Thriller_MJ
Proud Member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2011
- Messages
- 4,845
- Points
- 63
Bad for me. It just has no flow and no consistency. For me it's a "singles" album but not an album as a whole with a concept and a flow to it
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
"Earth Song" is more complex and intriguing than any pop effort that he had ever done previously (including the overhyped "Thriller" album and its songs,among others),but that is just my take on it.HIStory
![]()
MJ strayed from solid dance tracks on this record. It does opens up amazingly, but the later tracks don't make a cohesive listening experience. They just aren't strong enough together. Namely, D.S., 2 Bad (Shaq sinks the song), the anachronistic Come Together, Little Susie, Childhood and Tabloid Junkie. They aren't bad songs per say, but they don't work well together as an album. You could make the same argument about Dangerous, but that album is at least more dance worthy.
So (just for me) to make it tighter would be :
Scream
They Don't Care About US
Stranger In Moscow
This Time Around
Earth Song
Money
You Are Not Alone
History
Smile.
These 9 songs aren't better than Thriller. Not even close man. Y'all gotta put some respect on Thriller.
I sincerely agree,tbh.Within the fanbase - Invincible
Within the general public - Off The Wall
I like Invincible, but I think fans really overrated it when they say it's as good as MJ's previous albums. And while Off The Wall is a great album, I don't understand how critics can label that MJ's most genius work ever, when he's made songs like Who Is It, Will You Be There, They Don't Care About Us, Is It Scary.
They are not overproduced, keep it simple and get better results. His later work has so many sounds and recorded tracks that just get buried in the mixCan't fanthom how these early pieces get so much attention even though they're so impressively shallow in message,rather simple in composition (when compared to his later work,at least)
I disagree, Michael sounded most bright and energetic in his earlier work. He turned his vocals into an instrument resulting into an angry incomprehensible sound and articulation. I admire the reinvention and uniqueness but I will always pick his 70s/early 80s vocal style.and deeply unimpressive vocally (for most of the part),in contrast to what he'd later deliver during his career..
You do make a solid point,I respect your opinion thereforeInvincible is his most overrated work. Overrated by fans who can’t accept it is mediocre at best. It killed his music career basically
They are not overproduced, keep it simple and get better results. His later work has so many sounds and recorded tracks that just get buried in the mix
I disagree, Michael sounded most bright and energetic in his earlier work. He turned his vocals into an instrument resulting into an angry incomprehensible sound and articulation. I admire the reinvention and uniqueness but I will always pick his 70s/early 80s vocal style.
Indeed,I suppose that's where I've overexaggerated in one of my previous posts,among other things..You can't rate his solo albums highly enough. Vocally they are all excellent.
At this point it's not. It's strictly rated just like everything else.In the fan community, Invincible. It's has great moments, but it lacks little bit of Michael magic to make it truly shine