new album cover

[truthprevails]

I meant "do them a huge disfavor, not a favor..."  
Sorry I said "make" - that's a mistake.

[voiceforthesilent]

The best is the title of the album.
Currently, all folks looking for news in the web are googling the words "breaking news".
They will ALL end up with Michael.
The album is already on page 1 on Google.

THAT is an audience.
Michael, you are a genius.
You will "kill the cat" by its curiosity.  :mrgreen:
The avalanche is getting off. V day. Bravo!

This is incredible - way to go Michael! Genius...

[mjfansince4]

in my opinion, there's absolutely no way anyone else except michael could have created that cover. Who in the jackson family would think to replace a sign with eddie murphy's face? all those cameras? the "moon man?" there's just no way. this blows my mind. it just absolutely blows my mind. it's like he's been working on that cover for the past year and 5 months and he's just kind of shoving it in our faces and we have to pick it apart. there are probably so many layers of clues on that one album cover that it will probably take us another year to fully get it (we may never either!).

just blows my mind.

[PinkTopaz]

@ Im_convincedmjalive:

Of course we all make assumptions all the time, and perception plays a big role in our thinking, for ALL of us and for our entire lives.  If it weren't for your specific experience, would you think, upon seeing a white woman together with a dark-skinned person, that they must be related by blood?  Probably not... That doesn't make people automatically bad/racist.  It simply means that we're not used to seeing certain things, and whenever we're faced with something that's not the norm, we're a little taken aback.

You say, however, some things that I find interesting and highly debatable.

"Those types of perceptions and assumptions is what I am referring to when I say most people from what I have observed do NOT see Mike as a black man.  When I say a black man I am NOT only referring to skin tone.  There is a way that a black man in spirit carries himself."

WOW!  So "black people" are not like "white people", right?  They're... what?  How are they different?  They're more religious, less smart, they talk and walk a certain way, they...?!  These are stereotypes!  And I believe that many black people have fought long and hard to overcome such stereotypes, and to be seen as peers to white people.  We don't see Mike as a purely black man because he didn't see himself that way!!  He was a universalist, and moreover said - for instance - that he didn't want to be branded "a black singer".  He wanted to transcend limits of any kind.  

Also: Do we see Spielberg purely as a "Jewish" man?  Do we think of Bruce Lee as "a Chinese guy"?  Do we see Diana Ross as purely "African American"?  I don't think so...

Also: Does the color of our skin, or our nationality or ethnicity, really define our soul and our essence?  I would argue against such a notion any day of my life....

"When most people look at Mike they see a white man because of his skin tone. I am not being disrespectful I am giving my opinion based on observations.  When I say that people see him as a white man I mean that they see him as a white man through and through including his soul.  This is something I noticed when I read comments here on the forum."

Again, could you tell me the difference between a white man and a black man?  Is Travis Payne a "black man"?  Is Obama a "black man"?  How about MLK or Malcolm X?  Were they "black men" in spirit?  I have a very different impression of people on this forum: For the most part, I think we acknowledge Michael's complexity, and never forget that he was a black man and proud of it!  It's been discussed how Michael loved Africa, collaborated with many black musicians, never forgot his roots, etc.

"How many years have we seen an image of Mike being white?
A long freakin time. Long enough to burn an image into our brains.
This is why I believe the black skin toned Mike is being shown to remind the world Mike is a BROTHA all the way, down to his soul."

Hey, how about those pics of Mike from when he was a kid and into the 1980s, when his skin was still dark?  How about Thriller?  How about the fact that we know his family, and all his siblings?  Do you really think we forgot he's African American?!  Come on now...

As for Michael being a BROTHA "down to his soul": I don't believe souls have anything to do with human labels... I believe they're outside and beyond labels and categories.  That's why they're beautiful and pure!  Michael had a "brotha" side to him (using the term in the way I suspect you mean it), but he had many sides - as do ALL of us.  To define a person strictly by their color is to make them a huge disfavor, not a favor... And I'm sure Michael, of all people, would not have wanted that.

I agree with you. I was just going to say that yes, if I saw IMCMJA out with her daughter, I would think it's her daughter. Maybe it's because I haven't had much world experience, but I just know that I would. What I underlined, I especially agree with. Not even a non-believing "fan" would forget his roots and who he is besides his pale skin color- that I know from my few visits to fan forums.

By the way, I wish that at least one more recent- say 2000 onwards picture would have been used. It feels like catering to all of the stereotyping beliefs and talk of his life being "smeared" from that point onward, and not acknowledging that he is an amazing person always, no matter what color, age, few surgeries or "controversies"..

