http://www.sohh.com/articles/article.php/13804
http://www.newkerala.com/one.php?action=fullnews&id=25744

Well, welcome, to the real world, Michael. You can't always remain on top.

rules are rules. If an album is over 2 years old and ever dips below #100, it goes straight to the Pop Catalog chart. Christmas albums routinely sell big #'s every season, but have to go Pop Catalog even tho there have been years where Mariah and Celine's Christmas albums could've been in the top 20, but because of their age, they just had to be on Pop Catalog. That's how it goes, you can't make a special exception for Thriller, because then they should've made an exception LAST WEEK for Tom Petty's Greatest Hits album, which sold 70,000 after the Super Bowl, despite being from 1993. Thriller is still a 1982 album no matter how many remixes they tack on to it.

Remasters/reissues of old albums come out WEEKLY with bonus tracks that were unreleased until now, and always go pop catalog if they sell well enough to chart. If Beck's special edition 2-disc version of Odelay released a few weeks ago had to chart Pop Catalog, why should Thriller chart regular? Thriller is more than twice Odelay's age. If the rules are bent for MJ, then Tom Petty, Pink Floyd and others should be able to chart "regular" as well with albums that sell well enough to be on the regular chart, but are Pop Catalog because of the age.

Well, welcome, to the real world, Michael. You can't always remain on top.

:yeahthat

Seriously, what is this album? Is it a rerelease? is it a tribute album?

Mike, get it though your drug laced head, nobody cares about you anymore.

Write some new stuff!

:yeahthat

Seriously, what is this album? Is it a rerelease? is it a tribute album?

Mike, get it though your drug laced head, nobody cares about you anymore.

Write some new stuff!
it's a reissue of Thriller with a few bonus remixes tacked on to the end to try to make Michael appeal to younger audiences, because Michael obviously doesn't remember the fallout and hell The Rolling Stones, Sting and David Bowie received when they remixed classic songs with young hipper hip hop producers, even tho they at least had the good sense to just put those mixes out on an EP instead of tainting classic albums with them since they know someone who wants "Beggar's Banquet" doesn't want to hear Pharrell's voice on Sympathy For The Devil.

Those record label bosses should kick themselves where the sun don't shine. What the hell were they trying to prove, anyway? A Top 200? A top charter? Really, either they are absented minded f*cks or they don't get what goes around comes around.

Those record label bosses should kick themselves where the sun don't shine. What the hell were they trying to prove, anyway? A Top 200? A top charter? Really, either they are absented minded f*cks or they don't get what goes around comes around.
I agree, what is the point of chart peaks anyways? I think hard sales should be what matters. I mean, Madonna's "American Life" went to #1 on the chart and sold 670,000, whereas "Ray Of Light" went to #2 and sold 4 million and her debut album peaked at a lowly #8 and sold 5 million. Does anyone in their right mind consider AL a more successful album than Ray or Madonna because of the chart peak?

They should just be happy they sold 170,000 copies of an album that is 25 years old instead of whining that the chart rules weren't bent for them when it's never been bent for a reissue of an older album. You just sold 170,000 of an album that was released in 1982, what's to whine about? Most albums from 1982 haven't sold 170,000 in the past ten years!

it's a reissue of Thriller with a few bonus remixes tacked on to the end to try to make Michael appeal to younger audiences, because Michael obviously doesn't remember the fallout and hell The Rolling Stones, Sting and David Bowie received when they remixed classic songs with young hipper hip hop producers, even tho they at least had the good sense to just put those mixes out on an EP instead of tainting classic albums with them since they know someone who wants "Beggar's Banquet" doesn't want to hear Pharrell's voice on Sympathy For The Devil.

What is it with the Jackson family that they think they're always going to be "down with the kids?"

I haven't heard Janet's new album, but I have read more than one critic who has said that Janet is trying so hard to be young and hip, when it's pianfully obvious that she's a 41 year old woman trying to be young and hip.

Grow up!

