Latest on MJJC

How Would You Rate The MJ Illusion Performance?

How Would You Rate The MJ Illusion Performance?

  • Fantastic

    Votes: 24 16.4%

  • Good

    Votes: 69 47.3%

  • Poor

    Votes: 36 24.7%

  • Horrible

    Votes: 17 11.6%
  • Total voters
    146
Silouette said:
It's no problem Cav. It doesnt bother me like that. You can use w/e you like...obviously.
I'm in no way offended or anything.
Oh and just for the record, I've been a fan for....well probably longer than you've been in the world,
but I don't know that for sure. I'm just sayin I've been a fan a very, very, long time.
Click to expand...
If you were a fan at the time the pic in your sig was taken, then you'd be right. ;)

Just to be clear, I was not referring to anyone here with the term 'casual fans', I just mean the public at large. I know many people here thought the illusion was more realistic than I did. I genuinely don't understand that, but I'm not saying anyone is more or less of a fan because of their opinion.
 
i vote for _oo_. :D

i've watched the performance about 2 dosen times till now. i like the song more and more.

i think it should be viewed like this,
if you watch the remakes of Total recall or Robocop, don't compare them to the originals. see them as stand-alone movies and you'll enjoy them more and see that they aren't that bad.

STTR, imagine its Michael (try reaaallyy hard :rollin:). ignore the fact, that its someone else pretending to be Michael. the performance as whole, wasn't that bad.
 
I vote Good. At first i was not please with it but as i watch it over and over again i began to like it more and more STTR is one of my favor on Xscape cd. It was not perfect and the moves would not there but their tried and i give the Estate credit on that. It will be better next time.
 
lom kit said:
i vote for _oo_. :D

i've watched the performance about 2 dosen times till now. i like the song more and more.

i think it should be viewed like this,
if you watch the remakes of Total recall or Robocop, don't compare them to the originals. see them as stand-alone movies and you'll enjoy them more and see that they aren't that bad.

STTR, imagine its Michael (try reaaallyy hard :rollin:). ignore the fact, that its someone else pretending to be Michael. the performance as whole, wasn't that bad.
Click to expand...




I agree in the bold.
 
ivy said:
It won't and that's one thing I have hard time understanding. Some people are acting like Michael's legacy and/or reputation is so weak that whatever is done now will affect it. I believe the opposite is true - that Michael's legacy /reputation has been established in his lifetime by the stuff he himself released and nothing can change that. I'm also pretty sure if people have any negative feelings towards any posthumous release they would put the blame on the people who make the decisions and not MJ who has been dead for years and has nothing to do with releases.
Click to expand...

Yes! I don't understand this thinking at all either.
 
SoCav said:
It's strange to me that a lot of fans seem into this, because whenever a topic about impersonators was opened here, most people seemed very negative. But when it's officially licensed and bouncing off a projection screen, many suddenly seem into it. I'm not even talking about the way this thing came together. Whether you think it is all CGI or based on an impersonator (personally I think that they filmed Valentino and just - sloppily - used CGI on the face to make it look more like MJ), most of us seem to agree that it was not based on Michael's actual movements. So I genuinely do not get where the interest in this among fans stems from. Is it just the fact that it got people talking? Personally, I'd rather have people talking about Michael Jackson performances of Michael Jackson music, instead of a projection of (imo) a very average impersonator performing a remix of a Michael Jackson demo.
Click to expand...

I believe it depends on how you approach to it.

I don't like impersonators. People who try to look like and act like MJ is just creepy to me. Similarly I thought Tupac hologram was cool but weird. So I wasn't a fan of the idea to start with hence I wasn't hyped up or excited to see it.

When I watched it the first time , my reaction was "unimpressed". I had focused on the virtual character. Mouth sync problems was annoying, sometimes didn't look like or move like Michael, backup dancers seemed to dance better and those red shoes... so yeah I was not impressed.

The next day I approached it from a more calm and more general perspective. And as lom kit said, I just looked to the performance, ignoring the issues I had with "Virtual MJ" and performance was decent. It was leaps and bounds better than Tupac hologram which lacked movement and color and looked like a transparent ghost. MJ performance had depth, color, movement. Performance was decent. There's a reason why some media labelled it as the best performance of the night. The visuals, the song, the performance was decent.

