Did I mention intros? No.
This does not make sense at all.
Did I mention intros? No.
The Lost Children is one, if not the most boring released song Michael composed.
The problem I have is that is the least sounding Michael album, (so is Off The Wall but in that one he began to take control over his solo career, while in Invincible already had all the experience in the world) he relied way too much in other composers and producers. Too many people involved for my taste and I agree it's too long and many of the outtakes are better songs than many of the official Invincible track list. It's not a bad album but Michael spoiled us with his 90's masterpieces, it's not his best one for his standards. It's probably speculation on my part but I've often thought he just released the album the way it is because it was part of his contract, he just wasn't there. I however applaud Michael for having the capacity of making a different album from his previous works every time.
Is there a problem with Invincible ???
I'll go one better, I hate The Lost Children, such an awful song that didn't belong on any MJ album.
Next to little Susie, it is his worst song. It sounds like a parody song someone would make of a typical MJ world peace type of feel.
Next to little Susie, it is his worst song. It sounds like a parody song someone would make of a typical MJ world peace type of feel.
I wonder if he wanted to take a break from writing so much of his own material during the Invincible sessions. He had become a father during the Invincible sessions. He said the reason for the length of the album was that, at the time, he thought it would be his last studio album. He went back to his roots of writing a love album. It sounds like he was at a point where he wanted, at the very least, a chance to have a break while producing the album. And it might have affected his quality of work slightly.
Are you frikkin kidding me? Little Susie is a complete masterpiece. Everything about it is perfect, the tone is dark,the vocals vulnerable and weighty, the lyrics soft but powerful, the music haunting. :/ But then, maybe I'm in the minority here.
Next to little Susie, it is his worst song.
I must be the only one who liked Privacy. :beee:
I used to like it, back when I first got into his music. But after hearing his other anti-media/critic/paparazzi songs like WYWTOM and Tabloid Junkie, I began to think that Privacy was a mediocre MJ track. Not a mediocre track, rather a mediocre "MJ" track.
"I worked hard on the song, stacking vocals on top of each other like layers of clouds. I’m sending a simple message here: Leave me alone! The song is about a relationship between a guy and a girl, but what I’m really saying to people who are bothering me is: Leave me alone!"
I swear my opinion is always the opposite to almost everyone else. I hate ''Butterflies'' but most people love it, and then I love ''The Lost Children'' but most people hate that.
I don't quite understand Cry.
You can change the world (I can't do it by myself)
You can touch the sky (going to take somebody's help)
You're the chosen one (I'm going to need some kind of sign)
If we all cry at the same time tonight
So is the meaning and message behind the song that we can change the world if we all cry at the same time?...
Is there a problem with Invincible ???
mj_frenzy;4104575 said:I advise all those (who claim that ‘Invincible’ is too long) to take a look at the total length of his two, previous studio albums (‘HIStory’ & ‘Dangerous’.
mj_frenzy;4104575 said:I advise all those (who claim that ‘Invincible’ is too long) to take a look at the total length of his two, previous studio albums (‘HIStory’ & ‘Dangerous’).
Also, it really surprises me that words like (‘sappy’, ‘garbage’, ‘awful’, ‘parody’, etc.) are also so prevalent among (hard-core) MJ fans because this is exactly the type of words that is used (largely) by critics/non-fans/haters when it comes to MJ’s songs.
HIStoric;4104578 said:It's a similar concept with Dangerous vs. Invincible. Sure, they're a similar same length technically, but the songs on Dangerous flow much better imo, nor do they 'feel' as long to me whereas Invincible does feel dragged out after a while.
MAQ;4104581 said:I agree with the second part of your post. People need to stop this.
However, invincible is an album which does not require more than 60 minutes of play. It's a romance themed album and since it has a slower pace than Dangerous or HIStory or Bad, the record loses some steam after maybe 9 songs.
mj_frenzy;4104575 said:I advise all those (who claim that ‘Invincible’ is too long) to take a look at the total length of his two, previous studio albums (‘HIStory’ & ‘Dangerous’.
Also, it really surprises me that words like (‘sappy’, ‘garbage’, ‘awful’, ‘parody’, etc.) are also so prevalent among (hard-core) MJ fans because this is exactly the type of words that is used (largely) by critics/non-fans/haters when it comes to MJ’s songs.