They don't want to be regarded as a relic in the past, so they look for other options. Madonna can appeal to both young and old because she's a smart businesswoman. She knows who to appeal for and that's how she stays stable throughout her 25 year musical career. She doesn't look for one specific group of people. She learns to appeal to all. This is the sole reason that the Jackson family clan(mainly Michael and Janet) does not appeal to both because they think appealing to the young could make them hip with the young crowd and not like yesterday's news. Shame that both these two never followed Madge's method.

They don't want to be regarded as a relic in the past, so they look for other options. Madonna can appeal to both young and old because she's a smart businesswoman. She knows who to appeal for and that's how she stays stable throughout her 25 year musical career. She doesn't look for one specific group of people. She learns to appeal to all. This is the sole reason that the Jackson family clan(mainly Michael and Janet) does not appeal to both because they think appealing to the young could make them hip with the young crowd and not like yesterday's news. Shame that both these two never followed Madge's method.
what I find funny is that MJ thinks the key to winning a younger market is to have his old songs reworked by Kanye, Akon and co. Looking at the number of teenagers who buy classics The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin and the sort that came out when their parents were kids shows that when teens are brought up learning about how classic something is, they're gonna find it out for themselves. If a 15 year old will buy Sgt. Pepper, an album that came out in 1967, why would a 1982 release date hinder them from buying Thriller? I think MJ's stigma as a pedophile (whether true or not, a lot of people have made their mind up, much like OJ) and all around weirdo is the stumbling block to a lot of younger listeners, not the age of Thriller.

I think the best career move for Michael Jackson would be to concentrate on the image of that of a song crafter and a mature classic performer. He should look to Stevie Wonder.

In fact, they should collaborate.

That would give MJ the class he needs and the respect he so thinks he deserves.

I think the best career move for Michael Jackson would be to concentrate on the image of that of a song crafter and a mature classic performer. He should look to Stevie Wonder.

In fact, they should collaborate.

That would give MJ the class he needs and the respect he so thinks he deserves.
Stevie and MJ collaborated several times in the 80's, on the Bad album and also on one of Stevie's records

How soon before the race card is brought up? :rolleyes:

How soon before the race card is brought up? :rolleyes:
I know, it's discrimination against white women!!!! :lol:

Stevie and MJ collaborated several times in the 80's, on the Bad album and also on one of Stevie's records

I was thinking along the lines of Stevie producing an album for MJ.

Did he produce Bad?

I was thinking along the lines of Stevie producing an album for MJ.

Did he produce Bad?
nope, Bad was all Quincy Jones

I know, it's discrimination against white women!!!! :lol:
:rofl:

:rolleyes: He'll become so predicatable later on.....:p MJ, shove it where the sun don't shine, okay.

I'd rather listen to Thriller as it was originally done. I hate remixes.

I like remixes if they're well done, like Michael had some fantastic remixes for "Earth Song" back around 95-96. But what MJ's done here is just a predictable way to get back on the charts. The saddest part is that Japan gets another bonus track (Got The Hots), however, GTH is a song from the Thriller sessions released for the first time 25 years later, yet they see fit to make it a Japan bonus track while America gets all the lame guest stars that few people who appreciate the original album care for.

I listened GTH for the first. Quincy Jones and Michael Jackson thought the song itself was too anti-religious or something. It kind of reminds me a bit like Off The wall redux circa 1982 to me. In a good way. It's a not bad song. It' s like the continuation of the Off The Wall, you know.

I listened GTH for the first. Quincy Jones and Michael Jackson thought the song itself was too anti-religious or something. It kind of reminds me a bit like Off The wall redux circa 1982 to me. In a good way. It's a not bad song. It' s like the continuation of the Off The Wall, you know.
too bad it's only seen fit to be on a Japanese edition of the album. I grew up with Thriller, Akon, Kanye, will.i.am and Fergie don't even exist in the world where Thriller's from, they don't belong in it just like Pharrell didn't belong in the world where Sympathy For The Devil originally hailed (The Stones were smart enough to just release the "new mixes" separately when they decided to update it). He should've done the Yoko Ono thing and came out with a new album of reinterpretations of his classics instead of tainting his most beloved album. Got The Hots and For All Time should just be added to th 2001 edition of the album

I think Billboard should throw out the "Pop Catalog" chart all together. If an album from 1970 is selling more than a brand new release, then tough luck. In the UK, Beatles albums still chart over 40 year on because they still sell. If you're the 161st biggest selling album on a given week, you should be #161, whether or not you're over two years old. The UK's chart system is generally better than ours, their singles chart kicks ours anyday, they don't factor airplay in, since airplay is generally payola controlled anyhow

I think another factor hurting sales is that a single disc remaster of Thriller was already issued a few years ago and that the current one simply takes all the songs from that one and adds some new remixes.

