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

@R1chard Don't you think it would be great if the Biopic was successful considering the possibility that could lead to more/new fans, especially younger generations?

I think that's an important point...huge success means Michael, his legacy, his music will live on. Maybe his music or things he said will have a positive influence on some people. Or help them in a way...I think that's also an aspect to consider.

I agree that I don't care about how much money the people who produced the film will get. But regarding Michael's legacy it would definitely make me happy when many people watch the Biopic and help to carry his music and his messages into the future.

Not all of them, of course...but still...I feel like Michael is a great role model when it comes to how people should treat each other, the environment, etc. - something that's important in today's world. He definitely influenced me in some points and I am certainly not the only one.
 
So there you have it. Are you saying there's a MJ biopic you don't think is good, and that you don't care if it's successful?

This is gonna be interesting.


Let me see if I can help with the predicate logic. What you (and others) seem to be saying is:

1. If you like a work of art (eg a song) you must like the artist as a person
2. If you like an artist, you must like all 3rd party artworks based on them
3. If you like any work of art you must care about whether it is successful/popular

I can confirm that all of the above statements are false.


I honestly had to look this up to find out what you meant. I guess Leaving Neverland?

Again, for all of the reasons given before, I don't know or care about any of this stuff. I don't watch TV news or read garbage like Twitter or any of the gossip magazines. One celebrity talking about another celebrity is NOT news. It's a cancer that's killing the brains of millions of people. I don't need to know who is accusing who of whatever. I really cannot stress this enough: None of that matters.

MJ went through a trial and came out not guilty. Great. That's the end of the story. Now he's dead and therefore that fact can never change. I won't be devoting any of my precious time worrying about "public perception" or "cultural narratives".
I'm going to respond to this than for the sake of keeping the thread on topic - I'm moving on..

That isn’t what I said, and those premises don’t reflect my argument. I never claimed that liking an artist means liking every work about them, nor that anyone is obligated to care about popularity or success. You’re arguing against positions nobody presented. The point was much simpler: cultural projects influence how historical figures are understood by the broader public, and many fans find that meaningful while others don’t. Both positions are fine.

You personally don’t care about public perception or cultural narratives, you’ve made that clear. Others do. It just means people engage with art and legacy differently.. Many also view Michael Jackson’s legacy as larger than entertainment alone. For many people of color, his success represented barriers being broken and opportunities expanding that previously limited access and visibility. Because of that, discussions about his legacy aren’t only about one individual, but about the broader cultural progress his career helped make possible.


To get back on topic: I hope you enjoy the film for the reasons you may watch it, and the same goes for others who hope large success for the film.

The movie was most definitely made with love.. One thing that was very important was capturing the essence of who Michael Jackson was. While "die hard" fans will have to deal with creative liberty decisions that have inaccuracies - I believe outside of that.. And the obvious waiting for what is to come after part 1, people will be happy.
 
Richard is quickly becoming one of my favorite users here.

6pJNYBYSMFod2.webp
 
I’m getting behind this movie because it’s an official MJ product , just like an album release or broadway musical.
You mean like the Michael album from 2010 with fake tracks? Or the Wembley DVD that looks worse than a 3rd generation VHS? Or the offensive remixes and overcompressed sound of Thriller 25?

Being "official" has never been any guarantee of quality. Unofficial live recordings are actually better because they haven't been overdubbed like some of the official ones were.

Basically, Michael Jackson is dead, so the word "official" doesn't actually mean anything. In this case, all it means is that Branca gets paid a cut.

And specifically for this movie, being official guarantees it's worse, because it means they can't talk about the allegations.

If you can’t differentiate between this and the upcoming film then we’re all doomed.
My question was "Are you saying there's a MJ biopic you don't think is good, and that you don't care if it's successful?"

Did you say yes?

Would people be happy if we got a soundtrack that featured the songs in the film plus Hot Street and Dreams Away?
They would seem out of place. Plus I won't buy a whole album with another copy of Beat It and MITM, just to get 2 new tracks.

At this point they need to save the good stuff for Xscape volume 2, a full album of new stuff.

Don't you think it would be great if the Biopic was successful considering the possibility that could lead to more/new fans, especially younger generations?
I think they are gonna ask about the elephant in the room. "There's the trial at?" They're going to think it's a fluff piece and that Michael had something to hide. "Why is it swept under the carpet?" etc.

Let's be honest with each other. The allegations are the only reason Michael isn't still the biggest star in the world. It destroyed his musical career in a way that it never recovered. Dealing with that issue head on would do more for record sales than anything else ever could. Leaving it out will impact both the success of the movie and the success of the music.

You can talk about his humanitarian efforts all you like, but his success is over unless you can convince younger people that the allegations are just allegations. If you can do that, then the music and ideologies speak for themselves.

