Latest on MJJC

Unpopular opinions

respect77 said:
I was one of those who said I find the Beatles boring. But I disagree with this statement. I find them boring and I feel their music is dated and not as timeless as Michael's for example. BUT! We have to acknowledge their place in pop/rock history! I think we have to view everything in its own context. At the time they were really pioneering things and were very influential. Michael too cited them as one of his influences. I don't really listen to the Beatles, but I wouldn't call them overrated. I understand the influence they had on music.

Now, Elvis and Madonna are a different subject. They ARE overrated IMO. Actually I have always felt the media have been better to Madonna than to Michael. No matter what she put out they hyped her, while with Michael it was the other way around. I wonder if that had anything to do with the fact she is white and he was black (sorry to bring this up, but I cannot see any other reason why they would put somebody like Madonna above Michael).....
Click to expand...

Yep, I don't like their music but I agree with you on that they do have a bit of a place in music because unlike Elvis they at least wrote some of thier stuff. I always like to think of things as they were then and not in 21st century eyes .

And Wow, I'm the most annoying person on this topic. :eek: But this interests me though.
 
Oasis is one of the most overrated bands of all time
 
Last edited:
U2 haven't brought out a good album in 15 years and Bono is the most annoying front man.


But the beatles are brilliant, there is just no denying it, if you don't agree buy all their albums and listen too them in the order they came out and you will hear how they progressed music. I wasn't a fan growing up but then i bought sergent peppers and realised how good they were and went back to the start and bought all their albums.
 
DuranDuran said:
If you say so. The Ben album is better than Invincible. :p
Click to expand...

I agree. Dont get me wrong... Invincible was underrated but it was no where near spetacular to the point I would say it was the best album of the 00's. There have been plenty of better albums in the 00's.



I just wish people would listen the music they like instead of conforming to whats popular. All popular artists are all overrated to a certain degree even Michael Jackson even though he was talented.
 
respect77 said:
Some have already been said before by others, but I agree:

Elvis was not an artist, let alone the "king" of anything. Artists create, he didn't (ie. he didn't write his songs).
Madonna is VERY overrated and she can't sing.
Janet too is overrated. She can't sing either.
Usher, Justin Timberlake and Justin Bieber are lame MJ wannabes.
I HATE the HiStory album cover (what was Michael thinking?)! But the album itself was a lot better than given credit for.
The video for YANA is disgusting and YANA is a lame song. There are many, many LOT better songs on History than that!
I HATE the gold pants!
Michael was the sexiest when he was not trying hard to look sexy!
"Who is it" the best song of "Dangerous" and one of Michael's best songs ever.
Lady Gaga and Beyoncé are overrated, overhyped.
Rolling Stone became a tabloid long ago, also its editors are a bunch of snobs.
MJ's best video is Smooth Criminal, not Thriller.
Click to expand...

hey!!! :eek: you watch it, now...:throwingstones


:cheeky:
 
DuranDuran said:
Acts like Pink Floyd, the Rolling Stones, Grateful Dead, or Willie Nelson weren't particularly attractive, but are popular. Neither was Janis Joplin. Danielle de Niese is attractive, but isn't popular to the mainstream because she sings opera. So looks in itself doesn't sell reocrds.
Click to expand...

Never EVER meant to imply good looks are all that matters or even sells records, but rather it helps an artist's appeal both to the public and to a record company.

The difference today is that people download stuff for free, when before the internet, people had to buy a product. That's why the labels are in trouble, most people aren't going to pay for something if they can get it for free. Where I used to work, there was a guy would burn CDs & DVDs and sell them for $4 or $5. There's many people in my neighborhood that does this too. This cuts into legit sales too. Chain stores like Best Buy & Wal Mart that buys CDs in bulk and sell them for cheap, rather than the $20 a CD that other stores sell them for.
Labels only promote certain types of acts. When was the last time you heard a polka act on the radio or on MTV? :p[/color]
Click to expand...

