Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I actually watched some of Madonna's performances earlier this week. She really lacks stage presence, and her tour editors try to mask this by cutting away from her every 5 seconds during a performance. I haven't seen a performance where the camera just focuses on Madonna for 95% of the performance like with MJ. MJ is obviously the performance virtuoso. His stage command and presence is unmatched. He doesn't need a circus on stage, like with Madonna, to hold the audience's attention. Dancing is unmatched as well. Great pre-recorded live vocals. Great staging. Madonna, imo, is overrated as a performer at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 I actually watched some of Madonna's performances earlier this week. She really lacks stage presence, and her tour editors try to mask this by cutting away from her every 5 seconds during a performance. I haven't seen a performance where the camera just focuses on Madonna for 95% of the performance like with MJ. MJ is obviously the performance virtuoso. His stage command and presence is unmatched. He doesn't need a circus on stage, like with Madonna, to hold the audience's attention. Dancing is unmatched as well. Great pre-recorded live vocals. Great staging. Madonna, imo, is overrated as a performer at times. You've seen the light Austineisha!!! :excited: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 :clapping: :clapping: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna has spectacle. That's it. Mike and Janet have that, but they have the talent to back it up. Madonna on the other hand.... Her stans on this forum are going to be PISSED!!! Michael -the perfomer is good but his tours were,eh (for someone of his stature).. The excitement is not consistent thru-out. Madonna's is,imo. You all are getting to caught up in the "perfomer" and the fact of him performing being "an event" to where you have blinders on of how flawed his tours have been ..especially HIStory tour. That shit is soooo dead in most parts,its not even funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 I've never seen a full tour from either just bits & pieces. If Michael were still alive and I was given the option to go to This Is It vs Madonna's pending 2012 tour IDK who Id wanna see more. Mike would be a one time thing but Id probably be more inclined to watch (by a bit more) Madonna as I'm a bigger fan of her music. That tour w/o a doubt look like it was gonna MURDER his past tours (production wise NOT performance wise)....but far more elaborate than his others. THIS IS IT looks like what he should have BEEN doin for his tour imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 Obviously Madonna. Not to alot of ppl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Michael -the perfomer is good but his tours were,eh (for someone of his stature).. The excitement is not consistent thru-out. Madonna's is,imo. You all are getting to caught up in the "perfomer" and the fact of him performing being "an event" to where you have blinders on of how flawed his tours have been ..especially HIStory tour. That shit is soooo dead in most parts,its not even funny. The "excitement" in a Madonna show is the spectacle NOT the performer. That basically mean you can replace Madonna with any performer and have a decent show. The same can not be said for Michael. With the exception of the HIStory tour, Mike was either 100% live or 50%-60% live (and sounding GOOD). There are FEW people that can go from "spectacle" to simply being on stage by themselves performing and keep the crowd enthralled for their every movement. Madonna does not have that (and never did). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escapade Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 There are FEW people that can go from "spectacle" to simply being on stage by themselves performing and keep the crowd enthralled for their every movement. Madonna does not have that (and never did). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 The "excitement" in a Madonna show is the spectacle NOT the performer. That basically mean you can replace Madonna with any performer and have a decent show. The same can not be said for Michael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escapade Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Never Understood the hype about Madonna and why people choose to pay thousands of dollars to see an old crypt keeper do yoga on stage? She's not much of a singer, her dancing ( ), overall she's just smoke an mirrors. She's very creative though, i'll give her that. However I need more than that. Michael is the winner here clearly. Better Music, Better singer, Better Dancer, everything he does is just better than hers. :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Like, look at this: The camera changes like every 5 seconds. You can't even focus on Madonna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 The "excitement" in a Madonna show is the spectacle NOT the performer. That basically mean you can replace Madonna with any performer and have a decent show. The same can not be said for Michael. With the exception of the HIStory tour, Mike was either 100% live or 50%-60% live (and sounding GOOD). There are FEW people that can go from "spectacle" to simply being on stage by themselves performing and keep the crowd enthralled for their every movement. Madonna does not have that (and never did). Madonna is very good at crafting a well put together show. She's naturally more "artsy" than MJ. They're approach on stage is DIFFERENT. So in actuality you can say we're comparing apples and oranges. Why are you bringing up about Mike singing LIVE. You do know Madonna sings LIVE,right? More than Mike does,right? You're saying all this spectacle stuff...This Is It looked like it was gonna be a "spectacle". Thats my point. MJ -the perfomer mixed with "spectacle" would