Latest on MJJC

Has it become an anomaly to enjoy Michael Jackson's music?

Yeah I literally heard two MJ songs this past weekend in one sitting. It's played on radio, it's played in the car, at restauraunts. "Cancellation" just doesn't count for anything. It's blackballing, and you can't blackball Michael Jackson. Very different story from say, Gary Glitter.

AlwaysThere said:
How will future generations view him? That's impossible to judge. For the time being, though, he's fine. Not as good as he could/should be, but he's fine.
Click to expand...
That's the part I actually think might swing very far upwards. If nothing else we will be rid of and away from the "he wanted to be white" and "he should've loved himself" generation of people, medical sensitivity is becoming far more commonplace than before.

There are other scandals to MJ. Like dangling Blanket and his supposed claims of drug dependency. Various things that people that were alive to see will always have strong assertions on.

But as long as Robinson and Safechuck don't recant, they'll always be a aura of "Where there's smoke". Once they entirely discredit that then the record is clear.

And tbh, MJ himself said he had sleepovers, so until they clarify exactly what that is and what that means, in a harmless way, then that also isn't the best look.

(Also it's interesting to note that most of the young men MJ were with weren't actually little children; they were teenagers. I think that says something a lot less objectively suspicious about how MJ was, even if that's not a huge difference, it's not really a crime to mentor young teenagers. That's entirely different from being with little, little boys.)
 
Guys, you are damn right, my friends, but I want to say something. Despite many of people still listen to MJ music, big companies like Disney keep cancel MJ's involvment in their content. For example, idiots from Disney cutted out Simpsons episode, where was MJ cameo.... Or recently Sonic Origins (game) was released without MJ's music.... Big companies don't want MJ taking part in their business... Even after his death... That's so wrong, my friends...
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Yeah I literally heard two MJ songs this past weekend in one sitting. It's played on radio, it's played in the car, at restauraunts.
Click to expand...
You are damn lucky, my friend. In my country, radio always broadcasts only one song. Billie Jean
 
I think there will always be ups and downs but there is a lot to be thankful for.

Sorry @PurpleThriller I'll make this my last Twitter post! Couldn't resist, lol.

from @MJJSpotify2015 re Invincible at No. 84 Apple US 200 Pop Albums.
"BREAKING! "Invincible" has spent 5 whole days on the Apple US 200 Pop Albums"


And this. HCW was trending on TikTok last year, that translated into actual streaming stats and even now it is still hanging in there.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1662749559137660928
 
Richard76 said:
Guys, you are damn right, my friends, but I want to say something. Despite many of people still listen to MJ music, big companies like Disney keep cancel MJ's involvment in their content. For example, idiots from Disney cutted out Simpsons episode, where was MJ cameo.... Or recently Sonic Origins (game) was released without MJ's music.... Big companies don't want MJ taking part in their business... Even after his death... That's so wrong, my friends...
Click to expand...
Yeah ..I was really disappointed with them. Released last June of all times & not including him. Not that you'd not expect anything different from them . SEGA and its bitchy Origins sonic can suck it
apart from that i think we're really good.
 
He is nowhere near being cancelled...
I strongly recommend checking out 'MJChartData' on Twitter or Instagram, there you can see his most current charts and acoomplishments!
Thriller, Number Ones and other Albums are constantly charting around the world and only last year, he broke numerous records again through updates by the RIAA!
So, don't worry, Michaels legacy will live... For decades and even centuries to come!
 
