Who is the biggest musical villian ever?

[Dean Winchester]

Between Ike Turner (wife beater), Joseph Jackson (abusive father) and Col. Tom Parker (someone who marginalized Elvis to the point he was driven to gain weight and take pain meds and die young)

I think all three of these are perfect examples of "bad guys" behind the scenes, which do you think was the worst?

I never really knew what a vicious bastard Parker was until I saw a biopic on Elvis and Parker pretty much derailed Elvis' career for most of the 60's because he was so greedy.

I think I'm split between Ike and Joseph though, since they both were vicious to people they were supposed to love. Even a Jackson family commissioned miniseries depicted Joseph as a vicious brute, and that was with his consent!!!

[Ireneparalegal]

Well, Ike's abusive ways are true. If you asked him while he was alive he'd say it was false, but we all know it is true.

Joe Jackson's "allegations" are merely that, allegations. No one from his family has really come forth and stated what was shown in that Jackson family movie several years ago that starred Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs.

Col. Tom Parker, I am not real familiar with whether he was behind Elvis taking meds to the point of overdosing. Sounds like Elvis was not being forced to by means of a gun being pointed to his head. I always understood that Elvis created those problems himself. He wanted to make more money, make more records, tour and live like a night owl and sleep all day, he didn't exercise or take care of himself but he thought taking handfuls of diet pills, taking sleeping pills to help him sleep, taking pills to keep him awake, was the sure fire way to live. I can't see putting the blame on anyone but Elvis.

IKE TURNER IS THE WINNER.

[Dean Winchester]

Col. Tom Parker, I am not real familiar with whether he was behind Elvis taking meds to the point of overdosing. Sounds like Elvis was not being forced to by means of a gun being pointed to his head. I always understood that Elvis created those problems himself. He wanted to make more money, make more records, tour and live like a night owl and sleep all day, he didn't exercise or take care of himself but he thought taking handfuls of diet pills, taking sleeping pills to help him sleep, taking pills to keep him awake, was the sure fire way to live. I can't see putting the blame on anyone but Elvis.

Elvis actually tried unsuccessfully to disassociate himself from Parker in the late 60's (according to the film I saw) but Parker said he would take Elvis to the cleaners, so Elvis was pretty much stuck in a no-win situation. Elvis wanted to do West Side Story, but Parker refused because that movie took six months to make, whereas Elvis could've filmed five "Fun In Acapulco" movies in the same timeframe. He was a greedy scumbag who didn't care at all about Elvis, he just loved the money Elvis brought in.

I think the Joe Jackson thing is true because Michael and La Toya have both admitted to being beaten by him, and that miniseries you mentioned was actually commissioned by Motown and with the Jackson family blessing.

[Ireneparalegal]

Elvis actually tried unsuccessfully to disassociate himself from Parker in the late 60's (according to the film I saw) but Parker said he would take Elvis to the cleaners, so Elvis was pretty much stuck in a no-win situation. Elvis wanted to do West Side Story, but Parker refused because that movie took six months to make, whereas Elvis could've filmed five "Fun In Acapulco" movies in the same timeframe. He was a greedy scumbag who didn't care at all about Elvis, he just loved the money Elvis brought in.

I think the Joe Jackson thing is true because Michael and La Toya have both admitted to being beaten by him, and that miniseries you mentioned was actually commissioned by Motown and with the Jackson family blessing.
I thought LaToya took back all her allegations of being beaten by Joe. The only thing I find weird is the kids calling their dad by his first name. :crazy:

[catlover79]

I know Joe Jackson hasn't been proven guilty of any mistreatment, but I always get a bad vibe whenever I see him on TV. He's had numerous extramarital affairs. I just can't explain it all, but I think he'd be close behind Ike in this category.

[Shine]

Yoko Ono :lol:

Seriously though, I'm not really sure which one to pick.

[ABlairican Pie]

$haron Osbourne.

[Shine]

$haron Osbourne.

:rofl:

I knew you were going to say Sharon Osbourne. :lol: Even before I read your post I knew it would say Sharon Osbourne. :lol:

[88survivor]

Joe Jackson is like a demon under sheep's clothing. He looks sinister, abusive, abrasive, and untrustful. That's a father I would not live with. His supposed numerous affairs with....whoever was in the neighborhood. How Katherine ever lived with a man that cheated on her numerous times is beyond me. I guess Joe brain damaged Katherine so many times, she became an obedient servant to God and such a nitwit.

