The Official 'Michael' Bio-Pic Thread

(EXCLUSIVE) Jafaar Jackson on Which Michael Jackson Song He REALLY WANTS in Biopic Sequel!
104,226 views Apr 21, 2026 #EntertainmentTonight
Jafaar Jackson chats with ET's Kevn Frazier at the premiere of 'Michael,' in theaters on April 24.
The nephew of Michael Jackson opens up about how his family has reacted to his portrayl of the late 'Thriller'
singer and which song he really wants to do in the sequel.

👑 🫶🧚‍♀️
I find it a rather bizarre coincidence that both the song Smooth Criminal and the criminal investigation could appear in Part 2. First Michael hunts down a criminal, then the media and the public prosecutor's office turn him into a criminal himself. That has potential as a exciting story.
 
Last edited:
So someone can décide if he/she can appear in a movie/ tv/ Netflix show, while he/she is a public figure ? All those movies during MJ s lifetime, did they ask MJ his agrément?
No. But those other movies were not official. They didn't care if they stepped on anyone's toes. This movie, backed by the estate, does. For sure they could put anyone in the movie they want, but either they will piss people off, who they personally know and who were family/friends of Michael or they will get sued as they can't use certain people because the estate is the legal extension of Michael.
 
I peeked in the Leaving Neverland subreddit
Living rent-free in your head by the sound of it. I always find it better not to care what other people are doing.

Like whenever you watch a movie that uses songs from other artists, they didn't need to have the estate of each artist as producers of the movie to use the songs, they just asked and the estate agreed.
This. I really wish people would avoid posting stuff if they don't know anything about it.

If the Estate backs down, they cannot use any of Michael's music in the movie!!
Not true. Some artists don't even have an "estate" and yet their music is used wherever.

Have I missed something. Why is the movie only screening until 30th April in UK cinemas? I tried to book next week with some friends but my local cinema (Odeon) says the last day to book in the 30th April???
Basically they don't know how long they're going to carry a movie for. It's hard to predict how long the public will watch something for. Lots of films are only out for 2 weeks, and then plummet.

This is a powerful statement - Swifties will be mad AF
I don't know about that. Generally fans of other artists don't take it as a personal insult just because somebody outsells their favourite artist.

What was the question? If somebody wants to make a film about Paris, they can, whether she agrees or not.

Michael is still breaking records years after his passing
It's not really a personal achievement for Michael though, is it? In all likelihood, he would have been against this movie.

Similarly, the film largely ignores his romantic relationships more broadly. There is no meaningful reference to his connections with women such as Brooke Shields or Tatum O’Neal. Whether or not people interpret those relationships in different ways, they are part of the documented narrative of his adult life. Excluding them contributes to a portrayal that feels incomplete.
This was one of my problems from the outset. People are shaped by their relationships. For whatever reason, this film was too afraid to depict any, do will always feel incomplete.

Btw, you have a very good way with words.

This thread is such a downer. Feels like I'm on reddit. I don't care if some of you didn't like it.
That's the point. Nobody should care about what other people like, and nobody should be judging them for it.

You don't care that others don't like it. And that's fine.

Others don't care that you do like it. And that's fine.

We just need to live and let live.

With the way critics were trashing, it could have been a huge flop and laughing stock. It seems like some of you would have preferred that.
It's just that it's important. It simply does not matter to most people whether a movie/game/song/painting is successful or not. None of us on this board have any stake in this movie, unless perhaps you own shares in Sony or whatever.

This is the closest some like myself will ever get to seeing MJ in concert.
Except that it's literally not.

Watch Wembley. Watch Bucharest. Watch one of the hundreds of other concerts on YouTube.

so I don’t feel like I haven’t supported a film
You shouldn't feel guilted into doing something just to generate money for Lionsgate. Its not your responsibility.

Would anyone of you like a part 2 without accusations? I am not sure if it makes sense, as it influenced Michael a lot after 1993.
It wouldn't be worth making a movie that didn't tackle it. It IS the defining moment in both his personal and professional life - and at this point it's unexplained how it affected Michael himself. I'd love to understand that.

