Latest on MJJC

What you think about the 30th Anniversary concerts?

Kind of confusing, hardly any new content, the performances seemed “forced” and You Rock my world was left wanting
 
R1chard said:
I meant:
Usher
Mýa
Billy Gilman
Rayvon and Rikrok
Monica, Al Jarreau, Jill Scott and Deborah Cox
James Ingram
Marc Anthony
Monica, Tamia, Mýa, Deborah Cox and Rah Digga
Cassandra Wilson
Lil' Romeo and Master P
98 Degrees
Aaron Carter
Jason Paige

Literally don't know any of these. It's just a poor lineup used as filler. Dated. And very Amerocentric.
Click to expand...

You must be super young. These were all of the biggest stars at that time 🤣 believe me, I was 16 and I know everyone on that list
 
DuranDuran said:
Mike is from Gary Indiana, not Tokyo.
Click to expand...
No worries. I didn't say it had to be. The question was asked why I didn't like the show. That's the reason I didn't like it. It's fine.

Nite Line said:
Lol seriously. Everyone knows Usher. He was one of the biggest stars of his time and a highly successful artist.
Click to expand...
Again, Amerocentric. He might have been highly successful in America. Elsewhere, not so much. In the 2000s I was mostly going to rock clubs, not listening to radio, etc. I never had any exposure to him.

AdamBa17 said:
You must be super young. These were all of the biggest stars at that time 🤣 believe me, I was 16 and I know everyone on that list
Click to expand...
In 2001 I was 24. Maybe already too old to care about who was number one in the charts.
 
It's clear as day that Kenny Ortega was not involved in the 30th celebrations.

If you watch the unedited amateur footage it shows just how unorganised Michael, the band and the producers were. It's painful to watch the professionalism we are used to from Michael go out the window.

Was it a rush job? Did Michael not commit himself to the project enough?

It's certainly a stain on his near impeccable live performance history.
 
It doesn't even look like the You Rock My World performance was rehearsed. It looked like they just stuck the record on and let Michael dance around a little bit.
 
R1chard said:
Again, Amerocentric. He might have been highly successful in America. Elsewhere, not so much. In the 2000s I was mostly going to rock clubs, not listening to radio, etc. I never had any exposure to him.
Click to expand...
I just looked it up and Usher had 20 Top 10 hit singles in the UK, including 4 #1s. He also had hit singles in other places like Norway, Australia, Germany, & Netherlands.
 
DuranDuran said:
I just looked it up and Usher had 20 Top 10 hit singles in the UK, including 4 #1s. He also had hit singles in other places like Norway, Australia, Germany, & Netherlands.
Click to expand...

He’s talking nonsense. Usher was famous in Europe too.
 
Themidwestcowboy said:
HeÂ’s talking nonsense. Usher was famous in Europe too.
Click to expand...
I wasn't aware how popular Usher is/was in other countries outside of the USA. But it's pretty easy to Google it, lol. I know country music is really popular in the USA, but I've heard people say that it's not really a big thing elsewhere. I was mainly responding to the comment that the other acts are "Amerocentric", not how popular they were internationally per se. I would guess if these concerts took place in the UK instead of NYC, the acts would mostly be Eurocentric. The UK acts might not be known as well internationally or in the USA. Like Robbie Williams is not popular in the USA, but I understand he's a big act in the UK. Kylie Minogue only has 2 or 3 hits & A-ha is considered a "one hit wonder" in the USA.
 
The show isn't as great as his older concerts, but it holds a special place for me as this was the first time I saw ANY live performance of his. I was 15 and all I knew about Michael at that point was (aside from the negative press) Captain EO, the Bad album, and that he could do something called the "moonwalk". It was my first time seeing the Jackson brothers perform together, first time seeing the Billie Jean routine (and hearing that song in general)... there was something special about it, but I didn't fully realize at the time how magical it was.

Even though the show had its issues and we know that Michael's health wasn't the greatest at the time, I have to say I envy the people who were there; being able to see him live is a privilege that few can say they had.
 
DuranDuran said:
I just looked it up and Usher had 20 Top 10 hit singles in the UK, including 4 #1s.
Click to expand...
I don't know what to say. I think even when I was 10 I didn't care about who was number 1 in the pop charts. I definitely didn't by the time I got to 20. Plus by that time, I didn't watch TV, didn't listen to the radio, didn't read music magazines. I'm not gonna Google anything because that won't change what I said. Even if he had 50 consecutive number ones it still wouldn't change what I said.

Like, I said it because it's true. I hadn't heard of any of those people listed. That's a fact. It should also be the end of the conversation. It's really not the sort of thing we should be arguing about.

