Latest on MJJC

Michael Jackson To Unleash World Premiere Experience At Billboard Music Awards

Status
Not open for further replies.
WhoIsIt89 said:
I still know better than that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, they took some random impersonator and didn't even change his clothes. They let him wear his own cheap copy that he bought on ebay. Do you understand how stupid that sounds.

Ok, they used the body double (now it is obvious after watching that 2Pac thing) but they gave him the original clothes. Why would they use cheap copies when they can change his clothes with the real ones?
 
OnirMJ said:
Yeah, they took some random impersonator and didn't even change his clothes. They let him wear his own cheap copy that he bought on ebay. Do you understand how stupid that sounds.

Ok, they used the body double (now it is obvious after watching that 2Pac thing) but they gave him the original clothes. Why would they use cheap copies when they can change his clothes with the real ones?
Click to expand...

Because I don't see why Michael Bush would feel the need to recreate Smooth Criminal spats. For what? Wasn't any leaning going on, or the pants from the Dangerous leotard outfit.
 
OnirMJ said:
No I think that he is right. But I just don't believe that "Sources involved in the creation of this performance" would tell him that and lie on TV. And "all of them signed strict non-disclosure agreements".
Click to expand...


They did it with the Michael album and the Cascio tracks. Now it's suddenly outside of the realm of possibility? Yeah okay.
 
Man U guys are really mad about this it seems..

Like Elsa from Frozen says, let it go.. Let it goooo! Haha

It was clearly only done as a promotional tool and seems to have succeeded.. Looks as tho MJ nabbed the #1 spot, has another new song climbing the iTunes Charts (STTR), and everyone is talking about it..

Mission accomplished!
 
OnirMJ said:
Re-read my post.
Click to expand...


Idk, I mean, the sources did lie. The Cascio's and Teddy Riley went on TV and lied. Teddy Riley most likely had to sign a confidentially agreement right? Yet, he supposedly told on of 3T that he knew it wasn't Michael on the songs he produced. But that he was just doing it in hopes that they gave him a real Michael song. Which then got to us and the media via Twitter.

I think it's pretty comparable personally. It's essentially the same thing, someone involved told it to Damien what he knows, and someone involved technically told another person who had no affiliation with the album, what they knew. And that person in turn, then told everyone else.


EDIT: I actually appreciate that statement. At least they didn't even bother to address to "CGI/Impersonator" thing, like they addressed, you know, from the Michael album. They respect our intelligence after all.
 
Last edited:
OnirMJ said:
Seriously you can not compare fake songs with this. Computer character or impersonator with CGI head.. what is the difference? Really? Neither one of them are Michael Jackson.

And even though Ludacris called it Michael Jackson, the Estate never said it is Michael Jackson. They said Michael Jackson Experience, Virtual Michael and King Of Pop Illusion. Only crazy person can think that that was real Michael since there is no footage of Michael performing that song (which they also said).
Click to expand...

OnirMJ, it was the way the stunt was marketed.

NO one was under the illusion they were seeing Michael Jackson perform live. Maybe you did not see this preview before:


Maybe you did not read Branca's statement:

"It's so important to experience Michael Jackson in a live setting," Jackson's lawyer John Branca explained of how the idea came about. "This is something where we wanted a live performance in front of a live audience, and nothing speaks to that more than an awards show."?
https://ca.celebrity.yahoo.com/news...ings-fans-tears-2014-022000390-us-weekly.html
Click to expand...

Estate/Sony will not admit to using an impersonator as they believe it will ruin the magic trick. I do not believe they have to explain the technology however, this position of pretending this was somehow Michael magic, Michael's spirit and/or Michael had anything to do with this stunt beyond his vocals on STTR is utterly ridiculous and a wolf ticket.

If they said it was simply a tribute, it would seem boring however; that is where clever marketing comes in and can sometimes come back to haunt the marketer.

OnirMJ said:
The problem is that some of you had unrealistic expectations. What were you expecting? They said themselves that they don't have any footage of MJ performing that song.
Click to expand...