[ABlairican Pie]

:rofl:

I knew you were going to say Sharon Osbourne. :lol: Even before I read your post I knew it would say Sharon Osbourne. :lol:Yep, if I had my way, I'd chuck the entire henhouse at $haron, chicken wire and all! :D

But I think the list is too small with the above choices. I know that what Ike did to Tina was bad, no question, but I'm not sure if that qualifies him as the "worst" villain, unless there's something I don't know.

[Zebra 3]

Probably Wacko Jacko aka Pedo Pan.

[Dean Winchester]

Probably Wacko Jacko aka Pedo Pan.
well, Wacko owes a lot of being wacko to Joseph

[catlover79]

well, Wacko owes a lot of being wacko to Joseph
Supposedly one of the reasons MJ has had so much plastic surgery was so he wouldn't look like his dad. I think he accomplished that goal. :eek:

[Family Fan]

MTV---- It ruined music forever.

[Dean Winchester]

MTV---- It ruined music forever.
I do sorta agree here. I personally believe MTV started out as a good thing in the 80's, but as the 90's progressed, it started being more a vehicle to brainwash teens into what's "cool" and what "sucks". But the nail in the coffin for me was in 97 when they moved to Times Square and pretty much quit playing music videos most of the time.

I seriously believe the RIAA spends too much time blaming illegal downloading for poor music sales but nowhere enough on MTV (and VH1, MTV2, etc...) not playing music. It's 2007 and still the "big icons" in music are people like Beyonce and Justin Timberlake who managed to squeeze in at the very end of the 90's when MTV still played videos a little bit, therefore consumers have some familiarity with them that they don't have with Rihanna or Jonas Brothers or whatever who get radio airplay and nothing more. Throughout the 80's and 90's, there were pop and rock icons all over the place and MTV played a huge factor in launching so many careers, but now without MTV, there's only the radio and the internet, which IMO isn't quite the same. I honestly believe American Idol does more to help careers at this point than "MUSIC television", notice how many artists vie to become "guest judge" on there, because an appearence on Idol is one of the only guarentees to boost sales of their music.

I love the MTV of 1981 up until 96/97 (granted, they were slipping in the 90's, but up until 96/97 they still played enough of a variety of artists and had shows like 120 Minutes and the like which played artists of the like would never make it to MTV now) but ever since then, it's been the pits. If I took over MTV, I would axe every show they have and restore it to a music station, and I am sure sales of albums would go up again.

[friendsfan77]

I would say that Joe is a close second to Ike.

I wish I were old enough to have seen the earlier days of MTV. I barely remember much of anything in 1995-96 when I first had cable.

I agree about the fact that the RIAA should think more about the current state of MTV. And then Viacom has the gall to bitch and moan when people upload classic MTV and VH-1 clips on YouTube during the days when they were actually faithful or even half-faithful to their original purposes. If networks were more faithful to their original purposes and catered to the intended audiences instead of kissing the 18-34 demo's ass all the time, then people wouldn't need to go to the Internet and find old clips.

I remember how disappointed I was when I first saw TRL. I had finally gotten cable again in '03 and I heard so much about this show and how good it supposedly was. Then when I finally get to see it, I see that the music videos that ARE featured aren't shown in their entireties, or even close to it. They were just basically 30 second clips with crap all over the screen and with people in a little box making shoutouts and screaming their lungs out during half of it. Maybe it was better when it started; but by the time I got to see it, I was just majorly let down. I just don't see the point in that if it's a REQUEST show and the music videos that people request to see are hardly shown.

And any music videos that are seen are pretty much at 4 am and are never more than 6 months old. I could put up with some (and LORD, I stress the word "some") of the alternative programming for a little while but when you're called MUSIC television and you're now at the point where you hardly play any, that's when you know it's sad. Why do they even bother calling themselves MTV anymore?

[Dean Winchester]

I would say that Joe is a close second to Ike.

I wish I were old enough to have seen the earlier days of MTV. I barely remember much of anything in 1995-96 when I first had cable.

I agree about the fact that the RIAA should think more about the current state of MTV. And then Viacom has the gall to bitch and moan when people upload classic MTV and VH-1 clips on YouTube during the days when they were actually faithful or even half-faithful to their original purposes. If networks were more faithful to their original purposes and catered to the intended audiences instead of kissing the 18-34 demo's ass all the time, then people wouldn't need to go to the Internet and find old clips.