Is there no way to include that topic into the film without breaking a contract? Maybe using a different name i stead of chandler?
We've been through this. The contract only applies to the estate. Nobody else. You easily get around it by including in the small print "the estate didn't make this". That's literally all you have to do.

Lol miss prisscila wont be happy bout that
I'm sure she doesn't give a shit.

I also don’t think the movie works well if you’re not into his music. A biopic like Bohemian Rhapsody is enjoyable even if you’re not a Freddie Mercury fan, but this one feels more like a two-hour MJ commercial without much real depth.
That's a good take.
 
Well, if they're born and raised in the US there is really nothing italian about them, only the surname. But I have to admit that I don't get along with many Italians for a reason: they think they can take advantage of you. Unfortunately it has happened to Michael many many times as he was very naive, with "italians" and other nationalities.
The father at least was born in italy and the marie nicole made sure to say that they are a "nice itailian" family in their recent media tour selling their lies.
 
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THEM?!

WV9PMNLJVg8OjQhUBPiNNg_H-aQ7g9KzWkiyzi-oRo2f49ozix_zc-mv1jUd41pNNfEqa51YXk84wxLWgt_evkxe.jpg


I’m so pissed off. Why do they keep bashing this movie?? It’s obviously not bad. What a shame... If I had the chance, I’d ban these "critics" for good

Once you realise they are just ‘noise’, and they have NO CONTROL at all - when it comes to the Greatness and success of MJ, you will become more relaxed about it all.

And then, maybe, you’ll be able to fully appreciate what amazing achievements MJ is yet again making - DESPITE them and WITHOUT their help. 👍

Also, those of us that already know they have no power over MJ, don’t need links to ‘the noise’ (with love) 😉
 
Im going to see this movie today. My partner doesnt know my absolute LOVE for MJ, they'll get a shock today when I start crying through it telling them how much I miss him... miss someone I've never met 😆😭.

It's bittersweet for me seeing all the MJ love on social media. He's been shit on since LN, but I'm glad people are now okay with admitting they're MJ fans and feel like its okay to be now. I hope it stays like this.
 
Not true. Some artists don't even have an "estate" and yet their music is used wherever.
Do you know that for a fact? How could you know the movie producers haven't acquired the artist's approval to use their music.
I think you cannot possibly be right on this one. If you were, the previous movies about Michael would have used his music, but they didn't, non did. Why wouldn't they use it as it would have attracted greater audience for their movie. Non did, hence you most likely are wrong on this one.
 
Living rent-free in your head by the sound of it. I always find it better not to care what other people are doing.


This. I really wish people would avoid posting stuff if they don't know anything about it.


Not true. Some artists don't even have an "estate" and yet their music is used wherever.


Basically they don't know how long they're going to carry a movie for. It's hard to predict how long the public will watch something for. Lots of films are only out for 2 weeks, and then plummet.


I don't know about that. Generally fans of other artists don't take it as a personal insult just because somebody outsells their favourite artist.


What was the question? If somebody wants to make a film about Paris, they can, whether she agrees or not.


It's not really a personal achievement for Michael though, is it? In all likelihood, he would have been against this movie.


This was one of my problems from the outset. People are shaped by their relationships. For whatever reason, this film was too afraid to depict any, do will always feel incomplete.

Btw, you have a very good way with words.


That's the point. Nobody should care about what other people like, and nobody should be judging them for it.

You don't care that others don't like it. And that's fine.

Others don't care that you do like it. And that's fine.

We just need to live and let live.


It's just that it's important. It simply does not matter to most people whether a movie/game/song/painting is successful or not. None of us on this board have any stake in this movie, unless perhaps you own shares in Sony or whatever.


Except that it's literally not.

Watch Wembley. Watch Bucharest. Watch one of the hundreds of other concerts on YouTube.


You shouldn't feel guilted into doing something just to generate money for Lionsgate. Its not your responsibility.


It wouldn't be worth making a movie that didn't tackle it. It IS the defining moment in both his personal and professional life - and at this point it's unexplained how it affected Michael himself. I'd love to understand that.


