Was MJ the greatest entertainer of all time? (theater, actors, singers)

[MrMom2]

That's a sort of slap in the face to all entertainers ever, including the Vaudeville days, the Big Band era of Lucille Ball, and every other singer, composer, actor ever on stage or theater.

Entertainer just seems too broad a term. Lucille Ball was an entertainer of another kind, and certainly among the elite in her genre and time imho.

I think entertainers should be restricted to their time era, since it was different during each decade and the world was very different in its needs at those times. Had the Jacksons existed during the 40s, I doubt MJ would have ever been known at all. In contrast if Ms Ball lived now she may not be as successful. I'm just saying for THAT time era, that person was the best perhaps.

Saying he was the best of the 1980s, maybe the 90s. okay..maaaybe, but of all time? Not to me. I have a plethora of favorite actors and singers and performers I'd pick over MJ any day. No offence to him or the fans. I just think a month or two ago, no one would have been as fast to agree that he was the greatest of all time.

[austinguy2009]

I dunno...if you look at it in terms of worldwide impact, I don't think there was anything like him before (Beatles and Elvis don't come close). That, coupled with his insane technical talent - singing like a pro at 10, and not just copying others...the guy was a prodigy/genius. And he revolutionized pop dancing with his moves. To this day, all those people that are "popping" etc. are basically going off what he did. You also have to remember that he really influenced choreography in "street" type dancing. He just kinda changed what pop music was all about - and nobody has matched him unfortunately in terms of raw talent and genius.

[MrMom2]

Originally Posted by austinguy2009

I dunno...if you look at it in terms of worldwide impact, I don't think there was anything like him before (Beatles and Elvis don't come close). That, coupled with his insane technical talent - singing like a pro at 10, and not just copying others...the guy was a prodigy/genius. And he revolutionized pop dancing with his moves. To this day, all those people that are "popping" etc. are basically going off what he did. You also have to remember that he really influenced choreography in "street" type dancing. He just kinda changed what pop music was all about - and nobody has matched him unfortunately in terms of raw talent and genius.

Oh I totally agree with about about any post-MJ people in the music industry copying his style and the influence he had in that field.

What about the pre-Jackson days that he couldn't have influenced?

And the other entertainment fields that he had no influence on?

That's where I feel the catigorization is too broad. But I do agree with you 100% otherwise

[gerrynyc]

I agree, most entertainers now are not originals like MJ..
so...most definetly Michael Jackson is the best entertainer of all time...no one comes to his level. He was a great song writer, impeccable entertainer, and impeccable performer...who can compete with him?

Originally Posted by austinguy2009

I dunno...if you look at it in terms of worldwide impact, I don't think there was anything like him before (Beatles and Elvis don't come close). That, coupled with his insane technical talent - singing like a pro at 10, and not just copying others...the guy was a prodigy/genius. And he revolutionized pop dancing with his moves. To this day, all those people that are "popping" etc. are basically going off what he did. You also have to remember that he really influenced choreography in "street" type dancing. He just kinda changed what pop music was all about - and nobody has matched him unfortunately in terms of raw talent and genius.

[Pfhtex]

Let's not confuse talent with popularity.

[MrMom2]

Originally Posted by gerrynyc

I agree, most entertainers now are not originals like MJ..
so...most definetly Michael Jackson is the best entertainer of all time...no one comes to his level. He was a great song writer, impeccable entertainer, and impeccable performer...who can compete with him?

Quite a few big names of the Glory Days of Hollywood during the 1940-50s come to mind.

Fred Astaire, Lucille Ball, Bing Crosby, the Rat Pack, Old Blue Eyes

[urbanlemur]

No. Although he was good, he can't hold a candle to the entertainers of old.

[MplsTodd]

Originally Posted by austinguy2009

I dunno...if you look at it in terms of worldwide impact, I don't think there was anything like him before (Beatles and Elvis don't come close). .

I don't know how you can claim that the Beatles don't come close in worldwide impact. Arguably, it was the Beatles who really broke rock music on a worldwide basis, achieving phenominal popularity throughout Europe, Asia, Australia and North America via tours and record sales, not to mention making some of the first Music Videos (for broadcast on Ed Sullivan and similar shows). The 60s were arguably the most dynamic of all decades regarding musical innovation (British Invasion, Motown, Stax, Psychadelia, folk-rock, etc...) and the Beatles were the dominant musical force of that decade from 1964 until they split in 1970.

I'm not discounting Michael Jackson's popularity, especially in other countries (which was greatly enhanced by the more globalized era we now live in), but the Beatles influence is still present 40+ years later, as indicated by their strong record sales.

[catman]

He was a great dancer (picked up a lot of James Brown moves and added to them) and an good singer, but certainly not the greatest entertainer of all time. He was pretty much an oddity and has-been until he died; now all of a sudden he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. As someone else said, dying was a great career move for him. I don't mean to be unsympathetic to those who were really wild about him, but his best days were with the Jackson 5 and up toThriller. He hasn't been primarily famous for his music since then.

[BigSwede]

No.