The theory that Michael Jackson wanted to sabotage his ‘Invincible’ album

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
2,777
Points
113
Location
Greece
Country
Greece
There is a prevalent theory among many people (but also among fans) that Michael Jackson wanted to sabotage his ‘Invincible’ album, and he eventually succeeded in that.

As you know, Michael Jackson was beginning to have very serious problems with Sony Music during the sessions of the making of that album.

So, he believed that if he created and released a really good album, that thing would (contrary to his desire) benefit Sony Music greatly by bringing to the record company a lot of money via the album’s chart and commercial success.

According to this theory, he kept the truly good songs for himself by not including them on the 'Invincible' album, with a view to releasing them later through a new album but with a different record company (not with Sony Music).

Among these songs (that he kept for himself) were ‘We've Had Enough’, ‘Shout’, ‘Fall Again’, ‘Xscape’, ‘Blue Gangsta’, ‘Seeing Voices’, ‘Beautiful Girl’, and also some other finished but unheard ones (which have been described by few privileged people who heard them as masterpieces).

Especially, the fact that he did not include on the 'Invincible' album the ‘Xscape’ song (a song that he was so proud of it) and the removal of ‘Shout’ in favour of ‘You Are My Life’ gives even more credence to this theory.

This theory seems to be not far from truth due to several other reasons, for example:

Unlike his previous adult studio albums, Michael Jackson filled the ‘Invincible’ album with many substandard ballads.

He did not perform songs from that album during his on stage appearances in the following period (apart from ‘You Rock My World’ at MSG in 2001).

Also, according to reliable accounts, he was reworking the really good outtakes (from the 'Invincible' album) with some producers in the following 1-2 years (after the release of the ‘Invincible’ album) because he wanted to include them along with some other brand new songs in a new studio album slated for release in 2003.

Discuss.
 
What a ridiculous theory, but coming from you, it isn't a surprise.

Why would Michael sabotage his own album? He was motivated by commercial success. You think he would release a bad album on purpose that would jeopardise his sales and reputation (which wasn't that good in the US at that time).

"Unlike his previous adult studio albums, Michael Jackson filled the ‘Invincible’ album with many substandard ballads."

Speak for yourself. There are many MJ fans such as myself who like those 'substandard ballads.'

"removal of ‘Shout’ in favour of ‘You Are My Life’ gives even more credence to this theory."

No, it doesn't. Maybe only in your mind. And wasn't You Are My Life dedicated to his kids? So clearly, it was a special song for MJ. He didn't include in on Invincible, because he was trying to sabotage his album.

No offence, but you talk a lot of nonsense.
 
You made up this theory. It isn't talked about anywhere else. The ballads are substandard? Okay, I want to see you write and release your own... No? I didn't think so. Don't disguise your dislike for the album as a 'fan theory'. Just say you don't like the album.
 
mj_frenzy;4276042 said:
As you know, Michael Jackson was beginning to have very serious problems with Sony Music during the sessions of the making of that album.

Michael started having problems with Sony during the HIStory campaign when they wouldn't release 'Smile' as a single.

mj_frenzy;4276042 said:
Especially, the fact that he did not include on the 'Invincible' album the ‘Xscape’ song (a song that he was so proud of it) and the removal of ‘Shout’ in favour of ‘You Are My Life’ gives even more credence to this theory.

He fell in love with 'You Are My Life' and recorded it a couple of weeks before the album was released. That's mainly the reason why he took 'Shout' off. Had he thought that it wasn't strong enough, he wouldn't have bothered recording it that late in the sessions.

mj_frenzy;4276042 said:
Also, according to reliable accounts, he was reworking the really good outtakes (from the 'Invincible' album) with some producers in the following 1-2 years (after the release of the ‘Invincible’ album) because he wanted to include them along with some other brand new songs in a new studio album slated for release in 2003.

This doesn't necessarily prove anything. Michael would often rework music from the past with different people.
It's like saying that Michael left 'Earth Song' off of 'Dangerous' because he wanted to sabotage the album.

Also, how could that supposed album have been released in 2003 if Michael was still under contract with Sony back then.
 
