I believe some are confusing the Estate's role regarding Michael. The Estate has no ownership over Michael's legacy as a whole. Michael is the sole owner of his legacy and his ownership of it survived his passing. The Estate can add to his professional legacy with the success/failures of the posthumous products but, not subtract.
The Estate simply has ownership over his image. How the Estate chooses to utilize Michael’s image can damage the reputation Michael spent his life building. How the Estate can damage Michael’s reputation is increasing problematic. They jeopardized his vocal reputation with the Cascio tracks and now they put his reputation for live performances in jeopardy with the spectacle at Billboard. I believe using Michael's image in a performance he never personally did is despicable because there are those that believe they saw a "live" MJ performance because of the manner the Estate promoted the spectacle. (No one should confuse that statement with actually seeing Michael live as everyone understands he passed.)
The danger is evident when a person states, as Last Tear did (please understand Last Tear I am using your comment as an example only), that Michael would be criticized for the performance if he was alive as he was sitting on a throne and the dancing was decidedly out of character. It is an innocent thought however, anyone believing even innocently that Michael would do ANYTHING associated with that horrific performance - the stage, the clothing (not even white socks) the dance moves, (the awful dance break) the pretentious throne, the female at his feet (when did Michael ever have a female in that position in a performance), the song, the lip-syncing, the lighting, I can continue… - is such a disservice to Michael's performance reputation by his Estate that I am left speechless.
As for the USA Today article and YT clip: it is the Estate’s side where CNN showed Akil’s. Nothing more, nothing less. I personally am unconcern with whose technology was used and which party is victorious in the pending lawsuit (provided it is not settled). I admit that while that may be an issue, it is not the issue that holds my concern.
Once the computer framework for a digital Michael was created, Pulse visual effects supervisor Stephen Rosenbaum used videos as well as feedback from Jackson collaborators, including Rich + Tone Talauega, who choreographed the 1996-97 HIStory Tour, and Jamie King, the writer/director behind Jackson's Cirque du Soleil show One.
My frustration is a separate issue which Birchey, WhoIsIt98, and others expressed clearly despite some confusing it and/or unnecessarily pairing it with the separate issue of the Estate/Akil lawsuit. The Estate insists they did not use an impersonator and have continued with this ridiculous notion that Michael’s past movements were used for whatever that was on Billboard’s stage. They will continue with the idea that Michael had
some input in whatever that was beyond his STTR vocals.
Anyone who has even the slight clue to Michael’s past movements and reputation as a performer has every right to be suspicious that an impersonator was used simply because they saw the spectacle with their own eyes. A viewer did not have to see the spectacle live to know that was not Michael’s movements. Those who are not aware of Michael’s performance reputation may believe Michael could give a mediocre performance which is disheartening enough. It is even more disheartening when his fans insist it is possible despite being aware of his performance reputation only because his Estate says so.