It was said after the fact when it was obvious what was said in Leach's article was completely false. Look at the posts after that article was posted in this thread. Leach has been a supporter of the Jackson Family as a whole. I cannot personally point to Estate/Sony for providing Leach that information however; Leach wrote what he was told and it is difficult to think of other parties that would benefit from those tales. One can point to Billboard but, they had an vested interest in all of the performers that night; not one experience.

OnirMJ said:
But comparing this with Cascio tracks is just wrong. We all knew this ain't real because they told themselves that no footage exists. And looking at the technology it seems that even if they had a footage it can't be done without a body double.
Click to expand...

I discussed the footage above. They are not admitting to an impersonator; only fans are.

OnirMJ said:
Michael Jackson - Slave To The Rhythm
Production Companies: Optimum Productions, Pulse Evolution, Tricycle Logic
Creative Director: Jamie King
Associate Creative Director: Stephanie Roos
Executive Producers: John Branca, John McClain
Producers: Frank Patterson, John Textor, Karen Langford
Supervising Producers: Oualid Mouaness, Natalie Johns
Visual FX Supervisor: Stephen Rosenbaum
Production Designer: Tamlyn Wright
Editor: Guy Harding
Stylist: Michael Bush (Michael Jackson)
Stylists: Franck Chevalier (Dancers), Douglas VanLaningham (Dancers)
Choreographers: Rich Talauega, Tone Talauega
Production Manager: Nathan Stoebner
Production Coordinator: Joseph Davison
Click to expand...

And it continues.... who played Michael? It is unfortunate Bush seems to be playing along however; he had his own issues after the auction a while back and maybe this is his way of saying thank you for the support at that time.
 
Last edited:
Spyce;4010629 said:
Just so everyone knows... the Estate gets it:
Click to expand...

Our other goal is to use new and innovative ways to create entertainment on a grand scale that allows the world to experience Michael’s magic – something that reflects Michael’s love of spectacle and grandeur and his own desire to be a step ahead of others.

No one will ever replace Michael Jackson, the King of Pop. And certainly no one can dance like the greatest entertainer who ever lived – not even an illusion. Michael’s music and spirit are immortal, and that has been proven again these last few weeks. In bringing Michael’s spirit to the stage, the entire world was reminded of Michael’s genius as a singer, a dancer, and an innovator who pushed the envelope.
Click to expand...

No. They really do not get it.

The Estate is not Michael Jackson. No one - including the executors themselves - can create anything Michael would have because only Michael could do that. He is gone and they are not equip to carry on that part of his legacy. It is unique and to believe it can be carried on in this manner is to say it can be duplicated which means it was never unique at all.

Michael cannot be duplicated but, he can be appreciated and respected.
 
Last edited:
Tygger;4010710 said:
No. They really do not get it.

The Estate is not Michael Jackson. No one - including the executors themselves - can create anything Michael would have because only Michael could do that. He is gone and they are not equip to carry on that part of his legacy. It is unique and to believe it can be carried on in this manner is to say it can be duplicated which means it was never unique at all.

Michael cannot be duplicated but, he can be appreciated and respected.
Click to expand...

I apologize for the misunderstanding- what I meant when I said "they get it" is that they get what people are saying. They see and hear it all and have responded to it.

And I agree with you. Nobody can create anything that Michael would have because he isn't here. He cannot give that feedback, we cannot pick his brain for ideas and suggestions and comments. But does that mean that, just because he is gone, we should stop trying to innovate? If you read that statement carefully, you will notice that they say "No-one can ever replace Michael... and no-one can ever dance like him, not even an illusion." So, I take back my earlier statement. Yes, I do believe they "get it". They were not out trying to recreate or resurrect Michael as they are fully aware that they cannot do that, nor will they ever be able to. To achieve such a feat is purely science fiction, at least with today's technology. Maybe in 100 or 1000 years that will be different, but today it is not possible. What they were trying to do was "use new and innovative ways to create entertainment on a grand scale that allows the world to experience Michael’s magic – something that reflects Michael’s love of spectacle and grandeur and his own desire to be a step ahead of others." Again, not trying to recreate him, but allowing the world to experience what Michael was all about: wonder and "magic".

