Michael Jackson Movie.
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
- Status
North_Ranger
Staff member
Juski, ol' boy, I was being facetious. My bad on that part... does not show online and all that. Just threw the whole racist thing out there in jest.
But honestly, Master's degree in English doesn't mean I have to do an analysis on every piece of (popular) culture. I mean, this thread was about whether or not we would go and see the movie. I'm not because as a person I don't give two bits about Michael Jackson. Two separate emphases there...
If you want an analogy, Daniel Defoe's writing had a major influence on the form of novel writing, in essence helping bring forth a new variety of popular reading. I know that, I recognize the value of the cultural impact. Personally, however, I did not particularly like Moll Flanders, though. See the difference?
ElJuski
Staff member
That was my initial point. Completely and exactly. I never gave a shit about whether people enjoyed the man's music or not. I was simply bringing up the point that, regardless of one's personal opinions of the man or his music taste...he has done much on the pop-culture aesthetic.
And, I understand that you're not going to be hyper-analyzing everything. But really, where's the fun in having a discussion thread if we're all just going to push a "Like it" or "Don't like it" button?
Allen, who is Quiet likes this!
this ain't facebook, this as real as it gets, you on the forums, motherfucker don't you ever forget
North_Ranger
Staff member
I thought this was about whether or not people are hyped about the "This is it" or whatever the Jackson tribute film is called. I think it's a pretty simple question: yes, no, maybe. Plus reason.
I'm not. Because I didn't really like Jackson as a celebrity - that is to say, the weird-ass person who was made into an even bigger freak in the eyes of the media, but who after his death was just about loved by all and phooey to anyone who said a bad word about him after he kicked the bucket. I'm just tired of hearing about him, you know? And since I'm not a fan, I'm not gonna go an' see the movie.
I'm not. Because I didn't really like Jackson as a celebrity - that is to say, the weird-ass person who was made into an even bigger freak in the eyes of the media, but who after his death was just about loved by all and phooey to anyone who said a bad word about him after he kicked the bucket. I'm just tired of hearing about him, you know? And since I'm not a fan, I'm not gonna go an' see the movie.
North_Ranger
Staff member
...
EEEEAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!![/QUOTE]
I read that as the Wilhelm Scream™.[/QUOTE]
S
Soliloquy
D
Dusty668
So they auctioned all his stuff to pay debts because he knew his business? Wow, financial genius to match his musical "talent".
ElJuski
Staff member
No, I meant how he became one of the most popular and musically successful musicians of his time, not to mention one of the most (in)famous musical celebrities in pop culture history.
But obviously you've made up your mind, and there's no discussion to be had with you. If you can't objectively try and see the man's development of the art form...your loss. It's an unfortunate, shallow look at things. I'm sure you'll survive.
Also, it's funny, because everyone always falls guilty of this--when a thread gets derailed, or someone posits a tangent to the discussion, people whine or point out that's not what the thread is for.
Well, for the sake of argument, I made a point of discussion.
But, whatever, Dave. This thread can also just be about a joke and people saying "yay" or "nay". Sorry folks!
But obviously you've made up your mind, and there's no discussion to be had with you. If you can't objectively try and see the man's development of the art form...your loss. It's an unfortunate, shallow look at things. I'm sure you'll survive.
Also, it's funny, because everyone always falls guilty of this--when a thread gets derailed, or someone posits a tangent to the discussion, people whine or point out that's not what the thread is for.
Well, for the sake of argument, I made a point of discussion.
But, whatever, Dave. This thread can also just be about a joke and people saying "yay" or "nay". Sorry folks!
I agree with you all on points Juski.
His personality was questionable at times even disturbing, but there's no denying his immense talent at marketing his talent, and entertaining people.
North_Ranger
Staff member
Juski, I certainly didn't mean to get you riled up. You just went and waved a red flag in front of me when you went and brought up the Master's degree in English to the fray.
I'm very, very easily angered if someone disses my academic success. As a single, non-sporty guy without a steady job yet... that cuts mighty deep identity-wise.
I would like to know, however, if your last post was an angry vent against yours truly.
I'm very, very easily angered if someone disses my academic success. As a single, non-sporty guy without a steady job yet... that cuts mighty deep identity-wise.
I would like to know, however, if your last post was an angry vent against yours truly.
ElJuski
Staff member
I'm not mad or anything; and yeah, I was snarky on the english thing, but that's because that's what my (pretty much useless) degree is in. I was just kind of shocked to see someone who I would hope esteem critical analysis just go with the easy call.
