Latest on MJJC

Should the estate be looking to produce a BIOEPIC given the interest in a Freddie Mercury/Elton John

Honestly, not for me. There's too much of Michael's personal life that could cause a mess, mostly his vitiligo, his surgeries and of course the allegations. It's hard to do those tastefully and satisfy everyone, and not have them take away from his uber-fame and success worldwide along with his kindness for children because of his upbringing.
 
Thats true unfornately the allegations were apart of life and as much as we hate it but its something we gotta adapt to i guess.
 
I’m pretty sure the estate would need to wait a few more years before the motion capture technology evolves to the point that an actor can portray MJ throughout his entire adult life and they can digitally alter his facial features to fit the era of the appearance MJ had
 
^ they have that good enough today it's just the matter if theyd feel the need to cg the actors face to resemble Michael's more.. they may just use the persons real face, prostics and cg age progression..

They plan (whenever it actually happens) to do age progression on jaime foxx for mike tyson. I've been waiting for that.
 
I do not think it is necessary to use technology to modify the features of an actor, it is enough to choose different actors that interpret the different ages like in other movies, I think that for the boy michael is easy, another actor for the era of wall-thriller-bad, and another for the dangerous-history-invincible time, this actor can get a little older to interpret his last years as they have done with other actors in several movies, although it is not necessary since michael was not wrinkled or old in recent years. if michael changed a lot because of the surgery because that's not the important thing in the movie, just put a black actor as a child and then another actor lighter black skin young, and put an actor with white skin and black hair in the adulthood, in the movie they should explain vitiligo because it is part of their life and it is not something disastrous or what to hide, I think that this must be told in the movie, many who did not know through the movie condition on his skin and understand the color change. It is something positive. of his surgeries it is not necessary to speak, it is not the main topic and neither did Michael talk about this with anyone so it can be left aside. the most important thing is to choose good actors, the kind of hollywood actors who can do a good job, they do not have to know how to sing or dance, the music and the voice will be that of michael as in freddy's movie,the important thing is that the actors who interpret it are really actors, imitators would not be any good, this would not work, they should be actors of the stature of the great actors, who do it well.
and I think it's very important to show who was Michael as a person, as he was as a child and experiences as a child that would mark him, who was as a brother (and his brothers will get anecdotes and experiences to include in the film,positives), also show who was like uncle (taj, taryll and tj could count certain things that could be included and are positive) and who was as a friend and human being, you have to show both the talent and the human part, his help to others in selfless acts, also the importance of the messages in his music, the creative process, and show the most human michael, his joking and funny part, his kindness, and also his defects from the respect. would have to show clearly what was his perception of his childhood and the weight of fame in him, his natural talent and show the humanitarian michael and above all the human michael, son, brother, friend and father and the weight that fame had on his life for good and for bad. I believe that if the viewer connects with the human michael, the father who cared for his children, the teasing brother and the friend and fun-loving and read funny guy, this along with his talent, his tenacity at work, his perfectionism and creation will make this a good movie
 
Would so cool if they used cgi on a imperspntor and get them tp potray mike
 
I think that putting an imitator would not be a good idea if you want to make a good and quality film. it is better to look for a good actor as has been the case of Freddy Mercury's movie, the most important thing is not to dance like or look like him but to be a good actor, because the imitators lack the talent of a good actor. As for the actor's physique, it is enough to find a multiracial actor, with angles and a square jaw, that's how michael was, it must be
a multiracial actor, with a square jaw and a good actor, this is the important thing. I think you should find a black child actor for Michael child, another black actor that resembles his thriller era and a single adult actor for the dangerous, history, invincible and final years, this last actor should look like him in his epoca dangerous or history, that is, they must look for a white-skinned actor, obvious michael was black but in the film his vitiligo must be explained and a more white multiracial actor must be included for that time because obviously the vitiligo turns his skin white For this reason, it is better to choose a multiracial actor. he must also be an actor with a square and angled face since michael had square features, a wide jaw
 
Eventually technology may become good enough to convincingly use CGI to enhance an actor's MJ look for a whole film, but I don't think we're quite there yet.
They've done similar things already in films for short scenes. Look at the Star Wars scenes of Peter Cushing or Carrie fisher. Good but not convincing. Then there's the removal of Henry Caville's moustache in Superman Vs Batman. Dodgy to say the least.
There has already been age modification on film, for example Jonny Depp in the latest Pirates film, or Robert Downey Jn in Captain America, or Kurt Russell in Gaurdians Vol 2. Some better than others. Actually there are quite a few examples. Young Samuel L Jackson in Captain Marvel actually looks quite good!


