Latest on MJJC

"Michael", a biopic about Michael Jackson, is officially happening.

zinniabooklover said:
Sure, re-shoots are normal but do they typically happen this late in the day? I would have thought not. With an original release date of April 2025, surely any re-shoots would have been done last year? So the bit I do, sort of, believe is a partial re-write of the script - which, of course, raises the question of why it's needed. I still think it's possible someone is just stirring up trouble but it's also confusing!
Click to expand...
I wouldn't worry much about reshoots. They've probably received negative feedback from test screenings - these things happen with many movies.

For instance the next Marvel movie, Cap4, will premiere this February. They did reshoots for the forth or fifth time 2 month ago.
 
Fuzball said:
I wouldn't worry much about reshoots.
Click to expand...
oh, I wasn't worried. Just trying to make it make sense, lol. :D

Fuzball said:
They've probably received negative feedback from test screenings [...]
Click to expand...
ooh, I didn't even consider test screenings. Now I'm wondering if people have to sign NDA's if they attend one? :unsure:

Fuzball said:
For instance the next Marvel movie, Cap4, will premiere this February. They did reshoots for the forth or fifth time 2 month ago.
Click to expand...
oh, that's interesting. I had no idea they would do re-shoots that late in the process. It's making a bit more sense now!
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
middle of the road biopic ending before even a hint of the first allegations is suicide. That Friedman article is even worse and makes it sound like An American Dream extended version , how boring.

I remember when he was among the worst MJ haters and would be constantly writing negative things about Michael….it’s weird seeing him almost pro MJ these days
Click to expand...
Is he really pro-mj, now that the cascios have turned on MJ? He is friends with them.

I think we should take anything he says now with a grain of salt.

that article he wrong is filled with nonsense that basically parodies what Belloni wrote and some of it is blantantly untrue

Branca certain DOES know about the settlement and the original story belloni put out puts Branca in the scene TALKING ABOUT THE SETTLEMENT

so which one is it? One minute branca was there with johnny cochran, the next minute he never knew about the settlement?

GTFO roger

Also roger claims the biopic comes out in november in that the article another lie.
 
Moviefan2k4 said:
I personally doubt all of this is true, since Evan Chandler killed himself the same year that Michael passed, and Jordan's mother June had been married to a man named Dave Schwartz even before they met Michael. As for Jordan himself, he said for many years that Michael never touched him, and he was so hurt by both his parents' roles in the scandal that he emancipated himself from them. During the 2005 trial, Jordan released a statement saying that he'd legally fight any attempt that forced him to testify against Michael, and lead defense attorney Tom Mesereau also said he had witnesses who knew Jordan, that were prepared to co-operate if Jordan wound up telling his story. After his father's death, Jordan pretty much disappeared, to the point that his mother and sister couldn't even reach him. Accusatory director Dan Reed also tried tracking him down to support Wade Robson & James Safechuck's allegations, with no such luck. So if anyone is behind this new lawsuit, I'd have to imagine it would be June or Dave Schwartz - they're the only ones with a motive.
Click to expand...
This is not true I have hard evidence that he was with his mother sister and his whole family just a few months ago as well as evidence of them with him when LN came out too.

They lied about not being able to reach him.

Jordan has not disappeared and he and his family members have not stopped befriending people who like MJ either. I've seen it within the past year.
 
Media rumors and reshoots on one of the most anticipated this year, what a shock 🙃

"11th hour changes" or re edits are not that uncommon for historic movies.
Of course that is easy to exploit for those in the business of inciting mud fights in teacups.
Right, Friedman is friendly with Cacsios, that can't be forgotten...
 
Hot_Street said:
Jordan Chandler's silence must come to an end. He should realize that he is not making the same mistake as his father, whom he despises, and further damaging Michael's image.
Click to expand...
He may not speak but his anonymity may soon come to an end even if the estate caves and cuts him out.
 
Last edited:
I find it hard to believe that Branca and Steinsapir would forget such an important detail (if that's really the reason for the reshoot talks), and at this point, IMO, I don't think it is. If anything, I wonder if the "two grown men who need to get jobs" names or likeness were mentioned in the biopic (which might be an legal issue), and if that has caused a change due to the 2026 trial—perhaps the estate doesn’t want to give them any important details. It’s worth remembering that Sneddon and his team altered their timeline for the 2005 trial based off particular info, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the reshoots are due to some critical information the estate wants to keep under wraps to protect their defense. However, it could also be something as simple as incorrect hairstyles or clothing for an era. Lol. All in all, we all know how the media rolls; expect more of this the closer we get to a release date. Stay strong, fam! ❤️
 
Last edited:
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Even the articles themselves are saying it's only a rumor. PEOPLE quotes a source that says these headlines are false and Inflammatory. Just don't believe it.