Later on we discussed and learned some stuff which helped me to shape my evaluation criteria. For example I couldn't imagine MJ in red pants and red shoes but if bright colors was needed due to black background, I was okay with it. Similarly when we learned how much effort it required to animate eyes, neck, hair etc , some shortcomings - such as mouth sync problems - was understandable. Also if time, money or technological limitations required a body double to fill in some parts, rationally thinking I'm okay with that too. It doesn't mean I like that - I don't, it just means I can realize and accept limitations.

Therefore I would place myself as neutral (wasn't provided as a choice on the poll). I don't like it but I don't hate it either. It's not something I would watch over and over but it's not something that would annoy or anger me either. simply neutral. If you ask me to choose between good and poor, I would go with good simply due to the performance aspect and how it looked generally. I wouldn't say fantastic because it definitely needs a lot of work. Even if we say that a body double/impersonator was absolutely needed, still I would have liked to see a better dancer body double and a better face.

edited to add: oh and as I previously mentioned as I never expected to see "real MJ" and as I don't believe even a full animation could be "real MJ", I didn't feel cheated. Some people felt cheated so that might be causing a difference in regards to how people approach to this as well.
 
Last edited:
ivy said:
I believe it depends on how you approach to it.

I don't like impersonators. People who try to look like and act like MJ is just creepy to me. Similarly I thought Tupac hologram was cool but weird. So I wasn't a fan of the idea to start with hence I wasn't hyped up or excited to see it.

When I watched it the first time , my reaction was "unimpressed". I had focused on the virtual character. Mouth sync problems was annoying, sometimes didn't look like or move like Michael, backup dancers seemed to dance better and those red shoes... so yeah I was not impressed.

The next day I approached it from a more calm and more general perspective. And as lom kit said, I just looked to the performance, ignoring the issues I had with "Virtual MJ" and performance was decent. It was leaps and bounds better than Tupac hologram which lacked movement and color and looked like a transparent ghost. MJ performance had depth, color, movement. Performance was decent. There's a reason why some media labelled it as the best performance of the night. The visuals, the song, the performance was decent.

Later on we discussed and learned some stuff which helped me to shape my evaluation criteria. For example I couldn't imagine MJ in red pants and red shoes but if bright colors was needed due to black background, I was okay with it. Similarly when we learned how much effort it required to animate eyes, neck, hair etc , some shortcomings - such as mouth sync problems - was understandable. Also if time, money or technological limitations required a body double to fill in some parts, rationally thinking I'm okay with that too. It doesn't mean I like that - I don't, it just means I can realize and accept limitations.

Therefore I would place myself as neutral (wasn't provided as a choice on the poll). I don't like it but I don't hate it either. It's not something I would watch over and over but it's not something that would annoy or anger me either. simply neutral. If you ask me to choose between good and poor, I would go with good simply due to the performance aspect and how it looked generally. I wouldn't say fantastic because it definitely needs a lot of work. Even if we say that a body double/impersonator was absolutely needed, still I would have liked to see a better dancer body double and a better face.

edited to add: oh and as I previously mentioned as I never expected to see "real MJ" and as I don't believe even a full animation could be "real MJ", I didn't feel cheated. Some people felt cheated so that might be causing a difference in regards to how people approach to this as well.
Click to expand...


Ivy, you are forever the voice of reason. Thank you for your post
 
I like the part at the beginning of the song, before the lyrics even start, and it's just Michael's ad-lib going "WOO!", then the mouth moved at that moment in such an non-corresponding way to "Woo". It looked like one of those cartoon shows where a human mouth is added to a cartoon to make it "talk". Or how you make your hands talk by using your thumbs in like a fist, almost. It looked just like that, it was so lulzy.


But yeah, the more you watch it, the less miserable it gets. I still think though that if they can't do any better than a virtual impersonator in MJ Face, they just shouldn't bother.
 
Just wanted to thank everyone for the respectful dialogue in this thread. Although we may not all agree on the performance, it's really great to see that we can express our opinions in an open a honest manner without disrespecting the opinion of other members
 
ivy said:
... and those red shoes... so yeah I was not impressed.
Click to expand...
Yes, it seems like a few people, from what I've seen in posts, were not thrilled with the red color around the shoe area.