We've been through this. The contract only applies to the estate. Nobody else. You easily get around it by including in the small print "the estate didn't make this". That's literally all you have to do.


I'm sure she doesn't give a shit.


That's a good take.

Surprise, surprise.

You seem happy with the comments that support your negativity.

And, if I may say so, very ‘butt hurt’ for someone who was/is never going to watch the film.

Can I ask. What is a grown man doing, posting week after week on a topic he has no interest or joy in? It’s very odd to me.

I mean. I’m a grown (read ‘old’) man, but;

Being ill in hospital/bed for months, I have plenty of time on my hands 😁

I wanted to watch the film and enjoy feeling/hearing MJ in my first ever IMAX experience.

But mostly, this thread is giving me joy and happiness in my long waking hours.

Over to you?
 
so I don’t feel like I haven’t supported a film
You shouldn't feel guilted into doing something just to generate money for Lionsgate. It’s not your responsibility. (Commented by Richard)


Also, RICHARD, please don’t assume to know my motives for anything in my life. Certainly DO NOT try and tell me what to do or not do.

In fact, if you could avoid quoting me altogether I would very much appreciate it.

If you do that, I will return in kind.

It’s very clear two people could hardly be further apart in their attitudes and outlooks on life.

In fact, I would bet, when it comes to actually liking MJ, we are at opposite ends of the scale. I say this as I can never remember a positive post about him, from you, without you sandwiching it with negativity. 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Luiz Fernando
@Luiz_Fernando_J
·
33m


KING OF POP #MichaelJackson’s music biopic #MICHAEL crushing it in its Europe 2nd frame, even beating #TheDevilWearsPrada2 in markets such as #France & even #Spain!In #Spain’s #BoxOffice for instance, #JaafarJackson grossed SPECTACULAR $1.9M on 2nd FRI Holiday, going up INSANE +55.6% from first FRI, and reaching an $11M cume in 10 days!It came on top of #TheDevilWearsPrada2, despite the film starring #AnneHathaway, #EmilyBlunt & #MerylStreep grossing powerful $1.5M on FRI Holiday, up strong +68.5% from its $890k THU Opening Day, with a $2.4M 2-day cume in #Spain.

Luiz Fernando
@Luiz_Fernando_J
·
58m
In the UK, KING OF POP #MichaelJackson’s music biopic #MICHAEL starring #JaafarJackson shows what strong hold means, grossing a STRONG $2.1M on 2nd FRI, just a -39.7% drop at the British #BoxOffice, despite facing #Prada2’s debut & good weather.It hits a $23.9M 10-day cume in the UK. Eyeing a $6M-$8M 2nd 3-day weekend in the U.., what would be close to #BohemianRhapsody’s $7.5M 2nd weekend - and BoRhap wasn’t facing any new competition.

Luiz Fernando
@Luiz_Fernando_J
·
6h
Even with #TheDevilWearsPrada2’s historic performance, KING OF POP #MichaelJackson’s music biopic #MICHAEL EXPLODES in #Italy’s #BoxOffice, as the biopic grossed SPECTACULAR $1.6M on 2nd FRI Holiday, up +6.7% from first FRI, reaching $12.7M 9-day cume with 1.3M admissions.MICHAEL has it all to score the strongest hold for a blockbuster out of Christmas corridor in Italy.
 
Do you know that for a fact? How could you know the movie producers haven't acquired the artist's approval to use their music.
I think you cannot possibly be right on this one. If you were, the previous movies about Michael would have used his music, but they didn't, non did. Why wouldn't they use it as it would have attracted greater audience for their movie. Non did, hence you most likely are wrong on this one.
The Angry Birds movie used Bad for trailers, and maybe even for the movie I guess, they just had to ask the MJ Estate. It's the same with any artist/band whenever you watch a movie or commercial that uses their music. The producers etc... always have to ask whoever owns the masters of the record and then they settle on a price.
 
I have a thought about Janet and Paris.

