Do you think MJ was over saturated during the Bad Era?

Themidwestcowboy

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,885
Points
113
The Bad Era has a very fond place in my heart. It has my favorite tour of all time and one of the finest pop records ever produced. As a fan I'm obviously happy with his enormous output during this period, but I couldn't help myself asking one question. Was Michael over saturated during this period?

Looking back at the Thriller era and the real beginning of "Michael Mania", he was everywhere but that was a byproduct of releasing Thriller. This era had 3 Music Videos (not counting say say say) and he was also a part of the ET soundtrack and later did the Victory Tour (which came at the end tail of Thriller)

Now onto Bad. MJ released his autobiography, the album, the tour and moonwalker on cinema and VHS! On the album he made an abundance of music videos, 8 to be exact, that was playing on tv stations. Almost all songs were released as singles as well which means that MJ was constantly on the radio. He also had those countless Pepsi commercials (4?) and he also performed on the Grammy’s. I think he went into the mindset that he was going to be everywhere and that all those things were meant to bolster the sales of Bad.

What do you think about this approach? Do you think this was the right move after Thriller or should he have dialed it down a little?
 
Last edited:

dethorro

Proud Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
740
Points
63
Interesting thread. I personally don’t think he was over saturated and I’m glad we got to see so many different artistic visions come to life during this era.

His mysterious image and lack of interviews + the rumors that were going around at that time helped him with his image in the sense that the public was still, in a way, not getting enough of Michael Jackson, even after the Bad era was over.
 

staywild23

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
2,127
Points
113
I don't feel like I have a ton to contribute to this conversation, but I am obsessed with the Bad era and everything that came out of it. The main thing I tend to wonder about that time in Michael's life is how he managed to do it all. It is exhausting even thinking about everything that happened in his life in the 80s, but the late 80s and all that output is just insane. So many singles from one album, so many videos, a massive world tour. I mean, just watching Bad tour footage, I marvel at how he even made it through one night performing at that level, let alone SO many dates all over the globe. Sometimes I think fans hold Michael to an unfair standard he set for himself by comparing his 90s/2000s output to who he was in the 80s, but as you just laid out, he worked tirelessly and gave every thing he had. No way that would be sustainable for anyone, let alone someone going through the personal struggles he did.

I don't want to derail your thread at all. I would love to hear the answer to this from people who know much more about this than I do. But all I can say is that as a current fan, I am SO happy that there is such a plethora of content to explore from that time :)
 

filmandmusic

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2021
Messages
1,042
Points
113
He barely took days off since the late 60s really, hence the existence of the song childhood. Don’t forget about hosting children at Neverland, building Neverland, visiting hospitals. He toured for months each year from 1970 till 1981.

I mean yes he did too much, there is no doubt, I’m exhausted thinking about his life. Many people want that lifestyle, very ambitious people, never a free moment. Plus there is also the fact that he signed record breaking music deals so he simply had to do what he did, he was an employee and an employer.

I wouldn’t want to switch with his life for even an hour.
 

staywild23

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
2,127
Points
113
He barely took days off since the late 60s really, hence the existence of the song childhood. Don’t forget about hosting children at Neverland, building Neverland, visiting hospitals. He toured for months each year from 1970 till 1981.

I mean yes he did too much, there is no doubt, I’m exhausted thinking about his life. Many people want that lifestyle, very ambitious people, never a free moment. Plus there is also the fact that he signed record breaking music deals so he simply had to do what he did, he was an employee and an employer.

I wouldn’t want to switch with his life for even an hour.
This is so true! I was looking at some website recently that was listing all of the different tours he did since he started with Motown and you're totally right. He worked basically every waking moment of his life. I don't know how he had so much energy. I used to consider myself an ambitious person but, damn...

and totally agree. I would never want his life. I can't imagine how hard it was for him to ever feel at peace.
 

filmandmusic

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2021
Messages
1,042
Points
113
This is so true! I was looking at some website recently that was listing all of the different tours he did since he started with Motown and you're totally right. He worked basically every waking moment of his life. I don't know how he had so much energy. I used to consider myself an ambitious person but, damn...

and totally agree. I would never want his life. I can't imagine how hard it was for him to ever feel at peace.
Yeah and there is also misinformation. They say his first world tour was in 1987 but that is false, the first tour was from’ 1973 till 1975. They also said his first concert in belgium was in 1988 which is again false as he did a show there already in 1972. It’s something that irks me that journalists are too lazy to do a tiny bit of research.