These current rappers and hip hoppers have no relevance in regard to Thriller. Why try and put a contemporary spin on a project that's supposed to commemorate a classic??

Besides, I think everyone who would buy Thriller has already bought it already...at least once.

I think another factor hurting sales is that a single disc remaster of Thriller was already issued a few years ago and that the current one simply takes all the songs from that one and adds some new remixes.

These current rappers and hip hoppers have no relevance in regard to Thriller. Why try and put a contemporary spin on a project that's supposed to commemorate a classic??

Besides, I think everyone who would buy Thriller has already bought it already...at least once.
Good point. And not everyone who loves THRILLER would love a hip-hop spin on the music they remember. Liking pop and R&B doesn't mean you also like hip-hop.

Good point. And not everyone who loves THRILLER would love a hip-hop spin on the music they remember. Liking pop and R&B doesn't mean you also like hip-hop.
I agree. I don't give two passing craps about any of the artists who are supposedly "decorating" Thriller

I agree. I don't give two passing craps about any of the artists who are supposedly "decorating" Thriller
Mind you, I love hip-hop on its own, but when it is used as you stated to "decorate" an already established album, then forget it. I don't want any part of it.

I loved when hip-hop queen Mary J. Blige did that duet with Bono/U2 for their song "One"...now THAT was awesome. The song wasn't changed, just the addition of Mary J.'s voice with Bono's. I know there are more examples, but that one comes to mind.

Mind you, I love hip-hop on its own, but when it is used as you stated to "decorate" an already established album, then forget it. I don't want any part of it.

I loved when hip-hop queen Mary J. Blige did that duet with Bono/U2 for their song "One"...now THAT was awesome. The song wasn't changed, just the addition of Mary J.'s voice with Bono's. I know there are more examples, but that one comes to mind.
also when they did that, U2 never decided to place that on new copies of Achtung Baby because while there might be U2 fans who like Mary as well, she had nothing to do witht he band when that album came out in 1991. That's the big beef I think a lot of older fans have with the new mixes. Like I said before, do a new EP if you want to do new mixes of those tracks, not contaminate Thriller.

also when they did that, U2 never decided to place that on new copies of Achtung Baby because while there might be U2 fans who like Mary as well, she had nothing to do witht he band when that album came out in 1991. That's the big beef I think a lot of older fans have with the new mixes. Like I said before, do a new EP if you want to do new mixes of those tracks, not contaminate Thriller.
Exactly. That song stood on its own and its own merits. I believe it won a grammy, didn't it?

I think if THRILLER mixes can't be marketed on their own, on a different album, then it has no business being made.

How well is this remix album doing?

It flopped! MJ's going to get another loan or lose his Neverland Ranch for good on forecloser.

It flopped! MJ's going to get another loan or lose his Neverland Ranch for good on forecloser.
I wouldn't necessarily say it flopped. 230,000 in two weeks is very very good for an album that originally came out in 1982.

I made an MJ Mash-Up.

I wouldn't necessarily say it flopped. 230,000 in two weeks is very very good for an album that originally came out in 1982.
I agree. Any artist would love to have those kind of sales in two weeks for their album.