Record companies have had other fiscally troubled periods. In fact, Michael in the 80's arguably helped resurrect the industry during that period. But if in any period all it took was label backing and payola to MAKE an artist successful, they would not have had the economic doldrums they've had.

And very true, the internet has affected the industry economically like nothing else, but even with the smaller revenue numbers coming in, it is still ultimately the artist who makes an act successful.

ETA: I will give you Milli Vinilli (sp?) as an act that was ALL label manufactured to the extent that their grammy was actually rescinded, but when it comes to longevity and ongoing record buying impact, again I believe it's artist versus just label machinations.
 
Last edited:
mjscarousal said:
The 00's has been the worst generation of music ever.
Click to expand...

Every generation says that about their generation's music. The 60's had crap music, so did the 70's, 80's, 90's and so on. People only choose to remember the 'good' or popular music from those decades. All else is forgotten in time since if it doesn't have mass appeal, it doesn't really have any staying power in the long run. There are plenty of artists/bands that have created great albums that never get written about in those 'best of the 80's' lists. They were just never popular enough to make a big enough impact for their music to last beyond their active recording years.

mjscarousal said:
Radio is Dead.
Hip Hop is Dead
R&B is Dead.
POP is DEAD
Click to expand...

Mainstream, maybe. ;) Underground is the way to go.

analogue said:
Butterflies is one of Michael's worst songs

*Runs like he's never run before*
Click to expand...

:bugeyed
 
mjscarousal said:
I just wish people would listen the music they like instead of conforming to whats popular. All popular artists are all overrated to a certain degree even Michael Jackson even though he was talented.
Click to expand...

Usually when people refer to MJ as being overrated, they're only taking into account one aspect of his talent. Namely, his singing. True, there are singers who are just as effective and vocally even superior. But when you put the whole package of Michael together, that his dancing was equal to his singing ability, that even classically trained dancers and choregraphers are in awe of his innate gift that he was "able to just hear a rhythm and be able to master a step"...I don't think he is overrated at all.

MJ just didn't sing great, he danced great, he innovated, and was always trying to take the entertainment experience to another level for an audience. So to me, the entirety of his abilities and impact are often underrated to a degree.
 
gerryevans said:
Record companies have had other fiscally troubled periods. In fact, Michael in the 80's arguably helped resurrect the industry during that period. But if in any period all it took was label backing and payola to MAKE an artist successful, they would not have had the economic doldrums they've had.
Click to expand...
Payola is what gets acts on the radio and always has. That is why Taylor Swift is on the radio and Ani DiFranco isn't. Ani releases her own records, and doesn't have the funds to pay radio stations. Look at Prince. When he was on Warner Brothers, they had money to get him on the radio and MTV. But his albums after going independent get no airplay at all. He doesn't have the big money that Warners had. Most acts on indy labels don't get airplay. Sony or Universal can get you there, but Aligator or Malaco can't. They can't afford to make music videos or do a lot of promotion. If all it takes is talent, why does anybody bother to get a record deal? A performer can just print up their own records and CDs and sell it themselves and get popular. At Motown in the 60s, a lot more money was spent promoting The Supremes (or rather Diana Ross) than on promoting Shorty Long, The Spinners, or Brenda Holloway.
 
DuranDuran said:
Payola is what gets acts on the radio and always has. That is why Taylor Swift is on the radio and Ani DiFranco isn't. Ani releases her own records, and doesn't have the funds to pay radio stations. Look at Prince. When he was on Warner Brothers, they had money to get him on the radio and MTV. But his albums after going independent get no airplay at all. He doesn't have the big money that Warners had. Most acts on indy labels don't get airplay. Sony or Universal can get you there, but Aligator or Malaco can't. They can't afford to make music videos or do a lot of promotion. If all it takes is talent, why does anybody bother to get a record deal? A performer can just print up their own records and CDs and sell it themselves and get popular. At Motown in the 60s, a lot more money was spent promoting The Supremes (or rather Diana Ross) than on promoting Shorty Long, The Spinners, or Brenda Holloway.
Click to expand...

