Latest on MJJC

Madonna Producer: “She Has Succeeded Where Michael Jackson Failed”

btw I dont see anyone wearing Madonna's most memorable clothes, Doing her moves on stage and i sure as hell dont see
51LCxzF51QL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
of her music. and i dont see her as the record holder for the most records made or broke so her argument is buried 6 feet under.
 
Big Apple2 said:
I would really like to know if that can be confirmed by someone. If it turns out to be true, than the argument by "some" is moot, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I checked that out in Wikipedia and it says "Music" (released in 2000) sold 15 million, "American Life" (2003), 4 million, "Confessions on a Dance Floor" (2005) sold 10 million, "Hard Candy" (2008) 4 million.
Vince sold 13 million according to Wiki.
 
respect77 said:
I checked that out in Wikipedia and it says "Music" (released in 2000) sold 15 million, "American Life" (2003), 4 million, "Confessions on a Dance Floor" (2005) sold 10 million, "Hard Candy" (2008) 4 million.
Vince sold 13 million according to Wiki.
Click to expand...

Thank you respect77. Take em to school. LOL!

I'm not up on the "numbers," not even Michael's, so I truly appreciate your input.
 
Big Apple2 said:
Thank you respect77. Take em to school. LOL!

I'm not up on the "numbers," not even Michael's, so I truly appreciate your input.
Click to expand...

Wikipedia is not necessarily the most reliable source on numbers, however it can give an estimate. And what we can conclude from that is that it's not like Madonna wiped the floor with Michael in the 2000s. Even her most successful albums were at about the same range as Michael's Invincible, sales-wise.

The only difference is she released a lot more albums, did tours, while Michael didn't, and we all know why. So it's not quite fair to hold that against Michael. And I also agree with Memefan that quantity is not quality. Like I said I'd rather have Michael not release anything than to do songs like "Give Me All Your Loving". You'd think at the age of 53 she could do something more substantial than this.

 
respect77 said:
I checked that out in Wikipedia and it says "Music" (released in 2000) sold 15 million, "American Life" (2003), 4 million, "Confessions on a Dance Floor" (2005) sold 10 million, "Hard Candy" (2008) 4 million.
Vince sold 13 million according to Wiki.
Click to expand...
According to the Wikipedia page I checked Music has sold 11 million copies. I don't know how reliable those numbers are, they could be wrong. But I don't think it matters very much whether Music sold 11 or 15 million, the point is I don't think it's reasonable to say that Music was a commercial success but Invincible with 13 million was not.
 
With "Ray of Light" Madonna succeed to come away from the image as "stupid hoe" that has only sex in her mind.

But i have to say one thing, that not many would not agree, Madonna had developed artistically, where Michael, leave his troubles after 2000 aside, was stuck in the past. I mean watch her tours especially the "Drowned", "Re-invention" AND "Confessions" and you'll undestand what i mean. In all these tours she presented something new and different to her last tour. All her classics had new versions and new themes.
where Michael, although said he would like to make something different with his "oldies", he was afraid that people won't like it, cause they expect at an special point to do the special move and so on. And that was his problem, he should have done it. And as i say he was stuck, TII proved. He was doing the same old routines, hes been doing all these years. Ok, it was nice to see him back there, where he stoped.
In place of Thriller, Beat it, Sc, WBSS, HN, DD and 4 songs that have the same theme as MITM, he should have performed
Is it scary or Ghosts, Butteflys, 2000watts, YRMW, Unbreakable, WH, GITM, WII, 2bad and ect. that would have been awesome and fresh. Or do something inetresting with his "oldies but goodies". History was from dance point of view his best, else it was borring.
ok for TII, he had olny 4 months to get back in shape and put a show together. Michael always had his own head, but still, he was surrounded by "yes sayers", that didn't came or afraid to gave him some new ideas.

these commets by that producer aren't that wrong, just viewed from the wrong point of view.
 