Then there is the atrocious MJ likeness during the Billboard performance of Slave to the Rhythm.


Perhaps in 5 years it will be good enough for the main character for the whole duration of a film. So given how long these things take, perhaps they can start writing the script etc now!
 
I mean look what they were able to do with a commercial budget a couple years ago with marylin monroe - someone that wasnt around in a time where true HD capture existed..

https://youtu.be/plvWs0iJO58

That tells me that we are closer than later from great facial duplication.. especially since mike was around in the 90's and 00's when clarity of imaginary improved alot.
 
KOPV said:
I mean look what they were able to do with a commercial budget a couple years ago with marylin monroe - someone that wasnt around in a time where true HD capture existed..

https://youtu.be/plvWs0iJO58

That tells me that we are closer than later from great facial duplication.. especially since mike was around in the 90's and 00's when clarity of imaginary improved alot.
Click to expand...

Depends on how you look at it. Monroe was recorded on film which has much higher than HD image quality.
In the 90s they started using tape often which has much lower image quality.

Also the Monroe clips are very short glimpses and don't involve much movement or manipulation.
It's a much more difficult job to convincingly use CGI for the main character of a film.
The uncanny valley has steep sides.
 
I like how the Queen movie,is ok to have innacuracies,as it's "just a movie",yet meticulously picking the finer details of what an MJ movie should have.
It's why they should leave Michael well alone,for any movie ideas,because it's doomed to crash,without getting in the drivers seat.
 
^ I promise you alot of queen fans have the same.complaints we do about a Michael biopic. There were probably boycotts and everything.. it's the name of the game.when someone obsesses lol
 
stephenvalek said:
I like how the Queen movie,is ok to have innacuracies,as it's "just a movie",yet meticulously picking the finer details of what an MJ movie should have.
It's why they should leave Michael well alone,for any movie ideas,because it's doomed to crash,without getting in the drivers seat.
Click to expand...

If there's an MJ movie made then there will be creative liberties taken just like there is for every movie of this type, including the Queen film.
 
is that you can not pretend to see someone very similar to michael in the movie, which is not possible and fans should be understood, because it is better to leave behind imitators or things for a computer to simulate his face that is a failure. The key is just choose a good actor, he can even play the role of michael well, yes, to choose a good actor, neither imitators nor cheap actors. Real actor, good. On the other hand it is obvious that they can show their faults and it is normal, because all humans have defects and he also had them. if we accept this, and show his achievements and talents and showing a good person, the fun, humble and his real person that his closest relatives and friends saw in him and his work as a father. If the actor manages to transmit his energy, his kindness, his special light and the enveloping and captivating aura that michael had and that made him shine and stand out above the others both on stage and outside of it, it will be an achievement. would be good in a film about him, his person and his talent together, but the fans should accept that he also had flaws and that they can be shown and there is nothing wrong as long as it is done respectfully and that the image of him is good. .
 
Last edited:
KOPV said:
^ I promise you alot of queen fans have the same.complaints we do about a Michael biopic. There were probably boycotts and everything.. it's the name of the game.when someone obsesses lol
Click to expand...

Yes I am,and yes I did..
 
To answer your question: No, because a significant number of fans won't accept it.

Another problem is that critics would want to see Michael's scandals. Fans probably wouldn't want to see that. And the estate might not accept that.



If they did make a film, it would most certainly be about Michael and Quincy making either (or both) Off The Wall and Thriller. It would include:

- MJ and Quincy fighting.
- Love interest of either (or both) Tatum or Brooke.
- And they might turn Michael's love for Diana Ross into some sort of obsession. And might do the same for Elizabeth Taylor.
 
