Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Days Won


Posts posted by jarrylf

  1. Sombre church bells sound as Janet Jackson’s Rhythm Nation 1814 begins. An eerie, unsettled feeling unfolds as Jackson recites the “Pledge” her voice layered to suggest a group who are bound together on this journey as one: "We are a nation with no geographic boundaries, bound together through our beliefs. We are like-minded individuals, sharing a common vision, pushing toward a world rid of colour-lines."

    Then she dropped “Rhythm Nation” and the world would never be the same. On her fourth studio album, Jackson transformed from pop star into an icon.

    Forever defiant and entirely her own, Jackson refused to give the record label what they wanted, a sequel to Control. But she had bigger things on her mind, and used her art to make a political statement about issues of race, bigotry, gun violence, poverty, drug abuse, illiteracy, and ignorance.

    At 23-years-old, Jackson walked the talk. She co-wrote and co-produced every song on the album with Jimmy Jam and Terry Lewis, except the hard rock gem, “Black Cat”, which she penned and Jellybean produced. Rhythm Nation dropped 12 September 1989 and was envisioned as the national anthem of the 90s, thus the “1814”, a reference to the year the “The Star-Spangled Banner” was written.

    Jackson knew what the people wanted, and she delivered. “Miss You Much”, the lead song on the album, was a number one hit – and the second most popular song of 1989. With three more number ones on deck, Jackson was poised to have the bestselling album in the US in 1990 – her legend growing bigger with each and every hit.

    Rhythm Nation shattered records left and right, becoming the first album to have seven top five hit singles on the Billboard Hot 100, and earning Jackson nine Grammy Award nominations, including the first woman up for Producer of the Year and the only artist in history to receive nominations spanning five genres on a single album.

    Now, 30 years after changing the game, Jackson will finally be inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, in a star-studded event on March 28, alongside Stevie Nicks, The Cure, Def Leppard, Roxy Music, Radiohead, and the Zombies. The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame will host a Class of 2019 exhibition, featuring iconic items from their careers – including the unforgettable portrait of Jackson taken by Guzman, which appears on the album cover.

    Guzman is the husband-and-wife team of Constance Hansen and Russell Peacock, who, below, share memories and never-before-seen images from the iconic shoot.

    Can you take us back to the shoot and describe Janet’s arrival?

    Constance Hansen: We started doing 8x10 Polaroids around 1987. We were working with Geoffrey Beene and Barney’s. Janet liked that look.

    Russell Peacock: Janet knew exactly what she wanted. This was a big political statement on her part. After hair and makeup, she came in like a soldier.

    Constance Hansen: A little girl came in. She was really a little girl, so cute, fresh-faced, no makeup. She was soft, very sweet, and had the tiniest, lovely voice – really delicate. She came with her boyfriend at that time, René Elizondo Jr. They were very cute together. It was a secret.

    What stood out to you most about the shoot?

    Russell Peacock: The thing I remember most vividly from the shoot happened while we were waiting for Janet to finish her hair and makeup. René invited us into his brand new Range Rover and we listened to ‘Black Cat’ full blast, everything was popping. It was the loudest car stereo I had ever been in and he was really excited.

    Constance Hansen: It was a very long hair and makeup session, which is always the case when you are doing something like this. When she came out five hours later, it was the whole military look: the bandolier, the hair, the braiding, the key earring – what she wore in the ‘Rhythm Nation’ video.. That was the look but it was a very simple set. We just had a chair and it was very solemn, very stern. There is no laughing on the set.

    I am always looking at what people are doing, how they are feeling. Once we got started it was almost like watching a stage because it was separate. We made small directions but she really didn’t need it. We were just watching her. It was very voyeuristic.

    Could you talk about the process for making these photographs?

    Russell Peacock: With the 8x10, you can’t look through the camera when you take the picture, so you say, ‘Don’t move,’ put the film in, click it, and hope the person didn’t move too much because it’s a shallow depth of field. It’s an old fashioned way of working. You can’t take a lot of pictures like this. It’s a lot of set up – then you do it and that’s it.

    Constance Hansen: We were there a long time but we didn’t have that many images because it’s time-consuming. You are under a dark cloth, looking through the lens. When you are doing that, you are quite still. An exposure could be 15-30 seconds. We were controlling the perspective. You can make people thinner or taller, right in the camera, not in post. There was no post. Everything had to be perfection.

