• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Michael Jackson Overrated?

IS Michael Jackson Overrated?

  • He's good but overrated

    Votes: 11 33.3%

  • He IS the King!

    Votes: 15 45.5%

  • He isnt that good and he IS overrated

    Votes: 6 18.2%

  • OTHER / I Dont Know

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • Total voters
    33
celticwar17 said:
MJ was epic, no doubt about it. Sure, many people can do what he did, but he had a certain uniqueness no one has. And he was weird, but weird in a way where it had people love him/ hate him.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone hated Michael. Personally, my feelings were a mix of pity/sadness at seeing him fall apart, and in general thinking that it's unfortunate that such a great talent ended up imploding the way he did.
 
I listen to country music, for the most part. I like some individual songs in other genres, including a few by Michael Jackson, but I don't think he was that great. There are only a couple of groups in other genres that I buy their CDs just to see what new songs they have, but Michael Jackson was never one of them.

I think that is, to me, what determines a good artist. If I buy their newest album just to hear what they came up with or go out of my way to at least hear their newest song just because they sing it, then I think the person is a great artist.

But, as others have said, what makes someone great is entirely subjective.
 
Ockham said:
I agree he was a star, but he was no more talented than Ray or Stevie, or for that matter Jimi Hendrix or any of probably hundreds of more musicians and performers. He was over rated because of his weirdness, not because of his talent which was and continues to be sad.
Click to expand...

The media hails the wierd and the freaks and gives them national attention....why the hell was Anna Nicole Smith important to anything....only to the media
The point was made that there are many other entertainers singers that were much better than michael jackson that never got the attention...maybe they were too normal.
He was a good entertainer no doubt...but not all that
 
roguenuke said:
I listen to country music, for the most part. I like some individual songs in other genres, including a few by Michael Jackson, but I don't think he was that great. There are only a couple of groups in other genres that I buy their CDs just to see what new songs they have, but Michael Jackson was never one of them.

I think that is, to me, what determines a good artist. If I buy their newest album just to hear what they came up with or go out of my way to at least hear their newest song just because they sing it, then I think the person is a great artist.

But, as others have said, what makes someone great is entirely subjective.
Click to expand...

I like both types of music, country & western:mrgreen:
 
something devastating must have happened to MJ after thriller. at the time of thriller he was still a reasonably good looking black guy that could sing and dance his ass off. after thriller he just kept getting whiter and freakier. I can't think of a single song he made after thriller that I actually thought was great. he had a couple of duets with McCartney that were good, but other than that, most of his later stuff kinda sucked.
 
OscarB63 said:
please, he was sodomizing "Carlton" (later of Fresh Prince fame) at the time he released Thriller
Click to expand...

Yeah? And the whole world knew?

I rest my case.
 
BDBoop said:
Yeah? And the whole world knew?

I rest my case.
Click to expand...

you said:

BDBoop said:
AHA! But the vast bulk of his works were fait accompli before that issue came to light
Click to expand...

if the whole world knew at the time....by definition it could not be "fait accompli"

either you mistated your case, OR you don't understand what fait accompli means.
 
Its amazing how americans embrace their child rapers. One "child star" was supposed to testify against him but there was a FIRE at the high rise he lived in. He was almost murdered (like all those missing children) but others got killed instead.
 
The only MJ song I ever liked was Beat It, and that was because Eddie VanHalen was doing the guitar work.
 
OscarB63 said:
as Katt Williams sez "People don't say the same **** about you for 20 goddamn years if it ain't true. If a mother****er calls you a crackhead for 20 years, bitch you are smokin crack"

1 kid accuses you of molestation, it could be bull****
2nd kid comes forward, doubt begins to creep in
3rd, 4th, 5th kid comes along....you are a freakin little boy ****er

how many millions of $$$$$$ did michael pay to how many different little boy's families to buy their silence?
Click to expand...

Dont know the details. I recall there only being one actual accuser and that their story changed pretty much day to day (even AFTER the trial and in video that came out after the documentary on him the family that accuesed him later said it didnt happen) and thats the primary reason why he was acquited. Like I said...no doubt doods game was off...I just think that if there was actually sexual contact and assault more people would have come out of the woodwork. I am inclined to believe he was twisted but spent much of his time trying to relive and provide for other kids an 'ideal' childhood that he didnt have. I dont really know the truth about the situation...I dont know that anyone does.
 
Loose Feather said:
Its amazing how americans embrace their child rapers. One "child star" was supposed to testify against him but there was a FIRE at the high rise he lived in. He was almost murdered (like all those missing children) but others got killed instead.
Click to expand...