Let’s not forget the hundreds of hours that went into photoshoots and concert and video rehearsals, this actually goes as far back as 1965 when he joined the band
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
One can say that in the 'BAD' era Michael Jackson had the privilege of having a big machine behind him which helped him a lot to do all these things.

He had agents, advisors, lawyers, record producers, record distributors, music video directors, personal photographers, personal make-up artists, personal cooks, tour entourage, etc, that all of them were at his disposal in order to make his life a lot easier and less exhausting during that period.

He even had a ghost-writer for a significant part of his 'Moonwalk' book.

He did perform so many 'BAD' concerts in a gruelling tour schedule, but you cannot feel sorry for him about that because he did what he liked and wanted to do (performing on stage).

Also, in terms of sales of his 'BAD' album, all that over-saturation proved to be rather ineffective because that over-saturation did not really help him to surpass the sales of his previous 'Thriller' album (which was his goal from the very beginning of the 'BAD' era).
 

Themidwestcowboy

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,885
Points
113
Interesting thread. I personally don’t think he was over saturated and I’m glad we got to see so many different artistic visions come to life during this era.

His mysterious image and lack of interviews + the rumors that were going around at that time helped him with his image in the sense that the public was still, in a way, not getting enough of Michael Jackson, even after the Bad era was over.
I don't feel like I have a ton to contribute to this conversation, but I am obsessed with the Bad era and everything that came out of it. The main thing I tend to wonder about that time in Michael's life is how he managed to do it all. It is exhausting even thinking about everything that happened in his life in the 80s, but the late 80s and all that output is just insane. So many singles from one album, so many videos, a massive world tour. I mean, just watching Bad tour footage, I marvel at how he even made it through one night performing at that level, let alone SO many dates all over the globe. Sometimes I think fans hold Michael to an unfair standard he set for himself by comparing his 90s/2000s output to who he was in the 80s, but as you just laid out, he worked tirelessly and gave every thing he had. No way that would be sustainable for anyone, let alone someone going through the personal struggles he did.

I don't want to derail your thread at all. I would love to hear the answer to this from people who know much more about this than I do. But all I can say is that as a current fan, I am SO happy that there is such a plethora of content to explore from that time :)
These are interesting takes! I never thought about it this way. I wonder if the mystique surrounding him hurt his sales for Bad because in the Dangerous Era MJ was much more accessible when it came to interviews, award shows, Superbowl etc, and Dangerous was well on its way to outsell Bad before the allegations.

Now that I think about it, from 82 to 89, MJ never took a single break and was always in something high profiled. 82-83 the Thriller campaign, 84 the Victory Tour, 85 We Are The World, 86 Captain EO and 87-89 Bad era. It wasn't until after the Bad era that he finally had a bit of a cooling off period.
Also, in terms of sales of his 'BAD' album, all that over-saturation proved to be rather ineffective because that over-saturation did not really help him to surpass the sales of his previous 'Thriller' album (which was his goal from the very beginning of the 'BAD' era).
This is interesting. First of all MJ was never going to outsell Thriller, period. Thriller was once in a lifetime thing but I admire him for having that lofty goal. Secondly, as I stated above, Dangerous was well on its way to outsell Bad before the allegations, and that was only with the album campaign, The tour, a couple of interviews and the Superbowl. One also has to wonder if, and if how much, Bad sales were affected by his appearance during that era.
 
