Latest on MJJC

Leaked emails update (Michael Jackson)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lol guy's you are just going in circles. You all have stated the same opinions since the first page. Just chill. Email the Internet team with your concerns and opinions and wait for a official statement from the estate. I definitely think making us heard and being vociferous is a great gambit. We can sorta push them to either confirm it or denounce it. Let see what happens
 
Zakk said:
We're going in circles right now! i know he did sing live, and the BAD Tour will never be topped by anyone but it is clear to anyone, that when you see a video from the 1996/1997 performances.. you will see his focus is on his dancing, giving them an experience they will never forget, ageing takes it's toll on anyone.. dancing and singing is difficult for someone that is in their mid 20's.. but near 40's? completely different!
Click to expand...

You act like late 30s is ancient!!

Many, many artists matured wonderfully by that time, especially vocally. I don't know if medically he couldn't sing live well by then or he just didn't want to, but either way - it was a live show, & therefore should have been live.

I find it difficult to justify. If he had have pre-recorded vocals & mimed to them it would have been one thing, but miming to vocals recorded nearly 30 years earlier (OTW medley) was crazy and something like BOTDF looked almost ridiculous.

You can show non MJ fans Bad & Dangerous live & win new admirers but you can't really do that with HIStory tour.
 
I'm done with this thread, **** it. Prague 1996 is wonderful, and i hope it will be released.
 
Themidwestcowboy said:
Lol guy's you are just going in circles. You all have stated the same opinions since the first page. Just chill. Email the Internet team with your concerns and opinions and wait for a official statement from the estate. I definitely think making us heard and being vociferous is a great gambit. We can sorta push them to either confirm it or denounce it. Let see what happens
Click to expand...

Yes, and this is always the same in every HIStory tour thread. LOL. Which just shows how controversial it is even in the fanbase, so it's not the best idea to give it a high profile release IMO if even many hard core fans were not impressed by that show.

Bad tour is universally loved. Dangerous tour is loved as well. Victory tour has never been released before. Same for Triumph and Destiny. So ANYTHING would actually be a better choice to put in the cinemas than a HIStory tour show.
 
respect77 said:
Yes, and this is always the same in every HIStory tour thread. LOL. Which just shows how controversial it is even in the fanbase, so it's not the best idea to give it a high profile release IMO if even many hard core fans were not impressed by that show.
Click to expand...

Ha, yes. The only 2 things that divide fans artistically:

1. Miming / History Tour
2. Invincible
 
Tony R said:
You can show non MJ fans Bad & Dangerous live & win new admirers but you can't really do that with HIStory tour.
Click to expand...

That is actually true. When I show to my friends some performance it's not from HIStory Tour.
 
This thread deserves this meme
179341_s.gif
 
Just want to mention something no one has talked about in this thread.

"The worst thing to me personally to see is an opening show, because it is not as tight as it can be"

Michael Jackson Ebony Jet Magazine interview 1987
 
SmoothCriminal1995 said:
Just want to mention something no one has talked about in this thread.

"The worst thing to me personally to see is an opening show, because it is not as tight as it can be"

Michael Jackson Ebony Jet Magazine interview 1987
Click to expand...

That isn't really a concern, Prague/Bucharest & Brunei i think are the best shows from the tour.
 
I hope this doesn't happen and I hope the estate and Sony are listening to the complains and concerns. Personally I think it's a little naive of people to think that nobody would care about MJ's lip synching, he's criticized for many things and since when has the press not taken the opportunity to dish out more criticism when given the chance? The fact people outside the fan base complain about his lip synching says it all, having a lip synched concert put into the cinemas will attract people outside the fan community but will also give them a reason to think he wasn't as good as he really was. Sadly, many of his best performances are many years behind us and people are starting to forget about them because they haven't seen them for a long time. We know how picky MJ was with performances and perfectionism, so I doubt he would have wanted History released in cinemas.

To lighten the thread, I think most of us (especially the women) can likely agree that Mj's gold pants were one of the best things about the History tour. :giggle: :heat:
 


In the clip above during TDCAU, you can hear Michael sing live as they forgot to turn off his microphone.. which means that if Prague was recorded on multitracks.. live vocals may exist..
 