I agree. Any artist would love to have those kind of sales in two weeks for their album.
especially since record sales are in the toilet right now. It's been the #2 selling album in America (on the comprehensive chart that is, it's not allowed to chart on the regular chart because of it's age) for the past two weeks behind Jack Johnson. Especially when you consider that Number Ones failed to go top 10 here, The Ultimate Collection was a bit of a flop (Bon Jovi released a box set the same day that sold twice as many copies) and The Essential Michael Jackson didn't do nearly as well as a 2-disc collection with all the big hits (HIStory and Number Ones convienently left off at least one or two Thriller, Bad, Dangerous and Off The Wall hits so it wouldn't kill catalog sales... Essential has all but one single between 1979-1993) would be expected to do. Yet Thriller 25 is doing well. MJ is a freak and a trainwreck, but I wouldn't call the album a failure in any sense because you'd think everyone who'd want a copy of Thriller would have it by 2008.

especially since record sales are in the toilet right now. It's been the #2 selling album in America (on the comprehensive chart that is, it's not allowed to chart on the regular chart because of it's age) for the past two weeks behind Jack Johnson. Especially when you consider that Number Ones failed to go top 10 here, The Ultimate Collection was a bit of a flop (Bon Jovi released a box set the same day that sold twice as many copies) and The Essential Michael Jackson didn't do nearly as well as a 2-disc collection with all the big hits (HIStory and Number Ones convienently left off at least one or two Thriller, Bad, Dangerous and Off The Wall hits so it wouldn't kill catalog sales... Essential has all but one single between 1979-1993) would be expected to do. Yet Thriller 25 is doing well. MJ is a freak and a trainwreck, but I wouldn't call the album a failure in any sense because you'd think everyone who'd want a copy of Thriller would have it by 2008.
Let me add to your post, with the internet and the ability to download or get someone to burn you songs on a CD, sales of over 50,000 of any album (CD), in my opinion is great. I know it is not like back in the days when the anticipation of a CD meant lines at the music store and millions being sold in a week or two, but again, with downloading, whatever sales you can get especially for an album that most have or have downloaded by now, is a good thing for the artist.

It seems like MJ would keep Neverland Ranch and yet the idiots will still want to work with him. I agree, everybody would want that sale, especially for a 1982 album. I don't disagree on that assumption at all. But, really, some of the producers still want to work with MJ...:crazy: I know the man's a legend, but damn. I could see the real picture now...in a jokingly way.

Producer dude: No, your voice sucks and you haven't done anything decent for over a decade.

Scott Baio: But...

Producer dude: I don't care if you slept with millions of hotties. You just don't cut it in this industry, fool.

Scott Baio: But I have improved....

Producer dude: Listen, if I have one more word out of you.....**door opens**
Michael! Michael, has it hanging, buddy? You like samples and hip hop artists? I'll give them all to you. I will love to work with you, man. Nah, I don't care what you did in the past. It's all history, man. Let's make music together. I'll hire some of the hottest hip hop artist ever. It'll be a hit. It'll be another Thriller...and **trails on**

**door closes, leaving Scott Baio singing "Ben"**

Sorry I had add a B-D lister star, but had it been like a newcomer with an indie background music, producers would shoved that in the sidelines like it was BS. No matter if that person had a music background...they would laugh and laugh their butts off, disbelieving that person. It shows the true colors of the music industry. They wouldn't care if you were clean or not.....you have to be a legend with a bizarre history. Look at MJ.....producers and musician still want to work with him, no matter what.

http://www.amny.com/entertainment/music/am-idol0229,0,2290432.story?track=rss

I agree about that with producers. MJ is too much of a control freak that he would never dare let a producer take over and guide him the way Quincy Jones did during 1979-1987. Notice that Dangerous was when things really began to go downhill for him, that was the first time he started working with producers who were so in awe of his presence that they let MJ tell them how to produce. I think if MJ just decided to suck his pride in and work with a producer who isn't afraid to say "sorry Michael, you can do better", he'd make a comeback. I think one of the reasons Madonna has stayed relevant is because the producers she works with may be in awe of the fact it's Madonna, but lets them take over and guide her instead of being "I'm Madonna, I can do what I want". Orbit, Stuart Price, Mirwais, etc... all called the shots and they were collaborative projects, instead of vanity projects that someone was just lucky to produce.

The mere fact Michael calls the shots abt his plastic surgery and how he wants to look tells you he is IN CONTROL of everything pertaining to him. :crazy:

I know. Mom said I should have been a comedian, you know. :lol: I know that's how I think about the music business is about and I am pretty sure that's how it would be if someone famous came through the door.