Last edited:

staywild23

Premium Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
2,127
Points
113
These are interesting takes! I never thought about it this way. I wonder if the mystique surrounding him hurt his sales for Bad because in the Dangerous Era MJ was much more accessible when it came to interviews, award shows, Superbowl etc, and Dangerous was well on its way to outsell Bad before the allegations.

Now that I think about it, from 82 to 89 MJ never took a single break and was always in something high profile.82-83 the thriller campagin, 84 the victory tour, 85 We Are The World, 86 Captain EO, 87-89 Bad era. It wasn't until after the Bad era that he finally had a bit of a cooling off period.

This is interesting. First of all MJ was never going to outsell Thriller, period. Thriller was once in a lifetime thing but I admire him for having that lofty goal. Secondly, as I stated above, Dangerous was well on its way to outsell Bad before the allegations, and that was only with the album campaign, The tour, a couple of interviews and the Superbowl. One also has to wonder if, and if how much, Bad sales were affected by his appearance during that era.

Something that's interesting to me is that MJ, even now, was never able to outrun the expectation and standard set by Thriller. No other artist has to compete with those numbers to be considered successful - just him. Out of curiosity I looked up the top album sales of all time. I'm sure many fans already know this, but I didn't, so I'll share: Michael Jackson is the only artist who has 5 albums that are listed among the best selling albums of all time. Thriller, Bad, Dangerous, HIStory, and Off the Wall all had sales over 20million (with the first three being much higher). This is *objectively* amazing. It is only when compared to Thriller's sales that anyone could view any of his other album sales as lacking. When you consider that he maintained this level of success through allegations of committing some of the worst possible crimes, his changing appearance, and all kinds of other controversy, with constant media scrutiny, prescription drug dependency, etc. it is WILD. Just imagine the stratospheric sales he would have seen had none of those things happened, or if they had happened to a lesser extent? His career was derailed in the most extreme way and yet he still was insanely successful and beloved worldwide. (Side note: the next artists with the most albums on the list are Celine Dion with 4, and The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Whitney Houston, and Madonna all have 3 -- so it's unlikely anyone is going to take this achievement from him anytime soon, if ever).

Another thought I just had which gets back to the original thread topic is that perhaps overexposure did play a role in the sales for Bad! If you think about it, so many singles and videos from one album...I can imagine that everywhere you turned there was Michael, being his Bad self lol. So many going to number #1 and top 10... I can imagine every time you turn on the radio, there is Michael being a beast. You wouldn't really need to buy the album because the album, in almost its entirety, was played everywhere all the time. So...hmm... that kind of makes sense to me actually. I can absolutely see people thinking, "why buy a physical copy when I can just turn on the radio?"

Anyway, I am a newer fan, so I definitely can't speak accurately about the cultural context and how people were responding to MJ in real time outside of what I have researched, which I fully realize is not the same thing. However, it is unfathomable to me that his appearance in the Bad era would HURT his sales. I understand completely what you are saying because his appearance changed and I can imagine, living in that time, people were probably confused and put off by not understanding what was happening with him. But looking at it through a contemporary lens and taking everything he was during that era at pure face value...his Bad era appearance, aesthetic, charisma, swag, performance quality, energy, etc... let's just put it this way. I don't think I'm ever going to recover from all the swooning lol. Good lord that man was something. 🔥
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
@Themidwestcowboy, @staywild23, it has been said that sales of the 'BAD' album were adversely affected by the change in his appearance during that era.

The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time.

The fact that his skin tone became lighter alienated many of his black American fans, who did not like that change in his appearance and as a result they did not buy that album.

These fans (who represented a large portion of his American fan base in general) thought that Michael Jackson hated and betrayed his black race.

Also, Michael Jackson was over-exposed in the 'BAD' era not only because he wanted to outrun the expectation and standard set by his 'Thriller' album.

He also aimed at outrunning the standard set by American singer Elvis Presley.

According to certain sources, Michael Jackson even exhibited signs of depression in the 'BAD' era (after the release of his 'BAD' album) when he realized that no matter what he did he could not achieve more album sales and become more successful than Elvis Presley.
 