1) there's no proof or evidence that Michael Jackson raped anyone

2) wtf is a "raper"
 
VanceMack said:
Dont know the details. I recall there only being one actual accuser and that their story changed pretty much day to day (even AFTER the trial and in video that came out after the documentary on him the family that accuesed him later said it didnt happen) and thats the primary reason why he was acquited. Like I said...no doubt doods game was off...I just think that if there was actually sexual contact and assault more people would have come out of the woodwork. I am inclined to believe he was twisted but spent much of his time trying to relive and provide for other kids an 'ideal' childhood that he didnt have. I dont really know the truth about the situation...I dont know that anyone does.
Click to expand...

there were two "official" accusers

In 1993, a 13-year-old boy accused Michael Jackson of sexual molestation. According to the allegations, Jackson had kissed and fondled the boy while they were alone in bed. Allegedly, this repeatedly took place during a four-month period.

At the suggestion of the boy’s father, a civil lawsuit was filed in 1993. On January 25, 1994, Michael Jackson settled the civil lawsuit paying an undisclosed amount to his accuser. Many believe that he paid between 15 and 20 million dollars. After receiving the settlement, the boy refused to testify in any criminal matters. Therefore, the prosecution was not able to pursue a criminal case.
Click to expand...


Former Neverland employees also claimed they saw the singer groping five young boys in the early 1990s including Macaulay Culkin, the Home Alone child star.
Click to expand...
 
Manc Skipper said:
Anthony Gormley's "Angel of the North" is possibly the most viewed work of art in the world as it is passed by 90,000 commuters every day. It's good, but not that good.

images
Click to expand...

How many of the 90,000 actually look at it? How many look at it a second time?
 
BDBoop said:
Michael's father was a horrific bastard who did a literal ****-ton of damage. Maybe if he'd had a steady start, things would have gone differently.
Click to expand...

His mothers religion did severe damage to him as well.
 
OscarB63 said:
there were two "official" accusers
Click to expand...

I dont usually give much stock to the family's account or to disgruntled former employees. Still..maybe did...maybe didnt...i dont know. I know if ANYONE deserves to get their ass kicked it is parents of ANY child that would let them have play dates and sleepovers with a grown man. I cant get my brain around that in any circumstance...unless you are HOPING for a paycheck...
 
OscarB63 said:
as Katt Williams sez "People don't say the same **** about you for 20 goddamn years if it ain't true. If a mother****er calls you a crackhead for 20 years, bitch you are smokin crack"

1 kid accuses you of molestation, it could be bull****
2nd kid comes forward, doubt begins to creep in
3rd, 4th, 5th kid comes along....you are a freakin little boy ****er

how many millions of $$$$$$ did michael pay to how many different little boy's families to buy their silence?
Click to expand...

Not to start a whole offshoot on this subject, but every one of those kids were after something else. They had parents pushing them to tell stories.

If you were in Michaels shoes, and had a kid accusing you, when you didn't do it, wouldn't it be easier for you to pay them off to stay quiet especially when they money means nothing to you. Remember in this society, that the accusation means your guilty, you are a case in point.
 
BDBoop said:
And I strongly disagree. All manner of artists use gimmicks, that doesn't make them strange.
Click to expand...
There's a difference: Alice Cooper dressed up in make-up, acted a part that was integral to his musical persona. He was NOT the same person and is not today the same person as he is when he's on stage. That's an act, or as you put it - a gimmick. Michael Jackson was not putting on an act - he was the weird strange person on stage and off. MJ was not playing a part, not acting ... that was really him.

BDBoop said:
On the plastic surgery front, I heard at one point that as long as he could still see his father's face in his own, he couldn't bear looking at himself. Don't know if it's true or not, but it makes sense.
Click to expand...
Probably very true, but I really don't count his plastic surgery as part of his weirdness. That was some inner issue he had.
 
Ockham said:
There's a difference: Alice Cooper dressed up in make-up, acted a part that was integral to his musical persona. He was NOT the same person and is not today the same person as he is when he's on stage. That's an act, or as you put it - a gimmick. Michael Jackson was not putting on an act - he was the weird strange person on stage and off. MJ was not playing a part, not acting ... that was really him.

Probably very true, but I really don't count his plastic surgery as part of his weirdness. That was some inner issue he had.
Click to expand...

I read somewhere (we did a profile on him years ago) that his ultimate driving factor behind the plastic surgery was to transform himself into a walking anime character. Guy was walking proof that money cant buy happiness.
 
Michael Jackson was weird as crap, looked like an alien by the end, and was very likely a child toucher.

None of which makes him any less of an amazingly talented singer, songwriter, and dancer than being an idiot and very likely a murder makes OJ Simpson any less of an amazing runner. Or that being a drug dealer and person engaging in child prostitution made Lawerence Taylor any less prolific as the greatest LB of all time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom