Latest on MJJC

If you could re-shape Invincible...

Yes, that's why I said "Unbreakable" was a better title as it's more subtle in showing self-pride. "Invincible" comes across as too cocky.
 
The title is too forceful, too aggressive neither of Unbreakable or Invincible is good for me. I would have gone for something more hopeful like Speechless or something down to earth and vulnerable after all the shit that happened from 93 till 2001 like Don't Walk Away. Even Break of Dawn would be cool in a sense of Michael saying I'm putting the past behind me. The album is just not focused enough, it's a mix of songs without a plot

It is the only album title in his discography post Motown that doesn't fill me with intrigue and expectation.
 
I wouldn't have minded if MJ simply named the album Michael. That would signify it being his final album, which he always considered, or just a new beginning for him.
 
Last edited:
Spaceship said:
"Unbreakable" is definitely a better song than "Invincible". It actually sounds like what you would expect a title track to be, whereas "Invincible" is just a generic love song. Rewriting "Unbreakable"'s lyrics to call it "Invincible" is unnecessary when it'd be much simpler to just leave the song as is and name the album after it. Plus, while they're both words with egoistical connotations, "Unbreakable" has a subtlety that "Invincible" lacks. You don't look quite as cocky when you name your album "Unbreakable" as opposed to "Invincible".
Click to expand...
Unbreakable coming after History just sounds bad to me. Invincible makes for a better flow. It's literally alphabetically cleaner, H I. And I'm ignoring Blood, again, okay.
 
filmandmusic said:
The title is too forceful, too aggressive neither of Unbreakable or Invincible is good for me. I would have gone for something more hopeful like Speechless or something down to earth and vulnerable after all the shit that happened from 93 till 2001 like Don't Walk Away. Even Break of Dawn would be cool in a sense of Michael saying I'm putting the past behind me. The album is just not focused enough, it's a mix of songs without a plot

It is the only album title in his discography post Motown that doesn't fill me with intrigue and expectation.
Click to expand...
MJ never went for soft titles. Seriously? Why are we just rewriting the man's whole personality, are we just gonna ignore Thriller, Bad, Dangerous. Come on.

I've already said that if didn't need to have a plot. I can understand it's not a preference for some I guess.

Yes, maybe, he could've done a new Off The Wall, name and all. But then you'd need something, like Off The Wall. Call it, freaking, Slave to the Rhythm. There's a fun neon record.
 
Yeah, MJ had an established pattern of picking one word with something distinctive to it for his album titles. I don't see why he should have broken away from that here. You should take his artistic habits into consideration when discussing what he should have done with his albums; no point in suggesting something that MJ would have never done.

"Escape" is a title that would have fit MJ's style. I might have named the album that (and I definitely would have included the song itself), but Enrique Iglesias released an album with that title on the same day Invincible came out. Sure, MJ could have went with "Xscape", but people would still get them confused.

Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Unbreakable coming after History just sounds bad to me. Invincible makes for a better flow. It's literally alphabetically cleaner, H I. And I'm ignoring Blood, again, okay.
Click to expand...

I don't see why this matters lol, how the first letter of MJ album titles look when put together

O T B D H I

So if it were O T B D H U it'd look bad because ... ? I don't see why would you even take the first letters of the titles and put them together in the first place but more power to you.
 
Last edited:
Spaceship said:
Yeah, MJ had an established pattern of picking one word with something distinctive to it for his album titles. I don't see why he should have broken away from that here. You should take his artistic habits into consideration when discussing what he should have done with his albums; no point in suggesting something that MJ would have never done.

"Escape" is a title that would have fit MJ's title. I might have named the album that (and I definitely would have included the song itself), but Enrique Iglesias released an album with that title on the day Invincible came out. Sure, MJ could have went with "Xscape", but people would still get them confused.



I don't see why this matters lol, how the first letter of MJ album titles look when put together

O T B D H I

So if it were O T B D H U it'd look bad because ... ? I don't see why would you even take the first letters of the titles and put them together in the first place but more power to you.
Click to expand...
It's just something about the phonetics that sounds good. Thriller Bad Dangerous HIStory Blood on the Dance Floor, Invincible. I am just used to that and it does just fit together so well, in my view.
 