Hess

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
11,402
Points
83
Sorry - but the sentence "if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter..." is disrespectful IMO.

It has been proven over and over again - and finally in the autopsy rapport, that MJ had the rare skin disease Vitiligo. I think this is normal knowledge among MJ fans. So to claim MJ just for the fun of it changed his skin tone...??? Disrespectful to say the least.

MJ was the world most famous person - and all of a sudden his skin went totally white. - it was not just a lighter skin tone MJ experienced, it was white as porcelain. Terrible to have to live with white spots when you are in the spotlight 24/7 and maybe has low selfesteem because his father (and maybe siblings?) teased him with his appereance - big nose etc. - Must have been terrible for MJ.

He said it himself, at first he covered the white spots with dark make-up (which can actually be seen at some photos from concert were the sweat has removed the dark make-up. - Laster on the white spots was so big that it was easier to actually cover his natural dark skin with white make up. But that was a kind of damage control - absolutely not a wish or a desire to be white. - That is utter nonsens IMO.

Sorry I went out of topic - it just annoys me when people claim MJ wanted to be white - especially on a fan-forum where I think people know the truth.
 

Hess

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
11,402
Points
83
He also aimed at outrunning the standard set by American singer Elvis Presley.

According to certain sources, Michael Jackson even exhibited signs of depression in the 'BAD' era (after the release of his 'BAD' album) when he realized that no matter what he did he could not achieve more album sales and become more successful than Elvis Presley.

I've never heard this before - who are these sources?? I do actually believe MJ might was depressed later on in his life - after the 1993 accusations and medicin addiction etc. - But a depression around BAD era because he could not become more successful than Elvis Presley?? Sounds like tabloid nonsens - but if you have sources or anything to back this claim up I would like to see it.
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
@Hess, it was not publicly known at that time that Michael Jackson had a rare skin disease called Vitiligo.

They thought that Michael Jackson was intentionally trying to make his skin tone lighter in order to have a bigger commercial success.
 

Nite Line

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
2,119
Points
83
@Themidwestcowboy, @staywild23, it has been said that sales of the 'BAD' album were adversely affected by the change in his appearance during that era.

The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time.

The fact that his skin tone became lighter alienated many of his black American fans, who did not like that change in his appearance and as a result they did not buy that album.

These fans (who represented a large portion of his American fan base in general) thought that Michael Jackson hated and betrayed his black race.

Also, Michael Jackson was over-exposed in the 'BAD' era not only because he wanted to outrun the expectation and standard set by his 'Thriller' album.

He also aimed at outrunning the standard set by American singer Elvis Presley.

According to certain sources, Michael Jackson even exhibited signs of depression in the 'BAD' era (after the release of his 'BAD' album) when he realized that no matter what he did he could not achieve more album sales and become more successful than Elvis Presley.
What are you talking about? While I do believe that Michael’s changing appearance did turn some people away from him, the fact that you went on to say that Michael purposely made his skin tone lighter is disgusting. You do realise that Michael suffered from vitiligo.

And lol at Michael being depressed because he couldn’t achieve more album sales that Elvis and become more successful than him. The reality is that Bad has sold more copies than any Elvis album. In fact, Michael has five albums that have sold more than 20 million copies worldwide and sold more copies than any Elvis album. Elvis may have more overall album sales because he released way too many albums. Michael released very few and is still the third best selling artist of all time.

You talk so much nonsense and spread a lot of misinformation.
 
Last edited:

dethorro

Proud Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
740
Points
63
The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time.

Oh boy! Wow! I truly can't understand why you decide to waste your time on this forum insulting most of the things Michael has done in his life. So many of your posts contain false information or rumours which you present as facts and you reach your own conclusions, which are wrong a lot of times.

I'm not saying to be a fan means thinking everything Michael has done is great and that he was an angel, however, I can't help but get the feeling that you are not even someone who truly likes Michael Jackson, when reading your posts. I may be wrong and I don't mean to insult you in any way, but what's with all the negativity? And why do you feel the need to trash talk Michael so often, especially on a forum dedicated to him?

