Thriller VS Ghosts

[JM77]

After watching the Ghosts short film again recently, I think I remember Michael saying that he wanted Ghosts to be bigger than the Thriller short film during the 'making of' video. Though, it seems that Ghosts didn't and still doesn't receive the recognition that it deserves - not as much as the Thriller short film anyway.
If you watch the two short films, you can instantly see similarities between them - the horror/thriller (no pun intended ) themes, the classic heavy makeup, ICONIC costumes/clothing, the different characters played by Michael himself, the complex dance routines with the scary looking undead backup dancers, etc.
But is the issue the success of Thriller? Did Thriller's success cast a shadow over the potential of Ghosts to be bigger than it was and is?
Though, due to the Thriller short film being something that nobody else had done before, I was thinking that maybe Ghosts was ahead of its time - if it had taken Thriller's place of being made in 1982, then would it have had the same appreciation Thriller received as a short film? Did Michael start a trend that ultimately limited the success of Ghosts regarding recognition?

This is quite a complex topic I've realised and there are no completely correct assumptions or answers of what could/would have happened based on what has been said above^
I created this discussion to see what people think
Do you like one more than the other or like them equally?

I personally love both short films and think that they're equally AMAZING, where you can see how Michael would strive to be the best and take risks with blood, sweat and tears along the way. Look at what Michael as a perfectionist created!

 

[OnirMJ]

Ghosts (song) >> Thriller (song)
Ghosts (short film)

 

[HIStory]

I think Ghosts is superior to Thriller. It has a deeper meaning. It has a lot better choreography. Though also a lot more difficult, so it limits its chances to become as popular for masses of people to dance as Thriller is.

I think it is less known and popular than Thriller because it was released at a point of MJ's career where he lost a lot of his popularity - esp. in the US. Perhaps also because it's seen as an attempt to recreate Thriller (which is so wrong and it is a very superficial judgement, simply based on the fact that both have a horror theme). And maybe the music isn't as radio friendly either - and actually Ghosts has three songs not just one, so it is not your typical music short film.

I personally think Ghosts is better, deeper and more complex and the public is missing out.

 

[Psychoniff]

I'm with OnirMJ on this one regarding the songs. Although I don't care much for either 'short film'. I'm going to go as far as to say that I don't care too much for ANY of MJ's 'short films' to honest. Too much attention is paid the 'short films' and not the lyrics, harmonies, rhythms, percussions, melody, arrangements and overall production of the songs.

 

[Daryll748]

Great thread again. :clap:

Well, I love them both. I do have to admit I do love Ghosts a 'tad' more cause of all the visual effects and the elaborate storyline and the fact that I was 'gobsmacked' that Michael was the 'mayor' too :scratch:

I 'discovered' it when I glared at the 'credits' and I went...

:lol:


Okay, its NOT fair to 'compare' that way cause in 82 you didn't have all this 'special effects' yet that you had in 97 but anyway... I prolly watched Ghosts more often than Thriller.

Could also be the fact that I have it seperate on DVD and I don't 'need' to scroll through the others to find Thriller. Lazy, I know :smilerolleyes:

Though in my humble opinion, I think that Ghosts has a BETTER storyline than Thriller. The 'plot' is more exciting than Thriller.

Well, compare 'plots' now.

"Thriller"
Michael goes with his girlfriend to the movies as he drives her home, he runs out of gas so they need to walk instead.
Then, he proposes to her and he needs to tell her he's different cause the MOON reveals his dark secret. On the spot, he turns into a werewolf and chases his girlfiend....

Then, walking her home again :scratch:they are cornered by Zombies and he turns into one. (I always fretted about the mistake that he wears a 'crisp' jeans as Zombie, doh! )
Okay, she runs again into an abandoned house and sees Michael 'zombie' has reached her with the necessary screams lol.
But then she wakes up and he says 'what's the matter? I'll take you home"

I do love the fact you can think she 'dreamed' it all on that sofa cause of the horror movie they saw but then you see Michael's eyes and go 'WOW' :cheeky:

Storyline really doesn't carry a 'message' in it like Ghosts does but its still COOL.