Although, if I am seeing correctly, the shoes themselves are of a shiny metallic color, like gold or silver. What is red are the spats he is wearing that cover over the top part of the shoe and red socks are seen above the spats and below where the hem of the pants fall.

The inclusion of the red socks to be seen above the spats might be because their preference was for no skin on his leg to be shown when he has that leg swung up over the arm of the throne and the pant leg raises up higher.

If they were committed to having spats, white with this outfit would not have looked as good; and then white socks showing above them to cover the leg would have given the illusion of a cut off, shorter leg, whereas keeping things red like the pants gives the illusion of an elongated leg. It's a smoother look.

But it doesn't have to be everyone's preference, of course. A costumer would consider these things, though, so I can understand the choices that were made.
 
You still can see the white skin on his leg during certain shots, like there's a couple instances where he's doing the BOW routine, and when he begins to walk over to the woman on the other side of the "stage", his pants leg rides up. But yeah, it's obvious it was done to give off the illusion that "VV"'s legs were longer than they actually are.
 
TarinJade, Ivy, allow me.

I have said previously that Michael’s legacy cannot be damaged by his Estate as his ownership of his legacy survives his passing. His Estate does control his image and yes, they can uplift it or damage it. This is a one-time stunt using Michael’s image in a performance and I truly hope it remains a one-time stunt. The hologram at MJ ONE was ridiculous enough for me and I personally never want to see a stunt like the one done at Billboard in Michael’s name with the use of his image ever again.

That being said, this was done as a promotion and any MJ fan not well-versed with Michael’s past performances and/or may have not experience Michael Jackson “live” may very well see that performance as it was promoted: Michael “live.” Michael never did a live performance of STTR and he never did a lackluster performance like the one on Billboard’s stage. Yet, we have seen in the previous thread posters innocently suggesting he would perform in that manner despite that spectacle being completely orchestrated by others who are NOT Michael Jackson. The spectacle is still attributed to him.

Look at the clips of the two young performers we have seen recently. It obvious one went to the source, i.e., watched and attempted to imitate a Michael Jackson “live” performance to the best of his ability as so many have done before him and will after him.

[video=youtube;jZTCtpZyulM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZTCtpZyulM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m11s[/video]

You can see that in the dancers in LNFSG’s official video as well and it is wonderful to see.

[video=youtube;oG08ukJPtR8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG08ukJPtR8[/video]

The second young performer is rather young and has innocently worn a replica of the outfit VV wore when Michael Jackson NEVER wore that outfit and is mimicking VV's performance that Michael Jackson NEVER did.

https://www.facebook.com/MJJJusticeProject/posts/227244430819429

If his Estate continues stunts like this using Michael’s image, yes, you will start to see others mimicking those stunts as if it was Michael Jackson when it is not.
 
The kid doing the BJ has like 3-4 million more views than the STTR Billboard, dang..
 
As an 'attention grabber' for the general public, the illusion was successful for promoting Xscape. I was not impressed with VMJ's performance or appearance, however.
 
Hmmm i think because of the patent issue on hologram maybe this was fake...and i am sure it was not even Michael!
They made a modern cover for Xscape and then the come up with an old fashion stage the colors are yak?..That was disappointing for me.
 
This fan (since 1969) gives the entire promo/performance a B+ (better than good, but not great). As technology changes, I realize we have to change with it or at the very least adapt somewhat. The CGI segment wasn't what I focused on, anyway. HEARING Mike's voice booming front and center during an awards show nearly 5 years after he died is what brought me to tears. Tears of JOY!

I'm all for promoting his music in the newest, hottest, most technically-advanced way possible, because he's not here to promote it HIMSELF. So long as it's done respectfully (and I think the Mike Illusion was), I'm cool with it.

Grab this if you wanna see Mike perform, because we'll never see him do it again otherwise.


VisionDVD_zpsef8969cf.jpg
 
Tygger;4013501 said:
TarinJade, Ivy, allow me.