I find it extremely disrespectful and disgusting to say that Michael Jackson 'made his skin tone lighter at that time'.
 

dethorro

Proud Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
740
Points
63
Sounds like tabloid nonsens - but if you have sources or anything to back this claim up I would like to see it.
He doesn't...he never has. And when there are sources, they are extremely dubious or taken out of context.
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
Oh boy! Wow! I truly can't understand why you decide to waste your time on this forum insulting most of the things Michael has done in his life. So many of your posts contain false information or rumours which you present as facts and you reach your own conclusions, which are wrong a lot of times.

I'm not saying to be a fan means thinking everything Michael has done is great and that he was an angel, however, I can't help but get the feeling that you are not even someone who truly likes Michael Jackson, when reading your posts. I may be wrong and I don't mean to insult you in any way, but what's with all the negativity? And why do you feel the need to trash talk Michael so often, especially on a forum dedicated to him?

I find it extremely disrespectful and disgusting to say that Michael Jackson 'made his skin tone lighter at that time'.
Read what I wrote in its context and do not conveniently isolate my phrase for your attacks.

I wrote that many people at that time thought that Michael Jackson intentionally made his skin tone lighter (because they were not yet aware of his rare skin disease called Vitiligo).
 

zinniabooklover

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2022
Messages
3,638
Points
113
@Hess, it was not publicly known at that time that Michael Jackson had a rare skin disease called Vitiligo.

They thought that Michael Jackson was intentionally trying to make his skin tone lighter in order to have a bigger commercial success.
Agreed, the vitiligo diagnosis wasn't publicly known at that time.

"The fact that his skin tone became lighter alienated many of his black American fans, who did not like that change in his appearance and as a result they did not buy that album."

Yes, some of Michael's African American fans were influenced by the media speculation about his changing skin tone. Presumably, some of his Black British fans also believed the media nonsense. I never used to read about Michael back in the day so I have no way of knowing whether anyone in any Black community actually bothered to consider vitiligo as an explanation. I mean, I would hope so but I don't actually know.

Race politics in America is extremely complicated and I can believe that many of Michael's African American fans were probably truly angry and disappointed. However, I struggle to believe it would have put much of a dent into the sales figures for Bad. He probably lost thousands of sales because of this; I highly doubt he was losing millions of sales. That just seems so unlikely.

You wrote:

"The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time."

If. Really? If.

And, 'make'. Seriously? 'make his skin tone lighter'.

You know, you could have written that quite differently. You must be able to see how incredibly offensive it is to have written the sentence as you did. It is possible to acknowledge the speculative media coverage at the time without actually sinking to their level.

Michael did not 'make' his skin tone change and you know this. Why write such a sloppy, offensive statement?

I thought we were trying to be accurate and respectful on this board. Did I get that wrong?
 

Hess

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
11,402
Points
83
@Hess, it was not publicly known at that time that Michael Jackson had a rare skin disease called Vitiligo.

They thought that Michael Jackson was intentionally trying to make his skin tone lighter in order to have a bigger commercial success.

If you had written it like that it would have been OK. - But to be precise - what you wrote was:

"The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time."

This has nothing to do with rumours at the time and what people thought back then. - The way you wrote it - the only way it can be understood is like MJ was intentionally making his skin tone lighter.

All the media bashing and speculating about his changing colour - that's a totally different - and correct? - thing. It very well turned some black people against him because they did not know better at the time. - but now in 2022 we do know better.
 

filmandmusic

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2021
Messages
1,042
Points
113
Depressed because of Elvis? Yeah right. Just another media spin of white being better than black. It isn't even comparable as during Elvis' great moments album sales were practically non existent. So the only comparison that can be made is on the singles chart and with 5 nr 1 singles on 1 album I am positive there was nothing to be depressed about lol. He ended the decade with more nr 1 singles than anybody else and it certainly wasn't because of a lack of competition (Madonna, Whitney Houston, Prince, Bruce Springsteen, George Michael, Elton John).