Last edited:
lom kit said:
With "Ray of Light" Madonna succeed to come away from the image as "stupid hoe" that has only sex in her mind.

But i have to say one thing, that not many would not agree, Madonna had developed artistically, where Michael, beside his troubles after 2000, was stuck in the past. I mean watch her tours especially the "Drowned", "Re-invention" AND "Confessions" and you'll undestand what i mean. In all these tours she presented something new and different to her last tour. All her classics had new versions and new themes.
where Michael, although said he would like to make something different with his "oldies", he was afraid that people won't like it, cause they expect at an special point to do the special move and so on. And that was his problem, he should have done it. And as i say he was stuck, TII proved. He was doing the same old routines, hes been doing all these years. Ok, it was nice to see him back there, where he stoped.
In place of Thriller, Beat it, Sc, WBSS, HN, DD and 4 songs that have the same theme as MITM, he should have performed
Is it scary or Ghosts, Butteflys, 2000watts, YRMW, Unbreakable, WH, GITM, WII, 2bad and ect. that would have been awesome and fresh. ok he had olny 4 months to get back in shape and put a show together. Michael always had his own head, but still, he was surrounded by "yes sayers", that didn't came or afraid to gave him some new ideas.

these commets by that producer aren't that wrong, just viewed from the wrong point of view.
Click to expand...

The producer was talking about relevance, not how many new things each has done in their tours. Yes, Madonna was more present in the music business in the 2000s but that has nothing to do with artistic reasons. The allegations and the trial cannot be pushed aside as something that had minor effect in all this. They affected Michael's decade more than anything else. You may be right about Michael sticking with old routines at his tours, but as the sales for TII showed the public didn't seem to have a huge problem with that, on the contrary (and Michael probably thought why to change a winning formula), so this point is quite moot in this conversation about relevance, IMO.
 
lom kit said:
But i have to say one thing, that not many would not agree, Madonna had developed artistically, where Michael, leave his troubles after 2000 aside, was stuck in the past. I mean watch her tours especially the "Drowned", "Re-invention" AND "Confessions" and you'll undestand what i mean. In all these tours she presented something new and different to her last tour. All her classics had new versions and new themes.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's about being stuck in the past, necessarily. Madonna and Michael were just different artists, with different personalities. Michael wanted to give the audience the show he thought they wanted to see. Madonna maybe took more risks and tried different things in her concerts, did what she wanted rather than what the audience wanted. Both are perfectly valid approaches. You prefer Madonna's approach, and that's fine. I'm just not sure what it has to do with an artist being relevant or not.
 
lom kit said:
where Michael, although said he would like to make something different with his "oldies", he was afraid that people won't like it, cause they expect at an special point to do the special move and so on. And that was his problem, he should have done it. And as i say he was stuck, TII proved. He was doing the same old routines, hes been doing all these years. Ok, it was nice to see him back there, where he stoped.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but I have to DISagree with you.

Michael Jackson was obviously giving THE PEOPLE what they wanted. And in my opinion, it worked. Otherwise he would not have been able to sell out FIFTY shows in one city (probably could have been more, if he wanted).

He may have been prepared to do "the same old steps," as you say, BUT he was definitely presenting those "same old steps" in a very different way. The This Is It movie is proof of that.

The man's "situation" was not like anybody else's but he was STILL prepared to bring it in a new and exciting way, in my opinion.
 
Still, the title "Madonna has succsed where Michael failed" describes perfectly what I pointed out.
Not what this guy was talking about. thats why i said it's viewed from the wrong point.
If you like it or not, Michael wasn't relevant in the last 10 years. it took him to long to get ready after 2005 to get back.
If you guys are true to yourself you'll admit, that you were kind of disappointed that he was about to do the old stuff. "the public didn't seem to have a huge problem with that", well the public didn't know what the show is going to be until TII came in cinemas. And of course it wasn't big problem, just something that could have been done differently. So don't try to give back some commets and see it from the objective side.
 
respect77 said:
Madonna can be happy that that she was never treated like dirt by the media (perhaps something to do with race, I don't know) and that she was always a media darling whether she deserved it or not. I'd like to see how many albums Madonna would sell after being falsely accused with a horrible crime! How many world tours she would do if newspapers would pay people to tell horrible lies about her! I'd like to see how many albums she would do if she was put on trial with horrible false allegations and if virtually all the media turned against her and trashed her and ridiculed her! And I'd like to see Madonna sell out O2 50 times after she's gone through all that.
Click to expand...