Also, Frenzy. I don't get it. What's the point of lying and making up stories/rumors and then backing them up by saying "Michael thought" "Michael said" "People close to him said" and etc. Why not just admit that it is your own speculation and opinion? If you clarified that, you wouldn't get these comments. Saying that Mike was involved in your opinions gives them no extra credibility. I can see myself and other users have noticed a pattern here and it's getting annoying. I'm sorry to say, man. Please try to be honest.
 
Pure fantasy......created by people who want to rationalise their dislike for "Invincible", or by "music critics" who really don't know what they're talking about.

Most, if not all of the points made in this theory can be countered with perfectly logical explanations and have been, by others, I see.......so thank you!

I also think it's mean-spirited and quite unfair to denigrate Michael Jackson's last living studio album by over-thinking his motives and postulating with flawed reasoning.
 
dethorro;4276087 said:
Michael started having problems with Sony during the HIStory campaign when they wouldn't release 'Smile' as a single.

Michael Jackson did not start having problems with Sony Music during the ‘HIStory’ campaign.

Like Michael Jackson, Sony Music also wanted at that time to release the ‘Smile’ song as a single and even the record company began pressing that single (few initial rare, pressed copies of the ‘Smile’ single can also prove that).

But Charlie Chaplin’s Estate did not want the Tramp character to get a new, different interpretation by Michael Jackson in a music video that would accompany that single.

So, the cancellation of the release of ‘Smile’ was because of the legal actions of Charlie Chaplin’s Estate against that release, not because of Sony Music.

Michael Jackson began having problems with Sony Music during the making of the ‘Invincible’ album, and more specifically in 2000 when he demanded from Sony Music the licenses to the masters of his albums (i.e., mechanical copyrights) to revert back to him.

When Sony Music refused to give him these mechanical copyrights, it was then when he became mad with them and he also started to act in a rather irrational way in regard to the making of the ‘Invincible’ album.

dethorro;4276087 said:
He fell in love with 'You Are My Life' and recorded it a couple of weeks before the album was released. That's mainly the reason why he took 'Shout' off. Had he thought that it wasn't strong enough, he wouldn't have bothered recording it that late in the sessions.

It is not necessarily true that he fell in love with the ‘You Are My Life’ song.

That explanation for its inclusion (at the last minute on the album) was just provided by John Randy Taraborrelli, who did not have really any knowledge of what was going on during the making of that album.

dethorro;4276087 said:
This doesn't necessarily prove anything. Michael would often rework music from the past with different people.
It's like saying that Michael left 'Earth Song' off of 'Dangerous' because he wanted to sabotage the album.

This ‘Earth Song’ analogy does not really make sense.

During the ‘Dangerous’ album sessions, the ‘Earth Song’ was just a rough demo, more like a musical idea.

dethorro;4276087 said:
Also, how could that supposed album have been released in 2003 if Michael was still under contract with Sony back then.

Michael Jackson and Sony Music ended their contract in 2002.

It was a premature end that came earlier than the original, agreed end of the contract (2006).

Lawyers (hired by both sides) who were involved in those negotiations of the contract’s premature end can prove that.
 
mj_frenzy;4276116 said:
Michael Jackson did not start having problems with Sony Music during the ‘HIStory’ campaign.

Like Michael Jackson, Sony Music also wanted at that time to release the ‘Smile’ song as a single and even the record company began pressing that single (few initial rare, pressed copies of the ‘Smile’ single can also prove that).

But Charlie Chaplin’s Estate did not want the Tramp character to get a new, different interpretation by Michael Jackson in a music video that would accompany that single.

So, the cancellation of the release of ‘Smile’ was because of the legal actions of Charlie Chaplin’s Estate against that release, not because of Sony Music.

Michael Jackson began having problems with Sony Music during the making of the ‘Invincible’ album, and more specifically in 2000 when he demanded from Sony Music the licenses to the masters of his albums (i.e., mechanical copyrights) to revert back to him.

When Sony Music refused to give him these mechanical copyrights, it was then when he became mad with them and he also started to act in a rather irrational way in regard to the making of the ‘Invincible’ album.