"Ghosts"

Someplace else with Nice Normal people and the 'mayor' fed up with the 'freak' living in that castle is going to set him
straight once and for all cause all he does is 'scare' those kids with his 'ghosts' stories.

So, they set out on a 'lynch' party and Michael invites them in and shows him his 'world' "GAME TIME". You can see the villagers are scared and impressed but the mayor is stubborn in his belief though he's scared too, he still wants him to go. The look of 'remorse' on their faces is sublime really!

I just like the fact there is a message that "being different" is not wrong. Its enriching and entertaining and the villagers did have fun when the mayor ran away scared "HELLLOOO"

I think Michael plays 'masterfully' in Ghosts as he plays the two 'opposites' Himself as the 'Maestro' and the 'opposing' character "Mayor" only to show that you can only 'feel' what you do to the other if you 'forced' to see it yourself.

The 'mayor' called Michael a 'freak' so he 'slipped' into him and made him dance and then changed his face into something ugly. "Who's the freak now? " :blush:

Looks like I'm writing a whole 'essay' about it though :cheeky: they are only thoughts that pop into my mind that I try to type here

Anyway, to finish off I would have to choose "Ghosts" based on the storyline that I think is 'awesome' :wub: and yeash, the fact that I didn't know WHO the mayor was too

 

[OnirMJ]

It has a lot better choreography. Though also a lot more difficult, so it limits its chances to become as popular for masses of people to dance as Thriller is.

I agree with that. Ghosts (2 Bad actually) choreography is absolutely amazing. I think 2 Bad and Scream choreography are MJ's best. But they are both far too complex for masses to dance to it in flash mobs, prisons or talent shows. Only few people in the world can dance to choreography such complex as 2 Bad and Scream.

 

[Spaceship]

I prefer "Thriller", both as a song and a video. "Ghosts" isn't that great of a song, IMO, and while the video for it is good, I think "Thriller"'s video is better.

 

[KOPV]

I favor Ghosts... Maybe I just overdid watching Thriller growing up, I saw Ghosts the first time when it aired on TV in the U.S. I believe in 2003? maybe a little before that I'm not sure.. So it's fresher to me, I've been watching Thriller since the 80's so...

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

Ghosts is essentially Thriller part 2,

As Lionel Richie said about Thriller: its the Gone of the Wind of music videos

Nothing will ever top that, its not gone happen

 

[HIStoric]

I think I prefer Thriller both ways.

Thriller is such a great song and it automatically makes everyone want to get up and dance. I was listening to Thriller the other day and was thinking about how just how great of a pop song it is. I'm not great at explaining music but I prefer the way it sounds and makes you wanna groove more. Sure, it's not as complex or sophisticated as Ghosts but on the whole I prefer Thriller (and it's a GREAT party song!). According to my iTunes, I've played Thriller 112 times as opposed to Ghosts 47 times, so I clearly enjoy both songs (and why wouldn't I, they're both great songs in their own right, I just prefer Thriller!).

For short films, both are obviously high points in MJ's short film videography but I'd go with Thriller. It's pretty much perfect in every way for me and while it's not my favourite short film (that's Smooth Criminal), there's nothing I would really change about Thriller. It too was ambitious for it's time but it also hit every mark whereas I felt Ghosts didn't. Of course, I like Ghosts too. I don't think it's as amazing as others make it out to be, but it's still a film I enjoy every once in a blue moon. It's a much more ambitious piece of work I feel and while it's more impressive in some ways (i.e. more complex choreography), there are some things I would've done differently.

For starts I don't know why but the dialogue is pretty terrible at times and this is in a number of MJ films actually (Moonwalker and YRMW come to mind immediately). The best insult they could come up with is "Freaky freak boy"? Seriously?? I mean who says that? It doesn't come off as intimidating in the slightest, it comes off... laughable even. If I was the director, I probably would've done more than just have everyone in the same room staring at each other for 45 minutes too. I mean, the town folk really don't do much except stand there and I would've probably had some more settings too. I would've also expanded on the history of the relationship between the town folk and the maestro as well; when it comes to their relationship it's very tell, not show. Like it's just laid out for you through dialogue... you're a freak and we want you out of our town etc etc and especially in a visual medium, you want to show, not tell. It doesn't even have to be that long, if done right a montage would work just fine. It's not always 'tell, not show' though as I can think of some ways it does 'show not tell'. Also there's also some very one dimensional characters like The Mayor.