Many of us wonder why they aren't supporting the movie. Based on what Paris said in her stories, we know she was actually involved in the project at first. At the start, she saw the first draft of the script and suggested some edits. From her many interviews, we know that Paris likes to share things about Michael that don't quite fit the "public" image of him or how some fans see him. For example, she’s mentioned that he would swear sometimes or smoke, and so on. Most likely, she suggested edits to make him feel more "real", but they were rejected. You might disagree with me, but I think she has a point: these biopics are all made from the same mold, sticking to the parts of a personality that boost the artist's popularity. Not everyone wants to see the person as they truly were. Paris probably didn't like that, or the fact that her input was ignored. Also, you can tell from her video that she might be a bit salty with Prince - her comment like, "Oh, the big important producer didn't accept my edits", was clearly a dig at him

So, she simply decided to opt out. It doesn't necessarily mean the movie is bad or that something is wrong with it, it’s more that it just doesn't align with how she would have made it. That said, when she was recently asked about the whole situation with Colman in an interview, Paris explained that they’ve since texted, cleared everything up, and that there was a lot of misunderstanding surrounding her comments. She said she wishes Jaafar success and hopes the film about her father will "spread love and light". Also, let’s not forget that Paris is currently in the middle of a legal battle with the Estate, she’s suing Branca over finances and payouts. Because of this, she might not even be allowed to openly support or comment on their projects right now. That could be why she skipped the premiere.

Now, let’s talk about Janet. Does anyone here actually remember Janet showing up to the This Is It premiere? Do you remember her being there, supporting the movie we all saw in theaters? You don’t? Neither do I, because she wasn't there. And you know what else I don't remember? Everyone being shocked by it or questioning if the movie was any good. And remember when Janet showed up for Michael's 30th Anniversary celebration, where her whole family and tons of other artists were present? Yeah, she wasn't there for that either. And remember when Michael showed up for her MTV Icon special, where they had a whole concert with stars honoring her achievements? Yeah, he didn’t show up either, though he did record a video message. My point is, Janet has never really made appearances in her brother’s major projects, and he didn’t pop up at her events either. Janet is her own person as an artist - she has her own path. A long time ago, she separeted herself from the family creatively because she wanted to be known as Janet Jackson, not just Michael’s sister or the Jacksons' sister. And let’s be real - she totally pulled it off. Janet is Janet, and Michael is Michael. They both deeply respected each other's careers and never overstepped. Aside from Scream and maybe that Grammy ceremony where she presented him with an award, you won't find many examples of them collaborating. Simply put: this is a movie about her brother, not her. My question isn't even about why she’s not in the film, but why everyone suddenly decided she’s obligated to be there. And why is it such a tragedy if she’s not? According to La Toya, she was invited to participate but turned it down, and as La Toya said, "her decision should be respected". Plus, Janet is literally on tour in Japan right now - maybe she just couldn't make it to the premiere physically!

And one more thing: there’s such a thing as family thing - basically, stuff that happens behind closed doors. These often have nothing to do with the actual projects or their quality. For instance, we know Janet is very close to Randy, who in turn isn't close with Jermaine (at least according to rumors). So, there could be a conflict of interest or some purely family drama affecting how certain members publicly support the film. There’s also talk that Janet is somehow supporting Paris in her lawsuit against the Estate. I’m not sure if that’s true, but anything is possible. At the very least, we shouldn't judge things on the surface or jump on the hate train that the media is so desperately fueling right now for any reason they can find. Every single outlet, from Variety to Rolling Stone, is pumping out several articles a day, using everything from family rifts to the cursed Leaving Neverland and Dan Reed’s quotes about the biopic. On top of that, there are so many fakes. Just recently, a big account posted a fake screenshot of Paris’s story where she was supposedly bashing Antoine Fuqua and the movie.
aulg3c2g-oVmDv2rQQezx53xjQfXQkFUnYphXUSL0P1Vt5-Sax4y5D6nEw8DRNcviUmtIdJ1x-1Drqb59VKdHSrn.jpg

Paris saw it and commented, "I don’t even talk like that". Basically, it’s just hype on top of hype and non-stop hysteria. I think we need to be more cautious and not fall for these provocations. Many of them flip everything upside down just for the sake of negativity, which always gets more attention - especially when it comes to Michael
 
The goal of these movies was not to make Citizen Kane again, but to sell the brand Michael Jackson
That's the fatal flaw.