Although what you are saying may be partially true, Michael also wanted to do a 2 million dollar video for ‘Smile’ which Sony didn’t agree to because they didn’t want to shell out money at the end of the campaign.

They wanted Michael to sing ‘Smile’ live at the Royal Variety Show in London and at the German TV show Wetten Dass in November 1997 instead.

Michael obviously didn’t do it and the single was cancelled.


In this interview from 1998 it is clear that Michael was upset with them.

‘’Then Michael turns the pages and stops of the Collectibles page and sees a picture of the Smile single and asks whether it came out in Europe:
BW: no, the single has been cancelled, it never came out…

M: mmh! – Sighing

BW: Did you want it to come out?

M: Sure! Sony should have had that single come out!*– Saying this Michael has an upset expression on his face.’’


mj_frenzy;4276116 said:
This ‘Earth Song’ analogy does not really make sense.

During the ‘Dangerous’ album sessions, the ‘Earth Song’ was just a rough demo, more like a musical idea.


‘Earth Song’ wasn’t just a rough demo in 1990.

Bill Botrell has stated that ‘Earth Song’ was finished by August 1990.

Michael pulled it out in 1995 and David Foster helped him finish it completely.

Foster only changed the outro vocals from falsetto to full voice, and added a guitar riff in the second verse.

mj_frenzy;4276116 said:
Michael Jackson and Sony Music ended their contract in 2002.

It was a premature end that came earlier than the original, agreed end of the contract (2006).

Lawyers (hired by both sides) who were involved in those negotiations of the contract’s premature end can prove that.

Yeah, you’re right! Their contract ended prematurely in 2002.

However, Michael still owed the company two album with NEW material.

Until Michael satisfied the number of albums and of new songs as per his contract, Sony held the right to release albums (with new and old songs).

Sony released:

-Number Ones (1 new song) November 18th 2003

The Ultimate Colection (8 new songs) November 16th 2004

-The Essential July 19th 2005


-Visionary November 17th 2006

-Thriller 25 (1 new song) February 11th 2008

-King Of Pop (August 22nd 2008


Also by 2003 Michael was less interested in albums and tours.
He wanted to do film.
This was confirmed by many of his collaborators.
 
Did Sony reject the album when it was initially presented to them?

I remember hearing rumours of it at the time. It was originally slated to be released March 2001 then all of a sudden got pushed back to the last quarter of 2001.
 
If Michael wanted to ‘save’ Shout for another album, then why did he release it as a B-side? That doesn’t make sense.
 
dethorro;4276124 said:
Although what you are saying may be partially true, Michael also wanted to do a 2 million dollar video for ‘Smile’ which Sony didn’t agree to because they didn’t want to shell out money at the end of the campaign.

They wanted Michael to sing ‘Smile’ live at the Royal Variety Show in London and at the German TV show Wetten Dass in November 1997 instead.

Michael obviously didn’t do it and the single was cancelled.


In this interview from 1998 it is clear that Michael was upset with them.

‘’Then Michael turns the pages and stops of the Collectibles page and sees a picture of the Smile single and asks whether it came out in Europe:
BW: no, the single has been cancelled, it never came out…

M: mmh! – Sighing

BW: Did you want it to come out?

M: Sure! Sony should have had that single come out!*– Saying this Michael has an upset expression on his face.’’

‘Earth Song’ wasn’t just a rough demo in 1990.

Bill Botrell has stated that ‘Earth Song’ was finished by August 1990.

Michael pulled it out in 1995 and David Foster helped him finish it completely.

Foster only changed the outro vocals from falsetto to full voice, and added a guitar riff in the second verse.

Yeah, you’re right! Their contract ended prematurely in 2002.

However, Michael still owed the company two album with NEW material.

Until Michael satisfied the number of albums and of new songs as per his contract, Sony held the right to release albums (with new and old songs).

