MJ is a great dancer, singer, and occasionally a decent actor...his music...well, yeah the man does have his merrits. So I would say slighty overrated.
As for his legal issues...the guy caught a break that this happen in a California legal system. If it had been in another state his ass would be in jail right now.
See O.J. Simpson for details...
I find it increasingly scary that people seem disappointed in Jackson not being convicted of paedophilia.
Originally posted by Impediment
Oh, AC, your couth tact never ceases to amuse me. That's probably why I adore you so much. The latter comment about MJ was, I hope you realize, a joke. Get it? "Ha ha ha". Right?In all honesty, I feel that MJ, while he is a VERY talented artist, is very over hyped and, well, overrated.
I do have a question:
Considering all of the media coverage, excluding the pedo charges, we have seen of MJ over the years (i.e. dangling a baby out of a window), can you honestly say that the man is, in fact, not sane?
Then this was a case where it wasn't necessarily clear your text was jocular, my bad.
His behaviour and actions have been, at the very worst, odd. That's about it. People do worse shit every day.
It doesn't mean he's insane.
Insane are the people continually hounding him when he is one of the most secretive and private celebrities there is, considering his name. He was driven, arguably, into exile and people still didn't leave him alone.
-AC
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
As for his legal issues...the guy caught a break that this happen in a California legal system. If it had been in another state his ass would be in jail right now.
So, you have some inside information the Courts didn't have?
I'd be very interested in seeing it, then...or are you just calling a man that was found innocent "guilty", because of...I don't know...silly arrogance maybe?
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriVery late reply here — sorry.I said "For all we know.", it's not something I said was fact. If he wasn't in a band, what makes his opinion equal to all those people who support my argument that were around at the time?
Then show me stuff by all these bands you are supposedly aware of, and we'll see.
You don't have anything besides "The Sex Pistols' music wasn't 100% original so they're not the first punk rock band.". They were, but their music was influenced by a movement or sound that came before in creating something new.
That said, I don't need to have heard every band before The Sex Pistols. The fact of the matter is, people have, somewhere, somehow. I've studied and listened to enough music to know what The Sex Pistols are and what they did. You're trying to prove a negative, which doesn't work.
Still, if you have proof, then show it. Garage rock influenced The Sex Pistols, yes, big deal. So what? The Sex Pistols brought something to the table that hadn't been brought, and it created the most incendiary kind of punk, the real kind.
If you have anything that counters this, please present it. All the garage rock bands I have heard do not sound like The Sex Pistols, and I have heard a LOT. So if you have proof that counters it, present it and I'll concede my point.
Yeah, but that's aimless disobedience, rockstar attitude. Real punk rock was a reaction to a current state in the United Kingdom. That's why The Sex Pistols are considered the first, because nobody else was doing or saying what they were, about what they were.
I didn't see it. [/B]
I've done my research in the time I didn't reply, though, so I can now admit you are indeed correct about the Sex Pistols. Admittedly, i was going on an amount of guesswork in my assumptions. I also didn't actually understand what my father actually said about the Sex Pistols, he actually said something along the lines of: "While there were other bands doing slightly similar stuff to the Sex Pistols at that time, the Sex Pistols were definitely the starters of the movement as a whole, and deserve the acclaim they get."
So you are, for the most part, correct, and I've definitely learned something, too.
It really never gets old, thanks.
Wait though...you claimed to be rigidly observant to your father, did you not? You claimed he said something contradictory to my claims, when in actual fact, what he said, down to the very wording, was precisely my argument.
How do you misunderstand that quote you posted?
What's happened here is, you were lying, knowing I couldn't prove your dad wrong or prove you a liar regarding him. So, in the time you've done research and realised that I was right, you've had to modify your dad's argument, which was originally directly opposed to mine, into something that is pretty much what I was saying all along, verbatim.
Next time, do the research first and it'll save you a lot of silly bother.
You said:
Originally posted by The Grey Fox
Well, there were a lot of bands doing what they did, I know this for a fact since my own father was part of the first punk movement and saw, first hand, bands doing the things the Sex Pistols eventually became well known for before the Sex Pistols were even famous. Seeming this is coming from someone with much higher knowledge than you on the subject, there's nothing you can really say against that, since my evidence comes from a first hand source, while you're simply speculating.They were factually not the single first UK punk band ever to be formed. They just brought the image and attitude into peoples faces, which is why they are considered so important and that.
All based on your dad, who you claim was a higher source while I was speculating and you weren't.
Then said that your father said:
"While there were other bands doing slightly similar stuff to the Sex Pistols at that time, the Sex Pistols were definitely the starters of the movement as a whole, and deserve the acclaim they get.".