And yet, no matter how many times the guy made songs about the system, the press, about being manipulated, so many fans just come right along and think "Oh no! I have to believe this!"

We're doomed as a society, in the hands of man. They would destroy us all, as profit. And we wouldn't even seem to get it.
Click to expand...
Well, there are reshoots scheduled in March. If this is the case, it’s possible the movie will get delayed again.
 
Hollywood_Tonight said:
Well, there are reshoots scheduled in March. If this is the case, it’s possible the movie will get delayed again.
Click to expand...
The movie was pushed back possibly because reshoots were expected to be necessary, is more likely. That's how this works, unless this is Round 2 of Reshoots. They never gave a reason for reshoots right?
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
The movie was pushed back possibly because reshoots were expected to be necessary, is more likely. That's how this works, unless this is Round 2 of Reshoots. They never gave a reason for reshoots right?
Click to expand...
No they did not, but the film was already delayed as of Fall 2024 so they knew beforehand that reshoots would be needed and wouldn't be able to meet the original release. That makes the most logical sense
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
The movie was pushed back possibly because reshoots were expected to be necessary, is more likely. That's how this works, unless this is Round 2 of Reshoots. They never gave a reason for reshoots right?
Click to expand...
They did not provide a reason for the reshoots. However, since the film was initially scheduled for an April release, it seems these reshoots were likely a last-minute decision. While I’m not saying that article is true, I think it’s likely that something unexpected occurred, prompting them to change course.
 
So, I was just thinking about the Man In The Mirror movie that came out a number of years ago and how that film handled the Chandler situation. In this movie they actually changed the name of Jordan. This, as well as the fact that there has been no official statement from the estate/film companies regarding this mess leads me to believe that perhaps the reports are indeed true.
 
Last edited:
kelley said:
This is not true I have hard evidence that he was with his mother sister and his whole family just a few months ago as well as evidence of them with him when LN came out too.

They lied about not being able to reach him.

Jordan has not disappeared and he and his family members have not stopped befriending people who like MJ either. I've seen it within the past year.
Click to expand...
Wow, although I always presumed they continued a normal, wealthy and unbothered life
 
nextbigthing56 said:
So, I was just thinking about the Man In The Mirror movie that came out a number of years ago and how that film handled the Chandler situation. In this movie they actually changed the name of Jordan. This, as well as the fact that there has been no official statement from the estate/film companies regarding this mess leads me to believe that perhaps the reports are indeed true.
Click to expand...
The reports are literally untrue because Branca knew about the settlement, that can not be denied. Also with the amount of research Graham and king did they certainly knew as well.

Those articles of full of shit and pretending like the settlement details are some secret that were just revealed, when that info has been out there for decades.

I believe this belloni guy heard that they were reshooting some scenes and he made up the story about it being about the settlement and just claimed a "source" revealed his fake news.

But like most MJ haters he doesn't know what he's talking about and so he exposed himself with the incorrect information he put into his story.
 
Last edited:
nextbigthing56 said:
So, I was just thinking about the Man In The Mirror movie that came out a number of years ago and how that film handled the Chandler situation. In this movie they actually changed the name of Jordan. This, as well as the fact that there has been no official statement from the estate/film companies regarding this mess leads me to believe that perhaps the reports are indeed true.
Click to expand...
1. Man In The Mirror has nothing to do with the estate, its an unauthorized biopic and it's very common that due to legal issues people are renamed (I imagine they need to do this in the new biopic too) 2. Think what you may of Branca, but he is too smart and too experienced, he was also part of the legal team in 1993. No way he just forgot about the details of the settlement! Something new has come up; new legal issues, miscommunication with the filmmaker and estate (or even other family members), test screening issues or something completely different.

Edit: mistake Branca was not part of the legal team I 1993, my mistake.
 
Last edited:
kelley said:
The reports are literally untrue because Branca knew about the settlement, that can not be denied. Also with the amount of research Graham and king did they certainly knew as well.

Those articles of full of shit and pretending like the settlement details are some secret that were just revealed, when that info has been out there for decades.

I believe this belloni guy heard that they were reshooting some scenes and made he made up the story about it being about the settlement and just claimed a "source" revealed his fake news.

