Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson To Unleash World Premiere Experience At Billboard Music Awards

Status
Not open for further replies.
OnirMJ said:
I am not that into computers so I don't know what is possible and what not. But when you watch movies like Transformers it's pretty much everything possible. And even more in the movies there are more complicated stuff and characters doing more complicated moves that this "MJ" performance and it is even more realistic.

So what I'm saying is that it is possible that it is created entirely on computer. I don't know. Either way it's not Michael.
Click to expand...
Doesn't make sense, because everything looks real, other than the face. If they could create the whole body, the finger movements, etc. so fluidly (it really looks like a real person dancing), then why couldn't they create the face as well that real looking? It looks horrible - and it really looks a decade old.

The CGI of the face looks a lot like The Mummy Returns 2001
[youtube]RYHaarxQTFk[/youtube]
 
Pentum said:
Doesn't make sense, because everything looks real, other than the face. If they could create the whole body, the finger movements, etc. so fluidly (it really looks like a real person dancing), then why couldn't they create the face as well that real looking? It looks horrible - and it really looks a decade old.

The CGI of the face looks a lot like The Mummy Returns 2001
[youtube]RYHaarxQTFk[/youtube]
Click to expand...
 
Pentum said:
Doesn't make sense, because everything looks real, other than the face. If they could create the whole body, the finger movements, etc. so fluidly (it really looks like a real person dancing), then why couldn't they create the face as well that real looking? It looks horrible - and it really looks a decade old.

The CGI of the face looks a lot like The Mummy Returns 2001
[youtube]RYHaarxQTFk[/youtube]
Click to expand...
 
Pentum said:
Doesn't make sense, because everything looks real, other than the face. If they could create the whole body, the finger movements, etc. so fluidly (it really looks like a real person dancing), then why couldn't they create the face as well that real looking? It looks horrible - and it really looks a decade old.

The CGI of the face looks a lot like The Mummy Returns 2001
[youtube]RYHaarxQTFk[/youtube]
Click to expand...
 
He clearly f'ed up while they were filming him perform for it. Michael never moonwalked like that, what's the point of making a CGI image, that's supposed to be the man himself, mess up a moonwalk or do it too fast. There have been numerous animations since Michael debuted the move that has duplicated the moonwalk better than that at it's proper pace, ie. California Raisins just to name one. So what was the issue here.

Another thing, what would be the point of also having real people (the dancers) also imposed on the same screen as "Michael"? Wouldn't they be CGI too? They clearly aren't....So what's the explanation for this? It's simple, the body is that of the impersonator, and he's dancing along with his stage crew from whatever his tribute show is called.
 
morinen said:
Well, I never supported this album in the first place. I think it's a spit on Michael's grave to do shitty remixes on his songs "one a day" - on the songs he worked on for years - and then use his name to sell them, insulting his own versions in the process. This mess is just the last straw.

The only good thing about this project was 8 released demos, which I bought, but honestly, by now I wish the whole thing never happened. I would have sacrificed hearing "She Was Loving Me" and "Loving You" in order to save Michael from this embarrassment.
Click to expand...

Yes he would have been really embarrassed about a No 1 album
 
WhoIsIt89 said:
He clearly f'ed up while they were filming him perform for it. Michael never moonwalked like that, what's the point of making a CGI image, that's supposed to be the man himself, mess up a moonwalk or do it too fast. There have been numerous animations since Michael debuted the move that has duplicated the moonwalk better than that at it's proper pace, ie. California Raisins just to name one. So what was the issue here.

Another thing, what would be the point of also having real people (the dancers) also imposed on the same screen as "Michael"? Wouldn't they be CGI too? They clearly aren't....So what's the explanation for this? It's simple, the body is that of the impersonator, and he's dancing along with his stage crew from whatever his tribute show is called.
Click to expand...

"his tribute show" ???

What are you talking about? Those are the dancers chosen by Taluega brothers and Jamie King - probably dancers from Cirque One show!
 
WhoIsIt89 said:
He clearly f'ed up while they were filming him perform for it. Michael never moonwalked like that, what's the point of making a CGI image, that's supposed to be the man himself, mess up a moonwalk or do it too fast. There have been numerous animations since Michael debuted the move that has duplicated the moonwalk better than that at it's proper pace, ie. California Raisins just to name one. So what was the issue here.
Click to expand...

