Pink Floyd vs. Michael Jackson

[bhoyal]

I've seen some debate on other forums surrounding the length of time Dark Side of the Moon was on the Billboard charts (741 consecutive weeks) vs. the crazy amount of copies of Michael Hackson's ...excuse me...Jackson's "Thriller" album which all sold in a relatively short period of time.

I contend that fads are short lived and that's why they are fads. People blindly jump on the bandwagon and then you don't hear about it anymore. (AchyBreaky Heart, Macarena, Who Let the Dogs Out, etc.) Face it...other than his bizarre personal life - what talk was there about Michael Hackson in the last 10 years? Before he bought the farm, that is. Yes, "Thriller" sold a bazillion copies in about a year and that was like 1983 or '84 if I recall. But the last week of listening to people crying and gushing over this overrated long-ago washed up bubblegum pop sensation is nauseating. Especially the people claiming he was a "genius" and a "revolutionary." That is pure extract of B.S. He stole his trademark "Moonwalk" from the great James Brown and the Jax5 which was better than his solo crap was yet but a teenybopper sugar-coated Temptations ripoff.

Some facts to consider:

The Eagles "Greatest Hits" CD outsold Thriller in the U.S.

Pink Floyd "Dark Side of the Moon" was on the Billboard charts for twice as long as Thriller.

Most top ten albums? Rolling Stones with 36. Jackson didn't even sniff the top of the list.

Most #1 albums? The Beatles of course with 19.
(There is a Jackson on the list with 6. Janet Jackson, not Michael.)

Most total weeks at #1? Beatles 132. Michael Jackson down the list at 50.

The "Westside Story" soundtrack spent 17 more weeks at #1 than Thriller.

Comedy actor Jackie Gleason (yes, Ralph Cramdon the bus driver from the Honeymooners) had an album that was in the top ten twice as long as Thriller. As did big band's Glen Miller.

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Pink Floyd have done fuck all worth listening to since 1982 , Jackson since 1983.

My opinion = Tie

[khfreek]

Originally Posted by Urban Hatemonger

Pink Floyd have done fuck all worth listening to since 1982 , Jackson since 1983.

My opinion = Tie

Let's just ignore when both of them debuted :P

Also, the OP has the hilarious idea that we as music fans must all be distraught over the death of the "genius" Michael Jackson.

[bhoyal]

Originally Posted by khfreek

Let's just ignore when both of them debuted :P

Also, the OP has the hilarious idea that we as music fans must all be distraught over the death of the "genius" Michael Jackson.

No, not at all. I thought it was clear that all that gushing I saw was on other forums...general opinion forums, sports forums, etc. Not here at all.

[khfreek]

My bad. Of course there's gonna be a few people on here that dislike Pink Floyd's work, but most of us like PF more.

Can't really see this being a good discussion.

[bhoyal]

BTW...my office is near Cool Springs and I may even on my day off today be crossing through Brentwood to go to Costco over there today.

I think albums such as the White album, Sgt. Pepper's, Are You Experienced, Dark Side of the Moon, even I Robot by Alan Parson were groundbreaking. To me, Michael Hackson was just another fad that 1980's preppies in Idoz shirts and Members Only jackets wore out. He was like a singing/dancing version of other 1980's fads such as the little old lady who used to say "Where's the beef" and the early computer animated "Max Headroom."

[Urban Hat€monger ?]

Why are you asking the question if your mind is so obviously made up?

There's enough Jackson threads around at the moment, all i've seen you do so far is say Jackson is rubbish Dark Side Of The Moon is great.

If you're just going to repeat that over & over I see no reason to keep this open.

[Janszoon]

Originally Posted by bhoyal

He was like a singing/dancing version of other 1980's fads such as the little old lady who used to say "Where's the beef" and the early computer animated "Max Headroom."

Yeah, not so much. Whether you like him or not it's pretty hard to deny that his fame and influence were more long-term and more far-reaching than any of those things—by a lot. If it weren't do you really think his death would be getting so much attention more than a quarter century after Thriller came out?

[boo boo]

I've seen some debate on other forums surrounding the length of time Dark Side of the Moon was on the Billboard charts (741 consecutive weeks) vs. the crazy amount of copies of Michael Hackson's ...excuse me...Jackson's "Thriller" album which all sold in a relatively short period of time.

I contend that fads are short lived and that's why they are fads. People blindly jump on the bandwagon and then you don't hear about it anymore. (AchyBreaky Heart, Macarena, Who Let the Dogs Out, etc.) Face it...other than his bizarre personal life - what talk was there about Michael Hackson in the last 10 years? Before he bought the farm, that is. Yes, "Thriller" sold a bazillion copies in about a year and that was like 1983 or '84 if I recall. But the last week of listening to people crying and gushing over this overrated long-ago washed up bubblegum pop sensation is nauseating. Especially the people claiming he was a "genius" and a "revolutionary." That is pure extract of B.S. He stole his trademark "Moonwalk" from the great James Brown and the Jax5 which was better than his solo crap was yet but a teenybopper sugar-coated Temptations ripoff.

Some facts to consider:

The Eagles "Greatest Hits" CD outsold Thriller in the U.S.

Pink Floyd "Dark Side of the Moon" was on the Billboard charts for twice as long as Thriller.

Most top ten albums? Rolling Stones with 36. Jackson didn't even sniff the top of the list.

Most #1 albums? The Beatles of course with 19.
(There is a Jackson on the list with 6. Janet Jackson, not Michael.)

Most total weeks at #1? Beatles 132. Michael Jackson down the list at 50.

The "Westside Story" soundtrack spent 17 more weeks at #1 than Thriller.

Comedy actor Jackie Gleason (yes, Ralph Cramdon the bus driver from the Honeymooners) had an album that was in the top ten twice as long as Thriller. As did big band's Glen Miller.

Jesus f*cking Christ.

How f*cking desperate do you have to be?

I've never seen Brown do the moonwalk, but everyone knows he was an influence on Jackson but to say he stole all his dance moves from him is just retarded. Temptations ripoff? How f*cking ignorant, how is he a Temptations ripoff? Because it has soul influence? Give me a goddamn break. Seriously.

Do you really think anyone cares that Jackie Gleason sold more records? Do you really think The Eagles had the kinda impact Jackson did? Do you really think all you have to discredit the man for is his record sales?

I'm tired of people who like you who think having influences automatically translates to being a direct ripoff. It's like all the idiots who argue over which of the 1000 bands Red Hot Chili Peppers ripped off, if they had that many influences, they didn't f*cking ripoff anybody.

I can understand you're tired of the media coverage, but really, do you think a "fad" would get that kinda coverage if people stopped caring about him after Thriller? Forgotten about him in the past 10 years? Are you kidding? The last 10 years of the man's life has been a media circus, everyone talked sh*t about him. And I'm tired of people going to such ridiculous measures to discredit everything he did even in death.

Anyway, I say Jackson wins this. Because Floyd didn't give us that talentless hack Syd Barrett.

[boo boo]

Maybe I'm a little bitter.