mean NO ONE could touch his shows. This Is It would have SHUT EVERYONE DOWN. But we didn't get to witness that happen. As I stated before This Is It is the tour Mike should have been doin all along. His tours are so underwhelming to me when I go back to look at them. Dont get me wrong,I enjoy alot of the moments that dont cause for a big grawl from the crowd like him doin "Working Day & Night" on the Danerous Tour but overall it left me wanting more especially since he's "THE GREATEST" by the words standards. Madonna just gives me more eye candy. Her visuals are superb -its a journey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlight Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Well in her defense Austin as far as the tour itself THAT seems more like the editing of the video itself more so than the show. If you were there live itd probably be a different experience. I also kind of agree with Dayz shes much more visual & artsy & it is almost like apples & oranges. So is the Round 2 thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Well in her defense Austin as far as the tour itself THAT seems more like the editing of the video itself more so than the show. If you were there live itd probably be a different experience. I also kind of agree with Dayz shes much more visual & artsy & it is almost like apples & oranges. So is the Round 2 thread Naaaaahhhh, she just boring and has no stage presence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlight Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Naaaaahhhh, she just boring and has no stage presence. :lmao: Bitch. You just gon give me the Judge Judy & dismiss it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Wonder Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 :lmao: Bitch. You just gon give me the Judge Judy & dismiss it "Judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of ZERO for stage presence. That's all. Step out." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angela Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna has great visuals and does an excellent job with the overall production and making it look like a "show." With that said, I'd still take MJ as he's a better performer. Props, dancers, costume changes, gimmicks etc. are all great and in my opinion really help to enhance a show and make it more memorable, but if your performer is the shit, I'm not going to complain too much about a lack of all the other stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laveaux Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna gets my vote. Her Drowned World tour was everything to me. Never cared for Michael Jackson as a performer, he did nothing for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatOtherFan Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna is very good at crafting a well put together show. She's naturally more "artsy" than MJ. They're approach on stage is DIFFERENT. So in actuality you can say we're comparing apples and oranges. Why are you bringing up about Mike singing LIVE. You do know Madonna sings LIVE,right? More than Mike does,right? You're saying all this spectacle stuff...This Is It looked like it was gonna be a "spectacle". Thats my point. MJ -the perfomer mixed with "spectacle" would mean NO ONE could touch his shows. This Is It would have SHUT EVERYONE DOWN. But we didn't get to witness that happen. As I stated before This Is It is the tour Mike should have been doin all along. His tours are so underwhelming to me when I go back to look at them. Dont get me wrong,I enjoy alot of the moments that dont cause for a big grawl from the crowd like him doin "Working Day & Night" on the Danerous Tour but overall it left me wanting more especially since he's "THE GREATEST" by the words standards. Madonna just gives me more eye candy. Her visuals are superb -its a journey. Yes, she is very good at crafting a spectacle. That does not mean her tours are better. When the spectacle isn't there can she hold a crowd? Can she be on a stage by herself and keep a crowd enthralled with everything she does? That is the definition of a true performer...that is not Madonna. Because Madonna can't sing live... :lmao: Her stans brag about her singing live when it REALLY isn't anything to brag about. She sounds atrocious when she is singing live, and also she does use pre-records and back tracking to mask ALOT of her "live" singing. Prior to HIStory Michael was singing at least 60% live with the Dangerous tour, and 100% live with the "Bad" tour. Giving you GOOD vocals, along dancing, and the "eye candy" that you crave so much, etc. You can't give me anything from Madonna that tops that. It seems to me you are looking more so for "eye candy" than anything else, and if that's what you want Madonna will give you that, because she's dependent upon that to HAVE a good show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cnd Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 In terms of sheer entertainment and stage presence, Michael's tours without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janetDAYZ Posted October 2, 2011 Author Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna gets my vote. Her Drowned World tour was everything to me. Never cared for Michael Jackson as a performer, he did nothing for me. I hated the tour at first but as I've gotten older,I've been able to appreciate it more and I actually like it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaLpHieReBeL516 Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 im not here for relying on stage props and half assed stiff assed "dancing" im here for the one tht could put on a show by themselves in someone's basement if they had to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquaria Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 Madonna is a really vulgar cunt on stage I love that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.