I have said previously that Michael’s legacy cannot be damaged by his Estate as his ownership of his legacy survives his passing. His Estate does control his image and yes, they can uplift it or damage it. This is a one-time stunt using Michael’s image in a performance and I truly hope it remains a one-time stunt. The hologram at MJ ONE was ridiculous enough for me and I personally never want to see a stunt like the one done at Billboard in Michael’s name with the use of his image ever again.

That being said, this was done as a promotion and any MJ fan not well-versed with Michael’s past performances and/or may have not experience Michael Jackson “live” may very well see that performance as it was promoted: Michael “live.” Michael never did a live performance of STTR and he never did a lackluster performance like the one on Billboard’s stage. Yet, we have seen in the previous thread posters innocently suggesting he would perform in that manner despite that spectacle being completely orchestrated by others who are NOT Michael Jackson. The spectacle is still attributed to him.

Look at the clips of the two young performers we have seen recently. It obvious one went to the source, i.e., watched and attempted to imitate a Michael Jackson “live” performance to the best of his ability as so many have done before him and will after him.

[video=youtube;jZTCtpZyulM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZTCtpZyulM&feature=youtu.be&t=1m11s[/video]

You can see that in the dancers in LNFSG’s official video as well and it is wonderful to see.

[video=youtube;oG08ukJPtR8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG08ukJPtR8[/video]

The second young performer is rather young and has innocently worn a replica of the outfit VV wore when Michael Jackson NEVER wore that outfit and is mimicking VV's performance that Michael Jackson NEVER did.

https://www.facebook.com/MJJJusticeProject/posts/227244430819429

If his Estate continues stunts like this using Michael’s image, yes, you will start to see others mimicking those stunts as if it was Michael Jackson when it is not.
Click to expand...



Really good post. Great way of explaining one of the major points of this situation, in a nutshell. It's great that this is inspiring people and bringing in new fans. But when I ask myself this, "Do I really want younger generations, performing and attributing "Virtual Valentino" performances and stunts to Michael, the perfectionist, the guy who would rather give it his all every single night, and simply not perform at all if he felt like he'd be letting his fans down?" and I don't know, everytime I answer "no". I'm split on the fence with this, because like I said, I love the fact that this brought in new fans, I love that because of the Billboard Awards, a worldful of "youngin's" is discovering Michael for the first time and liking what they hear and see. But then again it's like, "okay, they're bringing in new fans, generating better sales, and making MJ an influential modern artist to the younger generation. But at what cost?" 20 years from now, will we still have Michael Jackson tribute artists? Or unknowing "Virtual Valentino" tribute artists? Will Billie Jean, and the sparkly jacket and glove continue to be the iconic mesh of song, dance and appearance, that makes crowds go crazy and stand on their feet whenever the opening bass of the song is played? Or will it be something new? Perhaps a "contemporized" Michael song, that in it's day was performed by a "Virtual Valentino" while he was donning a brand new Dangerous inspired Leotard covered in rhinestones? Will that become the new iconic outfit that everyone associates with Michael Jackson? It's a lot to consider, to say the least.
 
Pentum said:
The kid doing the BJ has like 3-4 million more views than the STTR Billboard, dang..
Click to expand...

They should employ this kid for one of the upcoming videos for the album. Not saying to use him for the whole video but they can incorporate him somewhere. It's great to see that magic lives on
 
Last edited:
Donalb, I agree.

I am not against the promotional aspect of Billboard because I want to see Xscape successful and that can only happen with promotion as per Estate/Sony. I am against any promotional tool that utilizes Michael's image in this manner.

I would have preferred a tribute not this nonsense of experiencing Michael "live" in a live setting because that opportunity has passed and cannot be re-created or replicated.

Why not have some of the world's best and/or up and coming dancers perform to STTR? Is superior dance not part of Michael's legacy? That is why the LNFSG video is such a wonderful tribute; it recognizes Michael's talent and shows while it is appreciated, it cannot duplicated. One of my favorite scenes are those with others tugging one of the the dancer's shirt to make it look like it is blowing in wind; a move Michael perfected. Another is the dancer attempting the Smooth Criminal lean and the excruciating look on his face is priceless.
 