[bec]

in my opinion, there's absolutely no way anyone else except michael could have created that cover. Who in the jackson family would think to replace a sign with eddie murphy's face? all those cameras? the "moon man?" there's just no way. this blows my mind. it just absolutely blows my mind. it's like he's been working on that cover for the past year and 5 months and he's just kind of shoving it in our faces and we have to pick it apart. there are probably so many layers of clues on that one album cover that it will probably take us another year to fully get it (we may never either!).

just blows my mind.

Yes, I agree completely. This has MJ's touch written all over it. It's like a circus poster, the old time ones.

[katy (MJFAN7)]

in my opinion, there's absolutely no way anyone else except michael could have created that cover. Who in the jackson family would think to replace a sign with eddie murphy's face? all those cameras? the "moon man?" there's just no way. this blows my mind. it just absolutely blows my mind. it's like he's been working on that cover for the past year and 5 months and he's just kind of shoving it in our faces and we have to pick it apart. there are probably so many layers of clues on that one album cover that it will probably take us another year to fully get it (we may never either!).

just blows my mind.

Yes, I agree completely. This has MJ's touch written all over it. It's like a circus poster, the old time ones.

Exactly, Michael had to have made that cover. The first time I saw it, I was on my phone, and even though it wasn't that big I was like "This is Michael's imagination, his work."

[PinkTopaz]

in my opinion, there's absolutely no way anyone else except michael could have created that cover. Who in the jackson family would think to replace a sign with eddie murphy's face? all those cameras? the "moon man?" there's just no way. this blows my mind. it just absolutely blows my mind. it's like he's been working on that cover for the past year and 5 months and he's just kind of shoving it in our faces and we have to pick it apart. there are probably so many layers of clues on that one album cover that it will probably take us another year to fully get it (we may never either!).

just blows my mind.

Yes, I agree completely. This has MJ's touch written all over it. It's like a circus poster, the old time ones.

Exactly, Michael had to have made that cover. The first time I saw it, I was on my phone, and even though it wasn't that big I was like "This is Michael's imagination, his work."

It reminded me so much of the Dangerous album cover, I thought it was the same artist at first.

Off-topic: Thanks for the Happy Birthday, MJFan7! You're always so nice.

[katy (MJFAN7)]

in my opinion, there's absolutely no way anyone else except michael could have created that cover. Who in the jackson family would think to replace a sign with eddie murphy's face? all those cameras? the "moon man?" there's just no way. this blows my mind. it just absolutely blows my mind. it's like he's been working on that cover for the past year and 5 months and he's just kind of shoving it in our faces and we have to pick it apart. there are probably so many layers of clues on that one album cover that it will probably take us another year to fully get it (we may never either!).

just blows my mind.

Yes, I agree completely. This has MJ's touch written all over it. It's like a circus poster, the old time ones.

Exactly, Michael had to have made that cover. The first time I saw it, I was on my phone, and even though it wasn't that big I was like "This is Michael's imagination, his work."

It reminded me so much of the Dangerous album cover, I thought it was the same artist at first.

Off-topic: Thanks for the Happy Birthday, MJFan7! You're always so nice.

That's what I was thinking of as well! Dangerous! There's so much on the cover, I'm sure there's a LOT of hidden stuff as well.

& You're welcome

[truthprevails]

The best is the title of the album.
Currently, all folks looking for news in the web are googling the words "breaking news".
They will ALL end up with Michael.
The album is already on page 1 on Google.

THAT is an audience.
Michael, you are a genius.
You will "kill the cat" by its curiosity.  :mrgreen:
The avalanche is getting off. V day. Bravo!

This is incredible - way to go Michael! Genius...

Good point, Grace and voiceforthesilent - but this is still only for the English-speaking community (those who conduct their Internet searches in English).  No doubt, though, that there's a little play-on-words going on here.  And that reminds me of that character BACK... and the meaning of saying "MJ is BACK".    Jackie just told us that Michael was a big-time prankster (something we actually knew already).  

[katy (MJFAN7)]

WTF? THE PRINCE SYMBOL IS GONE?  :shock:

Do you all remember, I posted this earlier today:

the Prince symbol!