UMJKtF said:
He is nowhere near being cancelled...
I strongly recommend checking out 'MJChartData' on Twitter or Instagram, there you can see his most current charts and acoomplishments!
Thriller, Number Ones and other Albums are constantly charting around the world and only last year, he broke numerous records again through updates by the RIAA! [...]
Click to expand...
That's one way to do it. Or just check out the Chart Watch thread, it all gets posted there including the RIAA updates. I find info comes up much quicker on the MJ fan accounts on Twitter than it does on the official Michael ones. Sometimes the gap is as much as two days. 🤷‍♀️
 
zinniabooklover said:
That's one way to do it. Or just check out the Chart Watch thread, it all gets posted there including the RIAA updates. I find info comes up much quicker on the MJ fan accounts on Twitter than it does on the official Michael ones. Sometimes the gap is as much as two days. 🤷‍♀️
Click to expand...
Definitely!
Also we gotta be careful which source we trust, because just the other day, I stumbled across somebody posting fake-data...
But nonetheless, Michaels music is doing crazy in modern times... Just take a look at Spotify or Youtube! His numbers are absolutely amazing especially for a legacy artist😌
 
zinniabooklover said:
Agreed. Someone has recently published a book about whether it's possible to separate an artist from their art if they have a 'difficult' story. Idk if Michael is in the book but he's been mentioned in the reviews and not in a good way. So I think there will always be some low moments.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately Michael is in it. There is a chapter on him. However, I strongly suspect the writer was told to include it, or did so without a great passion for it.

I was at a bookstore recently and picked up the book just to check if Michael was mentioned. He's not mentioned in the intro at all. I skimmed the first two chapters about Roman Polanski and Woody Allen and both are fairly in depth about the particulars of the issues with them. Very complex. The third chapter is about Michael and, honestly, it really barely mentions him. It is more about the debate around him. It discusses whether listening to the Jackson 5 is ok when Michael himself was exploited as a child. But then, of course, it does say explicitly that Leaving Neverland "confirmed" what no one wanted to believe. VERY frustrating. The way it is written, though, I'm not even confident that the author watched it. It almost seemed more like she was saying it was impossible not to come to that conclusion whether you saw it or not. It was interesting, but felt less impassioned to me than the previous chapters. Again, I can't help but wonder if she was asked to include this chapter by publishers.

Mister_Jay_Tee said:
. I was just looking at a Liz Taylor book. They kept trying to make Michael out to be as weird and doomed as could be, while also having to accept that Liz loved and adored him, as a mother. And that's the way it will be unless we completely uproot the American journalism/literature market.
Click to expand...
Ironically, during this same bookstore trip, I picked up a book about Liz Taylor also just to read parts about Michael. And tbh I was more upset about that than the book mentioned above. Just like you're describing here, I found them trying to depict Michael in the most bizarre way possible. They exaggerate and completely fabricate some details about Neverland. It was just sad to me that even in a book about one of Michael's best friends he is torn down.

Anyway, despite all of this I also feel very positively about Michael's legacy. This stuff definitely depresses me, but nothing will make me feel hopeless about his legacy. His numbers are incredible, in spite of being attacked so much. His numbers are better post-LN, in fact. His music is the gateway to learning the truth about him. I may be naive for saying this, but I think time will treat him well. Future generations will see the truth.
 
staywild23 said:
The way it is written, though, I'm not even confident that the author watched it. It almost seemed more like she was saying it was impossible not to come to that conclusion whether you saw it or not.
Click to expand...

This is the stance the media and other celebrities have in Belgium on MJ post LN. “It was so convincing and detailed that I can’t not believe it” are the words of one of the most famous Belgian singers who also happens to be a great fan. He also mentioned afterwards that he can “seperate the art from the private life”. His voice was most prominently heard post LN. It started a big tv debat straight after premiering and he was the central guest and fan who was asked for his opinion.
 
filmandmusic said:
This is the stance the media and other celebrities have in Belgium on MJ post LN. “It was so convincing and detailed that I can’t not believe it” are the words of one of the most famous Belgian singers who also happens to be a great fan. He also mentioned afterwards that he can “seperate the art from the private life”. His voice was most prominently heard post LN. It started a big tv debat straight after premiering and he was the central guest and fan who was asked for his opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes, such statements are very upsetting.
It also happens that people speak out this way and then change their mind, but don't say it publicly. We have a pretty famous anchorwoman and journalist in our country. Right after NL came out, she spoke very negatively about Michael. Recently saw her show where MJ was mentioned and she confidently admitted that LN was lying. And, that Michael in her opinion is justified, but you won't see that opinion anywhere else.
 
