Latest on MJJC

Exclusive: Inside Michael Jackson’s “Hollywood”

Tipareth said:
MJ fans and not only are still being in pain over Mike death.

An overly dramatic and tragic video, would make wounds bleed...

Their decision to not make it too dramatic is a good one, also the song is uptempo not ballad, maybe for a ballad the tragic vibe could have been more in the face.... But for an uptempo? Hard to combine tragic video and uptempo song/singing.

So the video is OK, beautiful. Not extraordinary like Mike would have done, but ONLY Mike can do that? How could you expect extraordinary from other people than Mike?

Still is good to have, than to have nothing. The video is nice, is decent, and the song superb. Enjoy it folks!:wub:
Click to expand...

It's interesting that you say all this after quoting what I just wrote. I'm not only referring to the video. You just completely ignored what I said regarding the changing of Michael Jackson's lyrics. Really? Does that not bother you?

It's incredibly disrespectful and wrong to change his lyrics. As I've stated several times.
 
Arklove said:
You're right. Now that we know Teddy CHANGED the lyrics and subsequently made the video positive. In the same token, I guess the lyrics DON'T HAVE TO MATCH WHAT MICHAEL JACKSON WROTE HIMSELF. But, hey, that's ok, right?
Click to expand...

Funny thing is the bridge isn't even in the video so explain how the bridge has an effect on the theme of the video?

:timer:
 
SeriousEffect. said:
Funny thing is the bridge isn't even in the video so explain how the bridge has an effect on the theme of the video?

:timer:
Click to expand...


We are all aware that the bridge penned by Michael is not in the video. Even without that bridge, the "theme" of Hollywood Tonight is not an inspirational story, it's a cautionary tale of elusisve movie startdom as per Michael's hand written note for Hollywood Tonight included in the album booklet. A runaway girl, age 15, has dreams of fame and riches. She wants to make it in Hollywood. She goes against her parents' will. Her struggles are too much to bear.

Now, do you think the official depicted the girl's struggles completely? Do you think the video illustrate Michael's original story?

Even without reading the bridge, I can tell what Michael's message is. The bridge makes the image of the girl's struggles more vivid.
 
SeriousEffect. said:
Funny thing is the bridge isn't even in the video so explain how the bridge has an effect on the theme of the video?

:timer:
Click to expand...

My point is that Teddy Riley changed the lyrics to a Michael Jackson song to 'make her succeed'....Therefore, making the storyline 'more positive', hence, ignoring his message and contradicting the lyrics...Subsequently, the video is now Teddy Riley's message, and not Michael's...What a disrespect to his art...

The video isn't bad...It's quite enjoyable for what it is...
 
^You do realize that the video could still be the same even with MJ's lyrics in there, right? It's not disrespect, it's just the director's take on the song.
 
serendipity said:
^You do realize that the video could still be the same even with MJ's lyrics in there, right? It's not disrespect, it's just the director's take on the song.
Click to expand...


the director's take on the song just touched the surface without going deep into the profound message.

may be it's not disrespect, it's simply another incident in which Michael's song-writing ability is overlooked and understated.
 
serendipity said:
^You do realize that the video could still be the same even with MJ's lyrics in there, right? It's not disrespect, it's just the director's take on the song.
Click to expand...

I didn't say the director showed disrespect, I said that Teddy Riley showed disrespect for changing Michael's lyrics...
 
Last edited:
No doubt Teddy was absolutely in the wrong, and very disrespectful to MJ as a friend and an artist. "We decided to let her succeed". WHO GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO DECIDE THE LYRICAL CONTENT?! We know first hand that Michael had other avenues for Hollywood Tonight, and therefore it should have been treated as such...
 
Arklove said:
I didn't say the director showed disrespect, I said that Teddy Riley showed disrespect for changing Michael's lyrics...
Click to expand...

OK. My point was, you connected the video to Teddy's changing the lyrics when there may not even be a connection at all.
 
For me it's not about the video at all (which I didn't like that much anyway) but the fact about the lyrics, that Riley changed what MJ had already penned down for the bridge. He just shouldn't have done that, in my very strong opinion.
 
Pentum said:
Also dropped the "she's only fifteen" line.
Click to expand...


Probably for the same reason why Sony don't release 12 O'clock. They want to avoid controversy.

Though I think they shouldn't have put HT on the album if they are not ready to release it the way Michael wanted it. I simply cannot accept others tampering with Michael's art as they please. It's one thing to finish something and trying one's best to finish it in the spirit of Michael, but it's totally different to change things he originally intended to be there, just because it wouldn't fit into the current mood or trend in pop music or something! It seems like you are not allowed to have dark, meaningful lyrics in today's pop music. It needs to be happy and dancable, not worrying or upsetting too much.

