The main reason most people don't like Invincible album is Rodney Jerkins?

You think anything done by Michael is random? Lol. I dunno why y'all so mad. He was 43, not 83. It's a good song and apparently Michael thought so too, plus it sounds awesome. I don't understand why some people are so bent out of shape over it.
MJ sang that song which didn’t fit him and which he didn’t have anything to do with because : 1- the fact that it was already entirely written, produced and performed meant that he didn’t have to put any effort in it and 2- he mistakenly thought, or somebody mistakenly told him, that the song was « current » and could be a hit. So a mix of laziness and an ill-advised « get-hits-quick-and-easy » mentality.
 
MJ sang that song which didn’t fit him and which he didn’t have anything to do with because : 1- the fact that it was already entirely written, produced and performed meant that he didn’t have to put any effort in it and 2- he mistakenly thought, or somebody mistakenly told him, that the song was « current » and could be a hit. So a mix of laziness and an ill-advised « get-hits-quick-and-easy » mentality.
Well I appreciate your opinion but just because you don't like it (which is fine, I don't like every single Michael Jackson song either) doesn't mean it's by definition crap.

I am curious why you think it doesn't fit him? I agree it might not fit his public persona, but who's to say this isn't a side of him the fans don't know? It's something completely different and you can like it or dislike it, but to say he made a mistake because the song was not 'current' is a weak argument. Or to say he 'didn't write it', by that logic Man in the Mirror, Human Nature, Cry, You Are Not Alone, Smile and many others are to be discarded also (and if it's up to me YANA can go straight into the trash bin. Not because I believe he 'didn't put any effort in it' or was 'ill-advised' or 'lazy' but simply because I don't like it, I just don't get bent out of shape when millions of others do).

Plus I don't remember Michael ever giving a rat's ass what was 'current', he always did his own thing which is why he stood out. This song shows a different side of Michael, and there are plenty of people who do like it because it's the only song in his real, deep voice which makes this song unique. To believe Michael would release something on an album he wasn't actively involved in, knowing how picky he is with what he puts on his albums, seems improbable to me. He must have liked it enough himself or he wouldn't have bought it and included in his album.

Again, it's a matter of taste whether you like it or not, but I believe you are assuming too much about Michael's 'mentality' here.
 
Last edited:
MJ should have mostly stayed away from the electronic "futuristic" sounding music on this album. Everyone was doing that sort of music at the time due to the new millennium starting. He should have aimed to have plenty of organic, raw-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out from everyone else.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: ssj
MJ should have stayed away from the electronic "futuristic" sounding music on this album. Everyone was doing that sort of music at the time due to the new millennium starting, so it just sounded like he was chasing trends. He should have aimed to have plenty of organic-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out.
I guess it's never good enough with a lot of fans.
 
MJ should have stayed away from the electronic "futuristic" sounding music on this album. Everyone was doing that sort of music at the time due to the new millennium starting, so it just sounded like he was chasing trends. He should have aimed to have plenty of organic-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out.
I loved the futuristic sound to invincible it was cool but it didnt the versatile sound that dangerous album and i think that why incincible didnt have the success thqat dangerous had
 
MJ should have stayed away from the electronic "futuristic" sounding music on this album. Everyone was doing that sort of music at the time due to the new millennium starting, so it just sounded like he was chasing trends. He should have aimed to have plenty of organic-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out.
Maybe organic sounding music is actually not a good trend. The clincher nobody seems to be able to consider.
 
He was cancelled by the establishment. The sales make that VERY CLEAR. He became a threat to the powers that be when Thriller blew up and he became bigger than they anticipated. From BAD on, the sales sink like the Titanic. Dangerous was selling like hot buns! And then Evan C(hild) Handler comes on the scene. He never recovered from there, didn't stand a chance. Invincible was completely ignored, even by the fans.

Thriller: 70 million copies.
Bad: 35 million copies.
Dangerous: 32 million copies. This album would have outperformed Bad and maybe even Thriller if it wasn't for the fake ass allegations.
HIStory: a lousy 20 million copies. Even if you include Blood on the Dancefloor in the sales it's still only 26 million.
Invincible: a pathetic 8 million copies sold while it's one of his best albums.

Invincible didn't have the success of the Dangerous album because it, no let me correct myself: HE was boycotted. Michael had been under attack ever since the BAD album for being too rebellious. Because as iconic Thriller might be, it is not his best album and Dangerous should have topped it in an honest world.

But then again, we can tell he is still being shadow banned to this day, unless you believe the views on YouTube are even close to accurate. Thriller gets a billion views every Halloween, gimme a break...
 
He was cancelled by the establishment. The sales make that VERY CLEAR. He became a threat to the powers that be when Thriller blew up and he became bigger than they anticipated. From BAD on, the sales sink like the Titanic. Dangerous was selling like hot buns! And then Evan C(hild) Handler comes on the scene. He never recovered from there, didn't stand a chance. Invincible was completely ignored, even by the fans.