staywild23 said:
Unfortunately Michael is in it. There is a chapter on him.
Click to expand...
OK. The 2 reviews I saw skated past Michael pretty quickly although one did include a photo of him - which is standard.

staywild23 said:
[...] I was at a bookstore recently and picked up the book just to check if Michael was mentioned. He's not mentioned in the intro at all. I skimmed the first two chapters about Roman Polanski and Woody Allen and both are fairly in depth about the particulars of the issues with them. Very complex. The third chapter is about Michael and, honestly, it really barely mentions him. It is more about the debate around him. It discusses whether listening to the Jackson 5 is ok when Michael himself was exploited as a child. But then, of course, it does say explicitly that Leaving Neverland "confirmed" what no one wanted to believe.
Click to expand...
That seems to be the default position for a lot of people. Some people want to believe this stuff and regard the tv programme as the last word on the subject.

staywild23 said:
VERY frustrating. The way it is written, though, I'm not even confident that the author watched it. It almost seemed more like she was saying it was impossible not to come to that conclusion whether you saw it or not. It was interesting, but felt less impassioned to me than the previous chapters. Again, I can't help but wonder if she was asked to include this chapter by publishers.
Click to expand...
The book has had mixed reviews over here. Her thinking has been called out for being muddled and unconvincing. Sounds to me like she had an idea that was maybe good enough for an article and has somehow strung it out across a whole book.

staywild23 said:
Anyway, despite all of this I also feel very positively about Michael's legacy. This stuff definitely depresses me, but nothing will make me feel hopeless about his legacy. His numbers are incredible, in spite of being attacked so much. His numbers are better post-LN, in fact. His music is the gateway to learning the truth about him. I may be naive for saying this, but I think time will treat him well. Future generations will see the truth.
Click to expand...
:)
 
zinniabooklover said:
The book has had mixed reviews over here. Her thinking has been called out for being muddled and unconvincing. Sounds to me like she had an idea that was maybe good enough for an article and has somehow strung it out across a whole book.
Click to expand...
I can understand why. Tbh I like the concept for the book a lot. And she writes it from her perspective as a fan/consumer. I think it is meant to be somewhat murky. But after MJ's chapter, I really wasn't sure what I was supposed to take away from it, in terms of even her own perspective on the matter. I know she thinks his music is great, feels for him as a child, doesn't want to (but does) believe the allegations, but ultimately she doesn't really wrestle with the bigger issues, in my opinion. Perhaps the reviewers are frustrated by the lack of a hard edge. I think her intention was to put the decision in the hands of the readers, but for me, it feels like she only scratches the surface. I was instantly lost when I saw how firmly she presented LN as a slam-dunk, no-room-for-debate kind of period on the sentence that is "Michael Jackson's legacy." It is actually WILD to me that an acquittal can be "erased" in some people's minds by a film that offered quite literally no evidence whatsoever.

Ironically, within the chapter she talks about how as she was writing it a Jackson 5 song came on and she couldn't help but dance. Perhaps that's the final statement she was trying to make.
 
staywild23 said:
I can understand why. Tbh I like the concept for the book a lot.
Click to expand...
Same. The positive review I saw said Dederer isn't didactic and doesn't offer 'prescriptive moralising' which I'm fine with.