Sony released:

-Number Ones (1 new song) November 18th 2003

The Ultimate Colection (8 new songs) November 16th 2004

-The Essential July 19th 2005


-Visionary November 17th 2006

-Thriller 25 (1 new song) February 11th 2008

-King Of Pop (August 22nd 2008


Also by 2003 Michael was less interested in albums and tours.
He wanted to do film.
This was confirmed by many of his collaborators.

But the shooting of the ‘Smile’ music video actually began (with the consent of Sony Music).

At one point later the shooting had to stop (and eventually it had to be cancelled) due to the issuing of a cease and desist letter by the Charlie Chaplin’s Estate against that music video.

If the Charlie Chaplin’s Estate did not issue that letter, the shooting of that music video would have been completed and eventually it would have been released (because Michael Jackson and Sony Music would have agreed on a compromise about its budget in the end).

‘Earth Song’ was far from being a finished song by August 1990, despite what Bill Bottrell stated about it.

Michael Jackson was still dabbling with that song around that time, and the song actually still needed a lot of improvements, such as better lead vocals, more background vocals, additional instruments, more lyrics on its refrain, etc.

Besides, Michael Jackson never worked hard on ‘Earth Song’ in order to finish it by August 1990 (for the ‘Dangerous’ album) because he knew it could not co-exist with ‘Heal The World’ in the same album.
 
mj_frenzy;4276190 said:
‘Earth Song’ was far from being a finished song by August 1990, despite what Bill Bottrell stated about it.

Michael Jackson was still dabbling with that song around that time, and the song actually still needed a lot of improvements, such as better lead vocals, more background vocals, additional instruments, more lyrics on its refrain, etc.

Besides, Michael Jackson never worked hard on ‘Earth Song’ in order to finish it by August 1990 (for the ‘Dangerous’ album) because he knew it could not co-exist with ‘Heal The World’ in the same album.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07a-EkuO1YI

95% of the lead and background vocals in this (not including the ad-libs) 1990 demo are exactly the same as in the 1995 version.

The only big differences is the fact that the 'What about flowering fields' and the 'We've drifted far' lines don't exist.

Even though the song needed some improvement, it still isn't a rough demo nor is it only a musical idea.

The September 20th 1988 demo on the other hand is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frD1shztC1Q
 
Last edited:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07a-EkuO1YI

95% of the lead and background vocals in this (not including the ad-libs) 1990 demo are exactly the same as in the 1995 version.

The only big differences is the fact that the 'What about flowering fields' and the 'We've drifted far' lines don't exist.

Even though the song needed some improvement, it still isn't a rough demo nor is it only a musical idea.

The September 20th 1988 demo on the other hand is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frD1shztC1Q

This is not a personal attack on Frenzy or anything but I just don't get where he gets all this info from, and how he can pass it around as facts.
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07a-EkuO1YI

95% of the lead and background vocals in this (not including the ad-libs) 1990 demo are exactly the same as in the 1995 version.

The only big differences is the fact that the 'What about flowering fields' and the 'We've drifted far' lines don't exist.

Even though the song needed some improvement, it still isn't a rough demo nor is it only a musical idea.

The September 20th 1988 demo on the other hand is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frD1shztC1Q
I love this version. I wish it was longer
 
This is not a personal attack on Frenzy or anything but I just don't get where he gets all this info from, and how he can pass it around as facts.

That's a dethorro post- nah, I'm kidding, you knew that.

I agree. I think he just makes it up and passes it off as fact in an attempt to seem knowledgeable or to gain recognition. I would like his posts if he said: "Hey guys, this is my opinion/my timeline!" or something like that.
 
I think it's strange how Michael never performed any songs (Except You Rock My World at the 30th anniversary shows. And tbh that performance wasn't all that great anyway) from Invincible during the time of the albums release. At United We Stand 2001 he performed Man In The Mirror, at American Bandstand 2002 he performed Dangerous, and at Apollo 2002 he performed Black Or White, Dangerous and Heal The World.
 
Is this supposed to be sarcasm? I got a good laugh out of it anyway.
 
analogue;4276274 said:
I think it's strange how Michael never performed any songs (Except You Rock My World at the 30th anniversary shows. And tbh that performance wasn't all that great anyway) from Invincible during the time of the albums release. At United We Stand 2001 he performed Man In The Mirror, at American Bandstand 2002 he performed Dangerous, and at Apollo 2002 he performed Black Or White, Dangerous and Heal The World.

At the 30th anniversary concerts, he only performed YRMW as that was the only song out from the album. Invincible wasn’t out yet and he didn’t want to give too much away, which is probably why he didn’t perform any other song besides YRMW. And the 30th anniversary shows were meant to be a celebration of his career, not promotion for the Invincible album, so it’s understandable that he mostly performed his biggest hits.

At United We Stand 2001, it was meant to be a tribute show for 9/11, so Man In The Mirror was the perfect choice. Perhaps he could have done Cry instead, but MITM was a better choice.

By 2002 bandstand and Apollo Theatre performances, due to his issues with Sony, Michael had probably given up on Invincible, which is a shame but understandable. This is probably why he choose to not do any songs from Invincible.
 
One of the things that started problems with Sony was probably the cancellation of the HBO shows "One Night Only" in 1995, where Sony lost several million $. Or maybe they didn't... if there was some insurance... who knows. But the HIStory campaign in the USA seemed damaged after that (no commercial Earth Song single etc), which Michael was for sure not happy with.
 
Last edited:
One of the things that started problems with Sony was probably the cancellation of the HBO shows "One Night Only" in 1995, where Sony lost several million $. Or maybe they didn't... if there was some insurance... who knows. But the HIStory campaign in the USA seemed damaged after that (no commercial Earth Song single etc), which Michael was for sure not happy with.
And wasn't this time around scheduled for a video shoot with b.i.g but got cancelled? God i wish he wouldve did that ONE night only....it was only 1 night
 
It's the other way around. Michael was mad with Sony for sabotaging Invincible, so he wanted, in turn, to sabotage Sony from then on (or "outthink them"). But not sabotage himself! Michael was too much of a perfectionist for that.


And about the fact that you consider the songs on Invincible as substandard...what about gems such as Unbreakable and Threatened?!
 
nicetheory.jpg
 
And wasn't this time around scheduled for a video shoot with b.i.g but got cancelled? God i wish he wouldve did that ONE night only....it was only 1 night

Actually that was TWO Nights Only. :D It was meant to be filmed on 8. and 9. December 1995 and then put together as one concert for TV the next day.

I've not heard about a This Time Around video shoot before. I doubt though that this was planned (on Sony level), as the song just isn't that strong. What's clear though is that Sony initially saw some potential in that song for the american urban music market (because of the Notorious B.I.G. rap feature - in the US he was huge at the time) and so had a lot of urban and club (house) remixes made. It looked like an Earth Song single (with This Time Around as B-Side) was sheduled around the HBO TV concert for the US market. At least there were the usual early promo-only CD and Vinyl single releases of those two songs released in the US shortly before the show was about to happen. So there might have been a commercial single release afterwards, if the TV show would not have been cancelled...
 
Last edited:
dethorro;4276193 said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07a-EkuO1YI

95% of the lead and background vocals in this (not including the ad-libs) 1990 demo are exactly the same as in the 1995 version.

The only big differences is the fact that the 'What about flowering fields' and the 'We've drifted far' lines don't exist.

Even though the song needed some improvement, it still isn't a rough demo nor is it only a musical idea.

The September 20th 1988 demo on the other hand is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frD1shztC1Q

The word ‘rough’ may be a bit hyperbolic on my part, but the ‘Earth Song’ demo version (of August 1990) underwent later many changes/improvements so as to reach its 1995 official version (on the album).

On the ‘HIStory’ album, the song had a newly recorded bridge, newly recorded ad-libs, additional vocals, newly recorded outro vocals, more lyrics, richer instrumentation, etc.

ChrisC;4276151 said:
Did Sony reject the album when it was initially presented to them?

I remember hearing rumours of it at the time. It was originally slated to be released March 2001 then all of a sudden got pushed back to the last quarter of 2001.

It was earlier than March 2001.

Actually, ‘Invincible’ was originally supposed to get a release in 2000.