I'll finish on a more positive note though and say that of course, the VFX are very good for it's time (notably the dancing skeleton) and the makeup/costume design is great. MJ's looking great although his outfit isn't really that much of a standout, but it suits its purpose. The choreography is top notch, a definite highlight of his career in this regard and I love seeing a late-30s MJ still pull off some very impressive moves. I love how there's a number of moments where songs are briefly constructed out of body movements, floor stomping as well as finger snapping etc. OOH also when Skeleton MJ's standing at the top of the hall, and his family are down on the floor, bent over and repeating the same move and chanting over and over, as if they're revving up their engines, and then MJ screams once more, pointing at the Mayor as his family start to charge forward towards the Mayor. I love that part

It's a much more ambitious work for MJ and I appreciate many of the upsides (notably the choreography and VFX), but honestly I feel it has more flaws overall than Thriller. I wonder how differently it's success would've been had it been released today in the age of the internet era where it would've been much easier to see a 40 minute short film.

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]

I prefer "Thriller", both as a song and a video. "Ghosts" isn't that great of a song, IMO, and while the video for it is good, I think "Thriller"'s video is better.

:bow: I agree with your choice and the reason behind it. I loved that Thriller paid homage to the classic horror movie genre and having Vincent Price do the rap sealed the deal for me (I love, love, LOVE Vincent Price). "Ghosts" didn't really impress me like Thriller did. I did like the skeleton dance a lot and the mayor's 'get down' dance, lol! I knew it was Mike when I looked at the "mayor's" eyes. Those EYES can't be disguised and always gave him away. :girl_blush: :girl_sigh:

 

[HIStory]

For starts I don't know why but the dialogue is pretty terrible at times and this is in a number of MJ films actually (Moonwalker and YRMW come to mind immediately). The best insult they could come up with is "Freaky freak boy"? Seriously?? I mean who says that? It doesn't come off as intimidating in the slightest, it comes off... laughable even. If I was the director, I probably would've done more than just have everyone in the same room staring at each other for 45 minutes too. I mean, the town folk really don't do much except stand there and I would've probably had some more settings too. I would've also expanded on the history of the relationship between the town folk and the maestro as well; when it comes to their relationship it's very tell, not show. Like it's just laid out for you through dialogue... you're a freak and we want you out of our town etc etc and especially in a visual medium, you want to show, not tell. It doesn't even have to be that long, if done right a montage would work just fine. It's not always 'tell, not show' though as I can think of some ways it does 'show not tell'. Also there's also some very one dimensional characters like The Mayor.

I don't think Thriller's dialogues are better and it's characters are more complex. In fact, I find the opening dialogue a bit awkward. But then these are music videos, so I find it odd when they get criticized for things such as "one dimensional characters" (and it's not like Thriller had more complex characters). The Mayor was obviously a reference to Sneddon and it did the job well IMO.

everyone in the same room staring at each other for 45 minutes

That's a bit unfair, since they are obviously not just staring at each other for 45 minutes. There is a lot happening in those 45 minutes - like some of the best dance sequences and choreographies of Michael's entire career.

 

[Euan]

I think it's personal preference really.

In terms of effect, thriller clearly wins but that isn't really enough to say it's a better video.

 

[HIStoric]

I don't think Thriller's dialogues are better and it's characters are more complex. In fact, I find the opening dialogue a bit awkward. But then these are music videos, so I find it odd when they get criticized for things such as "one dimensional characters" (and it's not like Thriller had more complex characters). The Mayor was obviously a reference to Sneddon and it did the job well IMO.

Of course but I don't go into a 13 minute music video expecting complex characters. When it's 3 times that length though and we have more of an opportunity, I feel there should be some attempt to add more depth to the characters (especially when he is the leading antagonist of the film). Maybe I am interpreting the film as more of a traditional short film than a super long music video, but even then I feel it could've benefitted from that. He was the man who pushed the envelope and transitioned music videos from a simple performance into a short film, perhaps he could've taken it further? Performance wise though, I felt MJ performed the part of the Mayor rather well actually.