I remember how disappointed I was when I first saw TRL. I had finally gotten cable again in '03 and I heard so much about this show and how good it supposedly was. Then when I finally get to see it, I see that the music videos that ARE featured aren't shown in their entireties, or even close to it. They were just basically 30 second clips with crap all over the screen and with people in a little box making shoutouts and screaming their lungs out during half of it. Maybe it was better when it started; but by the time I got to see it, I was just majorly let down. I just don't see the point in that if it's a REQUEST show and the music videos that people request to see are hardly shown.

And any music videos that are seen are pretty much at 4 am and are never more than 6 months old. I could put up with some (and LORD, I stress the word "some") of the alternative programming for a little while but when you're called MUSIC television and you're now at the point where you hardly play any, that's when you know it's sad. Why do they even bother calling themselves MTV anymore?


I agree. What is funny is that MTV forgets they aren't establishing any longevity. There is actually a huge demand on the tape trading market for vintage MTV (I am acquiring the first four hours from 1981 with all commercials included and some other vintage MTV from someone) but I highly doubt in 20 years there's going to be a demand for a The Hills or I Love New York marathon circa 2007.

A lot of today's younger kids don't "get" what MTV was about because they don't know what it's like to grow up with artists and "bond" with them. Artists like Madonna, Janet, Prince, Michael Jackson, U2, Bon Jovi and others continue to have scores of followers 20+ years on because they remember precisely where they were the first times they saw their videos on MTV, and remember the events their world premiere videos would be, and the sort. Outside of American Idol people, none of today's teenagers have ever had the same "bond" with Fall Out Boy or Alicia Keys or Amy Winehouse that those who grew up in the 80's and 90's had with their "icons". I believe the fact that Beyonce and Justin lucked out coming in right as MTV was in it's final stages of playing music has helped them continue to have careers and be bigger "icons" and "superstars" in 2007 than any of the current new artists are, because we remember watching N'Sync and Destiny's Child videos on MTV and remember the fuss they made, on the other hand, unless you're up at 4 am, you've never seen a Fall Out Boy or Amy Winehouse video on MTV.

[freshprinceofLA]

Probably Joe he has a hand in what Michael has turned into he beat down his kids psycologically and physically and Ike is pretty bad as well but I'll go with JOE here

[waichingliu81]

I would say that Joe is a close second to Ike.

I wish I were old enough to have seen the earlier days of MTV. I barely remember much of anything in 1995-96 when I first had cable.

I agree about the fact that the RIAA should think more about the current state of MTV. And then Viacom has the gall to bitch and moan when people upload classic MTV and VH-1 clips on YouTube during the days when they were actually faithful or even half-faithful to their original purposes. If networks were more faithful to their original purposes and catered to the intended audiences instead of kissing the 18-34 demo's ass all the time, then people wouldn't need to go to the Internet and find old clips.

I remember how disappointed I was when I first saw TRL. I had finally gotten cable again in '03 and I heard so much about this show and how good it supposedly was. Then when I finally get to see it, I see that the music videos that ARE featured aren't shown in their entireties, or even close to it. They were just basically 30 second clips with crap all over the screen and with people in a little box making shoutouts and screaming their lungs out during half of it. Maybe it was better when it started; but by the time I got to see it, I was just majorly let down. I just don't see the point in that if it's a REQUEST show and the music videos that people request to see are hardly shown.

And any music videos that are seen are pretty much at 4 am and are never more than 6 months old. I could put up with some (and LORD, I stress the word "some") of the alternative programming for a little while but when you're called MUSIC television and you're now at the point where you hardly play any, that's when you know it's sad. Why do they even bother calling themselves MTV anymore?

what is really amazing is that you have tv music stations and companies such as viacom bitching about how people are uploading videos and stuff like that on sites such as youtube, i mean, there are reasons why we turn to and rely on the PC and internet for our music and TV intake- and one of them is because the standard of music in the charts nowdays leave a lot to be desired. let's face it, the best music came out in the 50s right up the late 90s and since then, it has gone to ****. if you want classics nowadays, you have to tune into VH1 and not MTV- as they play all the current hits, most of which are nowhere as good as classics. the m in MTV no longer stands for music in music television. yes i love all genres of music, particuarly hip hop and r'n'b but most of it is overplayed and over excessive

[Dean Winchester]

it looks like Justin Timberlake's comment fell on deaf ears. I thought he had the clout that he would make MTV suits consider. A few months ago on the VMA's, he said that MTV needs to start playing more music and less reality shows and the entire audience erupted in applause, so MTV... listen to your golden boy

[Ireneparalegal]

Music videos and lip synching.