DuranDuran said:
I was mainly responding to the comment that the other acts are "Amerocentric", not how popular they were internationally per se. I would guess if these concerts took place in the UK instead of NYC, the acts would mostly be Eurocentric.
Click to expand...
Yes it probably would. AND THATS FINE. You can't please all the people all the time. MJ is the artist, he gets to put on any show he wants. If he puts on a rap show the jazz fans are not gonna be happy. If he puts on a rock show the disco fans are not gonna be happy. If he puts on a gospel show the techno fans are not gonna be happy. All of this is perfectly normal. If he's putting on a show for American TV then I would expect him to tailor it to an American audience. That's simply not me. I really don't understand why you got so triggered that I didn't love the show. I just didn't. Don't take it personally. It's no big deal.
 
R1chard said:
I really don't understand why you got so triggered that I didn't love the show. I just didn't. Don't take it personally. It's no big deal.
Click to expand...
I made no comment about whether or not you liked the show. I responded to you saying Usher is only popular in the USA and that the show was Amerocentric. If you don't follow what is popular with mainstream audiences, how can you comment on how popular a performer is? That is not the same thing as you not having heard of Usher or any of the other acts on the concert.

I simply said it was for the CBS network, which is in the USA. It wouldn't make any sense to have singers mainly known in India or Puerto Rico. That would not draw enough of an television audience and CBS is trying to get a high Nielson rating. CBS is not a cable channel, it's a regular free network. If you watch the Latin Grammys, the Country Music Awards, or BET Awards, then the acts shown will be geared towards those audiences.
 
DuranDuran said:
I made no comment about whether or not you liked the show. I responded to you saying Usher is only popular in the USA and that the show was Amerocentric
Click to expand...
I said that because it is. As you've hinted at, that was deliberate. By design. It's as though they just looked up whoever had had a #1 hit on Billboard and called them up.

DuranDuran said:
If you don't follow what is popular with mainstream audiences, how can you comment on how popular a performer is? That is not the same thing as you not having heard of Usher or any of the other acts on the concert.
Click to expand...
I'm sure other people from the UK have heard of Usher. But he's just not big. Especially with my age group. Or, dare I say it, with typical MJ fans.

Like, I'd not even heard of Akon until the Thriller stuff. It's as though they were trying to force MJ onto a new, younger audience or something.


DuranDuran said:
I simply said it was for the CBS network, which is in the USA. It wouldn't make any sense to have singers mainly known in India or Puerto Rico. That would not draw enough of an television audience and CBS is trying to get a high Nielson rating.
Click to expand...
Exactly. So we agree then?

If they had a singer from India, I'm sure the show would have been popular in India. Then it would have been indocentric and likely less popular in America. Same with Puerto Rico. I'm sure they knew what they were doing. In the end they chose USA at the expense of other countries.

DuranDuran said:
If you watch the Latin Grammys, the Country Music Awards, or BET Awards, then the acts shown will be geared towards those audiences.
Click to expand...
Yes. Indeed. Ultimately you have to make your decision and live with it. Glad we got to the bottom of this.
 
R1chard said:
I'm sure other people from the UK have heard of Usher. But he's just not big. Especially with my age group. Or, dare I say it, with typical MJ fans.
Click to expand...
If having 20 songs in the UK top 10 is not big, then I don't know what is. :laughingv6: You said you didn't watch TV or listen to the radio. So that means you are not qualified to determine who is popular or not. It does not matter if old people do not listen to Top 40 radio. Older people generally did not listen to The Beatles in the 1960s. That does not mean The Fab 4 was not popular with the mainstream audience. Top 40 radio has always mainly been marketed towards teens & young adults anyway. This is the UK Top 10 for this week. I guess you probably never heard of them either.

1 Ed Sheeran - Bad Habits
2 Olivia Rodrigo - good 4 u
3 The Weeknd - Save Your Tears
4 Galantis, David Guetta & Little Mix - Heartbreak Anthem
5 MÃ¥neskin - I Wanna Be Your Slave
6 KSI - Holiday
7 MÃ¥neskin - Beggin'
8 ArrDee - Oliver Twist
9 Doja Cat, The Weeknd - You Right
10 Calvin Harris ft. Tom Grennan - By Your Side
 
I love the Billie Jean suitcase build up in the 2001 concerts, because it was a smaller venue and the audience were pumped, it got the reaction it deserved.
I also love how Mike just throws the case and the stool haha so badass
 
R1chard said:
I'm sure other people from the UK have heard of Usher. But he's just not big. Especially with my age group. Or, dare I say it, with typical MJ fans.

Like, I'd not even heard of Akon until the Thriller stuff. It's as though they were trying to force MJ onto a new, younger audience or something.
Click to expand...

I don't know about now because I don't keep up with chart music nowadays, but Usher was really big in the UK back in the day. I mean 'Yeah!' was an absolute banger. Akon was pretty big too as far as I remember. 'Locked Up' was played a lot.
 