staywild23 said:
And she writes it from her perspective as a fan/consumer. I think it is meant to be somewhat murky.
Click to expand...
That was the impression I got. The reviewer describes Dederer as being prepared to be confused and wrong which I don't have a problem with. Otoh, the negative review points out various mistakes she's made, her crappy (in their view) writing and her habit of constantly delegating judgement to others. Perhaps none of that matters but what was interesting to me was that one review mentioned Michael so fleetingly I wasn't even sure he was in the book and the other review didn't mention him at all. A couple of years ago I'm sure that would have been different. I think he would have been one of the main subjects under discussion. Regardless of what Dederer had to say about him, I think the reviewers would have revelled in yet another opportunity to dump their crappy judgements all over Michael. So that seems like a major change, imo. I mean, the book is called 'Monsters' and, yes, Michael is in there but those 2 reviews just didn't focus on him.

staywild23 said:
But after MJ's chapter, I really wasn't sure what I was supposed to take away from it, in terms of even her own perspective on the matter. I know she thinks his music is great, feels for him as a child, doesn't want to (but does) believe the allegations, but ultimately she doesn't really wrestle with the bigger issues, in my opinion. Perhaps the reviewers are frustrated by the lack of a hard edge.
Click to expand...
I think this is just one of the problems with the book.

staywild23 said:
I think her intention was to put the decision in the hands of the readers, but for me, it feels like she only scratches the surface. I was instantly lost when I saw how firmly she presented LN as a slam-dunk, no-room-for-debate kind of period on the sentence that is "Michael Jackson's legacy." It is actually WILD to me that an acquittal can be "erased" in some people's minds by a film that offered quite literally no evidence whatsoever.
Click to expand...
This is the kind of sloppy thinking I can't be doing with.

staywild23 said:
Ironically, within the chapter she talks about how as she was writing it a Jackson 5 song came on and she couldn't help but dance. Perhaps that's the final statement she was trying to make.
Click to expand...
🤷‍♀️
 
I have a question but I don’t want to make it an entirely new thread

Are you worried about the rumor of leaving neverland 2 to be in the works? What will it be about? New accusers? Maybe it will focus on “recovery” of Robson and Safeschuck?
What have they gained from LN so far? If they had a goal with LN have they fulfilled it or is there more to come?

I never saw LN coming, I hope a sequel is nothing more than a an unfounded rumor…
 
filmandmusic said:
I have a question but I don’t want to make it an entirely new thread

Are you worried about the rumor of leaving neverland 2
Click to expand...
I think the public can see by now all the bs that goes down , over n over again film ..so, i wouldn't be too worried about LN.
filmandmusic said:
New accusers?
Click to expand...
:ROFLMAO:i laughed so hard that i missed out the ...:ROFLMAO:haha ! :eek::ROFLMAO:...that " Focus on recovery" bit ? haha
New low down , dirty leech scum mfs? .... then we fight , and then we jump the next leech mf that comes along after that, and so on.

I am not all that phased here with the likes of LN. ..i like a good rumble.
 
filmandmusic said:
I have a question but I don’t want to make it an entirely new thread

Are you worried about the rumor of leaving neverland 2 to be in the works? What will it be about? New accusers? Maybe it will focus on “recovery” of Robson and Safeschuck?
What have they gained from LN so far? If they had a goal with LN have they fulfilled it or is there more to come?

I never saw LN coming, I hope a sequel is nothing more than a an unfounded rumor…
Click to expand...
Bring it on. They can’t keep track of all the lies.
 
Some people and celebrities are less likely to want to say that they still listen to MJ and talk about him because of the documentary but he hasn't been cancelled. Radio plays his music all the time.
 
The fact they keep up this game if "Did he or didn't he? Well let's enjoy it anyway" is its own level of obvious acknowledgement of how bunk it is. The American journalists brainwashed to peddling this narrative are pretty silly otherwise.

They're not really playing R.Kelly or Gary Glitter anymore. Anyone else they just ignore their crimes and again, use MJ as a scapegoat. Real people know.

But here, every celebrity has their day of "controversy". And their critics. So it'll never be perfect. Most of its relegated to rando facts that elitist guy brings up when you're just trying to enjoy yourself, like "Remember Jerry Seinfeld dated a 17 year old?"

I'm rambling a lil. But you get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top