Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Michael Jackson used to play Russian roulette with his life since the early 2000s when he would overdose himself.Michael Jackson's death in 2009 shocked the world, but what were the contributing factors?
can you share legal, and personal aspects that played a role in the King of Pop's tragic end. I want to study Michael Jackson's life in detail
He would have been fine with the first 4, it was 5 and 6 that broke him.
It's nothing to do with the topic that's why I said this.Agree.
I think it's not the same person who post.
His sales would have been fine if Sony wasn't ****** him overI personally feel that he struggled with growing older and maintaining the sales of music he had before.
When you achieve such history making success, the only way is down.His sales would have been fine if Sony wasn't ****** him over
I said the maintaining of sales. Mj wanted high crazy numbers, but the music era was at a strange phase at that point.His sales would have been fine if Sony wasn't ****** him over
*1984He would have been fine with the first 4, it was 5 and 6 that broke him.
- Pepsi Accident in 1987
- Sexual assault accusations and Neverland raid by crooked DA Sneddon (2003)
- The dehumanizing treatment during the trial (2005)
Invincible sold 3 million in 5 days reportedly, without any promotion from Sony. It would have sold at least 20 million minimumWhen you achieve such history making success, the only way is down.
An artist who's peak was in the 80's and early 90's is going to struggle to repeat such gigantic sales.
Even for a once in a lifetime phenomenon like MJ.
Numbers never meant anyway and they still don't.Invincible sold 3 million in 5 days reportedly, without any promotion from Sony. It would have sold at least 20 million minimum
Captain Planet ol' logicOne of the reasons for the low sales of the 'Invincible' album was also the way Michael Jackson was dressed during the Virgin Megastore Signing Event (November, 2001).
At that event, Michael Jackson made the mistake to be dressed in a blue outfit, promoting in that way only the blue version (colour) of that album.
For example, if he wore (at that event) white shoes, blue trousers, red shirt, green belt, and orange hand watch, then he would have promoted all the 5 versions (colours) of that album, which would have resulted in more sales.
Say noOne of the reasons for the low sales of the 'Invincible' album was also the way Michael Jackson was dressed during the Virgin Megastore Signing Event (November, 2001).
At that event, Michael Jackson made the mistake to be dressed in a blue outfit, promoting in that way only the blue version (colour) of that album.
For example, if he wore (at that event) white shoes, blue trousers, red shirt, green belt, and orange hand watch, then he would have promoted all the 5 versions (colours) of that album, which would have resulted in more sales.
Having different colours was just silly, it was unnessacery, I remember hearing comments, like it was all about making money and ripping off fans. Die hard fans would buy all of them.One of the reasons for the low sales of the 'Invincible' album was also the way Michael Jackson was dressed during the Virgin Megastore Signing Event (November, 2001).
At that event, Michael Jackson made the mistake to be dressed in a blue outfit, promoting in that way only the blue version (colour) of that album.
For example, if he wore (at that event) white shoes, blue trousers, red shirt, green belt, and orange hand watch, then he would have promoted all the 5 versions (colours) of that album, which would have resulted in more sales.
I bought them all...Having different colours was just silly, it was unnessacery, I remember hearing comments, like it was all about making money and ripping off fans. Die hard fans would buy all of them.
One of the reasons for the low sales of the 'Invincible' album was also the way Michael Jackson was dressed during the Virgin Megastore Signing Event (November, 2001).
The lack of Invincible performances, tour and music videos did have an impact for sure. It came out and then suddenly it all stopped but the relationship had already turned sour by that point.
also the tracklist could've been betterThe lack of Invincible performances, tour and music videos did have an impact for sure. It came out and then suddenly it all stopped but the relationship had already turned sour by that point.
The main reason why it didn't sell so well was because of the inferior quality of the album compared to his previous work.
Also, the man was 43 years old and his popularity and image wasn't the same.
Yup, trim the fat I say and you have a much stronger album.also the tracklist could've been better
The lack of Invincible performances, tour and music videos did have an impact for sure. It came out and then suddenly it all stopped but the relationship had already turned sour by that point.
The main reason why it didn't sell so well was because of the inferior quality of the album compared to his previous work.
Also, the man was 43 years old and his popularity and image wasn't the same.
I disagree with the assessment of HIStory but there is a case to be made that Invincible does fit the trends of Pop music better than HIStory. It was a much easier listening experience, maybe a bit more "shallow".I do not agree with this argument. Invincible was completely up to the task of competing with these previous albums (it packs a punch I think, much more than History). I like this album and yet I don't like music from the early 2000s at all. It is a precursor of dubstep and even modern pop music (a little lofi too).
Let's take History, it was well below what it offered before and yet it was successful. This is mainly thanks to its gigantic promotion (tour, clips, etc.). I noticed that most people who like this album like it especially for its tour and the promotion which was in full swing all over the world (the meetings with Michael, the magazines, the goodies, the clips with a rather vulgar and trashy). But if we talk about the album as such, in my opinion (objectivity in art does not exist), it is full of faults and is no match for an Off The Wall or even a Dangerous.
I have to stop otherwise people will think I'm a History Hater x) I still love Michael... xD