Thriller: 70 million copies.
Bad: 35 million copies.
Dangerous: 32 million copies. This album would have outperformed Bad and maybe even Thriller if it wasn't for the fake ass allegations.
HIStory: a lousy 20 million copies. Even if you include Blood on the Dancefloor in the sales it's still only 26 million.
Invincible: a pathetic 8 million copies sold while it's one of his best albums.

Invincible didn't have the success of the Dangerous album because it, no let me correct myself: HE was boycotted. Michael had been under attack ever since the BAD album for being too rebellious. Because as iconic Thriller might be, it is not his best album and Dangerous should have topped it in an honest world.

But then again, we can tell he is still being shadow banned to this day, unless you believe the views on YouTube are even close to accurate. Thriller gets a billion views every Halloween, gimme a break...
You know thats the funny thing bout the thriller album and dangerous album cuz thriller didnt have many songs like dangerous did but yet it become the biggest selling album of all time . With the dangerous album it had more songs so one would think that would make it the biggest selling album
 
You know thats the funny thing bout the thriller album and dangerous album cuz thriller didnt have many songs like dangerous did but yet it become the biggest selling album of all time . With the dangerous album it had more songs so one would think that would make it the biggest selling album
It's not even about the amount of songs, Dangerous was a much more powerful album. The man started to speak TRUTH from BAD on, which is exactly why he could never top Thriller. And he knew it. We see the same today: speak TRUTH and get cancelled and mocked. Nothing changed.
 
MJ should have stayed away from the electronic "futuristic" sounding music on this album. Everyone was doing that sort of music at the time due to the new millennium starting, so it just sounded like he was chasing trends. He should have aimed to have plenty of organic-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out.
I have to agree with this. I remember reading somewhere that when he was introduced to Rodney Jerkins, he told Corey Rooney at the time that Rodney's productions sounded like everything else, didn't have that timeless feel. Corey pushed Michael to give Rodney another chance and he clearly did. I wish Michael would have went with his instincts on this one. The album is good, but is missing a little of the MJ magic.
 
It's not even about the amount of songs, Dangerous was a much more powerful album. The man started to speak TRUTH from BAD on, which is exactly why he could never top Thriller. And he knew it. We see the same today: speak TRUTH and get cancelled and mocked. Nothing changed.

I think in michaels eyes he could top thriller i just wish he wouldve relaxed more and not worry bout toping thriller
I have to agree with this. I remember reading somewhere that when he was introduced to Rodney Jerkins, he told Corey Rooney at the time that Rodney's productions sounded like everything else, didn't have that timeless feel. Corey pushed Michael to give Rodney another chance and he clearly did. I wish Michael would have went with his instincts on this one. The album is good, but is missing a little of the MJ magic.
Why did mj listen to corey 🤦‍♀️ god damn it
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssj
I think in michaels eyes he could top thriller i just wish he wouldve relaxed more and not worry bout toping thriller

Well you wouldn't take your job as an artist very serious if you wouldn't want to top your earlier work. Certainly not when evil forces are trying to keep you from achieving your goal.
 
To believe Michael would release something on an album he wasn't actively involved in, knowing how picky he is with what he puts on his albums, seems improbable to me.
MJ in the late 90's and early 2000's was sadly no longer the same man he had been earlier in his career. It's confirmed by the quality, quantity and nature of his output in those years, by the people he worked with, and by what we learned later on about his addiction and mental problems in his later years. Gone was the MJ would would spend countless hours slaving over the bass line from Billie Jean to get it just right. As evidenced by Invincible, by 2001 he just wanted complete songs from outside writers, where he could lay down his vocals by following note for note the guide vocals provided by the producers/writers.

2000 Watts is a song you could take and copy-paste unto any pop/r&b album from the early 2000's, by any 19-year-old pop star. The music, the lyrics, the "persona", the singing style, the sound -- none of it evokes Michael Jackson, his style, his world, his age, or anything else that could make this -- even though he didn't write it -- an MJ record.

Honestly, if somebody had asked MJ, in 2003, say, if he remembered the song 2000 Watts, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd said he'd forgotten about it.
 
He should have aimed to have plenty of organic-sounding songs with live instruments on the album to stand out.
What's funny is that the early rumors regarding the album, before it came out, was that he was going for an "Off the Wall" vibe. When we heard You Rock My World, we thought those rumors would turn out to be true, as that one kind of evoked Rock With You or songs of that style. But when we heard the album, well let's just stay by the time Heartbreaker came on we had been disillusioned of that particular belief...
 
It's so obvious what Invincible was missing, honestly. It needed more creative input from MJ; he should have written and produced more songs by himself instead of singing what other people made for him. Cut the album to 12 tracks and include finished versions of outtakes like "Beautiful Girl", "The Way You Love Me" and "Hollywood Tonight". Even a finished version of "In the Back" would have been better than most of what was on the album.

I feel like MJ had a spark when he first began work on the album in 1998, but it suddenly died out by 1999 and he was phoning it in. Perhaps it had to do with the Munich bridge accident that year in June. That's understandable, though, and it's surprising that the album wasn't worse given what he was going through.
 