What Sony are doing to Michael's art is utterly disrespectful. Imagine if a book publisher said they would change the ending of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet because it's too dark for today's market and they would make it a happy end! People would be outraged about that and rightfully so! It would totally negate Shakespeare's original message. As I see it it's not different when someone tampers with Michael's art and changes it to a totally different message that what he originally intended.

Sony need to learn if they want to sell "new" MJ records in the future! This is ART and you need to respect the artist and be true to his visions! On the album "Michael" they don't respect him!
 
I think HT video is great and does MJ justice.

MJ is no longer here - so should no more MJ videos be released? - IMO NO !!!

Sure we will NEVER have a true MJ video again - MJ is no longer here to make it!

BUT - to promote a song a video is cruciel, and then SONY and The Estate can only do so much as they can to try to live up to MJ standards, but it will never be MJ's vision/creation.

We most accept that videoes released in the future will be a video to promote tha MJ song, not a MJ video. - I think HT video is great - and I like the mix with BJ more and more.

ALSO - we got the demo raw vocals - GREAT JOB SONY! - That's what most fans wanted, so that was a smart move IMO, and also they sound great.
 
Thanks for posting this Qbee.

Welp! We'll never have another MJ perfect song or video again so.....

Anywayz, I do agree with you guys, Teddy should have left the spoken bridge as MJ wrote it.
Wonder if Tarryll was really OK with that?

As for the video...it's alright. I love the song tho....I play it all the time. :)
 
respect77 said:
Probably for the same reason why Sony don't release 12 O'clock. They want to avoid controversy.
Click to expand...

They wanted to avoid controversy? They've done a remarkably inept job, in that case.

The lyrics were most probably changed by Teddy Riley so that he could earn himself a nice little co-writing song credit, hence him being so pissed when his pathetic bridge was taken off the single version.

The video's a complete abomination. Sony and the Estate are turning Michael Jackson into a cartoon character. A hat. A glove. White socks. Yeah... that's Michael! Even though any fan worth their salt would know that Michael HATED being trapped by that image.

But why should the Estate let that get in the way of their fortune?

"She's giving hot tricks to men just to get in..." Man, prostitution never looked like so much fun, right?

The song is a complete INDICTMENT of Hollywood. Somehow the Estate has turned it into a complete CELEBRATION of Hollywood.

And how funny that Sony are now paying for 2 videos to be shot at the same time, where they wouldn't even fund 1 video for Michael when he was alive.

I expected nothing. I got even less. Amazing.

What's next? A video featuring Michael as a claymation puppet singing about the life in the birds and the trees being 'killed up'?

A complete abomination.
 
Sony was willing to pay for more Short Films for Invincible, Michael however was not happy with the budget, thus why he didn't appear in the video for "Cry".
 
SeriousEffect. said:
Sony was willing to pay for more Short Films for Invincible, Michael however was not happy with the budget, thus why he didn't appear in the video for "Cry".
Click to expand...

You're right. After watching this joke of a video (it sure ain't a 'short film'), I think it's fair to say that Michael had a point!
 
samhabib said:
They wanted to avoid controversy? They've done a remarkably inept job, in that case.

The lyrics were most probably changed by Teddy Riley so that he could earn himself a nice little co-writing song credit, hence him being so pissed when his pathetic bridge was taken off the single version.

The video's a complete abomination. Sony and the Estate are turning Michael Jackson into a cartoon character. A hat. A glove. White socks. Yeah... that's Michael! Even though any fan worth their salt would know that Michael HATED being trapped by that image.

But why should the Estate let that get in the way of their fortune?

"She's giving hot tricks to men just to get in..." Man, prostitution never looked like so much fun, right?

The song is a complete INDICTMENT of Hollywood. Somehow the Estate has turned it into a complete CELEBRATION of Hollywood.

And how funny that Sony are now paying for 2 videos to be shot at the same time, where they wouldn't even fund 1 video for Michael when he was alive.

I expected nothing. I got even less. Amazing.

What's next? A video featuring Michael as a claymation puppet singing about the life in the birds and the trees being 'killed up'?

A complete abomination.
Click to expand...

I agree Sam, and nice to see you again :)

It's completely disgusting and disrespectful to change lyrics of Michael's songs just because they don't want to be 'controversial'. Is this part of the estates plan of "enhancing of Michael's image"?.. :doh:

They didn't mind releasing controversial songs that would cause an uproar in the MJ community and now they let Teddy change lyrics to his songs that Michael himself created? What's next indeed.
 
samhabib said:
You're right. After watching this joke of a video (it sure ain't a 'short film'), I think it's fair to say that Michael had a point!
Click to expand...

You're too pessimistic. Video is not so bad. The song is dark, the video is not, but it delivers the message of the song (of course, Teddy's version). And Teddy probably used all the material that Jackson made??. "She's only fifteen" part probably was not even recorded, just like the original bridge.
 