    What makes this style of portraiture so revealing?

    Constance Hansen: It’s more considered and it’s intimate. You’re really fixated on detail.

    Russell Peacock: You get that look like in a daguerreotype, where people look like they are in a trance because they can’t move. You get this surreal feeling. I think during that time, what we liked about it was there was a neo-romanticism to the whole process.

    Seeing the outtakes from the shoot, I realised the originals were colour, not black and white!

    Russell Peacock: Yes, all the Polaroids were colour.

    Constance Hansen: The black and white photographs are Russell in the darkroom and he really is a master. They were manipulated and various things happened. He sometimes solarises them subtly or he tones them with selenium or he bleaches them. Also, you see the numbers ‘1814’, which is on the side – that was added in the darkroom.

    Russell Peacock: I made all these different prints for them to choose from but they used a pretty simple straight forward image in the end. After watching the videos, which we didn’t see, I realised what she wanted, whereas at the time, I wasn’t really sure. We didn’t even listen to the music aside from that one track.

    Janet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by GuzmanJanet Jackson, Rhythm Nation 1814, photographed by Guzman
    • Like 3
    • Upvote 3
  2. Nah conspiracy theories challenge facts.

    Yet when it comes to celebrities, inconsistencies is only a major thing when dealing with the biggest star in the world.......And again, it's weird that they get details of their own allegations wrong and re-edited, that's not normal either in these celeb cases....

    Why are you projecting so hard? You're literally on the side of "coulda"=did.......that's conspiracy lingo, your own example there is perfectly applicable to you right now, people who believe he was murdered have no concrete evidence but he "coulda".....people who believe he was a pedophile have no concrete evidence (or credible witnesses) but he "coulda" :lmao: You're doing a better job mocking your argument than I am :lol: 

  3. Nope, conspiracy theories are based on mostly un-provable circumstances that challenge provable facts. The doc is a conspiracy, challenging the facts we have on record with nothing to back up the challenge. Your side is "coulda"(=conspiracy) my side is credibility.

    What you're advocating for is that everyone believes everything everyone says UNLESS they're in court.:lmao:

    Them being inconsistent this entire time on this subject and going for MJ's purse first (only after he's dead, only after they both are in financial & career shit) means its more likely they are lying than that they aren't.

    Ah and yet most do remember their childhood & teen years vividly when it comes to sexual situations (especially since sometimes both accusers here claim it was all consenting), the R.Kelly girls can, and did so easily, McKenzie Phillips did so easily (was molested and groomed and consented with her father but her story has remained the same for years) it doesn't mean everyone does or can but that on top of their inconsistencies is another notch against them

    I'll enjoy the facts (until or unless they prove me wrong in time), you enjoy your theories, stories, and blind belief tho :D

  4. 13 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Careful.. I feel like Effram is a C-Error (Ciara fans)

    I want to add to this... Most of those songs were for other people.. or just ignored by her brother or what producers THINK is a Janet Jackson song (Curtains). 


    True.... I forgot that

    THAT TOO, and it shows, it shows so clearly. And there's been other Janet songs that were meant for others and that are covers....but her input makes them hers, her styling makes them hers. Not with Discipline. I jokingly call that album the demos cause I do believe if she got those songs, put her style on it, actually changed up her voice and used more of her voice on it, it could be as good as 20Y.O. :lmao:


  5. Basically, I'm too far into facts to be moved by their performance, and you're to far into their performance to see the facts. Theories aren't proven, their ignorance, their greed, and their motives are proven.

    I don't recall any of their court docs exonerating Michael (that already happened in 05), they show their lack of credibility and consistencies. They're aiming for tons of money off of edited stories and attempts to hide information. That's what the court docs prove and that's why they matter.

    Ah so it's a "conspiracy theory" that they're doing this for money.............can you provide sufficient evidence that no accuser of MJ has ever went public with the claims before attaching money?....cause without evidence THAT is the conspiracy theory, what's factual is that the money grab was the 1st move.

    And you can keep trying and failing at defending people's stories who don't even remember their stories all because you despise the man they're accusing who was completely exonerated. :lmao:

    And literally nothing and nobody credible to & consistent ever said or/& proved that MJ did molest anyone who was in or around his life, just that he was an easy target in life & death. :coffee:

  6. 1 hour ago, EphraimAdamz said:

    So ya'll acting like Feedback, Luv, Rock With U, Can't B Good, So Much Betta aren't bops?

