|
||||||||
Why still consider Micheal Jackson king of pop? |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 9,190
|
Why still consider Micheal Jackson king of pop?
I was wondering this today.
I mean I know he is a legened, and he's had one of the most successfull albums 'thriller'. And he was the best performer in his hay day. BUT He's not had any hit singles or albums 'apart from his re-released greatist hits ' if you can count that'. This past few years. And now he is post-poned his tour from 8th July to 13th July 'so he can have more time to rehearse' but now apparently he's only managed two rehearsals out of 45. And I think if he does cancel this tour or any other dates his chances of another comback will be over, and he will find it hard to get his fans back to make another comeback. What do you think? |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,530
|
As you say he had "Thriller" which is widely acknowleged as one of the greatest albums of all time in any genre. However he not only had this album but he had at least two other albums which would easily be in the top 20 albums ever. No one has made as big an impact on popular music than him. That's why he always will be the king of pop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 9,190
|
Yeah I know he had other very successfull albums but what I mean is we haven't heard any new material the past 3/4 years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8,590
|
Quote:
As you say he had "Thriller" which is widely acknowleged as one of the greatest albums of all time in any genre. However he not only had this album but he had at least two other albums which would easily be in the top 20 albums ever. No one has made as big an impact on popular music than him. That's why he always will be the king of pop.
As for the King Of Pop title, no idea tbh. No doubt he was a talent, but there have been far greater talents who are more deserving. One obvious example with a similar background as MJ is Stevie Wonder, who has a more impressive body of work behind him and is more responsible for that work (songwriting, production) than MJ |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 281
|
Because he's great that's why, amazing stage presence, amazing dancer and singer and he writes and produces his own songs, hes been going since childhood and he is still creating new fans.
He is the perfect example of someone who is completely different off stage than on and that is fascinating to watch. So many other good artists credit him as an inspiration. he will live forever. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Sorry, but if you think that MJ made three of the top twenty albums of all time you need to listen to some more albums. I've never seen a best album of all time list that included three MJ albums, normally just the one, Thriller (although personally I think Off The Wall is the better album).
As for the King Of Pop title, no idea tbh. No doubt he was a talent, but there have been far greater talents who are more deserving. One obvious example with a similar background as MJ is Stevie Wonder, who has a more impressive body of work behind him and is more responsible for that work (songwriting, production) than MJ I think the biggest thing was he changed the way things were done in the industry and was way ahead of his time, in the way that he was doing things that people wouldn't have even dreamed of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,693
|
I think Prince deserves this title more. He has influenced pop music more than MJ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 22,453
|
Quote:
I think Prince deserves this title more. He has influenced pop music more than MJ.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 686
|
He will always be the king of pop, no one has ever come close to replacing him nor will they.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 14,219
|
Because he has done things that no other male artist has done. His career has been groundbreaking and the things he has achieved, have not been replicated or come close to being replicate. He will always be the king of pop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Above the clouds
Posts: 22,453
|
I'd add he is the king of pop because his music has been incredible, i'm actually not sure how much of the man went into the music. He's like a f*cked up puppet in my eyes.
Needless to say some of the most incredible pop was penned in his name, and as a conduit for that he has suffered. I guess that is he ugly result of what made him. Saying that, I'm sure he's a nice enough bloke. |
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 18,069
|
He WAS the King of Pop. No-one has come close to being that since though. When someone tries (Justin Timberlake) it can't happen because they're just trying to be like Michael. Michael was like no-one else, such a unique singer, performer and personality. He's surely in the top 5 most famous men in the world, maybe THE most famous, certainly the most famous living entertainer. He's the king of that.
Btw Off The Wall, Bad and Dangerous are all better than Thriller. Musically I think Dangerous and History (the original songs CD, not the greatest hits) are my favourites. OK Heal The World is f**king terrible but the rest of Dangerous is amazing. Jam, In The Closet, Who Is It...I could listen to them forever. Thriller is shite in comparison, though it's a completely different style. There's much more going on on Dangerous. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Narrich!