I TOTALLY agree a label backing is essential. I just don't believe it is ALL about any ONE factor that makes an artist successful.
 
Elvis was untalented and I'm not afraid to say it everytime someone mentions his name.
 
The Lost Children is one of the best songs on Invincible
Michael Jackson is an underrated singer. Alot of people only seem to focus on his dancing
 
Adore said:
Every generation says that about their generation's music. The 60's had crap music, so did the 70's, 80's, 90's and so on. People only choose to remember the 'good' or popular music from those decades. All else is forgotten in time since if it doesn't have mass appeal, it doesn't really have any staying power in the long run. There are plenty of artists/bands that have created great albums that never get written about in those 'best of the 80's' lists. They were just never popular enough to make a big enough impact for their music to last beyond their active recording years.



Mainstream, maybe. ;) Underground is the way to go.



:bugeyed
Click to expand...


POP was what I was referring to because thats what the thread is about so I already know underground is where its at..

Everyone ALWAYS says that each generation feels that way but I kinda disagree with that. Each generation has its share of good and bad thats just human nature but out of all the eras of bad music the 00's has been the worse as far as MAINSTREAM goes so I think its pretty fair and objective to say that because true. Pop music is terrible today but there are also plenty of good music of this era that people can find that is not mainstream and that I do agree with.
 
gerryevans said:
Usually when people refer to MJ as being overrated, they're only taking into account one aspect of his talent. Namely, his singing. True, there are singers who are just as effective and vocally even superior. But when you put the whole package of Michael together, that his dancing was equal to his singing ability, that even classically trained dancers and choregraphers are in awe of his innate gift that he was "able to just hear a rhythm and be able to master a step"...I don't think he is overrated at all.

MJ just didn't sing great, he danced great, he innovated, and was always trying to take the entertainment experience to another level for an audience. So to me, the entirety of his abilities and impact are often underrated to a degree.
Click to expand...

When I made that comment I was not specifically ONLY speaking about Michael. Popular artists are always going to get extra because there popular regardless of how good they are or bad, there a little exaggerrated to an extent. For example, when people talk about good rappers, they mainly talk about popular ones not knowing most of the underground rappers are WAY better than most mainstream rappers.

Michael was a great artist, original, innovative etc etc but like I said had his degress of exaggeration and at the same time was underrated to a certain extent. Like people hype up Thriller when Off the wall was way better
 
DuranDuran said:
I'd say it was Marvin Gaye, or maybe El DeBarge. I don't like R. Kelly's stuff except for that 1st song he came out with "She's Got That Vibe". He can't sing to me, I'd rather listen to Bob Dylan. :p His stuff for other people like Aaliyah is alright because his voice isn't on it, lol.

That was the whole point of Motown, at least in the 60s. That's why there were other labels like Stax & Chess that appealed to the black audience more and rarely sold to the mainstream.
Click to expand...

if Bob Dylan did I believe i can fly then he might pull every nerve in his body and faint on the spot give me a break.

you got serious R.Kelly hate going on. i mean the cat has dominated R&B even folks who are hit and miss with him respect his longevity. but to each and there own.

cross over 80's style wasn't seeing Motown. MJ,Prince,Lionel Richie,babyface,Luther,Rick,Anita,New Jack Swing,Bobby and a few others the rest was generic and corny IMO
 
DuranDuran said:
He still needed big money and competent people behind him. If Mike had of been on a label like Malaco or Verve, or remained on Motown instead of switching to Epic, or kept Joseph as a manager, he wouldn't be where he is. He'd just be an oldies act. A label with money (payola) can make anyone popular and does it all the time, or they can kill your career just as easily.
Click to expand...
destiny gave him leverage when it sold. sony then cbs didn't see what he saw and tey certainly weren't feeling and quincy jones together.

joseph was with mj through thriller and without his daddy he would have had a donny osmond career. i like donny, however donny got left in the dust by mj when mj did triumph with his brothers and i ain't even gonna mention the solo adult records by mj. yeah it takes money but don't act like papa joe didn't get mj right.
 