Zakk said:
That isn't really a concern, Prague/Bucharest & Brunei i think are the best shows from the tour.
Click to expand...
If Michael didn't like opening shows I think that should be a concern. Listening to the audio there are lots of mic errors, where it wasn't on at the right time or it wasn't loud enough (ITC). As well there's no guaranteeing this is a great show, we've only seen short snippets of it (besides amateur footage)
 
Bruce Springsteen is 65 and he goes on stage for 3 and a half hours every night and has a lot of energy and would never dream of lip-synching, every single utterance of the drums and guitars and singing is right in front of you and that's the way it absolutely has to be. I'm aware Bruce isn't doing dance routines, but neither is MJ on a lot of songs on the HIStory tour.

Michael's choice was wrong I think. He sacrificed substance for style in his ongoing quest for perfection and is lack of willingness to move on. I'm aware of his ill health, and that being the case he should have made alterations to keep the show at LEAST 70% of live vocal. Shortening the show, not doing the tour at all, doing half of live singing, and half big choreographed routines... There's people banging on about the theatrics of the HIStory tour but I'm not even sure I know what they're talking about? Perhaps someone can enlighten me. Scream was just MJ on stage dancing free-style - same as all his other tours. Beat It, Heal the World, Billie Jean, Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' and The Way You Make Me Feel were all basically lifted from previous tours. Stranger in Moscow and You Are Not Alone were just MJ and spotlight free-style (no theatrics). Smooth Criminal was really similar with tweaks. Thriller as well.

Back when Bad 25 came out some reviewers picked up on the Wembley DVD lip-synching, and there was hardly any! I remember reading Prague reviews back in 1996 in local media and they slated the lip-synching and how similar the show was to previous tours. There were positive reviews of course but there was a lot of criticism around even then, and by the time the tour made it to the UK it was still ongoing. Of course where Michael is concerned there will always be critics sharpening knives but in the case of HIStory tour lip-synching it's the rare occasions where they are jusitifed.

Whatever the case may be lip-synching is inexcusable. I implore the Estate not to do this. This is just too damaging to his legacy.
 
And lip syning aside HIStory Tour is just boring compared to his previous tours. A lot of times MJ didn't seem like he wanted to be there
 
ChrisC said:
Bruce Springsteen is 65 and he goes on stage for 3 and a half hours every night and has a lot of energy and would never dream of lip-synching, every single utterance of the drums and guitars and singing is right in front of you and that's the way it absolutely has to be. I'm aware Bruce isn't doing dance routines, but neither is MJ on a lot of songs on the HIStory tour.

Michael's choice was wrong I think. He sacrificed substance for style in his ongoing quest for perfection and is lack of willingness to move on. I'm aware of his ill health, and that being the case he should have made alterations to keep the show at LEAST 70% of live vocal. Shortening the show, not doing the tour at all, doing half of live singing, and half big choreographed routines... There's people banging on about the theatrics of the HIStory tour but I'm not even sure I know what they're talking about? Perhaps someone can enlighten me. Scream was just MJ on stage dancing free-style - same as all his other tours. Beat It, Heal the World, Billie Jean, Wanna Be Startin' Somethin' and The Way You Make Me Feel were all basically lifted from previous tours. Stranger in Moscow and You Are Not Alone were just MJ and spotlight free-style (no theatrics). Smooth Criminal was really similar with tweaks. Thriller as well.

Back when Bad 25 came out some reviewers picked up on the Wembley DVD lip-synching, and there was hardly any! I remember reading Prague reviews back in 1996 in local media and they slated the lip-synching and how similar the show was to previous tours. There were positive reviews of course but there was a lot of criticism around even then, and by the time the tour made it to the UK it was still ongoing. Of course where Michael is concerned there will always be critics sharpening knives but in the case of HIStory tour lip-synching it's the rare occasions where they are jusitifed.

Whatever the case may be lip-synching is inexcusable. I implore the Estate not to do this. This is just too damaging to his legacy.
Click to expand...


Wholeheartedly agree. There may have been some extenuating circumstances, as even when he DOES sing live on the History tour (WBSS, J5 Medley), it sounded very hoarse.

However this whole argument of sacrificing live singing to perfect his dancing, according to some fans, is a bit disingenuous considering songs like You are not alone and Heal the World are also lip synced despite there being virtually no dancing.

All of MJ's tours before this were exceptional, with Bad being far and away my favourite. With History, I just can't bring myself to watch much of it because so little of it was actually live. I just don't think Michael's heart was in it for the History tour. He didn't have the same energy as previous tours and he didn't look like he was enjoying it a lot of the time. That is just my opinion. Don't get me wrong, his dancing was still breathtaking at times during the History tour.

The Estate should be showcasing MJ at his best, and out of any tour MJ ever did in his career, History was the worst (in my opinion, and I think a lot of other fans opinions).
 