And, enjoyed the performance or not, I do believe they achieved exactly what hey set out to do. People watched, people were captivated, audiences were moved and we're continuing to talk about it and discuss it, days later and I'm sure even weeks and months to come. And I have no doubt even in years to come as this could possibly be the start of something new in entertainment. Maybe not. But maybe.
 
LastTear said:
Thank you for this.

Can I ask, and I won't be offended if you chose not to answer, given what you know to be possible do you think this was a fair effort on behalf of the creators? I have become more impressed the more I've watched it but I see the flaws as well so I'm wondering if, for now, this is as good as it gets.
Click to expand...


No problem. Sorry I got to this so late. I honestly didn't expect people to give a care about what I had to say since people more or less made up their minds.

From a complete technical point of view, the CGI Michael was well done. He didn't fall into Uncanny Valley (like I feared when I heard about this hologram) and he didn't look like a CGI character like Tupac. The Tupac hologram creeps me out, honestly, since he rammed into Uncanny Valley for me. That and he looks more at home in a sci-fi movie than on stage singing.

The movements was also well done. It moved like a real person and not the CGI walk you can run into. Whether it was because they used a real person or just used really advance motion-caption remains to be seen. It also had facial expression that felt like a real person.

With the above said it is still flawed. Although it moves like a real person, it does not really move like Michael himself. It moves closer to an imposter or someone's idea of of Michael's dance techniques so it does not look quite right despite being technically sound. Michael has a lot of mannerisms and movements that are uniquely his, so you can see right away when something does not look right, even if you cannot directly explain it. In all honesty, that is why it really failed and why fans don't think much of the hologram while most casual people enjoyed it. Casuals take what they see and go with it while hardcore fans really knows how Michael moved so they can tell right away it is a fake.

In my personal opinion, they should not give up on the tech. They have a good foundation and they can improve on what they have and update with new technology. Personally, I see this as more as a dry run on what they need to fix or improve on.

However, I think what this experience have taught fans that no CGI model/hologram can replace a person. So, curve your expectations in the future.
 
L.T.D said:
That settles it for me then, I don't think it should of been done at all. I had no idea about any of this stuff before hand and had no idea was was possible and what wasn't possible so I expected way more than what we got and certainly didn't expect an impersonator. I do still believe it was over-hyped for what it was and that plays a big part in it for me.
Click to expand...

First, sorry for the double post.

I am not here to change anyone's mind either way. I only came here to give context since a lot of fans really do not seem to understand how holograms/CGI renders work. I am actually very surprise that so many fans believed that a perfect render of a person could be done in a computer. I mean, the point of reference was the Tupac CGI and how many people thought that CGI figure looked like him? It was more the novelty of them getting a CGI Topac on the stage that impressed people more than the actual model.

I do not know if they used an imposter or motion captive a person to mimic Michael's movements, but even if it was a complete CGI built the results would have been more or less the same since Michael is not here and he never did the dance for STTR. They had to build from the ground up. Even if they used the footage from Ghost, it would be limited since Michael only motion-caption a few minutes worth of dance moves.

Also, using an imposter for movement makes more since than trying to mimic human movement using a program. CGI people move unnaturally, so some type of motion-caption was used if it was completely built into a computer. I theorize that they used a train dancer who know Michael's style and captive their movements into a computer instead of covering an imposter on stage with a Michael skin. Although, I find it odd arguing about what would make Michael more 'real' since it is a fake either way.
 
Spyce said:
But does that mean that, just because he is gone, we should stop trying to innovate?
Click to expand...

Who are we or anyone to think we can innovate anything on Michael's behalf? People just need to stop trying to make things the same as when he was here. They just want to keep re-living those moments when Michael would come out with something new over and over again. It's just not possible. This Xscape release is as close as they will ever come so enjoy it now while you can I guess, but anybody that was actually around when Michael was in his prime knows it doesn't come close to that feeling. Tasteful, respectful projects that respect Michael as a person and artist. That is all we can hope for now. IMO the Billboard awards performance was not that. It was good promotion for the album to the general public, and it was a terrible representation of Michael the artist. That was the trade off. So the estate succeeded in their promotion, but they better be very careful with how they represent Michael's image to the world.
 