So that story, I call it bullshit.
 
Last edited:

dethorro

Proud Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2018
Messages
740
Points
63
Read what I wrote in its context and do not conveniently isolate my phrase for your attacks.

I wrote that many people at that time thought that Michael Jackson intentionally made his skin tone lighter (because they were not yet aware of his rare skin disease called Vitiligo).

This sums up what I was about to write:

If you had written it like that it would have been OK. - But to be precise - what you wrote was:

"The 'BAD' album would have sold more copies if Michael Jackson did not make his skin tone lighter at that time."

This has nothing to do with rumours at the time and what people thought back then. - The way you wrote it - the only way it can be understood is like MJ was intentionally making his skin tone lighter.

All the media bashing and speculating about his changing colour - that's a totally different - and correct? - thing. It very well turned some black people against him because they did not know better at the time. - but now in 2022 we do know better.

And I did not 'attack' you. I simply told you something which bothers me and I'm sure bothers others as well. It isn't about this one post only, either. It's about so many of your posts over the years which have contained many rumours and false information, for which you did not provide a source when asked for one.
It's also about your negative attitude towards Michael Jackson and his art in the majority of your posts, which I do not appreciate.

I doubt you care about my opinion but I felt it was necessary to share it with you and other members anyways.
 

SmoothCriminal1995

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
1,835
Points
83
Interesting question as always mate

I think Mike was heavily exposed during this era but not over exposed. The short films and the singles were well spread out and news clips from the tour helped fill the gaps in between.

For visual artists like Michael, it made sense to make sure that he was in the public eye often. I love the fact that he made lots of short films and put hard work on the promotion of the record, because it's fantastic and deserved attention. I just wish he got even more recognition for it

The genius of the era, is that Mike still remained elusive, which was a big part of his appeal. I do wish he ended the era with an interview of some sorts, his interview with with Ebony Jet in 1987 was my favourite one he ever did.

I wish Mike would have put as much work in his later projects as he did with the Bad Album, although I get he had his reasons

Sorry for the huge post, it's a really interesting topic
 

Pentum

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
7,136
Points
63
Location
Norway
I can't even fathom how Michael made time for all he did during the 80s. How he managed to record all of the stuff, rehearse, perform, write, plan, draw, build/buying, touring, collaborate, visit, host, socialize, spending time on his own appearance/fashion and SLEEP. And I am sure I am forgetting some other stuff.

The guy was simply a real genius. I doubt his appearance had any negative effect on the sales. I'd say it's the opposite. MJ was MJ also because of how unique and special he looked and was. I honestly don't think the BAD era could go any other way than it did, and surpass what we saw.

Thriller and especially Bad era was Mike at his peak in everything in my opinion. But it was also his prime age in terms of aging as well.

It is also my opinion that he could have continued the craze, has it not been for the allegations during the early 90s. It was not due to the skin color or nose. Because MJ was MJ in that sense. But the allegations is what "took him down" from the peak, in my perspective. Not only because so many more started disliking him, believing the lies, media going against him even more than ever, but because MJ really suffered and was truly hurt by what his "own country" did to him, his "own people". For the first time, he saw true evil and it damaged him which led him to a more political style of an artist (which in it's own also is more natural, as he aged and matured, like most of us).

Even til this day when I listen to Thriller and Bad era music, there is this energy in Michaels vocals and the way of singing, this sort of "fun, young, energic" feeling to them, that I do not feel "that" much after the BAD era. Which again, is totally fan, but one of the observations I use as a reason for BAD era being at his musical peak.

If we were to discuss other types of peak, i.e political peak, then obviously HIStory and forth would be the candidate.

So do I believe he was over saturated during the BAD era? Not in my biased opinion :D
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
I've never heard this before - who are these sources?? I do actually believe MJ might was depressed later on in his life - after the 1993 accusations and medicin addiction etc. - But a depression around BAD era because he could not become more successful than Elvis Presley?? Sounds like tabloid nonsens - but if you have sources or anything to back this claim up I would like to see it.
It has been noted that Don King by kept comparing him to Elvis Presley, and telling him that Elvis Presley was still bigger than him (in the late 'BAD' era) was something that appeared to have caused depression to Michael Jackson at that time.