I think Michael could have sang live throughout, and the sound engineer had the option to play the vocals from his microphone to the front of house mix.. for example their's a part from 'Dangerous' in Prague, where you hear him sing live.. other shows it's playback.. i think the multitracks hold the true magic, on the TV clips of BOTDF you can hear some live vocals too..
 
Tony R said:
You act like late 30s is ancient!!

Many, many artists matured wonderfully by that time, especially vocally. I don't know if medically he couldn't sing live well by then or he just didn't want to, but either way - it was a live show, & therefore should have been live.

I find it difficult to justify. If he had have pre-recorded vocals & mimed to them it would have been one thing, but miming to vocals recorded nearly 30 years earlier (OTW medley) was crazy and something like BOTDF looked almost ridiculous.

You can show non MJ fans Bad & Dangerous live & win new admirers but you can't really do that with HIStory tour.
Click to expand...

You stated loud and clear you hate/don't like the HIStory tour, I'm fine with that, not all have the same taste but I found absolutely insulting you're doubting his work ethic. Most of the songs Michael could sing, you can hear there was something wrong with his voice and breathing, he was sick an d it's a fact lupus affects pulmonary capacity.
 
I may be starting a war here, but I wholeheartedly and firmly believe in what I'm about to say:

Releasing a HIStory Tour show will do more damage to Michael's legacy than the Cascio tracks will in the long run.

The general public doesn't give a damn about the situation surrounding the Cascio tracks or the controversy surrounding their authenticity; at the end of the day, they're three Michael Jackson songs that they either like or dislike. The same applies for the HIStory Tour. No one is going to care whether or not Michael was sick or what the circumstances were; they'll judge the tour based on what they watch.

If someone is considered the greatest of all time in a particular field, why would you release something that could possibly jeopardize that position? The proclaimed "Greatest Entertainer to Ever Live" was miming almost the entire show, struggled to get through the easiest numbers, and showed little to no enthusiasm to be performing. His health status doesn't give the tour an excuse as to why all of the performances are below par; they actually stand as an argument as to why they should not be heavily promoted.

Truth be told, if this project goes through, it will be the first time in my entire life that I will be embarrassed to be a Michael Jackson fan. Why? Because this is not Michael at his best, it's him at his worst - a sentiment that a vast majority of the fan base agrees with. There's no sensible way for them to put together a halfway decent film out of this embarrassment of a tour.

Call me over-dramatic. Call me a non-fan. Call me whatever you would like. I am not judging anyone else for enjoying this tour, nor am I saying their opinion is wrong. I am simply voicing my own opinion when I state that the HIStory Tour is (for the most part) complete and total garbage and should not be shown to the world. I get more joy out of watching the This Is It film than I do watching anything from HIStory.

I don't think I've ever went on such a thick rampage based on something Michael's done... I feel dirty.
 
Can someone please post a link to an article or such showing Michael was indeed suffering from a form of lupus that affected his lungs (not the version that effects the skin primarily) and/or had some health issue effecting his lungs during the History tour and this was the primary reason for lip-synching. Thank you in advance.

I have a much different perspective from some of the thoughts posted regarding the History tour performances. As the years went on, Michael continued to be known as an extraordinary performer. However, his performances were becoming more known for the spectacle than the artistry which is the unfortunate effect of being an other-worldly talent relegated to pop star status. The King of Pop label had its privileges and its curses.

This is why I said in a previous thread I was not looking forward to a History era documentary. I personally see that tour as a man making compromises. At 38 or so years old, this was a man who:
- did not want to tour yet, most likely, had a contractual agreement to promote History,
- knew more monies were available to him through touring even at that time,
- was attempting to get pass a horrific allegation in front of a public that he could not be sure trusted him,
- had to accept a failed marriage,
- was starting his own family in a manner that may not have been his ideal,
- AND, still not wanting to disappoint his fans.

The list above is just the issues Michael went through that the public knew about. We do not know what other private issues were concerning him at the time. I can fully understand such a man deciding to lip-synch when deciding what to sacrifice in that scenario. That is much to handle and instead of taking time for himself, he toured. He was such a consummate professional that most do not even remember those public issues when he arrived on stage to perform. Audiences were transfixed by the man's talent.

I understand some fans were and it seems still are disappointed with History tour performances and I have no issue with that. I do understand the impending backlash IF (that is a rather skeptical if until I see the emails that detail the distribution of a possible 2016 concert release with nary a mention of the distribution of the OTW documentary supposedly pending this year) this tour is officially released and that is why I would rather see it as part of a collection package with other live performances by Michael; preferably from J5 on. Lip-synching or not, History is still one of the best pop concerts by any performer around.


