Latest on MJJC

Is this the new direction for Michael Jacksons Image?

SmoothCriminal1995 said:
Also I find it frustrating we keep getting paintings as album covers, I don't like the cover. (I like the poster though) We should be getting rare pictures of Michael not a painting of a rare picture. They have so many from each period in his life, that's my opinion though.
Click to expand...

It keeps with what Michael has done since 1991 however. Every single album cover post-Dangerous wasn't a photo, but instead a painting (Dangerous, BOTDF) or digitally-created artwork (HIStory, Invincible). Not against the use of photos for album covers (if done right), just something I thought of when I read your post :)
 
Wow some of us can be extremely negative.
None of us can bring Michael back!!

You can call the hollogram junk, but please remember some fans found it interesting.
 
ShipOfFools said:
Frank Zappa has 40 posthumous albums, but the difference between Michael and Frank is that nobody changed anything.

I think, if they want to please the fans, they need to release the songs, as they are.
Click to expand...

If this album had been only to release demos, I would havent purchased a copy.
I still dont get why they ruined Blue Gangsta, but some contemporized songs are great.

I dont like some fans say things like 'fans never like it', becuase there are other fans who like it.
 
HIStoric said:
It keeps with what Michael has done since 1991 however. Every single album cover post-Dangerous wasn't a photo, but instead a painting (Dangerous, BOTDF) or digitally-created artwork (HIStory, Invincible). Not against the use of photos for album covers (if done right), just something I thought of when I read your post :)
Click to expand...


While I agree with everything you say here, I still would like to see them do an album cover with a pic of Michael in his later years. Like anything from '03 to '09 would suffice. I'd personally prefer anything between '08-'09.
 
HIStoric said:
It keeps with what Michael has done since 1991 however. Every single album cover post-Dangerous wasn't a photo, but instead a painting (Dangerous, BOTDF) or digitally-created artwork (HIStory, Invincible). Not against the use of photos for album covers (if done right), just something I thought of when I read your post :)
Click to expand...

I totally see your point, but one thing I love about MJ's album cover's they are iconic and I just don't feel this one is. Like the Dangerous cover is genius because you see something different every time you look at it, yet to me this one looks rushed, that's just my opinion though.
 
personally, the way I look at it, Michael hasn't had anything to do with the new versions and thats alright. We can't have it any other way or any other solution as he has passed and with that comes great changes, such as the way his music is now produced and distributed. It is for the best, in terms of his musical legacy continuing in new markets and his estate continuing to flourish and look after his family. Listen to the demo of Dangerous, and then listen to the final album version. Sometimes demos change from their original versions once a producer or another person gets a chance to work on it, especially for album release.


I'm just glad I can enjoy new music from MJ and new fans are being attracted to him everyday. As a longtime fan, I don't want to feel guilty for listening to and enjoying the new tracks, as they are great, Michael would have more than likely loved them. Michael wanted to live forever and this is a perfect way to ensure that. :) Long live the Legacy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top