Latest on MJJC

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

Isn't it funny how the media wants to report that the biopic is in trouble and Some like Sneider and belloni were even implying it would be shelved. And then we have roger friedman, variety and Deadline claiming we're getting TWO block buster movies.

They are at war with each other.
 
Last edited:
LiveItOffTheWall said:
Well, according to Deadline, the movie will most likely be delayed and split into 2 parts. Oh, and here's another take on the allegations - the estate didn't want anything regarding the allegations in the movie and when they found out they were included, they were the ones who demanded the rewrite/reshoots.
Click to expand...
Would they have had this much material to add though? If they do this, chances are high the alegations will be dealt with properly, no?

Another +++ from having two movies - Michaels album sales will likely rocket twice instead of once.

And one downer - any delay might prevent Katherine from seeing any.
 
Lionsgate will make the announcement the week of the first original release date in a couple weeks. They will announce that they want to get this movie right, honor Michael how he deserves to be, and have all agreed to split it into two parts. The first of which will be coming out in April 2026, the second part in October 2026.

After this you won't be hearing anything about the biopic until October 2025 when promotion will begin.

It sucks it has to go this way , but they can't release a 4 hour movie in theatres. And no matter how much they try to shave it down, it doesn't work. With two movies, they figure it will gross more than one meaning more profits for everyone involved.

2025 will not be the year of Michael, it will be 2026.
 
Last edited:
travis3000 said:
Lionsgate annoncera la date de sortie du premier film original dans quelques semaines. Ils annonceront leur volonté de réaliser ce film avec brio, de rendre hommage à Michael comme il le mérite et d'avoir convenu de le diviser en deux parties. La première sortira en avril 2026, la seconde en octobre 2026.

Après cela, vous n'entendrez plus rien sur le biopic jusqu'en octobre 2025, date à laquelle la promotion commencera.

C'est dommage que ça se passe comme ça, mais ils ne peuvent pas sortir un film de quatre heures au cinéma. Et ils ont beau essayer de le réduire, ça ne marche pas. Avec deux films, ils pensent que ça rapportera plus qu'un, et donc plus de profits pour tout le monde.

2025 ne sera pas l’année de Michael, ce sera 2026.
Click to expand...
nobody knows
 
SmoothGangsta said:
Now we're supposed to believe that The Estate and Branca just didn't bother looking at the film at all until recently lol.
Click to expand...
🎯

John Branca is an exec producer on this project. I don't know how much involvement that entails but the idea that he (or MJE lawyers) didn't see the script before it was signed off or didn't get daily updates as filming was happening ... I find that hard to believe.

Mister_Jay_Tee said:
I reckon they should replace Jaafar Jackson with Jason Malachi in his place and see who notices a difference. Then charge 100 dollars to view the film.
Click to expand...
With the level of 'crazy' going on right now, why not? It makes about as much sense as all the other weird rumours flying around.

Anyway, I liked your joke and it made me laugh! :D
 
Last edited:
With this news from Deadline, I think it's pretty safe to say that it will definitely be a two-part movie now. And with that we can almost guarantee that they will cover the allegations and probably the trial as well (4 hours of movie and nothing about that? Sounds kinda crazy.)

But I do wonder if they will shoot additional stuff considering it's a two-part film now. And sounds like part-two will be very sad indeed.
 
kreen said:
No [Charles Thomson] is not [a fraud]. He's a huge fan but he's not a MJ hagiographer who refuses to ever criticize their idol. He has good takes that he bases on the fact he refuses to put on rose-coloured glasses when looking at MJ's career. And Invincible did suck.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU. Not to go on too much of a tangent, but he's easily my favorite on the MJCast due to his based takes (Though I don't remember a "fake nose" comment mentioned by @dam2040).

In addition, the guy nearly single-handedly toppled the 1993 allegations for the general public through his significant involvement with the "Square One" documentary, providing nearly the entire commentary for a very complex case into something easily digestible, and continues to research / break down all legal cases involving the Estate. There's a reason Taj is working with him for his documentary series.
 
kreen said:
No he's not. He's a huge fan but he's not a MJ hagiographer who refuses to ever criticize their idol. He has good takes that he bases on the fact he refuses to put on rose-coloured glasses when looking at MJ's career. And Invincible did suck.
Click to expand...
Lol get real. He worked for the sun as their MJ advisor and was a hater on fan forums in the early 2000s. Invincible absolutely does not suck and saying he wore a fake nose isn’t “just not wearing rose tinted glasses”
 
CodaBroda said:
THANK YOU. Not to go on too much of a tangent, but he's easily my favorite on the MJCast due to his based takes (Though I don't remember a "fake nose" comment mentioned by @dam2040).