My last post in general was an angry vent against the simple panning of someone's work because of that person. It should all be taken into consideration; I also think that people so readily just shit on Micheal Jackson for obvious personality flaws. What's remarkable about his case, however--much like, say, Warren Specter or Roman Polanski--is that regardless of their character and ethics, they've done some astounding things in their fields.
As a dude who loves literature, and art, and pop-culture, it really grinds my gears when people just pan it without really considering the art itself. But really that's why I get pissed at society at large.
Either way, *fist bump* we cool brochacho.
*sunglasses, sunset*
My last post in general was an angry vent against the simple panning of someone's work because of that person. It should all be taken into consideration; I also think that people so readily just shit on Micheal Jackson for obvious personality flaws. What's remarkable about his case, however--much like, say, Warren Specter or Roman Polanski--is that regardless of their character and ethics, they've done some astounding things in their fields.
As a dude who loves literature, and art, and pop-culture, it really grinds my gears when people just pan it without really considering the art itself. But really that's why I get pissed at society at large.
Either way, *fist bump* we cool brochacho.
*sunglasses, sunset*
K
Kitty Sinatra
The sequel, Dave, will be Weird Al's posthumous movie.
So, let's have some fun.
You parents on the forum, or those with little ones in the family close to you: If someone molested your kids, how much money would you be bought off for?
'Cause at that point, if the kid really was touched and you accept money for that, have fun with the child prostitution thing.
My guess is, none of you would. Hell, criminal charges would be the ruse to get the fucker in court so I get shed some blood. No money can repair that kind of damage, and who would accept money to see the fucker who touched their kids go free?
So I call Bullshit on the first trial--money-grubbers who nothing happened to, but they knew Jackson would want it out of his hair, like any celebrity would. If someone touched your kids, money makes it all better?
Second trial was just a joke--the family had tried scamming someone else in the past and failed. Try again, fail. Wonder who they'll try to scam next before their kid's terminal illness finishes and they can't find a rich sap to "settle" and pay the medical bills.
I didn't like Michael Jackson. I didn't enjoy his music aside from the Weird Al parodies, and I didn't like the personality he exhibited. But just on the logical side of examining what happened with those incidents, they're full of it.
You parents on the forum, or those with little ones in the family close to you: If someone molested your kids, how much money would you be bought off for?
'Cause at that point, if the kid really was touched and you accept money for that, have fun with the child prostitution thing.
My guess is, none of you would. Hell, criminal charges would be the ruse to get the fucker in court so I get shed some blood. No money can repair that kind of damage, and who would accept money to see the fucker who touched their kids go free?
So I call Bullshit on the first trial--money-grubbers who nothing happened to, but they knew Jackson would want it out of his hair, like any celebrity would. If someone touched your kids, money makes it all better?
Second trial was just a joke--the family had tried scamming someone else in the past and failed. Try again, fail. Wonder who they'll try to scam next before their kid's terminal illness finishes and they can't find a rich sap to "settle" and pay the medical bills.
I didn't like Michael Jackson. I didn't enjoy his music aside from the Weird Al parodies, and I didn't like the personality he exhibited. But just on the logical side of examining what happened with those incidents, they're full of it.
North_Ranger
Staff member
Well, I did try to tell you over and over again that my not going to see the movie has a lot to do with how I perceive Michael Jackson to be as a celebrity; I will not use the word 'person' since I don't have the privilege/shame/whatever to have met him in person. I have no desire to go watch a movie about a person whom I would, as a lay person, consider deeply troubled rather than eccentric; and whose status among the press went from "Beat him with the frenzy of a kid with Tourettes beats a piñata" to "Awww, such a great guy, such a nice guy, yay yay" overnight when he croaked.
That being sad... his music. Personally I don't like his music, but I am not gonna go and say the guy did not have an impact on contemporary popular music. In my personal perspective, things like "greatest" and "best" are subjective evaluations, not objective, so I don't think anyone's opinion on him being the best in his genre is more valuable than someone else's. But yes, the man did have a deep impact on the music scene.
My previous comments were short and snarky. And I reserve the right to be that way, goddammit. I have enough grief with my thesis; I don't want to come here just so I could do what I have to do on a daily basis.
But yes, we're cool. Just remember; next time you go dissin' my (soon-to-be-official) degree, I'm gonna beat you up so bad your teeth will come out of your ass. :batman:
- Status