I looked back at the album, and realized that the bubble that Prince's symbol was in, is now just an empty bubble (it's kind of blurry, but you can clearly see the bubble is now empty):



I swear I didn't 'edit' it in to the first one, you can even look at other screenshots of the album cover posted by other users, and you will see in the bubble by the Tiger on the right side, that there is a yellow symbol in it. Now go back to the website, click "Pre-Order" and use the magnifying glass over the album. The bubble is empty! Maybe it wasn't "meant" to be the Prince symbol, and they removed it because it looks very similar to it? :? I'm confused. :|

[MJsForever]

It seems to me that the album cover only includes things up to "Dangerous" As a matter of fact the dangerous part is cut in half.
For those of us who believe "Michael Jackson" was not always "Michael" (twins, double whatever) I think its a huge clue. It says to me that Michael is back.
I believe we have not seen the real Mike since the Dangerous era.  I think at that point he was a brand and they found someone else to play the part of "Michael" I think that person could have passed on 6/25/09 and now the "real" Mike is back.  I know this seems far fetched but I have really looked hard for an explination of some of the events in Michael's life, and this make sense to me

[Tumic Shason]

[truthprevails]

It seems to me that the album cover only includes things up to "Dangerous" As a matter of fact the dangerous part is cut in half.
For those of us who believe "Michael Jackson" was not always "Michael" (twins, double whatever) I think its a huge clue. It says to me that Michael is back.
I believe we have not seen the real Mike since the Dangerous era.  I think at that point he was a brand and they found someone else to play the part of "Michael" I think that person could have passed on 6/25/09 and now the "real" Mike is back.  I know this seems far fetched but I have really looked hard for an explination of some of the events in Michael's life, and this make sense to me

Someone played the part of Michael?  OK, but where would they find that person that looks, sounds and behaves just like Michael?  Impersonators seem to have a very hard time pulling off any real resemblance!  And where would the real Michael go (and what would he do) all this time?  And how would the 2 Michaels split the money from performances etc?  And all those people meeting Michael in real life wouldn't be able to tell the difference?!  Sorry, I personally can't possibly believe this.

As for explanations for some of the events in MJ's life... We must accept the fact that we may never know the full truth - the what's, when's, who's and why's.  We're not insiders!!  We see only what we're shown and happen to hear from others (hearsay - not admissible in a court of law).  There are limits to all the "investigating" we're doing.  The fact that there are gaps in our understanding doesn't mean we should fill them with whatever comes in handy, or what we wish to believe.

[_Anna_]

It seems to me that the album cover only includes things up to "Dangerous" As a matter of fact the dangerous part is cut in half.
For those of us who believe "Michael Jackson" was not always "Michael" (twins, double whatever) I think its a huge clue. It says to me that Michael is back.
I believe we have not seen the real Mike since the Dangerous era.  I think at that point he was a brand and they found someone else to play the part of "Michael" I think that person could have passed on 6/25/09 and now the "real" Mike is back.  I know this seems far fetched but I have really looked hard for an explination of some of the events in Michael's life, and this make sense to me

Someone played the part of Michael?  OK, but where would they find that person that looks, sounds and behaves just like Michael?  Impersonators seem to have a very hard time pulling off any real resemblance!  And where would the real Michael go (and what would he do) all this time?

They didn't say what was that person's role in Dangerous tour, and they didn't say he was on stage playing in Michael's behalf. Most likely they are talking about the Thriller warewoolf scene when in both Dangerous and History tour is played by a stunt. But he has the face completely covered by the mask so he doesn't need to look like Michael, just to have somehow similar body.

If you go on youtube and search in both Dangerous and History, Thriller warewoolf scene, look at him in the Dangerous tour before and after the warewoolf scene and you'll see the differences in body; if you look at Bucharest 1992, the gold suit is larger on the one who plays the warewoolf, because the guy is thinner and even a bit shorter. And in History the one who plays the stunt in the same scene is easy to recognize too, even with the warewoolf mask on, because when he takes out the jacket he wears long sleeved t-shirt and Michael didn't wear long sleeved t-shirts.

It's easy to recognize because of the moves, the moves are more "nervous", they don't have Michael's character in them.
 So that's the double they are talking about. There was no need for him to have any similar face with Michael.

Dangerous- Thriller
[youtube:2wjk3otm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWq1uMJOA1Q[/youtube:2wjk3otm]



History- Thriller
[youtube:2wjk3otm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYBz5IsRDLM[/youtube:2wjk3otm]


So no stunt with VISIBLE face

[truthprevails]

Anna:
I understand what you're saying, and I have no doubt that MJ used stunts and body doubles at times, but MJsforever said something very different from what you said:

"I believe we have not seen the real Mike since the Dangerous era.  I think at that point he was a brand and they found someone else to play the part of "Michael" I think that person could have passed on 6/25/09 and now the "real" Mike is back."

That's what I was addressing.