When it comes to the dialogue, Thriller's isn't anything to run home about but it does its job fine and I've never really felt it was awkward. Regardless, it's miles better than "Who's the freak now? Freaky-boy, freak, circus freak!". It sucks because that's one of the best non-musical scenes in the film and I always get pulled out by that line in particular. It's really cringey and not intimidating at all, the opposite even.

That's a bit unfair, since they are obviously not just staring at each other for 45 minutes. There is a lot happening in those 45 minutes - like some of the best dance sequences and choreographies of Michael's entire career.

Yes... from the maestro and his family. Admittedly it's been a while since I've seen the film but apart from the Mayor, what do the other 15 people really do though? I remember the children give their support from time to time but most of the crowd, aka the parents, mainly just stand there... maybe cue shot of horror or amazement every once in a while and a line about you should be ashamed for having a bad influence on our children or something.

 

[HIStory]

When it comes to the dialogue, Thriller's isn't anything to run home about but it does its job fine and I've never really felt it was awkward. Regardless, it's miles better than "Who's the freak now? Freaky-boy, freak, circus freak!". It sucks because that's one of the best non-musical scenes in the film and I always get pulled out by that line in particular. It's really cringey and not intimidating at all, the opposite even.

Well, I never felt that way about that line and to me if you consider that awkward I don't know how the dialogues in Thriller aren't. I think we should just agree to disagree on this.

Also I personally do not think that line in particular was supposed to be "indimidating". To me it's more a reflection on real life where people, the media did use these exact terms to describe Michael while in reality it's them who become freaks and "ugly" with that kind of behaviour. When you consider the film as autobiographical (which it obviously is) then it makes sense IMO.

Yes... from the maestro and his family. Admittedly it's been a while since I've seen the film but apart from the Mayor, what do the other 15 people really do though? I remember the children give their support from time to time but most of the crowd, aka the parents, mainly just stand there... maybe cue shot of horror or amazement every once in a while and a line about you should be ashamed for having a bad influence on our children or something.

Why should the other 15 people be more active? I think they represent the masses, the general public who are so easily led astray, manipulated and get dragged into a lynch mob by a few opinion leaders (eg. Sneddon, the media). They are not necessarily very active in real life either, they are the silent masses though who buy the tabloids and believe them or who vote "guilty" in polls and who (figuratively speaking) make up the lynch mob without actually knowing anything substantial about the cases and about the person they are about to lynch. They simply follow someone (eg. media, Sneddon, rumours etc.) who told them that person is bad and should be feared and destroyed. I personally do not feel I need a more elaborate, in-depth portrayal of these people for that purpose.

To me alone for the fact that Ghosts reflects on real life events in Michael's life makes it better. And we did not yet talk about the superior choreography which is not irrelevant at all since, after all, we are talking about music videos. In comparation to me Thriller is rather shallow, even though I can understand that due to its much bigger popularity it's culturally more significant for the general public. But again, I can respect if someone thinks otherwise, this is just my opinion.

 

[OnirMJ]

Also the town people (parents and their kids) suck at acting! Where did they find them and why did they cast them? Only good characters are the ones played by MJ and the dancers. I agree that the dialogue could have been better. And I don't like the ghoul coughing scene. That was not funny to me at all. I like the score by Nicholas Pike though.

 

[HIStoric]

Also I personally do not think that line in particular was supposed to be "indimidating".

Yeah. I sat there afterwards thinking intimidated wasn't the right term, but regardless I know it takes me out of the picture every time and I just can't take that part as seriously with that line in there. Maybe MJ tried to make it too friendly towards children and was afraid of using worser language? That's what I've always thought watching that part.

I think they represent the masses, the general public who are so easily led astray, manipulated and get dragged into a lynch mob by a few opinion leaders (eg. Sneddon, the media). They are not necessarily very active in real life either, they are the silent masses though who buy the tabloids and believe them or who vote "guilty" in polls and who (figuratively speaking) make up the lynch mob without actually knowing anything substantial about the cases and about the person they are about to lynch. They simply follow someone (eg. media, Sneddon, rumours etc.) who told them that person is bad and should be feared and destroyed. I personally do not feel I need a more elaborate, in-depth portrayal of these people for that purpose.