DuranDuran said:
Did you know that Sheena Easton is the only singer to have hits on the pop, R&B, dance, country, adult contemporary, & jazz charts? :p
Click to expand...
and nobody remembers her aside from we got tonight, for your eyes only and sugar walls.

she was a cute pop act she ain't seeing no linda ronstadt on being versatile or natalie cole.
 
analogue said:
Quincy Jones gets way to much credit for Thriller. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve credit but in my opinion people like Bruce Swedien and Rod Temperton deserve more praise and attention than Quincy

*Runs*
Click to expand...
without Q they would be successful in side kick to the side kick kind of way.

Q caught both these cats when nobody saw that in them and for that they stayed loyal to Q.

Swedian is solid at his craft but remember Q put him on the big map and the same goes for Temperton.

Heatwave had moments and some big songs but when he got in Q's camp off the wall,thriller,Q's projects,Anita Baker and others.

Q kept temperton and Swedian working.

Q knew hit material those cats didn't have that thing that Q had.
 
folks are scared of success and the comedians in here dissing "thriller" is off the hook. thriller is the gold standard for the versatile album.MJ did it all stop the Hate.

U2 are corny and so is coldplay. that Aha soft sounding music does nothing for me.

Beyonce got 14 to many grammys.

Alicia Keys got 7 to many grammys as well.

New Jack Swing was way more fun and better than sleepy time Neo Soul.

folks forgot how to make a soundtrack long ago. mixing older tracks and calling it a soundtrack ain't a soundtrack it is a mixtape.

i love Bob Marley but why is he the only person most people associate with Reggae?

Prince is a Great Artist,however he has been better Live than in the studio for over 20 Years IMO
 
mistermaxxx said:
U2 are corny and so is coldplay. that Aha soft sounding music does nothing for me.
Click to expand...


To me U2 are BOOOOOOOORING! I used to try to get what's all the hype is about and tried to get into their stuff but I can never listen to a U2 album from start to finish at once. They are so overrated IMO.
 
gerryevans said:
Usually when people refer to MJ as being overrated, they're only taking into account one aspect of his talent. Namely, his singing. True, there are singers who are just as effective and vocally even superior. But when you put the whole package of Michael together, that his dancing was equal to his singing ability, that even classically trained dancers and choregraphers are in awe of his innate gift that he was "able to just hear a rhythm and be able to master a step"...I don't think he is overrated at all.

MJ just didn't sing great, he danced great, he innovated, and was always trying to take the entertainment experience to another level for an audience. So to me, the entirety of his abilities and impact are often underrated to a degree.
Click to expand...

I agree totally. There might be better singers than MJ, there might be better dancers than MJ, there might be as good songwriters as him, there might be people with as creative ideas in video and else - but all in one? Only MJ had it ALL at this high level IMO!
 
analogue said:
Quincy Jones gets way to much credit for Thriller. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve credit but in my opinion people like Bruce Swedien and Rod Temperton deserve more praise and attention than Quincy

*Runs*
Click to expand...

I think Quincy deserves credit for encouraging Michael to write songs and he is also a good craftsman in terms of arrangement etc. BUT! I can see where you are coming from when you say he is given waaay too much credit for Michael's success. It annoys me when people think Michael's songs were written by him! Yes, some people really think Quincy wrote Michael's albums! Some even think WATW was written by Lionel AND Quincy! So if people get this idea then you can tell Quincy IS overrated in his role in MJ's success. Give credit where due but not more! Also can you believe Quincy wanted to drop Billie Jean from Thriller because he thought it was a weak song? Then when MJ got his way to put it on the album Quincy wanted to cut off the bass intro because he didn't like it! So we only have Billie Jean - and in its form - because Michael insisted on it, not because of Quincy!
 
Bruce Springsteen is just as boring as his big idol Elvis
Eminem is a bad rapper
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top