R1chard said:
Like, I said it because it's true. I hadn't heard of any of those people listed. That's a fact. It should also be the end of the conversation. It's really not the sort of thing we should be arguing about.
Click to expand...

But you said it as though just because you hadn't heard of any of the other artists, they were irrelevant and out-dated.
Whitney Houston? Britney Spears? Usher? C'mon!!

You not knowing who anyone is, is not a valid criticism of the entire show. It's not even objective. That's why others have an issue with it.

"Amerocentric" is also not a valid criticism - the concert was for the 30th Anniversary of an AMERICAN group and a top AMERICAN solo artist. AMERICAN pop royalty. I would say that the Jacksons, or Michael in particular, had a hand in choosing who was there. I wouldn't expect to see too many overseas talents there, at all. It's not even a thing.
 
Last edited:
R1chard said:
Yes. Indeed. Ultimately you have to make your decision and live with it. Glad we got to the bottom of this.
Click to expand...

I imagine that you only listen to MJ or something, but there's lots of good music made by other artists too. Usher, Luther Vandross, Gloria Gaynor, Shaggy, NSYNC/Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, THE JACKSONS... I mean all of em were and are big artists. 30th Anniversary was a great great show.
 
The concert was clearly thrust on him and he didn't feel much like doing it.

With the first night, he was under the influence of Demerol and got out of bed less than an hour before he entered the concert, appearing rather bored for a good portion of the performances.
With the second night, he clearly lacks his usual confidence, with him covering his mouth and closing his eyes constantly.
And in both he had an immobile top lip due to Lupus treatment, making him far less emotive.

The biggest problem I have is the editing, from the unnecessary and borderline creepy blur applied to Jackson's face (photos without it revealed he looked fine), the obnoxiously frequent crowd shots to the meshing of the two nights removing all the best parts of each performance.

Despite all that, I come back to this performance often and it's grown to become one of my favourites, I can't really put my finger on why, his vocals are some of his best he's ever delivered but I can't see that being the whole reason.
 
I really love the Jackson 5 part. - Live vocals and so great to see them together on stage.

Had MJ's solo part been sung live it had been great too.
 
I didn’t like it, Michael looked slow, didn’t sound good, he looked tired. What I did like was the energy and enthusiasm of the crowd.
But my biggest gripe is he didn’t do the original robot dance during dancing machine!
 
One of the worst performances at all. And all because of bad very bad shooting...What id*ot was recording these concert?? He literally almost EVERY second record somebody other but NOT MICHAEL!!! Thats a cringe lol! I don't watch these performance to look like some random guy from the audience behave like a clown... I watch it to feel and enjoy Michael's performance!!! But almost EVERY second camera show me some random cringe dude close up... Thats a really annoying. And also i founded strange that Michael always close his mouth with his arms and bends... Didn't get it why he is doing this. But all in all Michael looks awesome 😎 and very very strong
 
I like it and it's one of my favorites, the 7th september show was a disaster but the second show was nice. It must've been nostalgic for the older fans to watch the Jacksons perform again, my only complaints are the reliance on lip-syncing and that YRMW should've had a real choreography instead of just putting background dancers.
 
PurpleThriller said:
Britney was not a teenager during that performance. She turned 20 one or two months after the performance happened.
That's a full grown,young adult in my opinion
Click to expand...

Well, you are a teenage from age 10-20 I guess? When she was 19 she was still a teen 😛
 
kai said:
Well, you are a teenage from age 10-20 I guess? When she was 19 she was still a teen 😛
Click to expand...
I agree but I was under the impression she was sixteen during that performance given how people talk about it.
 
I enjoy listening to them because, in my opinion, it’s one of the only above average bands Michael has ever had. However, on a performance front, they’re embarrassing and should never be commercially released. The entire show is mimed (half of the J5 songs were re-recorded after the fact because Michael’s live vocals were below par), the “You Rock My World” choreography is terrible, and it includes footage from when Michael was very obviously under the influence. Also, the fact that one audience had to sit through Britney Spears singing “The Way You Make Me Feel” should qualify them for a partial refund.
 
AlwaysThere said:
I enjoy listening to them because, in my opinion, it’s one of the only above average bands Michael has ever had. However, on a performance front, they’re embarrassing and should never be commercially released. The entire show is mimed (half of the J5 songs were re-recorded after the fact because Michael’s live vocals were below par), the “You Rock My World” choreography is terrible, and it includes footage from when Michael was very obviously under the influence. Also, the fact that one audience had to sit through Britney Spears singing “The Way You Make Me Feel” should qualify them for a partial refund.
Click to expand...
I wish they used more footage from September 7th, to be honest. He constantly covers his mouth and does no dance moves on the 10th despite that being the night he's sober. The amateur versions of each night are both better than the edited version IMO. Also the Britney bashing seems unnecessary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top