[Dean Winchester]

Music videos and lip synching.
speaking of lipsynching, I remember years back on the AOL Music boards, some overzealous Milli Vanilli fanatic swore that Rob and Fab actually did sing and that they were paid to take the fall by rich, racist Beatles fanatics who were worried that MV were going to take the Beatles' place in rock history :lol:

[Ireneparalegal]

speaking of lipsynching, I remember years back on the AOL Music boards, some overzealous Milli Vanilli fanatic swore that Rob and Fab actually did sing and that they were paid to take the fall by rich, racist Beatles fanatics who were worried that MV were going to take the Beatles' place in rock history :lol:
oh sh*t...:rofl: What a crock! :lol:

[friendsfan77]

I'm still trying to believe how Milli Vanilli managed to be on Soul Train... "performing" out of all songs... Girl You Know It's True. lol

[Ireneparalegal]

Well, most, if not all, performers on Soul Train did lip-synch. So, they were only doing what they did best. :lol:

[catlover79]

Well, most, if not all, performers on Soul Train did lip-synch. So, they were only doing what they did best. :lol:
Yeah, but they were lip-synching to their own voices. That makes a world of difference. I remember I was in 4th grade when that whole MV backlash started. :rofl: Us girls forgot about them quickly once the New Kids on the Block hit the scene. What were we thinking?? :rofl:

[Ireneparalegal]

Yeah, but they were lip-synching to their own voices. That makes a world of difference. I remember I was in 4th grade when that whole MV backlash started. :rofl: Us girls forgot about them quickly once the New Kids on the Block hit the scene. What were we thinking?? :rofl:
True dat abt the "singing to someone else's voice". :crazy: :lol:

I remember when my eldest daughter was a fan of the NKOTB. Remember how they shortened their name to NKOTB so they wouldn't seem so "teeny bopperish" anymore? :rofl:

[88survivor]

We still go by that name: NKOTB. It is much better than saying the whole name. That was without Maurice Starr's help that they changed the name completely, though.

[catlover79]

We still go by that name: NKOTB. It is much better than saying the whole name. That was without Maurice Starr's help that they changed the name completely, though.
I remember when the buzz was that NKOTB were going to be "the next Beatles". :eek: puke: Then again, that's what people said about the Knack. :lol:

[Shine]

I remember when the buzz was that NKOTB were going to be "the next Beatles". :eek: puke: Then again, that's what people said about the Knack. :lol:

:lol:

[Dean Winchester]

I will admit a deep dark secret that it took nearly 20 years to admit.

I always secrely loved "You Got The Right Stuff", it was such a catchy number :lol:

[waichingliu81]

I will admit a deep dark secret that it took nearly 20 years to admit.

I always secrely loved "You Got The Right Stuff", it was such a catchy number :lol:

actually, NKOTB weren't that bad. speaking of their songs, i also liked 'tonight', 'step by step', 'please don't go' and 'cover girl'

[88survivor]

I actually did become addicted to their music when I first heard them in late '86, though. That's when they had their first album and also their second biggest album, Hangin' Tough. I must say every song I listen to was a jam, but it was all thanks to Maurice Starr behind the wagon.

[catlover79]

I will admit a deep dark secret that it took nearly 20 years to admit.

I always secrely loved "You Got The Right Stuff", it was such a catchy number :lol:
There's no shame in admitting that, John. I still have a couple of their tapes from when I was younger, and recently listened to them again. The songs they did were no worse (or better) than the stuff that later groups like the Backstreet Boys and N Sync did. The Right Stuff was indeed a guilty pleasure, and I'll say the same for Please Don't Go Girl and I'll Be Loving You Forever.

[88survivor]

I have a couple of their CDs as well. So you are not alone, catlover.

[catlover79]

I have a couple of their CDs as well. So you are not alone, catlover.
:lol: :D