Don King was the promoter of the Victory Tour.

People close to Michael Jackson also spoke about jealousy towards Elvis Presley.

That is why he wanted a moniker at that time (in the late 'BAD' era), similar to Elvis Presley's 'King Of Rock And Roll' moniker.

"…Michael had wanted a moniker like Bruce Springsteen, Frank Sinatra and Elvis [Presley] … In fact, I was the one who got Liz Taylor to introduce him at the Soul Train Awards in 1989 as 'the King of Pop, Rock and Soul'…" (Bob Jones)

Bob Jones was his long-time publicist from 1987 to 2004.
 

Pentum

Proud Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
7,136
Points
63
Location
Norway
mj_frenzy, I don't mind most of your posts, but you have to stop taking every single word from all the various sources so literally. These quotes and words from other people are not always the make or break, and one often tends to lose sight of the bigger picture
 

Hiker

MJJC Staff
Staff member
Joined
Feb 5, 2022
Donations
$20.00
Messages
1,471
Points
113
Even til this day when I listen to Thriller and Bad era music, there is this energy in Michaels vocals and the way of singing, this sort of "fun, young, energic" feeling to them, that I do not feel "that" much after the BAD era. Which again, is totally fan, but one of the observations I use as a reason for BAD era being at his musical peak.
Dangerous era is my favourite, but that is not based on pure vocals. He looks much more confident on stage and how he carried himself off stage. Though I agree that till Bad we see a much more fun, young and energetic Michael. This may be natural evolution of being in late 20s vs early 30s. Also I have read some theories that Bad tour was too exhausting and taxing on his vocals. So there may not have been over saturation during Bad era (sorry I have no clue on that), but Michael might have over exhausted himself with that non-stop activity during that time. His shift towards a more 'cynical, I am disenchanted by the world' Michael is clear in HIStory. Though that does show us a new side of Michael the creative genius.
 

SmoothCriminal1995

Proud Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
1,835
Points
83
I never got the Elvis thing, because Michael was much more of a superstar worldwide. Elvis is huge in America but Michael is much bigger in more territories

I always wonder if Mike felt overworked after the Bad era, because he apparently was tired of making short films (someone mentioned in the Bad 25 doc) hence why Mike made a cameo in the Liberian Girl vid.

I know after the Bad era he never put as much effort into all projects, like he did during the Bad era. Maybe he felt he had nothing to prove and wanted focus more on his music, not on the promotion of it
 

mj_frenzy

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
1,974
Points
48
Location
Greece
I never got the Elvis thing, because Michael was much more of a superstar worldwide. Elvis is huge in America but Michael is much bigger in more territories

I always wonder if Mike felt overworked after the Bad era, because he apparently was tired of making short films (someone mentioned in the Bad 25 doc) hence why Mike made a cameo in the Liberian Girl vid.

I know after the Bad era he never put as much effort into all projects, like he did during the Bad era. Maybe he felt he had nothing to prove and wanted focus more on his music, not on the promotion of it
Michael Jackson's cameo appearance in 'Liberian Girl' was Jim Yukich's idea.

The director came up with that idea when they were trying to find the concept of this music video.

"I pitched the idea to Michael that we would have him shoot the video while all these are people waiting to begin the video, and they don't realize it until the end is that he's directing…He loved the idea…" (Jim Yukich)

Also, the aggressive and costly promotion in the post-BAD eras show the exact opposite.

For example, in the HIStory era Michael Jackson at that time focused more on the promotion of his new music, rather than on his new music.

The HIStory video teaser for instance, which was shot in Hungary, although it was so brief (4 minutes), yet it cost around 4 million dollars.

Or, the 'Scream' music video which was the most expensive music video ever made (7 million dollars).
 
Top