That's a good point actually. I was thinking somewhere along those lines for those characters (that they could potentially represent the 'quieter' masses), but I didn't really think about it for long enough to consider the points you mentioned how they blindly follow a leader etc etc. Maaybbeeee if I was in charge I would've done something different than just having them stand there, but you have changed the way I see them.

And we did not yet talk about the superior choreography which is not irrelevant at all since, after all, we are talking about music videos. In comparation to me Thriller is rather shallow, even though I can understand that due to its much bigger popularity it's culturally more significant for the general public. But again, I can respect if someone thinks otherwise, this is just my opinion.

When I was thinking about the two, I never took cultural impact into consideration because that's not fair on Ghosts. I've never really been the sort of person to prefer something over another simply because it's a more sophisticated piece of media. I totally understand that some fans would like it more for the autobiographical aspect and I respect that, it's just I personally get much more enjoyment out of Thriller than what I do for Ghosts (and that's not to say I don't like Ghosts because I especially like the song, it's one of my favourite older MJ songs).

If I was director, would I have done things differently with Ghosts? Yes definitely. I feel out of the two films, Ghosts has more flaws and that it also had more potential than what we got in the end. Thriller may be the most shallow of the two but I can't really find any flaws with it and I feel it was executed well in just about every sense. Like I said earlier, I wouldn't touch it.

 

[Electro]

Also Ghosts (song) is not in the movie enough. The song is perfect and should have been more prominent in the movie.

The song Ghosts was edited in afterwards. Originally it was only 2Bad in a super long extended Version.
So we can be "lucky" that the song is in there at all.
The original version of the short film is still around, not sure if on YouTube at the moment.

 

[OnirMJ]

The song Ghosts was edited in afterwards. Originally it was only 2Bad in a super long extended Version.
So we can be "lucky" that the song is in there at all.
The original version of the short film is still around, not sure if on YouTube at the moment.

I know. I have that version. I love 2 Bad also. Not a big fan of Is It Scary though. Although the original movie was supposed to be called Is It Scary and that was while 2 Bad hasn't been written yet and probably Is It Scary (song) was in its early stages because in 1993 MJ didn't yet started working with Jam & Lewis.

 

[MAQ]

I prefer Ghosts. Always have!

The thing with Ghosts is that it wasn't really meant for the public. It was meant for the MJ family. In fact, I think it was more for himself. During that time period, Michael's songs were largely out of what I'd like to label as "the mainstream". There were absolutely no immature or shallow songs on HIStory - in fact only one song could be considered a love song.

So everything in Ghosts is symbolic; The Neverland Ranch which was described as a creepy place (by the press during the last 16 years of MJ's life) being the Maestro's abode, the town mayor looking like TS, the townspeople looking like dumb sheep following the wind, and the kids being the only people who really understood that the Maestro didn't mean any harm.

On first glance, some of it seems childish - however, it has a much deeper meaning. The dialogue could be considered amateur however I think Michael wanted it that way. He was thought of as a freak and they wanted him out of the town. Plus, Michael wasn't exactly a big fan of curse words or anything violent - especially in front of kids. I also think that Ghosts wasn't exactly aiming to be another horror short film - we've seen how scary Thriller was so we could infer that Ghosts wasn't all about horror. Instead, it had symbolism, some very clever humor (especially if you match the film with Michael's life) and a really entertaining story.

Thriller was cool no doubt. But if you compare the artistry, Ghosts wins by aa country mile. And do I even have to mention the dancing? Ghosts wins easily in that too. The first time I watched Ghosts I was like how could that dance routine be humanly possible.

So.. Ghosts all the way !

 

[Bringing Brighter Days]

I prefer Ghosts. Always have!

The thing with Ghosts is that it wasn't really meant for the public. It was meant for the MJ family. In fact, I think it was more for himself. During that time period, Michael's songs were largely out of what I'd like to label as "the mainstream". There were absolutely no immature or shallow songs on HIStory - in fact only one song could be considered a love song.