Piek;4276154 said:
If Michael wanted to ‘save’ Shout for another album, then why did he release it as a B-side? That doesn’t make sense.

I could mention the ‘Come Together’ song, which although was a B-side on the ‘Remember The Time’ single (1992), Michael Jackson included that song also on the second disc (of new songs) of his ‘HIStory’ album three years later (1995).

Erandi;4276304 said:
It's the other way around. Michael was mad with Sony for sabotaging Invincible, so he wanted, in turn, to sabotage Sony from then on (or "outthink them"). But not sabotage himself! Michael was too much of a perfectionist for that.

And about the fact that you consider the songs on Invincible as substandard...what about gems such as Unbreakable and Threatened?!

Are these two songs really gems?

‘Unbreakable’ has received a lot of negative criticism by many people and fans, and especially considering that this song is in essence just a faster version of The Notorious B.I.G.’s ‘Unbelievable’ song (1994).

There has been negative criticism also for the ‘Threatened’ song, too (which has been particularly criticized for its over-stuffed production and its rather rehashed lyrical theme).

Electro;4276291 said:
One of the things that started problems with Sony was probably the cancellation of the HBO shows "One Night Only" in 1995, where Sony lost several million $. Or maybe they didn't... if there was some insurance... who knows. But the HIStory campaign in the USA seemed damaged after that (no commercial Earth Song single etc), which Michael was for sure not happy with.


Electro;4276313 said:
Actually that was TWO Nights Only. :D It was meant to be filmed on 8. and 9. December 1995 and then put together as one concert for TV the next day.

I've not heard about a This Time Around video shoot before. I doubt though that this was planned (on Sony level), as the song just isn't that strong. What's clear though is that Sony initially saw some potential in that song for the american urban music market (because of the Notorious B.I.G. rap feature - in the US he was huge at the time) and so had a lot of urban and club (house) remixes made. It looked like an Earth Song single (with This Time Around as B-Side) was sheduled around the HBO TV concert for the US market. At least there were the usual early promo-only CD and Vinyl single releases of those two songs released in the US shortly before the show was about to happen. So there might have been a commercial single release afterwards, if the TV show would not have been cancelled...

It is well documented that Sony Music did not release ‘Earth Song’ as a single in USA back then due to different demographic factors of the country.

But ‘This Time Around’ had a strong potential in USA (especially in the country’s urban radios), so the record company decided to bundle ‘Earth Song’ (as a B-side) with the single release of ‘This Time Around’ there.

Sony Music made huge efforts to help ‘Earth Song’ to achieve chart success in USA (among others, by paying urban radios in USA to play the song more frequently).

It was a marketing decision (on the part of Sony Music) to help ‘Earth Song’ to achieve chart success in USA, although that move proved to be unsuccessful in the end for that song there.
 
mj_frenzy;4276363 said:
Are these two songs really gems?

‘Unbreakable’ has received a lot of negative criticism by many people and fans, and especially considering that this song is in essence just a faster version of The Notorious B.I.G.’s ‘Unbelievable’ song (1994).

There has been negative criticism also for the ‘Threatened’ song, too (which has been particularly criticized for its over-stuffed production and its rather rehashed lyrical theme).

I'm listening to Unbelievable rigth now. It's nothing like Unbreakable.

Threatened is over produced and thematically rehashed? Please, just open your own thread called "I don't like Invincible" and have fun there.

Michael was a perfecionist and knew that his albums will live longer than him. He knew what the word legacy meant. The idea that he would want to sabotage his own comeback album can only come from another poor soul who can't get down with Invincible because it's "oh so different."

Fan fiction is OK, but please...there is already enough false information and crazy theories about Michael out there. I came to this forum to get away from that crap. To see similar nonsense among his fanbase is dissapointing to say the least.
 
I thought Invincible was originally planned to be released in 1999. And looking back, I think that would have been a great time to release it. In 1999 Michael looked great, was performing great and he looked happy and excited to be performing again.
 
I thought Invincible was originally planned to be released in 1999. And looking back, I think that would have been a great time to release it. In 1999 Michael looked great, was performing great and he looked happy and excited to be performing again.

