Soulflower

Well Michael Jackson never said he wanted to make a "comeback". The MEDIA is proclaiming that. An artist like Michael Jackson does not have to come back to anything but just return to making music but anybody can read whatever they want to read in that.

Last I checked Michael has never "blabbed" about his health and if you have heard anything once again its coming from the media which does not speak for Michael Jackson.



Whats wrong with liking Michael Jackson? His a great artist. This IS a Michael Jackson thread so you might find some fans here like you might find some fans in whatever section on the forum. Why is that a problem?

Whatsitoosit

being a fan is one thing... denying the obvious and pretending all is fine and dandy in never never land is another. He does need to make a come back because his last album was a flop and his reputation is tarnished... for the King of Pop, this is unacceptable. His ability to be the artist he once was is questionable, so no... he doesn't just need to show up and perform, he needs to make "a comeback". I like his music... I just find the rose tinted blinders some people have on amusing, that's all.

__________________
"It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile,
but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face."

Soulflower

Of course but that goes for ANY artist who has hardcore fans. They probably would not be like that if people would stop wearing blinders when it comes to "Michael Jackson as the artist". So it really can go both ways. Most of what is already obvious you mention in your post. People know his reputation is tarnish and people know even though his concerts sales are a success it will never equal to his peak. Thats true and people KNOW that already. Its a fact, the same with older artists such as Stevie Wonder, Paul McCartney and Prince. So to keep mentioning it as an excuse to downplay his success with the concerts is ignorant.

His last album was not a flop but since the media loves to put Michael Jackson on a pedestal with his older material they said that.
Invincible sold about 2 million in the United States(1 million sold in a America equals platinum) and well over 8 million worldwide. Now in a industry that is poor on record sales thats good. Also he was competing with current artists. Not to mention Invincible only had one music video and 2 singles. It sold pretty damn well if you ask me for the circumstances it was in. Its not as nearly a success as his older works but it still sold pretty good.

Also, the recent Thriller25 C.D. sold well over 2 million in the United States and worldwide. An artist like Michael Jackson is guarentee at least 2-4 million because of his fanbase and that guarentees platinum everytime. Michael has done that with every album so he really does not have to make a "comeback" Just return to making music.

Whatsitoosit

You just answered your own question... he made platinum from his last album due to his fan base... not the actual music itself. You're probably right though... he can just jump on a stage and everybody will go nuts because of who he is. A true comeback in my mind would be him releasing an album of a "Dangerous" caliber where he isn't repeating past glories and he isn't trying to be something he isn't. Invincible was a flop by Michael Jackson standards... forget the numbers. Had some unknown artist made that album, perhaps it would have worked better (perhaps it would have been easier forgotten)... the style and sounds just didn't work for him.

__________________
"It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile,
but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face."

SydMM

Whenever he needs money, he'll do a tour.

__________________

boo boo

Try not to type when you're obviously inebriated.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Soulflower

Basically repeating what you said earlier.

My only arguement was his a great artist and just because his last album did not do so well according to MJ standards and his tarnish image, does not mean his a bad artist or takes away from his success period. People bring this up ALL the time and it is never going to take away from MJ's success as an artist.
His past glories and classics will always be more successful which me and you both agreed with and is true. Michael is just trying to make music and people are trying to compete Michael with Michael. Just enjoy Michael Jackson as an artist. So what if his next album does not do so well and if it is a success good for him. Its just nice to see a great artist/ performer returning to what he does best and not the scandels.

Whatsitoosit

well if that's the case, he needs to return to the plastic surgery clinic because that seems to be what he does best these days Honestly, he should just tour and stop making new music for when he is gone history will be kinder on him.

__________________
"It takes 43 muscles to frown and 17 to smile,
but it doesn't take any to just sit there with a dumb look on your face."

Soulflower

Well going by that distorted logic, I guess Prince should stop making music because it will never be as good as his old material. I guess Stevie Wonder should stop making records because it will never be as good as his old classics. I guess James Brown should have stopped performing because he was well over 50. Thats a ignorant logic because these legends do what they do because they ENJOY it. Its YOUR choice how you rate them and the pedestal you sit them on but their going to continue to do their thing.

scottsy

hehehehehehehe...who knows whhat goes on in that magical room in the neverland ranch with all the murals of Michael adorning the walls... Halloween, every single day...

__________________
"If you're like me, then it's possible you're a clone generated from my stolen DNA. I suggest you turn yourself in for destruction immediately" - Shaun Micallef.