By the way, there may have been a contractual reason why Michael could not sing Billie Jean live for M25 as it was the only non-Motown song of the night. The M25 BJ performance did not suffer due to lip-synching in my view.
 
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
You can read in the autopsy Michael had lupus and also you can read all the issues that disease cause.
Click to expand...

If I am remembering correctly, his autopsy did not confirm or deny lupus.

Please know, I am not saying Michael did not suffer from lupus however; it would seem he suffered from discoid lupus which effects the skin.

My question is: is there any documentation saying lupus effected his lungs in such a manner that he preferred to lip-synch during the History tour?
 
AlwaysThere, as you said, it is your view and you are entitled to it.

I will simply say that I do not see the History tour or anything Michael has done as garbage, I do not currently or previously believe Michael's health issues were the reasoning behind the lip-synching (I am attempting to find out where that idea originated from), and I do not feel joy watching TII particularly after the AEG civil trial.

I will also say that after reading some of the posts here, I felt compelled to say what I said in my post which seems to have been posted the same time as yours. While you may have felt dirty after posting, I felt a need to be rather defensive of Michael while posting.

Suffice to say: I believe neither of us should have our fandom questioned for feeling as we do or lectured at length.
 
Last edited:
There were medical records on auction when Michael suffered the burn accident, besides showing graphic pictures from the born, it was also shown a rash on his scalp typical of discoid lupus. He was also diagnosed with that disease that year, while he was alive he never discussed it publicly, so we didn't know until the autopsy report came out.



What Are the Symptoms of Lupus?
The symptoms of lupus differ from one person to another. Some people have just a few symptoms, while others have many. In addition, there are many different symptoms of lupus because the disease can affect any part of the body. Some of the more common symptoms include:


Achy joints (arthralgia)
Unexplained fever (more than 100 F)
Swollen joints (arthritis) He started to develop arthritis in one of his fingers
Prolonged or extreme fatigue
Skin rash .
Ankle swelling and fluid accumulation
Pain in the chest when breathing deeply (pleurisy) his breathing is notoriously heavy in that tour
A butterfly-shaped rash across the cheeks and nose
Hair loss
Sensitivity to the sun and/or other light
Seizures
Mouth or nose sores
Pale or purple fingers or toes from cold or stress (Raynaud's phenomenon)
 
And people are saying they're not being unfair and harsh towards Michael, you weren't melodramatic Always There, you were blatantly cruel and insensitive. Like I said, I'm fine if some of you don't like the tour but calling it garbage compared to 3 fake songs is a slap on the face. Michael probably knew he wasn't in the shape he used to be on previous tours that's why he fought back not doing it but he had a contract to fulfill.
 
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
There were medical records on auction when Michael suffered the burn accident, besides showing graphic pictures from the born, it was also shown a rash on his scalp typical of discoid lupus. He was also diagnosed with that disease that year, while he was alive he never discussed it publicly, so we didn't know until the autopsy report came out.
Click to expand...

I am aware of this. What I am attempting to understand is where this concept that Michael was suffering from lupus (more directly, discoid lupus which effects the skin) and this is the reasoning behind Michael lip-synching during the History tour originated from. I have never heard this theory before this thread and I want to understand why some are accepting this as fact.
 
Tygger said:
I am aware of this. What I am attempting to understand is where this concept that Michael was suffering from lupus (more directly, discoid lupus which effects the skin) and this is the reasoning behind Michael lip-synching during the History tour originated from. I have never heard this theory before this thread and I want to understand why some are accepting this as fact.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't affect the skin exclusively. There are various symptoms besides the butterfly rash and destruction of the skin tissue.

Depending on its cause, pleuritic chest pain may be accompanied by other symptoms:[9]


Dry cough
Fever and chills
Rapid, shallow breathing
Shortness of breath
Rapid pulse
Sore throat followed by pain and swelling in the joints
Ventricular tachycardia
 
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
And people are saying they're not being unfair and harsh towards Michael, you weren't melodramatic Always There, you were blatantly cruel and insensitive. Like I said, I'm fine if some of you don't like the tour but calling it garbage compared to 3 fake songs is a slap on the face. Michael probably knew he wasn't in the shape he used to be on previous tours that's why he fought back not doing it but he had a contract to fulfill.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I mean the tour isin't my favorite, but calling it complete garbage is just being over dramatic and vicious. But hey, it's all opinions at the end of the day so whatever.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top