dagblog - Comments for "Michael Jackson: Overrated"

U2 is easily more

Dave Baum — Fri, 27 Jun 2014 21:40:12 +0000

U2 is easily more influential, musically, than MJ.

"his innovative music video

Anonymous — Sat, 19 Apr 2014 17:35:33 +0000

In reply to Before I reassume my role as

"his innovative music video experiments" .. . Well firstly, I believe a certain Mister John Landis ( the director ) should take some credit for those videos of Jackson's. Secondly, they really weren't all THAT pioneering anyway ( more false hype right there I believe ). There were numerous other musical artists who'd already been making conceptual music videos long before Jackson got around to it, like namely The Buggles ( Video Killed the Radio Star ), Talking Heads ( Once in a Lifetime ), David Bowie ( Ashes to Ashes ), Devo ( numerous ones, including a short film titled 'The Truth About De-evolution ), and even Frank Zappa ( Uncle Meat and numerous other musical short films ). Jackson just made HIS with much bigger budgetts and more publicity than anyone before ( he could aford to cause he was already a pretty big name star ). And anyway, even that famous 'Thriller video is miserably dated and corny as hell TODAY!

How can you say Michael

cynmans7137 — Wed, 01 Jun 2011 22:01:56 +0000

In reply to Michael Jackson: Overrated

How can you say Michael Jackson lack excellence or importance. Dude where have you been for the past 30 years, sleeping under a rock? Michael jackson is one of the most important musical icons of the 20 century if not of all time. The man turned American Pop culture global while breaking down many racial barriers for black artists. Last time i checked Michael was the first artist to sell 100 million records outside of the United States. He not only has the best selling album of all time but 5 of the best selling albums of all time worldwide, 13 guiness book of world records, more awards than any other living or dead artist. He has sold more than 350 million records as solo perfomer and another 275 million as a member of legendary singing group the jackson 5. If that's not excellence what is? Michael may not have been white but he is the greatest and that's something no one can ever take away from him. He deserves our respect. the man worked too hard and sacrificed so much of his personal life to bring joy and great music to the masses. Why can't you admit that even if you don't like him personally. You said something about the media over glorifying him but the last time i have seen positive coverage regarding michael i was around 6 years old and I am now 26. The dishonest and disgraceful media have done nothing but kick dirt and disstort the true genius and legacy of michael jackson. you know what you're right Michael Jackson is not in the same league as Elvis or the beatles Lennon. He is in a league of his own no one can touch him. Rip Michael true king of music and entertainment.

That's right, blame Canada

acanuck — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 18:57:46 +0000

In reply to Well, thank YOU for your

That's right, blame Canada once again.

Cosign. Bowie rocks. Or

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:30:00 +0000

In reply to DAVID BOWIE in regards to

Cosign. Bowie rocks. Or rocked anyway.

DAVID BOWIE in regards to

Anonymous — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 15:55:22 +0000

In reply to This thread got silly, I

DAVID BOWIE in regards to true influence, importance and musical innovation runs circles around MJ or any of the other bands/acts just mentioned. He is EASILY the most important solo star Post Beatles.....hands down. ( something that doesnt get recognized enough in North-America)

BOWIE did everything before MJ..androgyny, videos ( see Ashes to Ashes as example), theatre/dancers/mime ( see 1974 Diamond Dogs Tour) on stage, ( MJ was heavily influenced by Bowie's "weirdness" in the 70's) the music alone..His late 70s Berlin works paved the way for the cooler music of the 80s/90s...everything from Industrial, New Romantic to Rave and beyond.

Just ask fellow MJ megastar of the 80s MADONNA who her musical hero is: Its BOWIE.

The chameleonic changes Bowie did in the 70s' musically and stylistically made MJ, Madonna and Prince possible in the 80s.........( they were all regular Bowie concert goers when younger)

Well, thank YOU for your

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:35:28 +0000

In reply to Well, thank YOU for your

Well, thank YOU for your civil way of discussing things (pretty rare on ye olde net)

That's how we do it here at dag. Or try anyway, except when the Canadian subversives get us all riled up. Come back any time.

P.S. correction to my last

p-twist — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:14:04 +0000

In reply to Well, thank YOU for your

P.S. correction to my last post, wherein I erroneously stated that Elvis was the first "white boy" to do rock and roll: Bill Haley--imho one of the true "Kings of Rock and Roll"--was a "white boy", too, but just older and--sorry Bill--not as sexy to the then up-and-coming Baby Boomers as young Elvis was. Elvis was the right person at the right time to bring rock and roll to the masses. But, again, imho, the "Kings of Rock" were the originators like Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bill Haley, et al. Not that Elvis wasn't important, he just wasn't--imho--THE "King" of Rock. Nor is Michael, imho, the King of Pop. Yet both were certainly important.

Well, thank YOU for your

p-twist — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:08:27 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the follow-up

Well, thank YOU for your civil way of discussing things (pretty rare on ye olde net) and I agree that he, for me anyway, isn't up there with any of my fave-o-faves (Beatles) and he didn't do much in the way of originating, music-wise (for that matter, I don't think Elvis was "The King of Rock", I think that title belongs to artists like Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Bill Haley & His Comets, who really ORIGINATED rock-n-roll--Elvis just was the first white boy to do it and, granted, he did it with extraordinary charisma and unique style and, let's face it, sexiness--he didn't bring sexy back, he created it *lol*), but Michael Jackson as an overall performer was extraordinary--the total package, not just the music. Someone described him in a piece I read since his death as a, quote, "stick of dynamite" on stage and I think that describes it. The precise, original (in dance, he did originate) dance moves, the soulful way he sung far ahead of his years when a child, etc. And, like I said earlier, some of the songs of The Jackson Five and then of Michael as a solo artist were really great, great works of pop, imho (and then some of his solo stuff was decidedly not, too, I'll grant ya). My entire point, such as it is, is simply that, imho, I think the attention he is getting now is warranted. As for the title "King of Pop"? That one is definitely up for debate. ...Anyway, this is a good discussion! And I may join the throngs of people ordering Thriller on Amazon because suddenly I have a burning desire to hear "Wanna be Startin' Something" and I don't have the net at home so I don't dare go to youtube here at work. ANYWAY: peace out, and I hope Michael Jackson is finally at peace now. I think a lot of his music will stand the test of time and be enjoyed as long as there are humans left on this planet to enjoy it.

Thanks for the follow-up

Michael Wolraich — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 15:20:16 +0000

In reply to Ghengis, you asked me "I'll

Thanks for the follow-up p-twist. MJ doesn't really do it for me, but that said, I won't dispute pop genius, and agree that this is a contribution, though I still don't think it amounts to what some are making of it.