In addition, the guy nearly single-handedly toppled the 1993 allegations for the general public through his significant involvement with the "Square One" documentary, providing nearly the entire commentary for a very complex case into something easily digestible, and continues to research / break down all legal cases involving the Estate. There's a reason Taj is working with him for his documentary series.
Click to expand...
He knows the allegations. Thats never in denial. Anything past that? Not worth listening to
 
That would be wild if the delay/reshoots have nothing to do with changing the plot to minimize the '93 allegations, and purely changing it to suit a two-film structure (more $$$); that's my copium anyway
 
dam2040 said:
I have no other explanation for the constant fear mongering & wallowing like it’s the first time an MJ project has attracted negative press
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure people here in a Michael Jackson forum checking the forum daily for any news don't have cancellation anywhere on their wishlist. It's just reality that these executives with extreme money invested will have a fear of losing it, and won't hesitate to kill or hinder creative efforts in order to maximize their gain. It consistently happens in the film industry, and Michael's story is the last to deserve that.

If there's any truth to the rumors of the creatives needing to alter their vision (and they do appear to have at least some truth), it's concerning for the resulting quality of the product, but not the performance. It's gonna kill at the box office, even if it's just a high-production montage of his hits.
 
kelley said:
Isn't it funny how the media wants to report that the biopic is in trouble and Some like Sneider and belloni were even implying it would be shelved. And then we have roger friedman, variety and Deadline claiming we're getting TWO block buster movies.

They are at war with each other.
Click to expand...
Well, one thing I think is very sure:
If a studio determines it’s movie is in trouble quality wise, it most certainly won’t split it in two.
I think they see that they have lot’s of good/great material at their hands, which would either result in a crammed or overlong movie.
So splitting it in 2 parts is the way to go & is actually a GOOD sign.

What’s about that rewrite/extortion/can‘t mention chandler thing, we don’t know.
And it probably won’t come to light till long after the release.
 
kelley said:
Isn't it funny how the media wants to report that the biopic is in trouble and Some like Sneider and belloni were even implying it would be shelved. And then we have roger friedman, variety and Deadline claiming we're getting TWO block buster movies.

They are at war with each other.
Click to expand...
Sneider first mentioned the film could be released in two parts, as far back as January 29 in his newsletter:
 
The fact that we didn't see leaked photos of Jaafar in MJ role post 1990s make me wonder that isn't only about the allegations, but also the visual effects applied on him to fit MJ's look during that period
 
So the press wants me to believe that the estate and their gaggle of lawyers, at the same time they were at war with HBO over Leaving Neverland, somehow let the film get into the final months of editing before realizing that the entire third act was against the terms of the Chandler settlement? Neither they nor MJ’s own son said anything? And now to compensate they’re splitting the movie into two parts?

It just makes no sense. I don’t know what’s happening but I would be utterly baffled if it was that.

(Also, as a side bar—even if the film did disparage Jordan Chandler, who cares? He would have to come out of the woodwork to sue, which he absolutely wouldn’t.)
 
Since people can't stop speculating on unfounded claims here's a statement from Lionsgate yesterday
"Ever since we debuted some early Michael footage at CinemaCon last year, it's been crystal clear how much global interest and enthusiasm there is,"Fogelson said from the Las Vegas stage. "Much has happened since (likely reshoots), and while we aren't quite ready to share more, we're going to have some very big! and exciting! things to say in the coming weeks (this month). So be patient, and stay tuned."
From the Earnings call this February
Ruben Fleischer just showed us an exciting new director's cut of the third installment of Now You See Me (November 2025) extending a franchise whose first two films grossed nearly $700 million at the worldwide box office. And we're well on our way to completing production on our highly anticipated event movie, Michael.
Last month
A source close to production denies this (report by Puck), and tells Variety that characterization is Reed's "personal opinion", and that, "the script never portrayed the Chandlers in the way Mr. Reed has opined".
Last month again
A source close to the production tells PEOPLE Jan. 24, "The Michael Jackson biopic is not in total chaos. The inflammatory headlines about the moving halting are simply not true. The film is moving forward, and reshoots are happening in March."
 