As I said, I'm a big fan of Madonna. But nevertheless, I agree. Even with all the controversy that surrounds her, she's never had to deal with the things that Michael had to deal with that unfortunately, ended up destroying his life. She didn't have to deal with a pair of horrible and false accusation cases and a skin disorder which both led to massive, ongoing media and public ridicule. And even after Michael's 2005 trial, he still had to face a constant stream of lawsuits and stupid accusations that went on all the way up until his death and his estate is trying to handle a whole bunch of them even to this day. So all of this slowed him down an awful lot while he was alive. But it doesn't mean that he failed. His lowest selling album, in my opinion, still did better then some other singers who had the media and public cheering for them. Not to mention how the tickets for "This Is It" sold out in mere minutes for Michael when alot of the media had been saying for years that he was done as a artist. And I am sure he was aware of how the critics reviewed his albums and musical appearances so poorly after 1993. So I'm not surprised that he was afraid of what people would think when "This Is It" was being planned. In other words, I can't blame him if he was stuck in the past after he had already tried to move forward as an artist and he got trashed to high heaven for it. Madonna has had her share of media problems, public relations issues and some legal trouble. But that's nothing compared to what happened to Michael, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Michael alaways was working and wanting to do new things but circumstances got in his way. It wasn't his fault and Madonna is lucky she never had to deal with the pain and humiliation as Michael did. Sure she has had people say unkind things but Michael's character was was viciously attacked and his freedom was at risk. So many artists get mega promotion and can't even sell 10 million bue he did with hardly any promotion. This is It showed how relevant he was and it meant more because of everything he went through.

I think I know this guy who made the comments. Does he do his own music too? I have seen videos and the name seems familiar. He needs to remember something else that Michael was performing since like 5 years old and when the 2000s came he was in his 40s. That is a long time in the business right there.

I am not a Madonna fan but I do like some of her songs. He is not doing her any favors because she has her own legacy and he doesn't need to put down Michael or anybody to build her up. If Michael inspired her and looked up to then they need to realize that Michael wouldn't put someone else down to put himself up. Not everybody has to like Michael but I think he earned to be respected for all he gave to the world. I am not mad at this just sad how people can be at times.
 
lom kit said:
If you guys are true to yourself you'll admit, that you were kind of disappointed that he was about to do the old stuff.
Click to expand...
I respect your opinion, but I think it should be kept in mind that your personal opinion is not necessarily shared by everyone. You like to see artists do new things in concerts, and that's cool. But there are many people who actually do prefer to see artists like MJ and Madonna perform their classic songs rather than new stuff. Some people go to a concert to hear the old songs that made them fans in the first place. People are different, they like different things and have different opinions. It's not that everybody secretly agrees with you and just refuses to admit it, it's that different people genuinely have different opinions.
 
I have never been to a Madonna concert but I sure went to see Michael and I would do it again. Madonna had to keep reinventing herself to keep the public interested but all Michael had to do is be MICHAEL and everyone was interested. It's like Randy Phillips said at the Murray trial they had never seen interest from the public like the responce MJ got. No other artist can commant the kind of audience MJ does. Madonna's name wasn't even mentioned when he talked about special artist that can command residency concert engagements in London. He said Prince had the most shows, Beyoncé was second and Usher and Justin Timberlake were next. Madonna did not make the cut so don’t get me started on who is the most relevant and who is not being objective. Interest in MJ was off the charts and if they had added a hundred shows they would have sold out.
 