Spyce, I read the statement very clearly and I maintain my view. The problem the Estate is having is they believe they can simply duplicate what they refer to as the “MJ experience.” It has to be understood that that experience cannot be duplicated. We will not experience Thillermania/Michaelmania again. We will not experience Michael performing live again. I can go on but, you most likely remember the complaints/regrets some fans had after Michael passed and continue to this day. His Estate is of the opinion they can successfully recreate those experiences and for profit.

To experience Michael, one has to go backwards to past recording, short films, performances, etc. That is where the monies/profit is and it seemed as if the Estate learned that with the success of Xscape.

If anyone missed a live Michael Jackson performance, yes, you did indeed miss something special however; it has to be accepted that one will NOT experience that. This is life and as it is said, it can be unfair (laughs). You can see what you missed on YT and other such places where Michael’s performances have been preserved on film. Estate/Sony would like you to believe if you missed a Michael Jackson performance, it would be similar to what happened at Billboard and that is beyond ridiculous.

The Estate’s statement refers to Michael’s love of spectacle and grandeur and his desires which are unique to Michael, the person. Those are HIS attributes and not theirs to assume. Part of Michael’s brand was “entertainment on a large scale” but, the entertainer himself is gone. Michael did not in any way hand off his attributes that were unique to him to his executors. Some have compared this to Walt Disney and it is not the same. The man was not his brand and the exact opposite is the issue for Michael.

It is interesting that fans who do not appreciate what happened at Billboard are consistently and erroneously accused of believing Michael would be resurrected, inflated expectations, etc. It is actually the opposite and it is his Estate that supports those beliefs. Instead of trying to recreate moments for anyone who missed it which is a simple fact of life, I would prefer the Estate continue to respect and appreciate Michael’s art.

It should not be glossed over that that Xscape was number one in 50+ countries BEFORE the stunt at Billboard. Continue to respect and appreciate Michael’s art and the Estate will get the profit they desire; Xscape is proof.
 
By the way, it looks like someone at Rolling Stone may lurk here. They made a list of what issues they had with "whatever that was!" Just know the list I decided not to post is longer. laughs

Billboard Music Awards 2014's 15 Best and Worst Moments
From the inane Michael Jackson hologram to Lorde's goth scorcher

Worst Misuse of a Pop Icon: Putting Michael Jackson's Name On Whatever That Was

You wouldn't think something could get any more crass and shameless than "Michael Jackson hologram," but the Billboard Awards and the executors of his estate certainly found a way.

First off, we’re pretty sure that wasn’t even a hologram of Michael Jackson, but a hologram of a Michael Jackson impersonator — where are you gonna find one of those in Las Vegas? You guys know this is 2014 and we're not watching this on a cathode TV with rabbit ears — i.e., we can see his face.

Secondly, Michael Jackson analyzed everything — videos, choreography, etc. — to the last detail and would have never approved some slapped-together mess full of Cirque du Soleil nonsense and no discernable theme.

Thirdly, even Michael at 55 years old would have moved around more than that. The most physical musician in pop history was sitting in a chair.

Fourthly, in a room full of people who would gladly sing Michael's praises (Kelly Rowland, Pete Wentz, John Legend), why waste his introduction for Ludacris, Brad Paisley and Ke$ha to shill their new ABC show, "Which allows you guys, the fans, to vote for your favorite live performances."

Hands down the most appalling, lamest cash-in on MJ's legacy we've seen thus far.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/p...el-jacksons-name-on-whatever-that-was-0503365
 
CrazyVegasMJ said:
No offense to Damien cuz I do like reading his articles but ive never seen him as much of a reliable source.

He pretty much writes his articles as though he's posting in this forum and usually the only info he has is the info we already have here on the forum (or from official announcements, releases, etc).

So like I said I enjoy reading his articles but for me it's usually cuz it basically sums up most of the discussion going on in here anyways..
Click to expand...

ive vey thought this myself, I always consider his articles as "A summary to date".
 
Ramona122003 said:
No problem. Sorry I got to this so late. I honestly didn't expect people to give a care about what I had to say since people more or less made up their minds.