Eddlicious said:
If they're ending the first movie on a positive note then it'll end with him at the 1984 Grammy Awards. If they're going with the dark ending route then I'm guessing it'll end with the news of the first allegations breaking.
Click to expand...
I don't think it would be a good idea to end the first movie with the allegations. People who watch the first part won't necessarily go to watch the second part and they would just leave with the impression that he was guilty. Whether they decide to bring up the allegations in the first part or in the second part, they need to fully deal with the allegations in the same movie, you don't want to raise up questions without providing answers.

They could end the first movie with Bad and show how the media was beginning to torment him, hinting that things are about to get rough in the second part. Ending it with Bad would allow them to start the second movie on a high note with Dangerous and the Superbowl before the allegations hit.

Remember that sad letter that Michael wrote in his hotel room during the Bad tour? That could be a good moment to end the first part, the last sentence hits pretty hard:

“Like the old Indian proverb says, “Do not judge a man until you’ve walked two moons in his moccasins.” Most people don’t know me. That is why they write such things... I cry very, very often because it hurts and I worry about the children, all my children all over the world. I live for them... Animals strike not from malice, but because they want to live. It is the same with those who criticize. They desire our blood, not our pain. But still I must achieve. I must seek truth in all things. I must endure for the power I was sent forth, for the world, for the children. But have mercy, for I’ve been bleeding a long time now.”
 
etoile 37 said:
I don't think it would be a good idea to end the first movie with the allegations. People who watch the first part won't necessarily go to watch the second part and they would just leave with the impression that he was guilty. Whether they decide to bring up the allegations in the first part or in the second part, they need to fully deal with the allegations in the same movie, you don't want to raise up questions without providing answers.

They could end the first movie with Bad and show how the media was beginning to torment him, hinting that things are about to get rough in the second part. Ending it with Bad would allow them to start the second movie on a high note with Dangerous and the Superbowl before the allegations hit.

Remember that sad letter that Michael wrote in his hotel room during the Bad tour? That could be a good moment to end the first part, the last sentence hits pretty hard:

“Like the old Indian proverb says, “Do not judge a man until you’ve walked two moons in his moccasins.” Most people don’t know me. That is why they write such things... I cry very, very often because it hurts and I worry about the children, all my children all over the world. I live for them... Animals strike not from malice, but because they want to live. It is the same with those who criticize. They desire our blood, not our pain. But still I must achieve. I must seek truth in all things. I must endure for the power I was sent forth, for the world, for the children. But have mercy, for I’ve been bleeding a long time now.”
Click to expand...
Right now they don't need footage, they don't need a trailer. Literally just a poster with the release date (October 2025) would be enough
 
If they will split it why not end with the Superbowl? Then the second part can resume with the dangerous tour and the circus around the allegations etc.
 
dam2040 said:
Lol get real. He worked for the sun as their MJ advisor and was a hater on fan forums in the early 2000s. Invincible absolutely does not suck and saying he wore a fake nose isn’t “just not wearing rose tinted glasses”
Click to expand...
Genuinely interested to hear the source for these; he seems like just a level-headed fan. He invests serious time into the MJCast (interviews, specials) as well as press interviews during LN in defense of Michael, documentaries, etc. No non-fan would dedicate their time for someone they hate.
 
lying
Matthew Belloni

@MattBelloni
Uh oh: At CinemaCon, Lionsgate declined to give an update or say anything about the delayed Michael Jackson movie, which is still scheduled for October release.



and the truth what Fogelson actually said about the movie at CinemaCon

1743631380728.png
 
IhateTheMedia said:
Since people can't stop speculating on unfounded claims here's a statement from Lionsgate yesterday
"Ever since we debuted some early Michael footage at CinemaCon last year, it's been crystal clear how much global interest and enthusiasm there is,"Fogelson said from the Las Vegas stage. "Much has happened since (likely reshoots), and while we aren't quite ready to share more, we're going to have some very big! and exciting! things to say in the coming weeks (this month). So be patient, and stay tuned."
Click to expand...
Please don't be PR speak, please don't be PR speak... that sounds like prep for a 2-film announcement 🤞
 
& to think... it would've been out in like 2 in a half weeks from today🙄. I've never heard of a 2 film movie in theaters... will this be a 1st or something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top