All I remember when I heard Michael was doing the shows was that I was happy for him and I wish I could go see it myself but I knew I couldn't be able to. People bought the tickets before knowing what kind of show Michael would do or maybe they did know but they wanted to see him. The truth is he was planning on doing new things with what he had already done as we saw in This is It. Michael thought about the future not the past.

I think it's funny how people say Michael was not relevant when during the 2000s you would see Usher, Justin and others imitate him in some way. People trying to accomplish what he did. People didn't want to give him the credit but his influence was there.People always wondered what he was doing, where he was and when he did go to an event the attention was on him. And when he announced those concerts the world came to him. And when he died, the world felt like it stopped.

I am sorry maybe we all have different meanings for relevance. All I know that Michael changed the business and people are still trying to be like him, entertain like him and achieve like him. To me that shows Michael was and always will be relevant.
 
Last edited:
Madonna and Michael were both relevant these last years and will stay relevant.
They are both legends that have inspired countless new singers who are pretty much copying themselves after them.
Michael is on a higher level than Madonna when it comes to the word legend (and she says so herself as well) but don't forget that Madonna just a few years a go ( I want to say 2 years or something?) actually completed the most successfull female tour ever. So let's not act like she's not relevant.

What this guy has said is a common misconception that is out there.
We as fans feel like Michael has always been relevant because his music doesn't age and we would always go and see him. (looking at the 02 shows) And it's true. Michael didn't need to keep releasing music to stay relevant.
That's why so many people strive to have a career like his.

Doesn't mean Madonna is sad for releasing music every couple of years. It's just a matter of perspective I think.
Personally I feel like Michael was as relevant as ever because even a mention of a possible album made people go crazy.
Not many artists can do that. Not to mention all the new singers being compared to him in the last 10 years.

It's indeed sad when people have to tear someone down to build someone else up. An artist like Madonna doesn't need that.
 
lom kit said:
If you like it or not, Michael wasn't relevant in the last 10 years. it took him to long to get ready after 2005 to get back.
Click to expand...

Again, you act like the allegations were nothing. That he should have get over it and get back to show business immediately. I'm not sure you comprehend the effect they had on Michael physically and psychically. To be accused of a horrible crime like Michael was, ridiculed, mocked, lied about in the media constantly and you blame him for taking long to get back?

If you guys are true to yourself you'll admit, that you were kind of disappointed that he was about to do the old stuff.
Click to expand...

Don't project your own opinion onto others! Just because you were disappointed that he wanted to do the old stuff, doesn't mean others were too.And there is nothing more objective about your opinion than about anybody else's. Opinions are subjective.

"the public didn't seem to have a huge problem with that", well the public didn't know what the show is going to be until TII came in cinemas.
Click to expand...

Michael did the same routines since the Victory tour, but the public never seemed to get bored by that, so if it didn't disappoint people at Bad, Dangerous and HIStory tour, I don't know why would it have disappointed them at TII. The point you brought up is simply irrelevant in this thread. We were talking about relevance, so I can't see how tour routines come to the picture. If Michael's tours earlier had flopped because of him doing the same routines you would have a point, but since the public always loved his tours and tickets for TII in 2009 sold like hot cakes, this subject has nothing to do with whether he was or wasn't relevant.
 
Maybe she has a better manager and doctor than Michael had
 
I believe if the trial and everything didn't happen that things would have been different. Michael was always working. His plans kept getting pushed aside. It was not his fault. After everything he had been through and treated I don't think some people would have blamed Michael if he stayed away and just had a private life.

This guy has his opinion but I think he is overlooking a lot of things especially what Michael had to deal with. It was not like Michael was releasing all these albums in the 2000s and no one was interested.
 
Michael's not been as relevant in the 2000's, but he still is VERY relevant. Michael Jackson is STILL the worlds biggest star. Where Madonna is concerned, Give Me All Your Lovin was the WORST song I've EVER heard. She's relevant for being shit.
 