From a complete technical point of view, the CGI Michael was well done. He didn't fall into Uncanny Valley (like I feared when I heard about this hologram) and he didn't look like a CGI character like Tupac. The Tupac hologram creeps me out, honestly, since he rammed into Uncanny Valley for me. That and he looks more at home in a sci-fi movie than on stage singing.

The movements was also well done. It moved like a real person and not the CGI walk you can run into. Whether it was because they used a real person or just used really advance motion-caption remains to be seen. It also had facial expression that felt like a real person.

With the above said it is still flawed. Although it moves like a real person, it does not really move like Michael himself. It moves closer to an imposter or someone's idea of of Michael's dance techniques so it does not look quite right despite being technically sound. Michael has a lot of mannerisms and movements that are uniquely his, so you can see right away when something does not look right, even if you cannot directly explain it. In all honesty, that is why it really failed and why fans don't think much of the hologram while most casual people enjoyed it. Casuals take what they see and go with it while hardcore fans really knows how Michael moved so they can tell right away it is a fake.

In my personal opinion, they should not give up on the tech. They have a good foundation and they can improve on what they have and update with new technology. Personally, I see this as more as a dry run on what they need to fix or improve on.

However, I think what this experience have taught fans that no CGI model/hologram can replace a person. So, curve your expectations in the future.
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for the information. I know nothing about things like this but I wish people to have more understanding how difficult it was to create the VMJ. Thanks.
 
Tupac Shakur's hologram was based on his performance at the house of the blues. Here's proof;

it was obviously far easier for them, considering they had an actual performance.
 
Ramona122003 said:
No problem. Sorry I got to this so late. I honestly didn't expect people to give a care about what I had to say since people more or less made up their minds.

From a complete technical point of view, the CGI Michael was well done. He didn't fall into Uncanny Valley (like I feared when I heard about this hologram) and he didn't look like a CGI character like Tupac. The Tupac hologram creeps me out, honestly, since he rammed into Uncanny Valley for me. That and he looks more at home in a sci-fi movie than on stage singing.

The movements was also well done. It moved like a real person and not the CGI walk you can run into. Whether it was because they used a real person or just used really advance motion-caption remains to be seen. It also had facial expression that felt like a real person.

With the above said it is still flawed. Although it moves like a real person, it does not really move like Michael himself. It moves closer to an imposter or someone's idea of of Michael's dance techniques so it does not look quite right despite being technically sound. Michael has a lot of mannerisms and movements that are uniquely his, so you can see right away when something does not look right, even if you cannot directly explain it. In all honesty, that is why it really failed and why fans don't think much of the hologram while most casual people enjoyed it. Casuals take what they see and go with it while hardcore fans really knows how Michael moved so they can tell right away it is a fake.

In my personal opinion, they should not give up on the tech. They have a good foundation and they can improve on what they have and update with new technology. Personally, I see this as more as a dry run on what they need to fix or improve on.

However, I think what this experience have taught fans that no CGI model/hologram can replace a person. So, curve your expectations in the future.
Click to expand...

Ramona122003 said:
First, sorry for the double post.

I am not here to change anyone's mind either way. I only came here to give context since a lot of fans really do not seem to understand how holograms/CGI renders work. I am actually very surprise that so many fans believed that a perfect render of a person could be done in a computer. I mean, the point of reference was the Tupac CGI and how many people thought that CGI figure looked like him? It was more the novelty of them getting a CGI Topac on the stage that impressed people more than the actual model.

I do not know if they used an imposter or motion captive a person to mimic Michael's movements, but even if it was a complete CGI built the results would have been more or less the same since Michael is not here and he never did the dance for STTR. They had to build from the ground up. Even if they used the footage from Ghost, it would be limited since Michael only motion-caption a few minutes worth of dance moves.

Also, using an imposter for movement makes more since than trying to mimic human movement using a program. CGI people move unnaturally, so some type of motion-caption was used if it was completely built into a computer. I theorize that they used a train dancer who know Michael's style and captive their movements into a computer instead of covering an imposter on stage with a Michael skin. Although, I find it odd arguing about what would make Michael more 'real' since it is a fake either way.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your response, I was interested to try to understand what might be a realistic expectation for this technology.