    Bops don't equal greatness, those songs are bops, and are some of the best songs on the album, but they sound like Ciara/Britney songs, not Janet.

    1 hour ago, EphraimAdamz said:

    I saw someone place Discipline at #11 which is a stretch

    I sure did, becasue the songs compared to her discog are basic and in the area of the 1st 2 albums, however her 1st 2 albums give off way more of her voice than Discipline did with all them demo sounding1 take vocals. A massive part of my love of Janet is the styles of her singing, Discipline without a doubt is the album she gave the bare minimum in her vocals for every song (excluding the harmonies). So no artistic input, no creative input, nothing about the album stands with her best, it could've been done by Ciara easily, her most limited use of her vocals=11th.

    • Upvote 1
  7. 52 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Doesn’t mean he wasn’t abused 🤦🏾‍♂️ just means he wants compensated for it.. none of those emails or journals means he wasnt abused.

    I need copies of these transcripts from court cases. I looked for these journals and court transcripts and none were found

    James remembers the abuse. Not many people remember the dates or even years. Perfect example: Janet couldn’t tell you which songs came from which classic album. By your logic, she’s lying. 

    Money is irrelevant when it comes to abuse. Going for MJ’s purse doesn’t mean he didn’t molest children 

    Name one celebrity/wealthy person who hasn’t accused someone they’ve abused of “going for money”. Hell, even none-abusive relationships go for money (child support) so “going for money” is literally an attempt to undermine the real issue, in this case, child abuse

    It means we can't take his word for it on this case because his relevance and finances are clearly his priority, PERIOD.

    Oh no problem:

    Wade's Witness statement being stricken from the record:https://www.scribd.com/document/367639167/Robson-Summary-Judgment-Ruling

    The Book Deals threat:https://www.scribd.com/document/335685460/MJ-Estate-Motion-to-Compel-Robson

    Wade begging for a job with MJJ:https://leavingneverlandfacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Wade-Email-to-Cirque-Wanting-MJ-Show-Badly-532x1024.jpg

    James's financial issues: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cacd.564084.1.0.pdf

    Wade denying knowing what "time to get mine" means in his diary: https://themichaeljacksonallegationsblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/wade-robson-deposition-extracts.pdf

    James lying about being asked to/able to testify:https://www.offidocs.com/loleaflet/dist/loleaflet.html?service=owncloudservice04&file_path=file:///var/www/html/weboffice/mydata/1948333/NewDocuments/1093695.odt&username=1948333&ext=yes

    Ah but he said he didn't remember them being abused because they seemed fun & loving, but then he said he was always in fear, but then he said he didn't remember at all until 2013, then he said he knew all along it was wrong and he was always in fear. The difference in the Janet example, we have evidence to correct her, because otherwise, she is wrong, what you're arguing is being wrong doesn't mean you're wrong. And the Janet comparison doesn't work because in her case she's been wrong, in their case they've been proven to have lied about what they've said and what they did and when they did it from their time with Michael, to their trials, to the doc, to their damn interviews. In this case, on this subject, they lie....so they aren't credible. Doesn't mean abuse didn't happen, it just means you have to have blind faith in un-credible liars that it did.......that don't work for me :coffee:

    :lmao: It doesn't mean he didn't but making the purse the priority jacks the credibility, and I can name many cases (including R.Kelly & Bill Cosby) where there were accusers that didn't do that before coming forward. Name someone who's done that with accusing MJ......

    47 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Cool! Tell ya story! Come out so many others can do so! I applaud his book. Him being denied a job and writing a tell all does not mean he wasn’t sexually abused 🤷🏾‍♂️

    Bringing up his court cases after they are over is irrelevant. His 2015 court case was dismissed bc of statues of limitations and his 2017 because the Estate could not be held liable. That’s it. Cut and dry. The court cases weren’t thrown out for perjury or his testimony.. period. Neither dismissed his childhood sexual abuse from Michael Jackson and that factual. Wackos can continue to try to pretend to be lawyers and pretend to break down what was said in court (as if that matters).. at the end of the day, the person they’re defending is a child molester 

    You're championing for a book of tabloid sourced stories...........that's um............well I would say that's probably why he never got the deal, but there are books about MJ's tabloid stories, so this had to be really bad, but then again, seeing as how they cant keep up with their claims.....that's not surprising.