Madonna has never impressed me.. I liked Holiday and some of the other '80's hits but I've never thought she could sing or dance. I thought Madonna at the Superbowl was stiff and lipsynched. Put her in front of millions alone with no staging or costumes or dancers and let's see how captivating she is. You could put Mike alone on a stage with some glittery socks and black ran down penny loafers and he would mesmerize you:punk: and that is the honest to God's truth
 
Michael is the best of all time! Period. His talents are outerwordly. You cannot say the same of Madonna. Pleeeeease. She cannot sing, she is an average dancer. She got famous because she exploited SEX, promiscuity and her bashing her religion. All those controversies help sell and artist. Michael is in the stratosphere, Madonna will always be earthbound.
 
Madonna, sell out 50 dates in minutes. Then come back, bitch. To say Mike ain't relevant??? THIS IS IT! That says it all. 'Past it Jacko' well yeah, he's so passed it he sold out 10 dates in a minute after almost the WHOLE WORLD thought he was a PAEDO. bitch please.
 
Moonwalker.Fan;3603963 said:
Unfortunately he is right:
Madonna Producer: “She Has Succeeded Where Michael Jackson Failed”


Michael´s last/final artistically and commercially successful album was HIStory and HIStory era was MJ´s even last although the most successful in his career, everything after 1999 failed!!!!

On the contrary, Madonna with Ray of Light album started her second phase of her career, she literally exploded as an artist..., but Michael.... was falling down... on almost everything..., but he was Michael Jackson, and was an Icon, but all the failures had dramatic impact on him... artistically he was burn out, and financially was desperate=no cash.

During the last 15 years, Madonna vs. Michael... Madonna has ruled the music, from 1998 to 2008 -5x album + 4x world tour, but Michael from 1998 to 2009: only 1 album + 6 GHs compilations, NO WORLD TOUR, 1 catastrophic interview (LWMJ), allegations, trial and one never implemented (world) tour, death.

We as the MJ fans have to be fair and honest - we can admire Michael for everything he had ever done or recorded, but we can not :fortuneteller:
Click to expand...


Did Madonna or any other of the relevant artist for you and this "producer" here, had to go through what MJ did during the last 15 years of his life?

This comment is a damn shame for so many reasons. Really! And i would say this even if it didn't concern MJ.
 
Honestly I don't think this person deserves any of our attention.

Michael Jackson WAS and WILL ALWAYS be the benchmark that artists strive to be. I'm secure in MJ's abilities and impact, no crap producer can tell me other wise.
 
I don't know how anyone can say MJ was irrelevant during the 2000's, especially when compared to Madonna. Invincible sold very well at the time while not getting promotion up to scratch for an artist of MJ's calibre, yet it still did extremely well, Number Ones was also a success, had catalogue albums been able to chart on the billboard 200, it would have entered at number one, going on to sell over 13 million, The Essential MJ sold over 7 million, Thriller 25 sold 3 million, King of Pop sold 5 million now these are all good numbers and most of them are greatest hits albums with songs we're all heard before and all got, which other artist could do that? Not to mention the 50 sold out dates in 4 hours, I still remember to this day what it was like getting tickets on Friday 13th March 2009! It took forever to get tickets.
Also on Madonna remixing her classics and mixing it up, I never got the hype of fans wanting MJ to switch things up, when I got tickets to TII, I wanted to see the classic Billie Jean, WBSS, and all the rest of it, its classic, if it isn't broken don't fix it!
Now his popularity among non-fans may have been less, I won't deny it. Back when I was in school, some of my friends would make fun of me for liking MJ, and then there was all those cruel jokes about him in movies and whatnot, but the fact remains Michael Jackson was never and will never be irrelevant.
 
“She has left her landmark in music and fashion in every era. In the 80s, in the 90s. And she has succeeded – what I think Michael Jackson has failed to do –
Click to expand...
Man. You must be kidding. Please. Give me a break. :ermm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top