'Invincible' was initially supposed to be released on November 9th 1999.
 
Xeones;4274356 said:
I was hoping somebody would notice my (admittedly deliberate) discrepancies! I'm very impressed with your knowledge!

Xeones;4276272 said:
I think he just makes it up and passes it off as fact in an attempt to seem knowledgeable or to gain recognition. I would like his posts if he said: "Hey guys, this is my opinion/my timeline!" or something like that.

So, according to you, am I knowledgeable or not?

Not that I care, but at least try to be consistent with what you say.

analogue;4276391 said:
I thought Invincible was originally planned to be released in 1999.

dethorro;4276397 said:
'Invincible' was initially supposed to be released on November 9th 1999.

That is not true, and that particular date of release (on November 9th, 1999) was not officially confirmed at the time by Michael Jackson himself, or by Sony Music.

The initial, original date of release of the ‘Invincible’ album referred to 2000.

On November 11th (1999), Sony Music released a compilation album called ‘Pop Songs’ (of various artists, including also ‘Blame It On The Boogie’ by The Jacksons), which was actually a limited, promotional CD edition for the McDonald's fast food company in Germany.

With the CD booklet, there was also inside an advertisement for Michael Jackson’s forthcoming album announcing actually that his album was about to get a release very soon in the following year (2000).

Also, ‘Invincible’ could not get a release in late 1999, because Michael Jackson was working also on some other very important for him projects in that year, like the ‘MJ & Friends’ concerts, or the preparations for his Millennium concerts that were supposed to take place in Sydney and Honolulu on December 31st, 1999.
 
mj_frenzy;4276446 said:
That is not true, and that particular date of release (on November 9th, 1999) was not officially confirmed at the time by Michael Jackson himself, or by Sony Music.

Even if it wasn't, it doesn't mean that it isn't true. That was the date that Sony originally set in June (1999). It was the deadline which Michael eventually didn't meet because of several postponements.

mj_frenzy;4276446 said:
The initial, original date of release of the ‘Invincible’ album referred to 2000.

By mid-2000, the album seemed to be nearing completion and the mixing process started. However, Michael decided to write completely new material. That's when: 'Unbreakable', 'Heartbreaker' and 'Threatened' were born.

mj_frenzy;4276446 said:
With the CD booklet, there was also inside an advertisement for Michael Jackson’s forthcoming album announcing actually that his album was about to get a release very soon in the following year (2000).

Yeah, obviously because Michael hadn't met their initial deadline of November 1999. They thought that the album would be ready by 2000.

mj_frenzy;4276446 said:
Also, ‘Invincible’ could not get a release in late 1999, because Michael Jackson was working also on some other very important for him projects in that year, like the ‘MJ & Friends’ concerts, or the preparations for his Millennium concerts that were supposed to take place in Sydney and Honolulu on December 31st, 1999.

Michael started writing and recording demos in October 1997 (right after the HIStory Tour ended) alongside Brad Buxer and Michael Prince.

In August 1998 he started working with Dr.Freeze on 'A Place With No Name', 'Blue Gangsta', 'Break Of Dawn' and 'Jungle'.


In February 1999 Sony executives (including Tommy Motolla) visited the studio to hear some new songs. Michael played them 'Break Of Dawn' and Motolla loved it.


In March 1999 he met with Cory Rooney in New York to record 'She Was Loving Me'


In early/mid 1999 Rodney Jerkins presented him 'You Rock My World' which Michael recorded not long after and 'Xscape'.


So Michael could've easily released an album in late 1999. He had enough great material by then.
 
Last edited:
Did Sony reject the album when it was initially presented to them?

I remember hearing rumours of it at the time. It was originally slated to be released March 2001 then all of a sudden got pushed back to the last quarter of 2001.

Michael presented a few songs to them before he started work on invincible, but I think it was ultimately him who decided that he wanted to go in a different direction. I recall reading interviews with people from Sony saying they were very happy with the material he had played them. I think that they were more concerned about how long it was taking him to make it.
 
Back
Top