I never claimed that liking an artist means liking every work about them, nor that anyone is obligated to care about popularity or success.
I agree we're getting way off topic. That's kinda my point - wouldn't it be a good idea to separate the movie from predictions about the success of the movie? Like, move all that into a separate thread? It would be good for the conversation if it wasn't cluttered up with unfounded talk of "billions" all the time.

Can we at least agree it's silly to be obsessed with trying to find things to claim as new records? With views of a trailer, of all things? Not everything has to be a competition where MJ "beats" Elvis and Queen.

And we certainly don't need "you have to care about this otherwise you must be a hater and should go elsewhere". Yawn.

The point was much simpler: cultural projects influence how historical figures are understood by the broader public, and many fans find that meaningful while others don’t. Both positions are fine.
Yeah, I get that. I think this is just gonna be seen as a musical light entertainment piece, rather than a serious historical document. It's too incomplete and one-sided for that.

To get back on topic: I hope you enjoy the film for the reasons you may watch it, and the same goes for others who hope large success for the film.

While "die hard" fans will have to deal with creative liberty decisions that have inaccuracies - I believe outside of that.. And the obvious waiting for what is to come after part 1, people will be happy.
Yeah, I could probably live with minor inaccuracies and some artistic liberties. That's to be expected. I'm sure the concert scenes will be well-made. But it gets a major black mark from me for not being brave enough to tackle both sides of the story. And I definitely will not tolerate it merely being used as a vehicle to sell some demo recording of an unknown song from the 80s as though it's the new Billie Jean.

I'm open to changing my mind, but at this point, I'm 80-90% sure I will not watch the film.
 
I think they are gonna ask about the elephant in the room. "There's the trial at?" They're going to think it's a fluff piece and that Michael had something to hide. "Why is it swept under the carpet?" etc.

Let's be honest with each other. The allegations are the only reason Michael isn't still the biggest star in the world. It destroyed his musical career in a way that it never recovered. Dealing with that issue head on would do more for record sales than anything else ever could. Leaving it out will impact both the success of the movie and the success of the music.

You can talk about his humanitarian efforts all you like, but his success is over unless you can convince younger people that the allegations are just allegations. If you can do that, then the music and ideologies speak for themselves.
Not sure about that...I think nowadays, especially younger people do ask more questions and don't just believe what the media or other people say. So, I guess...many viewers = more people who want to get to know the real Michael and find out the truth. But maybe just my pov, who knows 🤷.
 
Love this, fantastic recreation. You'd swear that's a photo from the Victory Tour. Wish they didn't use those striped pants though 😅

6421a07d0d15ad3ea389d40f54c2eba7.jpg
How many times did Michael wear the striped pants VS the black pants? I've always wondered if those were really his pants or if he just decided to borrow Randy's pants. 🤣 I mean they look super tight on Randy and a bit looser on Michael, so it could be...

Victory-tour29.jpg
 
Evan sued everyone who made that interview because of the NDA.
Evan broke the NDA a few months in when he spoke to harvey Levin on radio show at the time and admitted he drugged jordan. the recording exists and we know where it is but the powers that be will not hand it over

the Chandlers also broke the NDA when they gave info to Gutierrez to publish in his book and when they helped evans brother wrote his book . they never abided by the NDA. it sucks that nobody in michaels corner seemed to care about that and didnt tell him to take legal action against them
 
How many times did Michael wear the striped pants VS the black pants? I've always wondered if those were really his pants or if he just decided to borrow Randy's pants. 🤣 I mean they look super tight on Randy and a bit looser on Michael, so it could be...

Victory-tour29.jpg
As far as I know, it was only Kansas on the first night.
 
I wonder what Human Nature live audio they will use for this!
I'm gonna assume it will be from whatever show we got HD footage of in the Thriller 25 doc. I hope - hope, its not Yokohama or Wembley. The brothers backing vocals were very much front and centre most times during the Victory Tour. For better or worse.
 
I'm gonna assume it will be from whatever show we got HD footage of in the Thriller 25 doc. I hope - hope, its not Yokohama or Wembley. The brothers backing vocals were very much front and centre most times during the Victory Tour. For better or worse.
Meh victory tour ...i kimda wish they would go pass that
 
I'm gonna assume it will be from whatever show we got HD footage of in the Thriller 25 doc. I hope - hope, its not Yokohama or Wembley. The brothers backing vocals were very much front and centre most times during the Victory Tour. For better or worse.

Yeah you’re prob right!
 
Evan broke the NDA a few months in when he spoke to harvey Levin on radio show at the time and admitted he drugged jordan. the recording exists and we know where it is but the powers that be will not hand it over

the Chandlers also broke the NDA when they gave info to Gutierrez to publish in his book and when they helped evans brother wrote his book . they never abided by the NDA. it sucks that nobody in michaels corner seemed to care about that and didnt tell him to take legal action against them
They need someone in their team on this forum! Seriously!
 
Back
Top