He clearly ****ed up? OK, he can do it over and over again until they shoot the footage they needed. But it is little harder to program a computer character to do an unnatural dance move and to look like a human while doing it.
 
OnirMJ said:
"his tribute show" ???

What are you talking about? Those are the dancers chosen by Taluega brothers and Jamie King - probably dancers from Cirque One show!
Click to expand...


And I ask, what would be the point, of imposing real people, onto the same screen as that of "CGI Michael"?


The obvious explanation would be they were there with the tribute artist, performing the same routine, as the same time he was....As far as doing the step over and over, they clearly had time constraints and needed it ready to air at the time it was advertised.
 
WhoIsIt89 said:
And I ask, what would be the point, of imposing real people, onto the same screen as that of "CGI Michael"?
Click to expand...

What would be the point of having a Godzila in the same scene with the real people? They first shoot the dancers and then inserted virtual Michael into the recorded footage. Same thing like they are doing in the movies. The actors act in front of air (nothing) and then they insert Godzila using the computers.
 
OnirMJ said:
What would be the point of having a Godzila in the same scene with the real people? They first shoot the dancers and then inserted virtual Michael into the recorded footage. Same thing like they are doing in the movies. The actors act in front of air (nothing) and then they insert Godzila using the computers.
Click to expand...

Godzilla is real. Everybody knows this
 
OnirMJ said:
What would be the point of having a Godzila in the same scene with the real people? They first shoot the dancers and then inserted virtual Michael into the recorded footage. Same thing like they are doing in the movies. The actors act in front of air (nothing) and then they insert Godzila using the computers.
Click to expand...

LOL, I'm done. Feel free to believe what you will.
 
WhoIsIt89 said:
LOL, I'm done. Feel free to believe what you will.
Click to expand...

I really don't care that much because I think it is irrelevant. Video game "Michael" or impersonator with CGI MJ head = the same thing = not Michael Jackson.

Good idea but poor execution.
 
A question : If the face is CGI or something that's superimposed on to the face of the body double why do they even need an impersonator? Why not use an actual dancer with similar body type that can deliver the dances at least at a high level?
 
MJelboo said:
It isn't that simple for me. I feel uncomfortable at the thought that his image is being manipulated. I have less problems with using video footage, audio footage of Michael and show it to the public. But making him move and walk and sing just feels awkward and disrespectful. He never danced to STTR. He never explained how he would do it and what moves he would do. And yet here 'he' is, dancing to it anyway. You have to at least *somehow* see how that bothers some people, right?
Click to expand...

I kinda feel the same way...Before we even knew anything about this virtual MJ, I was indifferent to the whole idea...But then the hype really got me going and I was curious and excited to see it. Then I saw it, and I just didn't like it.

My expectations were just too high, and I know this. I thought it could have been MUCH better. Mostly because the face just did not look right at all and screamed impersonator. It looked more like a tribute show than anything else.

I didn't understand the crying in the audience either, I didn't get that vibe at all...I watched it again this morning and it was less 'weird' I guess, but it just made realize that he just cannot be recreated in any way, shape or form.

I think he would have thought it was pretty cool technology, but again, who knows what he would have thought of the final result? He probably would have wanted to manipulate it himself and give all sorts of input...But then again, if he was here, this wouldn't be needed lol....It was a good effort, but I dunno....Not for me...
 
ivy said:
A question : If the face is CGI or something that's superimposed on to the face of the body double why do they even need an impersonator? Why not use an actual dancer with similar body type that can deliver the dances at least at a high level?
Click to expand...

Exactly!
 
OnirMJ said:
Also, are you telling me that the impersonator couldn't do better moonwalk than that?? I can do better moonwalk than that!
Click to expand...
LOL, are you telling me that they animated a shitty moonwalk? At least if it's animation, they can make things perfect

By the way, strong similarities with the hologram MJ and IMMORTAL MJ

oWAooQI.jpg
 
Rich and Tone told Access Hollywood that it's 100% Jackson, they didn't air it in the actual story, but as a clip previewing the upcoming story. I don't remember if they specified if it was the dancing.
 