If you're too young to remember Invincible or any album and you want to know how good it really is, compare it with the best songs that came out the same year from the best artists.

Bad is the best example, it sounds better than most if not all albums from 87. I love Kick (Inxs), Sign O' The Times (Prince) and Faith (George Michael) but nothing on those brilliant albums has the resonance of Man In The Mirror, the drama of Dirty Diana or the rich soundscape of Liberian Girl.

The Bad album was groundbreaking and ahead of its time, by comparison Invincible was not. That doesn't mean it's a terrible album by any means
 
hey i sure if this is random but could someone please tell me information about invincible.
i dont know how to make a forum, thank you if you respond
 
Got it, once a pattern is established never stray from it! Creativity is forbidden in art.
 
Spaceship said:
Yeah, MJ had an established pattern of picking one word with something distinctive to it for his album titles. I don't see why he should have broken away from that here. You should take his artistic habits into consideration when discussing what he should have done with his albums; no point in suggesting something that MJ would have never done.

"Escape" is a title that would have fit MJ's title. I might have named the album that (and I definitely would have included the song itself), but Enrique Iglesias released an album with that title on the day Invincible came out. Sure, MJ could have went with "Xscape", but people would still get them confused.



I don't see why this matters lol, how the first letter of MJ album titles look when put together

O T B D H I

So if it were O T B D H U it'd look bad because ... ? I don't see why would you even take the first letters of the titles and put them together in the first place but more power to you.
Click to expand...
Escape does not really work as a title because it departs from Mike’s naming scheme in that it is a verb. His Epic solo albums, starting from Thriller and ignoring Blood on the Dance Floor, went:
  1. noun
  2. adjective
  3. adjective
  4. noun
  5. adjective
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Unbreakable coming after History just sounds bad to me. Invincible makes for a better flow. It's literally alphabetically cleaner, H I. And I'm ignoring Blood, again, okay.
Click to expand...
“Alphabetically cleaner”? 😅

No worries, since I believe I am on your side when it comes to the best title for the 2001 album. But I’m struggling a bit to get what you mean here.
 
Just came to think about that Michael with Invincible actually departed somewhat from his naming scheme, namely with the number of syllables:
  1. 2 (Thriller)
  2. 1 (Bad)
  3. 3 (Dangerous)
  4. 3 (HIStory)
  5. 4 (Invincible)
Invincible also is the only of the albums in this bunch to start with a wovel.
 
Thriller and Bad are true English words (＜ Old English pyrlian, and Middle English bad respectively). Dangerous, History, and Invincible have Latin roots (＜ dominus, historia, and invincibilis respectively). This is interesting, because in a way—since he wrote the song—it was Rod Temperton who named Thriller, and Quincy Jones likely played a part in naming Bad, whereas the other three albums most likely were fully of Michael’s choosing, and it just so happens that they have a common denominator in their Latin roots.
 
Alright I think we're getting too deep into this.

"Invincible is not as good an album because it's one too many syllables long"
 
Agonum said:
Escape does not really work as a title because it departs from Mike’s naming scheme in that it is a verb. His Epic solo albums, starting from Thriller and ignoring Blood on the Dance Floor, went:
  1. noun
  2. adjective
  3. adjective
  4. noun
  5. adjective
Click to expand...

"Escape" can be a noun, actually.
 
Spaceship said:
[…] "Escape" is a title that would have fit MJ's title. I might have named the album that (and I definitely would have included the song itself), but Enrique Iglesias released an album with that title on the day Invincible came out. […]
Click to expand...
Not to worried about the confusion there, as I don’t believe there’s any significant overlap of the respective fan bases.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Alright I think we're getting too deep into this.

"Invincible is not as good an album because it's one too many syllables long"
Click to expand...
Personally, I’m discussing the title. I thought you were, too?
 
Agonum said:
Not to worried about the confusion there, as I don’t believe there’s any significant overlap of the respective fan bases.
Click to expand...

They're both pop. Iglesias's Escape opened at no.2 on the Billboard 200 the same week Invincible debuted at number one spot. Two major artists releasing their albums on the same day with the same title would be inconvenient. Perhaps Iglesias would have renamed his album to something else if he heard that MJ was naming his album "Escape", but that's not a certainty. Yeah, I'd just go with "Unbreakable" lol.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top