will always respect Michael's wunderkind business sense. As far as questioning Mottolla, I am all for it.

 

[loveforever]

I didnt read every posts here, but a Q&A with Tommy Mottola? ? ? I am sure all his "answers" are self serving, especially a business shark like him, You know these kind of people in hollywood. when he sold you for gold, he can talk to convince people he sacrificed himself for you. Didn't Conrad Murray teach us a convincing interview (even by authorities) turn out to be a big load of hideous shameless lies when the words can be challenged.
I know there are two things you can't mess up with Michael Jackson, his music and his children.

 

[mthalen]

de·lu·sion·al
1. having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions.

Seems about right if you ask me? Michael still thought he could sell 100.000.000 records, when his album sales head been steadily declining after Thriller.
Calling Mottola a racist seems kinda odd, with him having been Married to Mariah (or is she white now?).

I think MJ has had way to many people in his ear. And as Mottola said: way too many yes-men.
But it's hard to blame him, as the guy never had a normal childhood, always had success and got screaming fans around him wherever he went.

Invincible was't the success it should've been, and the rise of the downloading era didn't help either (I admit: I downloaded the album and bought it months later on sale).
Although 10.000.000 albums sold would've been a success to any other artist, but when you're aiming for 100 million, wel....

Not surprised at all that Sony pulled the plug: just look at the TV-season nowadays. You can't start watching a new show anymore, because half of them get
cancelled within the 1st year. It's just business.

 

[loveforever]

Michael's goal for his every albums is to sell 100 million records. His persistence and ambition is his path to success and made him the biggest artist. He was not afraid of the pressure and challenge when most people would rather choose a easy life.

 

[mthalen]

Yeah, but you need to be realistic about your goals, or at least accept that they're probably set too high to ever make a profit.

 

[HIStory]

I agree with Mthalen - I think Michael put unnecessary pressure on himself with chasing this 100 million number. I sometimes wish he hadn't focused so much on sales or at least had been realistic in his expectations. I guess, it's probably something that he saw at Motown: you have done a good job if your record sells. He needed that kind of feedback. But sometimes a good job isn't rewarded with extra high sales. I think his best album was Dangerous, but it wasn't his bestseller. So what? There are a lot of other factors those play into the sales of an album than just the music itself. Timing, image etc. It still was a very successful album, as were all of Michael's solo albums basically, just not Thriller - let alone selling 100 million.

 

[jamba]

About Michael's goals to sell 100 million albums. The Jackson 5 were always in these talent shows when they were starting. It was competitive--beat this group, get to the top, win the talent show. And Michael being the youngest probably it made a big impression, and I am sure Joe was really promoting that "win, win, win" attitude. So I see that desire re the 100 million sales in the context of those early years climbing their way to the top via those many talent show competitions.

 

[144000]

Yeah, but you need to be realistic about your goals, or at least accept that they're probably set too high to ever make a profit.

it's insulting to imply one's idea of 'realistic' to another person. That's up to the individual. If everybody was required to have the same definition of reality, a lot of vital things that we have today would not have been invented. Reality is what the individual makes it. To me, worrying about what somebody else thinks is reality is bowing to peer pressure. I can let the word 'delusional' roll off my back. I'd feel a lot better about myself, than if i let somebody else determine my definition of 'reality', when i know that person wouldn't be with me in a foxhole. I am happy for MJ's far reaching goals. The result is a lot of happy healed people, children taken care of who had cancer, on his ranch, etc.. etc...not to mention, his children are set for more than one life. If a person isn't happy with another person's lofty goals, that doesn't give them the right to call that goal minded person 'delusional'. Mottola can make all the noise he wants, but Michael fed Mottola's family for him. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you...

Come to think about it, the so called 'delusional' Michael Jackson fed a LOT of Sony's peoples' families, for a long time. Michael's the real reason why CBS became Sony. I was there when people even in the media called Michael ' a shot in the arm' of the music industry, in the 80's. I'm not going to forget that. And I'm certainly not going to blame Michael, because some thieves who love to pirate, are haters of the music industry IMO. Even further, IMO Mottola blamed Michael for the pirates by cutting back on him.

 

[mthalen]

Of course it's not. That's the whole idea behind the word 'realistic'
Man, it seems some people feel the need to try and defend any and everything MJ ever did.
There's no need for that, this is a fan forum, everyone loved the man. But that doesnt mean everything he did was right or you may never judge any of his actions...