    Cute story, but the truth is their words in court matter, and they always will ESPECIALLY since they're pressing for an appeal, Every lie they said in court in the past will be used against them as it should, just because the case is over doesn't mean we have to ignore their blatant sloppy lying. They keep getting blindsided by their own words from 2 years ago and that's not OK, it don't mean they weren't abused by someone in their life, but it definitely does mean they should not be taken seriously in this conversation. And acting like it doesn't is more wacko than anything really, you're basically saying "who cares if you're lying, tell your story! Get his money! It's all the same!"...

    • Upvote 1
  8. I want to note his emails indicate that he only started writing his book (that he denied trying to do) after he was denied jobs with MJ's company, and only used the threat of said books (that were so badly done later nobody would pick them up after trying to shop them around for a while, which has to be REALLY crappy cause it's so easy to get a book out on MJ) to attempt to blackmail the estate into paying him, but they don't want you to know that....too bad that was brought up in court.

    Problem is too, he was looking for and citing every TABLOID article that even his family in his emails denied being true or credible....but he still cited them, very telling.

    They're liars because they've been proven to have lied and fabricated/edited tons in their stories on this subject SINCE coming out, not even to do with their memory of their childhood, of their memory of what they said 2-4yrs ago, they're trash. 

  9.  He lied about having journals and tried his hardest not to have them turned over to the court so he couldn't be questioned about saying making these claims will make him relevant after years of "joking" and saying he'd do this if he ever needed to.:lmao:

    Except, his witness statement was stricken for the blatant lying.....which didn't and don't help his claims boo

    Wow....that...doesn't make sense at all, especially in Safechuck's case who was essentially a teenager for most of what he alleges, and it's pretty odd how it doesn't here yet in real cases with real abuse victims (especially from celebs) they remember things so clearly and so vividly, yet with Michael Jackson being Michael Jackson......it's weird how it's JUST him where that's what these 2 have in common......how telling

    Again I ask, so you're saying no MJ accuser ever went for the money before they came out with the claims? Also....Cochren was only worked with MJ once....he was kinda sorta dead by the time of the 2nd trial.... :coffee:

  10. Hiding emails meaning being FORCED to produce them and also lying about them, (like literally the opposite of Hillary :lmao:). He even said in his journal his claims will make him relatable and relevant

    And I'm sure his witness statement being thrown out had nothing to do with it being thrown out at all. :coffee:

    Eh that's what he's saying, but he's also said he's looked into all the information on this and seemed surprised to learn so much when confronted with information he overlooked :lmao:

    Except timelines do matter when you're making allegations against someone for SO much money, and you have so little to go on, AND you have shit credibility, explain the making up the entire story about Michael begging him to Testify, when Safechuck wasn't allowed to testify, something everyone on both sides knew. He 1st said he forgot this happened to him until he saw Wade asking for money on TV, then in court he said he told his mother it happened in 05, then in the doc he said he didn't specify to his mother what had happened just that "Michael's a bad man" and made up the story of turning him down, AND then said he didn't realize it was abuse or wrong until he went to therapy in 2013....Again, the sloppiness of it all  :lmao:

    So it's Just an "excuse"......nothing to do with Jordan Chandler's father trying to negotiate deals with MJ  (before even accusing of molestation, threatening to sell other weird stories to the tabloids) for months to keep him from going public? Was it just an excuse when it was revealed that the 2nd boy and his family had falsely claimed abuse against 2 others before Michael before Michael's trial exposed that and was a MAJOR cause in why they lost (beyond all their other lies being exposed)? Is it just an excuse cause Wade tried to get a payout before going public.....and then when he did....for $1.6Billion, James says he didn't remember being molested until he saw Wade coming forward (what he said in court, not the doc)....and that 1.6Billion had nothing to do with it and the fact that he was in a terrible financial situation just like Wade....that's just an excuse too huh? :lmao:

    Sorry doll, but it's only an "excuse" when it's not proven, when it is proven, it's a reason. Find 1 person who accused Michael without trying to cut a deal 1st, then it'll be an "excuse", but with these 4, it's the reasons.