So everything in Ghosts is symbolic; The Neverland Ranch which was described as a creepy place (by the press during the last 16 years of MJ's life) being the Maestro's abode, the town mayor looking like TS, the townspeople looking like dumb sheep following the wind, and the kids being the only people who really understood that the Maestro didn't mean any harm.

On first glance, some of it seems childish - however, it has a much deeper meaning. The dialogue could be considered amateur however I think Michael wanted it that way. He was thought of as a freak and they wanted him out of the town. Plus, Michael wasn't exactly a big fan of curse words or anything violent - especially in front of kids. I also think that Ghosts wasn't exactly aiming to be another horror short film - we've seen how scary Thriller was so we could infer that Ghosts wasn't all about horror. Instead, it had symbolism, some very clever humor (especially if you match the film with Michael's life) and a really entertaining story.

Thriller was cool no doubt. But if you compare the artistry, Ghosts wins by aa country mile. And do I even have to mention the dancing? Ghosts wins easily in that too. The first time I watched Ghosts I was like how could that dance routine be humanly possible.

So.. Ghosts all the way !

the MJ family?

 

[JM77]

Okay, its NOT fair to 'compare' that way cause in 82 you didn't have all this 'special effects' yet that you had in 97

That exact thought went through my head, and that's one of the reasons that makes this a complex topic. I agree, people can't really compare the effects, makeup, etc. as 13 years later (from 1983 to 1996) makeup, visual effects/'camera trickery' were more advanced. Because of this I think that I could see more effects in Ghosts than there is in Thriller, that are more advanced as well. And I must say, when I first watched Ghosts, I had no idea that Michael played the Mayor as well as a few other characters. It just shows that this side of Michael's short films developed from the time of Thriller, based on him having to wear different clothing/costumes and wear heavy makeup to play different characters. For example, in Thriller he plays the werewolf and the zombie, but in Ghosts he plays, the Maestro (who has his own effects other than makeup), the Skeleton, the Super Ghoul, the Mayor Ghoul and the Mayor.

 

[Galactus123]

I think Thriller is better song and short film. Ghosts is too long. They could have cut like 10 minutes out of it and it would be better. I like the choreography and the music parts are great. The short version was actually the first short film by Michael I ever saw.

 

[OnirMJ]

15 years later (from 1982 to 1997)

Irrelevant, but it's actually 1983 and 1996.

 

[JM77]

Irrelevant, but it's actually 1983 and 1996.

My mistake, I usually associate 1982 to Thriller and 1997 to Ghosts due to their release dates, regarding the album and the song

 

[OnirMJ]

My mistake, I usually associate 1982 to Thriller and 1997 to Ghosts

Yeah, Ghosts was officially released on May 9, 1997 but it was filmed and first screened in 1996 and released along with select prints of the film Thinner. Thriller was filmed in mid-October 1983 and released on December 2, 1983.

 

[JM77]

I edited my post^

 

[MAQ]

the MJ family?

The fans I mean .

 

[Daryll748]

My mistake, I usually associate 1982 to Thriller and 1997 to Ghosts due to their release dates, regarding the album and the song

Well, I make that mistake too though I 'should' know the 'real' dates as mentioned

Reading my 'reply' again :blush: I might have been a bit too harsh on Thriller cause yeash, I have consider it was made in 1983 and I'm sure the effects used there were 'topnotch' too.

I really did love Thriller but Ghosts is still my fave one though :cheeky:

 

[JM77]

Well, I make that mistake too though I 'should' know the 'real' dates as mentioned

Reading my 'reply' again :blush: I might have been a bit too harsh on Thriller cause yeash, I have consider it was made in 1983 and I'm sure the effects used there were 'topnotch' too.

I really did love Thriller but Ghosts is still my fave one though :cheeky:

Once again I agree Both Thriller and Ghosts are wonderful in their own right based on effects and makeup (and entirely too) - Thriller's makeup and effects were 'topnotch' for 1983 and Ghosts' effects and makeup were likely 'topnotch' for 1996