Last edited:
Invincible was not missing anything, quite the contrary. It is an extremely interesting album that should be dissected by anyone who wants to know more about Michael Jackson. The song Speechless is -to those who understand the lyrics- absolutely heart breaking.
 
Your songs can't be very personal if you didn't even write them.
Just because somebody writes their own songs doesn't mean they are personal. Unless you think John Lennon (or Paul) is a walrus, Johnny Cash "shot a man to watch him die", Phil Collins is a Mexican, Prince really had sex with his sister, or Charlie Daniels had a fiddle battle with the devil. 🤣 In the band Rush, most of the lyrics are written by the drummer, not the lead singer. Dungeon & Dragons style fantasy lyrics are common in prog & metal songs.
 
Just because somebody writes their own songs doesn't mean they are personal.

But you still need to write a song for it to be personal. That doesn't mean everything you write is personal, though. No need to strawman.
 
But you still need to write a song for it to be personal. That doesn't mean everything you write is personal, though. No need to strawman.
Interesting point although I don't agree with it. In the strictest sense, I suppose it could be argued that a self-written song is the only one that can be personal. But, actually, there are so many cover versions where the singer absolutely makes the song personal, makes it their own. Imo.

"Sinéad O’Connor milks melodrama out of every lovelorn moment on "Nothing Compares 2 U."It’s a performance that illustrates her remarkable facility as a vocalist: alternating between rage and sorrow, her singing has a wounded quality the lyrics lack."

 
Last edited:
RIP Sinead O'Connor, but she didn't write "Nothing Compares 2 U"; Prince did and he had released his own version of the song in 1985, 4 years before she recorded her cover in 1989. Her version is more well-known only because Prince didn't release his as a single. His version still blows hers completely out of the water and I have no doubt that it would have been a smash if he did release it as a single.

She never truly made it her own, nah. May they both rest in power, but she just rode the coattails of Prince, who was a better musician than her in every single way.
 
Prince didn't release Nothing Compares 2 U first. It was originally released by The Family. The Family was another of Prince's protege acts like Vanity 6. The lead singers of The Family are St. Paul & Susannah Melvoin, who is the twin sister of Revolution guitarist Wendy. I know because I have the album. I knew the song before Sinead's version. Prince did eventually release a live version in the 1990s with his then band New Power Generation.
 
RIP Sinead O'Connor, but she didn't write "Nothing Compares 2 U"; Prince did
Well, of course. There can't be many people who don't know it's a song by Prince. It gets mentioned constantly.

and he had released his own version of the song in 1985, 4 years before she recorded her cover in 1989. Her version is more well-known only because Prince didn't release his as a single. His version still blows hers completely out of the water and I have no doubt that it would have been a smash if he did release it as a single.
Perhaps. We'll never know. As for his version being better than hers, that's just personal taste. I don't like his version. And the live version from Paisley Park doesn't hold my attention, either.

She never truly made it her own, nah.
But she did for me and for loads of other people. All of whom know that Prince wrote the song but we just happen to prefer the Sinead version.

May they both rest in power, but she just rode the coattails of Prince,
No, she didn't.

who was a better musician than her in every single way.
That's irrelevant. I wasn't talking about her as a musician. I was talking about a singer being able to make a cover version of a song their own even though they didn't write the song. I stand by that idea. Other people can disagree but I think there are loads of cover versions out there that work on a personal level far beyond what the actual songwriter achieved.

Prince didn't release Nothing Compares 2 U first. It was originally released by The Family. The Family was another of Prince's protege acts like Vanity 6. The lead singers of The Family are St. Paul & Susannah Melvoin, who is the twin sister of Revolution guitarist Wendy. I know because I have the album. I knew the song before Sinead's version. Prince did eventually release a live version in the 1990s with his then band New Power Generation.
Oh, I'd forgotten all about this. I never liked The Family and the song fell flat for me.
 
Last edited:
There can't be many people who don't know it's a song by Prince. It gets mentioned constantly.
So she always lived under his shadow, career wise.
But she did for me and for loads of other people.
And? If someone randomly covered one of MJ's songs and their version hit No.1, would they actually make it their own song? Nah fam, it'd still be an MJ song before anything else.
No, she didn't.
She was a one hit wonder known only for one song that was made by Prince. Without him, she wouldn't have been successful. Rode his coattails.

Not like it matters, though. The fact is that she had no hand in making the song as she only covered it. It wasn't "personal" to her in the same way that a song is personal to the person who actually wrote it. If anything, it was only personal to her in the same way that it would be personal to anyone else who enjoyed the song and covered it. But that's not actually relevant. The song isn't "hers" just because her version was more popular than everyone else's.

I think MJ was the best person who could have sung "Rock with You", "Man in the Mirror", "Thriller", "Baby Be Mine", etc and I prefer his version of those songs more than anyone else's. But as much as I like them, the fact that he didn't write them can't be overlooked. He was carried by Quincy and Rod Temperton on those songs. "Billie Jean" is definitely more personal to MJ than those, because he actually wrote it. The best example of MJ's artistry would be "Billie Jean", because on top of being a great song, he actually wrote it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top