Next time, don't lie.
-AC
Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't really, just thought I'd throw my comment in there.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahaha, you expect a reply?He replies to people who agree with him.
-AC
I'm going to be very clear and to the point. I'm not going to repeat this again. I said it to the two of you in the past. And you're either incredibly stupid or purposely trying to irritate me. I'm going to say it this time and this time ONLY! Try again...and I will bring a case of baiting for the two of you with the other mods and Raz.
I'm not interested in ANY discussion with AC and Bardock42. I can't put you on ignore and I'm NOT interested in ANY further social interactions with you two.
Let this be very clear. If you see me in a thread leave me alone. I'm not bothering you and I expect the same.
So, I highly suggest you guys move along and stop quoting me trying to bait me.
There...I'm making this public since via pm you guys don't want it.
END.
Apologies to fellow KMCers but this had to be said in this thread. Sorry, for disrupting the thread.
If you are going to put an opinion out on the forum, I might question, agree or argue it. If you do not want to reply, that's your choice, but you can't expect me to not answer any post I wish to answer in a civil, on-topic manner.
As for your PM comment, last time you asked me to address you in PM, I did, to which you replied with ferocious insults...Raz doesn't seem to care, nor do the other Mods, so I don't bother anymore, but I will use the forum in the way it is intended...if my reply alone pisses you off, too bad, this is not your little playground and I am not your puppet.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriNah, you're wrong in saying I lied, as per se. I was just doing a **** load of speculating and extrapolating from something I actually misinterpreted. So yeah, I do apologise for that, you're right, I was doing that because I couldn't back down, ridiculous of me. But I wasn't lying: I did actually misinterpret something my dad had said a while back. I only used that quote because I couldn't really think of a real reason for the Pistols' being overrated, I simply believed they were. Then I actually bothered to ask my dad what his opinions were on them, and he said that. Maybe he did say the contrasting opinion before I asked him this time; I don't know. My memory isn't that good.
It really never gets old, thanks.Wait though...you claimed to be rigidly observant to your father, did you not? You claimed he said something contradictory to my claims, when in actual fact, what he said, down to the very wording, was precisely my argument.
How do you misunderstand that quote you posted?
What's happened here is, you were lying, knowing I couldn't prove your dad wrong or prove you a liar regarding him. So, in the time you've done research and realised that I was right, you've had to modify your dad's argument, which was originally directly opposed to mine, into something that is pretty much what I was saying all along, verbatim.
Next time, do the research first and it'll save you a lot of silly bother.
You said:
All based on your dad, who you claim was a higher source while I was speculating and you weren't.
Then said that your father said:
"While there were other bands doing slightly similar stuff to the Sex Pistols at that time, the Sex Pistols were definitely the starters of the movement as a whole, and deserve the acclaim they get.".
Next time, don't lie.
-AC [/B]
Either way, if I hadn't caused that debate, I'd have continued thinking the Sex Pistols were overrated, so it's probably a good thing, isn't it? I found it fairly interesting, anyway. I have an interest in music, anything that can further that is good by me.
Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
I'm going to be very clear and to the point. I'm not going to repeat this again. I said it to the two of you in the past. And you're either incredibly stupid or purposely trying to irritate me. I'm going to say it this time and this time ONLY! Try again...and I will bring a case of baiting for the two of you with the other mods and Raz.[B]I'm not interested in ANY discussion with AC and Bardock42. I can't put you on ignore and I'm NOT interested in ANY further social interactions with you two.
Let this be very clear. If you see me in a thread leave me alone. I'm not bothering you and I expect the same.
So, I highly suggest you guys move along and stop quoting me trying to bait me.
There...I'm making this public since via pm you guys don't want it.
END.
Apologies to fellow KMCers but this had to be said in this thread. Sorry, for disrupting the thread. [/B]
Hahahahahahaha. God, imagine what you'd be like if you had some real authority in your "offline" life.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Which was an uncalled for flame, not the 'civil manner' you claim. Don't act like that again.
The second one I agree with, I apologize. The first comment I think was on the topic that was discussed, and also civil, WD claimed Michael Jackson is surely guilty, so I inquired what makes him say that as courts have found him innocent.
But yeah, I was wrong about replying to AC's post about WD. Sorry.
I respect alot of the following bands for their input into the musical world but I can't help but feel fanboys and publications like NME, Radio 1, MTV, Kerrang et. all and their peers have put 'em on pedestals prone to criticism.
1. The Beatles
2. Radiohead
3. Tool
4. Oasis
5. Metallica - Even though I do like 'em, a fair bit actually.
6. Joy Division
7. Sex Pistols
8. The Smiths
9. Depeche Mode
10. New Order