    • Upvote 1
  11. 13 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Chicago is fucked as a whole

    Release a sex tape with some straight (or gay) famous dude that’s not a porn star... He gotta be a top though or it’s career suicide :lmao: 

    RIGHT!!! Start outting closet stars you had relationship/fling with lol, that'll distract completely :lmao:

    "don't talk about that court shit, lets talk about why her man's bootyhole in my DM's & on my breath..."

    Related image:lmao:


    • Upvote 1
  12. 13 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Class act, she is 😂

    I don’t watch the show. Never will

    Indeed :lol: and I now, that's why I drew that out lol, just to further point out the mess she is with this.

  13. That's expected, I'm surprised given by shit going down Monday that there were shows yesterday & today.

    A great example of the bullshit she's on, she said when she 1st came back concerning her husband, if anything was going on we wouldn't see her with her wedding ring (dumbass logic there) but it's been reported she's been taking it off after the show and putting it on for it........................................................................you to old and too much to be doin this shit....Again if she was Wendy "the hairstylist" or the "designer" this shit wouldn't mean much (it still don't) but as someone who made their living dumpster diving for dirt on people..... :coffee:

  14. 27 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    His attorney does matter.. 100% or he would be in prison by June

    Yes.. Chicago PD is shit 

    The pix were from 2016 or something 

    I’m sure it didn’t hurt his dating scene. But he can no longer send nudes... at least with his face in em :lol: 

    Nah Chicago fucked this up before his attorney's were picked, if not he'd be on trial right now.

    Shit he might want to for distraction from this :lol:

  15. "Emails didn't prove anything"...............Then why hide em? :lmao:, and that the judge found Wade such a bad/lazy liar his entire witness statement was thrown out, and that both were such bad liars their case got thrown out (had next to nothing to do with statue of limitations), and they had to do a doc to get the attention, validation,  and money they crave...The emails proved who they are, sloppy greedy liars trying to benefit from assumptions.

    Sweetie your repeating yourself, I've already torn down James beyond "timeline" repeatedly (and why timeline is important is becasue it's not mixing March with May or 87 with 89, it's mixing 88 with 92....mixing up being 10 with being 14), he might be trashier than Wade lol. A better actor sure, but arguably a sloppier liar....he just told fewer lies, but more obvious ones :lmao:, eh maybe that equals them out.

    The hilariousness in the accusing of Michael is that he allegedly said that, and just 4 out of what's calculated to have been maybe around 30 that spent that same type of time with him come out, and all 4 just coincidentally happen to be shitty people with obvious motives............. :blink:

    The money grab is an "excuse" until evidence proves it to be the reason....as it has here. :coffee:

    • Upvote 1
  16. How did I go so long without simplifying the facts that:

    Wade says not to pay attention to how much money he's trying to get, and pay attention to what this means for victims, yet.....his emails he tried to hide (but was forced to turn over) expose that he tried to negotiate a deal with the estate for hundreds of millions that would prevent him from going public with the book or interviews BEFORE he did....and he was repeatedly denied....and here we are with a million edits, and with a partner who's a sloppier liar than him....

    I'm loving Dan Reed's actually been getting dragged in some interviews about the lack of information he knows about other cases (and about Wade & James) that he claimed to have studied so hard.

    I feel you @Selz , it's 1 of those things I can respect being on the wall about. If a accuser comes out who doesn't go for money 1st (hasn't happened) or is a trashy liar, it's goin down.

    • Upvote 1
  17. 11 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Many high profile cases have a team of lawyers... not all of em are at the table holding their client’s hand 

    Just bc he didn’t show up next to him doesn’t mean George wasn’t involved in the case

    Legal Adviser aka attorney... literally from the same article: 

    “Smollett's surprise court appearance came one day after one of his attorneys, Mark Geragos...”

    The point remains, by all means, he was not hands-on at all from a public standpoint. AND, his attorneys didn't matter at all, the police fucking up the investigation did. He does have the clout, but still, the kii is this result wasn't a hard one to come to considering how much the police fucked up.

    5 minutes ago, Game For Now said:

    Found em... I am pleased ^_^ 

    They indeed made my morning:D (hadn't seen them in a while since he 1st outed em)

    Given his track record now.....I wonder who leaked em....I'm so sure that hurt his dating scene.....
    Image result for side eye look gif

  • Create New...