Last edited:
I read that after the success of the queen movie that they are confirming an elvis biopic. It's going to be directed by Baz luhrmann.

Once the estate sees how people react to elvis's biopic it could turn the estate more towards or against the idea..


Though we all know eventually it will happen. The king of pop will get a movie eventually
 
E.P.

KOPV said:
I read that after the success of the queen movie that they are confirming an elvis biopic.
Click to expand...
I don't know what the point of that is. There's several biopics about Elvis already. There was even a TV series in the early 1990s about his early days. It didn't last that long though. Last year a biopic about Colonel Tom Parker was announced. To me that would seem to pretty much be a movie about Elvis too.
 
Re: E.P.

DuranDuran said:
I don't know what the point of that is. There's several biopics about Elvis already. There was even a TV series in the early 1990s about his early days. It didn't last that long though. Last year a biopic about Colonel Tom Parker was announced. To me that would seem to pretty much be a movie about Elvis too.
Click to expand...


Yeh i dont think an full on bio movie has been done on elvis maybe little bits here and there but not a full on movie.
 
Not going to lie, the Freddie Mercury biopic has made me a massive Queens fan. I never cared for Queens before but after watching the biopic, I can't stop listening to them. I have them on repeat for the past two weeks.

Even though I've my reservations about a MJ biopic, I know if it's done right, it can be very beneficial to MJ's legacy. I think if they ever decide to do a MJ biopic, they must split it up in two films and not tell his entire life story in one movie. The first movie can focus on the first 25 years of his life. And if that is a success, they can then proceed to the second movie, which focuses on the last 25 years of his life, which undoubtedly were more controversy filled than the first 25 years of his life.
 
Re: E.P.

barbee0715 said:
I remember several Elvis movies-especially the Kurt Russell one.
Click to expand...
:yes: Kurt's was the first biopic I think. Kurt was actually in a movie with Elvis when he was a kid and was also in the fictional movie 3000 Miles To Graceland. Here's some other ones:
81rP1NxoeML._SY445_.jpg
v95udAENiGaHNC6oMb9zwmUyA2p_grande.jpg
81HdIniNxaL._SY445_.jpg

elvis_good_rockin-2.jpg
krali-korumak-protecting-the-king-izle.jpg
 
For MJ it would be better than a biopic and spreading his music to new fans as well and celebrating it can only be a good thing.
Annita said:
I don`t think I would like this with MJ. It seems to be like the Mamma Mia-film. So the actors will sing Prince songs.
Click to expand...
 
A MJ bio has the potential to do VERY well. It has to be done tastefully though, and that will be hard. MJ lived the most extravagant and interesting life out of any celebrity. The public would be very interested to see this movie. IMO, if it garners This Is it style reviews, and the fanbase approves.... it has potential to gross $500 million+ globally, and surpass the Queen biopic.

It won't be easy though.... MJ's fans are very critical and have sky high expectations, and they will have to be careful as to how much controversy they put into the film. My best advice is to focus on the music. I also think its best to wait several years for all this hype for music bios to calm down. I'd rather them launch this film when the public isn't sick of these music documentaries.
 
travis3000 said:
A MJ bio has the potential to do VERY well. It has to be done tastefully though, and that will be hard. MJ lived the most extravagant and interesting life out of any celebrity. The public would be very interested to see this movie. IMO, if it garners This Is it style reviews, and the fanbase approves.... it has potential to gross $500 million+ globally, and surpass the Queen biopic.

It won't be easy though.... MJ's fans are very critical and have sky high expectations, and they will have to be careful as to how much controversy they put into the film. My best advice is to focus on the music. I also think its best to wait several years for all this hype for music bios to calm down. I'd rather them launch this film when the public isn't sick of these music documentaries.
Click to expand...

Agreed
It will need to be done well and released before fatigue sets in (or WAY after as you suggested)
There are (and have been) a few of these types of TV shows and movies and at some point the audience will lost interest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top