But like most MJ haters he doesn't know what he's talking about and so he exposed himself with the incorrect information he put into his story.
Click to expand...
Branca was not involved in the settlement. Cochran was. Who, like Chandler's father, has been dead for a while. Pretty much any major figure in the MJ circle involved in the settlement is dead or completely off the radar (Jordy). And since the settlement is sealed and no one was or is allowed to talk about it, current players (like Branca) were not familiar with the terms. I'm not familiar with Belloni (what makes him a MJ hater?), but I have heard from more than one source (I'm in the film industry), that this is completely true. The good news is that they finally have landed on a solution in the script, albeit more similar to the Broadway show. I would have preferred this to tackle the allegations head-on whether than skip them, b/c, much like the estate's silence on this, most people assume rumors to be true if no one actively refutes them. And we have never heard MJ's on a large scale like this opportunity provided. But, the movie will still be a hit, irregardless...which ultimately, is all the Estate and Lionsgate/Universal care about, sadly.
 
Honestly I'm not seeing why a major rewrite would even be required. There are probably plenty of work arounds to mention this stuff and I don't see why they would be using language or names etc that would make them vulnerable legally.

Of course maybe everyone involved in this production is just incredibly stupid, who knows.
 
Spidey said:
Branca was not involved in the settlement. Cochran was. Who, like Chandler's father, has been dead for a while. Pretty much any major figure in the MJ circle involved in the settlement is dead or completely off the radar (Jordy). And since the settlement is sealed and no one was or is allowed to talk about it, current players (like Branca) were not familiar with the terms. I'm not familiar with Belloni (what makes him a MJ hater?), but I have heard from more than one source (I'm in the film industry), that this is completely true. The good news is that they finally have landed on a solution in the script, albeit more similar to the Broadway show. I would have preferred this to tackle the allegations head-on whether than skip them, b/c, much like the estate's silence on this, most people assume rumors to be true if no one actively refutes them. And we have never heard MJ's on a large scale like this opportunity provided. But, the movie will still be a hit, irregardless...which ultimately, is all the Estate and Lionsgate/Universal care about, sadly.
Click to expand...
If that is true, then prepare for this movie to be called a whitewash and much worse. If the allegations are not mentioned, that’s a huge mistake. I’m worried and I gotta say, disappointed.
 
Renan_Antonio said:
If that is true, then prepare for this movie to be called a whitewash and much worse. If the allegations are not mentioned, that’s a huge mistake. I’m worried and I gotta say, disappointed.
Click to expand...
If it's just gonna be a generic middle of the road biopic movie then I will be much less interested in it to say the least.
 
If the Chandler case is out, chances are high the movie will be torn apart by the critics, thus resulting in a lot less revenue.
Would they really risk such a high budget by dropping the Chandler case? Surely they would be aware of the backlash? This movie is not like the Michael album... The Cascios were a really bad decision, but this movie is a lot bigger than that story. It's potential is a lot bigger and the budget is also a lot bigger.
 
The only thing I'm wondering, because I refuse to buy into this scare mongering, is what age rating the film will target.

There's a lot of things that are quite adult about what happened to MJ.

Media will rip this apart anyway - it goes against their narrative of the man for 40+ years
 
If the allegations are dropped, I also wonder what kind of “climax” and “tense” moment for the storyline are they going to choose. In Bohemian, it was about the group being separated and Freddie’s problems with drugs, etc, for then to get to the comeback for Live Aid.

What could they do here? I really can’t think of anything in 92 pre-allegations to cause a good story finale.
 
Spidey said:
Branca was not involved in the settlement. Cochran was. Who, like Chandler's father, has been dead for a while. Pretty much any major figure in the MJ circle involved in the settlement is dead or completely off the radar (Jordy). And since the settlement is sealed and no one was or is allowed to talk about it, current players (like Branca) were not familiar with the terms. I'm not familiar with Belloni (what makes him a MJ hater?), but I have heard from more than one source (I'm in the film industry), that this is completely true. The good news is that they finally have landed on a solution in the script, albeit more similar to the Broadway show. I would have preferred this to tackle the allegations head-on whether than skip them, b/c, much like the estate's silence on this, most people assume rumors to be true if no one actively refutes them. And we have never heard MJ's on a large scale like this opportunity provided. But, the movie will still be a hit, irregardless...which ultimately, is all the Estate and Lionsgate/Universal care about, sadly.
Click to expand...
So which version of Beloni's story do you believe?

His first version where he said the script had a scene of BRANCA and Cochran discussing the settlement?


Or his new current story that branca didn't know anything about the settlement and now they have to scrap the third act???

Both of these claims can't be true. They contradict each other.


Also the settlement is not sealed from the lawyers, otherwise Larry Feldman wouldnt have been able to leak it back in early 2000s.

Branca certainly has access to the settlement as well.

Why do you chose just believe this story even though it makes no sense? Because some hack "journalist" put it out there?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top