OnirMJ said:
You're too pessimistic. Video is not so bad. The song is dark, the video is not, but it delivers the message of the song (of course, Teddy's version). And Teddy probably used all the material that Jackson made??. "She's only fifteen" part probably was not even recorded, just like the original bridge.
Click to expand...

Don't tell me what I am. Pessimistic? No. I just value Michael Jackson's art more than you do. You're happy to see his lyrics being changed? The ones that he wrote with his own hands? The hands that wrote Billie Jean, Beat It, Earth Song and Black Or White? Suddenly they're not good enough for the world to hear? And Teddy Riley has to 'salvage' a Michael Jackson song?

Pessimistic? Don't make me laugh.

You want to see what they're doing to Michael Jackson's art? THIS is what they're doing to Michael Jackson's art!

The great Jackie Wilson reduced to a singing and dancing claymation puppet. THE Jackie Wilson that Elvis stole his whole career from!

[youtube]xJ3-NnNx6Zs[/youtube]

Arguably the greatest jazz artist of all time, Nina Simone, converted to a singing black cat. Nine Simone!!!

[youtube]eYSbUOoq4Vg[/youtube]

What the Estate is doing with Michael's art is no different to that, in my eyes. Pessimistic? No. Realistic.

You applaud it if you want. Don't tell me what I am or what my personality is.
 
OnirMJ said:
You're too pessimistic. Video is not so bad. The song is dark, the video is not, but it delivers the message of the song (of course, Teddy's version). And Teddy probably used all the material that Jackson made??. "She's only fifteen" part probably was not even recorded, just like the original bridge.
Click to expand...

The song is dark but the video delivers the message of the song? You're right...It delivered Teddy's message...Not Michael Jackson's....Nothing wrong about that at all...
 
What I find funny is that Teddy says had Michael recorded the bridge, they would have undoubtedly used it. Umm...so, then why not use it using Taryll's voice...??

Riiiiight Teddy...
 
Arklove said:
What I find funny is that Teddy says had Michael recorded the bridge, they would have undoubtedly used it. Umm...so, then why not use it using Taryll's voice...??

Riiiiight Teddy...
Click to expand...

And miss out on the co-writing credit? You're obviously just thinking about Michael's art and not how to screw every last drop of money out off this project. Shame on you. Back to economics class for you!
 
samhabib said:
And miss out on the co-writing credit? You're obviously just thinking about Michael's art and not how to screw every last drop of money out off this project. Shame on you. Back to economics class for you!
Click to expand...

:blush: *hangs head in shame* You're right, I'm a terrible fan

;)
 
samhabib said:
Don't tell me what I am. Pessimistic? No. I just value Michael Jackson's art more than you do. You're happy to see his lyrics being changed? The ones that he wrote with his own hands? The hands that wrote Billie Jean, Beat It, Earth Song and Black Or White? Suddenly they're not good enough for the world to hear? And Teddy Riley has to 'salvage' a Michael Jackson song?

Pessimistic? Don't make me laugh.

You want to see what they're doing to Michael Jackson's art? THIS is what they're doing to Michael Jackson's art!

The great Jackie Wilson reduced to a singing and dancing claymation puppet. THE Jackie Wilson that Elvis stole his whole career from!

[youtube]xJ3-NnNx6Zs[/youtube]

Arguably the greatest jazz artist of all time, Nina Simone, converted to a singing black cat. Nine Simone!!!

[youtube]eYSbUOoq4Vg[/youtube]

What the Estate is doing with Michael's art is no different to that, in my eyes. Pessimistic? No. Realistic.

You applaud it if you want. Don't tell me what I am or what my personality is.
Click to expand...

And you are comparing Hollywood Tonight with that? I see your point, but I think it's much better video than those two. I understand you, but I decide to look on the positive side of this project (Michael). I don't care who's making money, I'm just happy to hear new music (that I like, I like the whole album) and to see new videos (I prefer Hollywood Tonight over Hold My Hand, I know that those are not Michael's vision but I see both of them as a great tribute and great promotional videos). And yes, I'm happy with the Estate, I think that they are doing a good job, not great though.

I value Michael Jackson's art the same as you do, that is stupid what you've said. We just have different opinions about his "posthumous career". I'm not happy that the lyrics are changed, but Michael didn't recorded it so Teddy decided to write his own lyrics because he thought that that would be better for the song. I don't approve his decision, but I like the final version very much.

You think that you would done better video?
 
OnirMJ said:
You think that you would done better video?
Click to expand...

I know I would have.

They're treating Michael's art as mediocre pop music with no depth, and they're totally missing the point. He was one of the few commercially successful artists (dare I say: massive!) who were able to merge popularity with true, meaningful art. Michael was a master of that. Now all they do is barely scratch the surface of his commercial side while completely dropping ALL artistry.
 
ANYONE could have done a better video...Michael practically left an instruction manual...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top