WhoIsIt89 said:
Really good post. Great way of explaining one of the major points of this situation, in a nutshell. It's great that this is inspiring people and bringing in new fans. But when I ask myself this, "Do I really want younger generations, performing and attributing "Virtual Valentino" performances and stunts to Michael, the perfectionist, the guy who would rather give it his all every single night, and simply not perform at all if he felt like he'd be letting his fans down?" and I don't know, everytime I answer "no". I'm split on the fence with this, because like I said, I love the fact that this brought in new fans, I love that because of the Billboard Awards, a worldful of "youngin's" is discovering Michael for the first time and liking what they hear and see. But then again it's like, "okay, they're bringing in new fans, generating better sales, and making MJ an influential modern artist to the younger generation. But at what cost?" 20 years from now, will we still have Michael Jackson tribute artists? Or unknowing "Virtual Valentino" tribute artists? Will Billie Jean, and the sparkly jacket and glove continue to be the iconic mesh of song, dance and appearance, that makes crowds go crazy and stand on their feet whenever the opening bass of the song is played? Or will it be something new? Perhaps a "contemporized" Michael song, that in it's day was performed by a "Virtual Valentino" while he was donning a brand new Dangerous inspired Leotard covered in rhinestones? Will that become the new iconic outfit that everyone associates with Michael Jackson? It's a lot to consider, to say the least.
Click to expand...
Whoa dude you're way overthinking it lol
 
Tygger said:
I would have preferred a tribute
Click to expand...

haven't you got tired with all the tribute videos Estate keeps releasing though? Look at all the videos they made posthumously. It has been random people singing and dancing MJ songs. I'm not saying they are bad but just that we got way too many of those.

Why not have some of the world's best and/or up and coming dancers perform to STTR?
Click to expand...

Because that's what they did at iHeart awards.

Business side of this is probably being overlooked by many but Estate successfully secured a place for MJ on two competing awards shows. iHeart got the LNFSG first airing with Usher dance tribute and Billboard got STTR performance with Virtual MJ. Billboard probably would have passed on a second dance tribute performance. Billboard went for "Michael Jackson you have never seen before" and it paid of as they got the 13 year highest ratings.
 
I couldn't say it was "good" because I didn't really like it. There is room for improvement, and I'm still not convinced an impersonator wasn't involved at all in some way. It set out what it achieved to do for sure, plenty of people loved it and it was useful as a promotional tool. I still don't think they should try doing this again unless Michael's looks and movements are greatly improved upon, if it can be done. I don't know, maybe if I watched it again I would have a different opinion about it. I only watched it once. The idea of watching it again makes me feel uncomfortable though lol. Maybe after more time has passed.

One thing is for certain, Michael never can be replicated, not on computer or through an impersonator. That's one thing I got out of this illusion. We can't really have him back the way he was. It just makes me miss him all that much more.
 
CrazyVegasMJ;4013706 said:
Whoa dude you're way overthinking it lol
Click to expand...

No, it is a big picture or long term view.

Ivy, I do not remember any complaints here with the Iheart Radio performance when it happened. My only complaint with that respectful tribute was the Anka shout-out. I have no idea what concept was sold to Billboard. Anything with Michael Jackson’s name attached to it most likely would have been cosigned by Billboard - as Iheart Radio did before them - as they would appreciate the ratings Michael Jackson’s name still brings.

It happened, it is over, and I hope it never happens again. The Estate should learn their lesson that they are not Michael Jackson and they surely cannot recreate him. Michael’s over-the-top showmanship and attention to detail was not passed along to the executors. The proof is in that “live” performance that most here agree needed work.

Michael also knew how to pace himself. His Estate is left to decide how to top this latest trick in true Michael Jackson fashion; a position they placed themselves in for whatever reason. We already experienced Michael “live” as the Estate sees it and to keep doing the same trick - as you stated with the tributes - may be considered tiring.
 
Last edited:
CrazyVegasMJ said:
Whoa dude you're way overthinking it lol
Click to expand...

Uhm, not at all. As was said, it's thinking about the bigger picture. Do I think that will happen? Not necessarily. Is there a possibility should "Virtual Valentino" go on to do tours and other various Michael Jackson attributed events it's a distinct possibility. Plus, how can I be overthinking it when it's already happened?
 
Last edited:
Fantastic for me because it cured my emotional dilemma I went thru a couple of weeks ago, the exception of Michael's face is just the one flaw, but the performance is just a mind blow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top