The only part I have to disagree with is that there are fans rather than casual observers who appreciated this illusion for what it was. Maybe they and I looked at this from a different mindset to start of with. Idk

And I agree with you as viewing this as a dry run, really how much new technology is showcased and then never improved on as technology improves?
 
Wow. Just... wow. So much anger in this thread. Me and my sis are die-hard MJ fans (have been since we were teenagers), and both of us were very sad after seeing the performance. Mainly because it was so obvious they're trying to cash in on this album, and because the performance was done very poorly. On the other hand we're both happy to hear new music (even though I completely deleted the remix versions on my iTunes) but yeah... It's sad. But I am not angry about it.

What pissess me off the most is Timbaland and LA Reid being involved in the producing of the album. LA is known for his greed; a lot of artists have hinted this many times. P!nk, Janet Jackson to name a few. Timbaland... On the day MJ died he was on the phone with MTV pretending to be sad and crying, and then saying he was never a fan of Michael, nor did he listen to his music. I could just smell the FAKE on him ever since. The album is what I'm angry about (excluding the original demo versions), the performance not so much.
 
New music is great. This performance was helpful in promoting the new music.

Before they do another hologram performance tech should be improved! - Face needs to look like MJ. - That's important !!
 
LastTear said:
Thanks for your response, I was interested to try to understand what might be a realistic expectation for this technology.

The only part I have to disagree with is that there are fans rather than casual observers who appreciated this illusion for what it was. Maybe they and I looked at this from a different mindset to start of with. Idk

And I agree with you as viewing this as a dry run, really how much new technology is showcased and then never improved on as technology improves?
Click to expand...


I personally cannot say how much an improvement it was technically, since I do not know how they made the CGI Michael. It seems based on the same technology, but different than what they did with Tupac. What I know is that CGI Michael looked better than Tupac who looked like a rapping CGI image you would see on the PS3.

I guess I am being too general with fans. I personally saw more complains and anger from fans over the hologram than casuals. Most of the reaction from the more casual audience was positive, with some thinking that the hologram could have been better.

Given that the Tupac CGI was showcase in 2011 (correct me if I am wrong) they made many improvements in just two to three years. Technology advances fast, so I can see CGI Michael getting a lot of improvements. Just don't expect Michael to raise from the grave.
 
Hess said:
New music is great. This performance was helpful in promoting the new music.

Before they do another hologram performance tech should be improved! - Face needs to look like MJ. - That's important !!
Click to expand...

Sorry again for the double post.

I just wanted to highlight the bolded because I keep seeing how the face didn't look like Michael. Personally, I thought the face did look like him from the Dangerous Era. Maybe you think it didn't look like him because his mannerisms were off. And the fact his body had a dignified effect to it.

Oh well, to each there own.
 
Zakk said:
Tupac Shakur's hologram was based on his performance at the house of the blues. Here's proof;

it was obviously far easier for them, considering they had an actual performance.
Click to expand...

Based, not sourced from. They had an actor (like they did with virtual MJ) with CGI head. We proved that yesterday and we now have the guy who created it (Pac) admitting it.
 
Pentum said:
Yet another confirmation that an actor (impersonator) was involved in the whole dancing including the head, then they rendered the face.
Click to expand...

Just like they did with 2Pac. Exactly the same technology. They just had a performance from Pac so the actor could learn the "moves".
 
Guys, this is a video I am posting about a term called "Uncanny Valley", which am sure is the reason why FANS found the performance of billboard "unsettling", because they couldn't RELATE to the MJ they KNEW. Also the reason why a lot of people liked the billboard performance because they welcomed the new image of MJ or also because it was their first time seeing him that way. Before going on ahead and saying there was an impersonator and all such things and ruining the whole experience for them, I guess we need to understand what we are DEALING with that has resulted in divided opinions. And no one can explain this better than a person who had to deal with this problem and OVERCAME it magnificently. He is the director of Avatar. The people who know a little bit about digital entertainment understand this term and also have correctly identified it with MJ's performance. Am glad some of them commented about it on MJ's video. Please give this a look. Thanks :D

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top