ABC World News with Diane Sawyer had a little bit about it. They repeated it's not a hologram and it's not an impersonator. They explained it's a "virtual human being, a 3D Avatar". They also said Estate isn't telling specifics saying MJ would have loved the secrecy / mystery surrounding it.
 
ivy said:
A question : If the face is CGI or something that's superimposed on to the face of the body double why do they even need an impersonator? Why not use an actual dancer with similar body type that can deliver the dances at least at a high level?
Click to expand...

Its probably finding that guy, Michael moved a specific way. I have never been convinced by anyone in my entire life who is impersonating or doubling for Michael. I doubt they would audition as this thing is being kept under wraps, I think the guy in the STTR performance was Jamie King.
 
Pentum said:
LOL, are you telling me that they animated a shitty moonwalk? At least if it's animation, they can make things perfect
Click to expand...

I don't know what they did, but that moonwalk was shitty. And in my opinion it is harder to program a good moonwalk than do a good moonwalk especially if you are a professional dancer or impersonator.
 
I know better. And they didn't use an actual dancer simply because impersonators are better at duplicating the moves of the man they've studied for the majority of they're lives. We know this, it doesn't matter how good of a professional dancer you are, we know that it's simply difficult to duplicate Michael's movements. It'd essentially be the exact same even if they did hire a professional dancer and they got his trademark moves memorized. It'd still be someone on a screen copying Michael's dance steps but lacking the essence and energy he had that made those moves unique.


The whole "why would they use an impersonator and not a professional dancer" is a moot point to me.
 
ivy said:
ABC World News with Diane Sawyer had a little bit about it. They repeated it's not a hologram and it's not an impersonator. They explained it's a "virtual human being, a 3D Avatar". They also said Estate isn't telling specifics saying MJ would have loved the secrecy / mystery surrounding it.
Click to expand...

No Way.............anyone got a pipeline to the estate I want this in writing xD
 
By the way, strong similarities with the hologram MJ and IMMORTAL MJ

oWAooQI.jpg
[/QUOTE]

Oh my gosh Pentum ^^ your right its just like it :yes:

Edit- whoops not sure why it didn't quote properly lol ,thanks for that post Pentum :)
 
Debbie Rowe's reaction about the MJ hologram...... 'embarrassing for the children, horrible....'

Source: Entertainment Tonight
 
Finally watched the performance. While I think that it's a good promotional tool to help sell Xscape, I don't ever need to see it again. It just didn't do anything for me.
 
Birchey said:
Its probably finding that guy, Michael moved a specific way. I have never been convinced by anyone in my entire life who is impersonating or doubling for Michael. I doubt they would audition as this thing is being kept under wraps, I think the guy in the STTR performance was Jamie King.
Click to expand...

The impersonators I know (and I don't know them all) never perform anywhere near Michael's level. To me the advantage of an impersonator would be the face looking similar (to an extent) to MJ. But if the face isn't used I don't get why they would need an impersonator. It shouldn't be that hard to find a 5' 10" thin dancer that can do MJ moves. I mean look to Usher, he can do an impressive moonwalk. Sure it probably won't be convincing to fans (meaning fans can identify MJ and a dancer) but the dancing would look more high quality. So I truly don't get why would they even need an impersonator for this if they don't need a look alike face..

nd they didn't use an actual dancer simply because impersonators are better at duplicating the moves of the man they've studied for the majority of they're lives. We know this, it doesn't matter how good of a professional dancer you are, we know that it's simply difficult to duplicate Michael's movements.
Click to expand...

Of course even a good professional dancer wouldn't be able to duplicate MJ's movements exactly but wouldn't you think they would be better than an impersonator? I mean Vincent Peterson dancing next to MJ at Bad 25 documentary and the backup dancers at TII had a lot better movement than any impersonator I saw. So I disagree at impersonators are better that duplicating MJ moves - when it comes to dancing.

----------------------

If we operate on the idea that a living human was needed for the movements but not the face and we all agree that no one can match MJ's movements, why not go with a decent dancer so that at least the moonwalk etc would look better? Not look like MJ but good dancing skills?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top