I want to watch a good movie. One that tries to be good. It's all about quality.

I don't care for them trying so hard to "sell a brand". Yawn. I want to watch a movie that's made for me, not one that's made to satisfy MJ's publicists.

People won't pay a tickets to watch that sad story of a superstar falling an all-time low. People wants to see feel-good movies.
Um, no.

Amy?

Last King of Scotland?

They could offer him to be a producer to gain some profit from Part 2.
Can we all just stop talking about topics we don't understand?!

In any case, why would anybody want the ****** Chandlers to benefit from a MJ movie?!?

Why do they keep bashing this movie??
Because everybody has different tastes?

Seriously, I don't understand why people are so obsessed with other people's opinions. You like one thing, they like something else. That's all there is to it.

Do you know that for a fact? How could you know the movie producers haven't acquired the artist's approval to use their music.
Songs literally get used in movies all the time. Probably the vast majority of movies. It's not uncommon for a movie to have 10 or 20 songs, all from different singers. A movie most definitely does not have to be made or endorsed by an "estate" to use music.

Yes. I know this for an absolute fact.

You seem happy with the comments that support your negativity.

And, if I may say so, very ‘butt hurt’ for someone who was/is never going to watch the film.
I've said before, I have no stake in this film or any of the people involved. I'm neutral. I don't care if it's a success and I don't care if it's a failure. Just like I don't care if KFC makes more money than McDonald's this week. It's a silly thing to care about.

Can I ask. What is a grown man doing, posting week after week on a topic he has no interest or joy in? It’s very odd to me.
I dunno. Mostly it's an interesting topic of conversation. Doesn't mean you have to love the thing you're talking about. ie people talk about war and taxes, and getting sick, but they don't like any of those things.

Over to you?
Ok. What was the question?

Also, RICHARD, please don’t assume to know my motives for anything in my life. Certainly DO NOT try and tell me what to do or not do.
I didn't tell you what to do. I said it’s not your responsibility to "support" this film and to make it a success. Branca is hoping people feel guilty for not going.

I said that because it's true.

But by all means do what you want to do.

In fact, if you could avoid quoting me altogether I would very much appreciate it.
Well, you asked me a question...

It’s very clear two people could hardly be further apart in their attitudes and outlooks on life.
What can I say, people are different. And that's fine isn't it?

Isn't it?

In fact, I would bet, when it comes to actually liking MJ, we are at opposite ends of the scale. I say this as I can never remember a positive post about him, from you, without you sandwiching it with negativity
I'm not about to get into one of those silly competitions where we all try to pretend we're a bigger fan that somebody else. The ignore button is right there, feel free to use it.

Screen X format looks interesting. Posted on X by @mjsunbaenim. You get more image on the sides but I suspect its only for some scenes.
That does look very interesting. I wonder how it's achieved from a technical point of view. Perhaps just distorted the last few columns of pixels, the way they sometimes stretch/blur phone footage on TV.

Do we know how far back it goes?

My question isn't even about why she’s not in the film, but why everyone suddenly decided she’s obligated to be there. And why is it such a tragedy if she’s not?
Exactly. Well said. I think people are reading way too much into this stuff. It's just a movie. It's not even Michael's movie. Maybe Janet just didn't care about it. Doesn't mean she hates her brother, lol. Maybe she just couldn't be bothered stepping out and getting hounded for the night. Silly to judge her for not jumping up to attention at the drop of a hat.

Edit - oh, she's in Japan? Yeah, that'll do it.
 
Last edited:
Addressing the allegations is damned if you do, damned if you don’t. If they address them, reviewers and critics will complain that they didn’t paint him as a disgusting pedophile. People aren’t interested in an objective movie; they want one that validates the picture of MJ they believe to be true.

They’ll never go near the Chandler case. Best case scenario is we get the Bad and Dangerous eras.
I think it's funny too, if you use the Arvizo transcripts to the T, the film would get tanked for making a mockery of the "victims" when in reality it's just how pathetic their case was
 
Back
Top