Posts: 2,036
|
He's still the king of pop because no one has taken the crown off of him yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: England
Posts: 2,588
|
He's only the king of pop to his fans, everyone else just thinks he's weird
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 281
|
Quote:
He's only the king of pop to his fans, everyone else just thinks he's weird
and the're not fans
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
As you say he had "Thriller" which is widely acknowleged as one of the greatest albums of all time in any genre. However he not only had this album but he had at least two other albums which would easily be in the top 20 albums ever. No one has made as big an impact on popular music than him. That's why he always will be the king of pop.
ok, he was a great pop product in the 70's 80's and i cant deny the popularity of thriller, and one or two other albums. but that was over 20 years ago, 'no one has made as big an impact on pop' ... utter nonsense! ever heard of the beatles? . only the fans regard him in such high esteem, ordinary music fans (like me) just see him now as a washed out, dodgy, sleazy, rather pathetic individual. it was 25 years ago that he was at his peak.... time has moved on and i see NO mj influences in todays music. he was a successful product of his time, legend?..NAAAHHHH. id suggest james brown out shines jacko by a mile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,765
|
Quote:
Because he has done things that no other male artist has done. His career has been groundbreaking and the things he has achieved, have not been replicated or come close to being replicate. He will always be the king of pop.
the bloke was a successful pop product, a figurehead for the micheal jackson product of writers, correographers, producers... thats all. god i HATE blind faith.... i find jack fans the most annoying people on the planet, turning a convieniant blind eye to his personal exploits that would have got any normal person a prison or hospital sentance and im talking about the activities PROVEN, not the unproven ones. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mended Drum
Posts: 13,750
|
As someone has said WAS the king of pop. But considering he's released nothing new in years, it's kind of difficult to hold onto the crown.
As for the 3 wacko albums in the top 20 of all time. What complete and utter garbage, there are FAR better albums. But I guess the fans consider anything he does gold. Personally I think these concerts have about as much chance of happening as Gordon Brown announcing a General Election within the next week. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: England
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
Really? not everyone i know
and the're not fansHe's only the king of pop to his fans, but "most people" just thinks he's weird Better?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 281
|
Quote:
Cant edit my comment so will edit here
He's only the king of pop to his fans, but "most people" just thinks he's weird Better? ![]() Anyway, yeah i agree he is different but so what, what's so great about being normal anyway, the man never had a normal childhood or life so why should he be a normal man. Other great performers had the luxury of childhood, he never, fancy having his life from the age of 11 geeze I would be a bit strange, but like i say so what. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,136
|
He had big gaps between albums which is why his 4 big albums (Off The Wall, Thriller, Bad, Dangerous) were spread over 12 years, because there was a 4-year gap between each one (1979, 1983, 1987 and 1991).
So compare that to The Beatles who were together as a group for only about 8 years (1962-1970) but during that period were prolific. If we were to give an award for "kings of pop" we might give it to The Beatles who were probably bigger than Michael Jackson, but you still cannot deny Michael Jackson's own achievements as great in their own right. History also had its moments (actually Earth Song is his biggest selling single in the UK) and what he did subsequently to that failed dismally by his standards. |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 11,669
|
The "King of Pop" thing was a marketing ploy started by him. No one ever called him that before he called himself that. But the mass media repeated it so often that the gullible public bought into it as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 9,190
|
I think he is a legened but it's just that he's had 'no new material in order still be king if pop, I know he's the worlds most successfull pop artist, I mean if you look at madonna who is the queen of pop, is still making successfull music and tours ect so she deserves her title Imo,
The thing with MJ is that he has a strong presence the crowd go wild for him. |
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: HEED ARMY!!!!!
Posts: 32,092
|
MJ vs Elvis, King of Pop vs King of Rock and Roll, in a steel cage, next on Eurosport
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,325
|
If MJ is still a King, he's Denethor (from LotR)...
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:45.



I think the biggest thing was he changed the way things were done in the industry and was way ahead of his time, in the way that he was doing things that people wouldn't have even dreamed of.

and the're not fans
. only the fans regard him in such high esteem, ordinary music fans (like me) just see him now as a washed out, dodgy, sleazy, rather pathetic individual. it was 25 years ago that he was at his peak.... time has moved on and i see NO mj influences in todays music. he was a successful product of his time, legend?..NAAAHHHH. id suggest james brown out shines jacko by a mile.