Latest on MJJC

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

I’ve been listening to the man in the mirror instrumental and it’s so beautiful. I really hope we get to hear a slowed down version of it during certain emotional moments in the movie. I know it was rumoured to be used throughout the film.
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
I’ve been listening to the man in the mirror instrumental and it’s so beautiful. I really hope we get to hear a slowed down version of it during certain emotional moments in the movie. I know it was rumoured to be used throughout the film.
Click to expand...
I agree. Heal the world instrumental is amazing as well. I have a new love for this song after listening to the instrumental.
 
AmitLal92 said:
I find it odd that the movie is still not listed on Universal's upcoming movies page. They even have their 2027 films listed but no mention of Michael.
Click to expand...
We now know through Brancas interview they were contemplating pulling the plug on international distribution so this is probably why no mention
 
dam2040 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1984563739027194131

Branca interview with the Financial Times

Film sounds like a disaster the more I hear about it. Ending at the Bad Tour is not what I wanted
Click to expand...
It really isn’t the best outcome. They have to do the sequel and announce it’s coming when the film releases. Maybe at the credits just a little tease like ‘Michael - part 1’ or something. A sequel with the latter half of his life is a must that’s for sure.
 
michaeljackson.nl said:
It really isn’t the best outcome. They have to do the sequel and announce it’s coming when the film releases. Maybe at the credits just a little tease like ‘Michael - part 1’ or something. A sequel with the latter half of his life is a must that’s for sure.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if they don't announce a second part this all seems totally pointless to me.
 
Last edited:
just like the rumours we keep hearing , it sounds like it’s all bloody true!!!!!

Not a chance in hell there will be a second movie covering all the bad shit, this will end Bad tour!!!

They could have even ended it at the 93 superbowl. Sounds like shit aka an American Dream part 2.0.

Are we gonna get a love story between Joe and Katherine the first 30 mins too 🙈

As I’ve said, the Dangeorus tour photo is man in the mirror is now redundant.
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
just like the rumours we keep hearing , it sounds like it’s all bloody true!!!!!

Not a chance in hell there will be a second movie covering all the bad shit, this will end Bad tour!!!

They could have even ended it at the 93 superbowl. Sounds like shit aka an American Dream part 2.0.

Are we gonna get a love story between Joe and Katherine the first 30 mins too 🙈

As I’ve said, the Dangeorus tour photo is man in the mirror is now redundant.
Click to expand...
Thats definitely what its about to be
 
he's actually so stupid. i hope that the journalist just manipulated his words and the essence of this interview to cast a bad light on him and the movie. truly hope that's the case.
 
knigofpop said:
"We're not out to declare Michael's innocence" is scary though... That's exactly what this film should be doing. That's all I wanted really.
Click to expand...
It's a blockbuster movie, big budget and big box office expected, and it's backed by the estate. It was never going to be preachy about the accusations. It's designed to earn a lot of money so it will be a celebration of Michael the Thriller guy. That's what I wanted because too many people don't realize who Michael was outside the scandals. But yeah, I do think they need to address his innocence, but not in a preachy way. Because of the stakes I wouldn't be surprised if they managed to cut out any mention to the allegations.
 
We were initially getting a cradle to the grave (or at least 90s) story but that’s now been wiped.

It’s gonna be a vanilla greatest hits mash up of Michael during his early J5 days and the abuse by Joe and will showcase Michael at his peak during the 80’s whilst dealing with the fame/ surgeries and vitiligo.

That’s it , it will have Zero impact on his reputation as an alleged child molester. That’s what hurts me the most about this film.

Don’t get me wrong , that story told is epic and will look amazing on the big screen, but it’s not what we need.

The world already knows that Michael was a genius and the biggest and best entertainer.
 
I think they are going to tell the story of why MJ was different but how that made him so talented etc - and then leave it there so the viewer connects the dots to what happened in later years

Sounds like a terrible strategy, having to pay out of their pocket for the reshoots, its so amateur - Universal nearly pulling the plug as well. Just pathetic, its not like the film was a surprise or forced on them
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
just like the rumours we keep hearing , it sounds like it’s all bloody true!!!!!

Not a chance in hell there will be a second movie covering all the bad shit, this will end Bad tour!!!

They could have even ended it at the 93 superbowl. Sounds like shit aka an American Dream part 2.0.

Are we gonna get a love story between Joe and Katherine the first 30 mins too 🙈

As I’ve said, the Dangeorus tour photo is man in the mirror is now redundant.
Click to expand...
LOL I Said it when I heard the rumor and everyone was bashing on me Everything in Michaels Life was real (except the Child molestation)
 
That "metoo" and "woke" reference in that manner in the article means that I have lost all remaining interest in this film, estate and John Branca can go **** himself. I do not associate with shit talk like this. This is not defending MJ - doing quite the opposite.

**** this.
 
dam2040 said:
I think they are going to tell the story of why MJ was different but how that made him so talented etc - and then leave it there so the viewer connects the dots to what happened in later years

Sounds like a terrible strategy, having to pay out of their pocket for the reshoots, its so amateur - Universal nearly pulling the plug as well. Just pathetic, its not like the film was a surprise or forced on them
Click to expand...
This whole story sounds so fishy. I know not to 100% trust tabloid rumors, but leaving out the allegations because the estate didn't know the settlement didn't allow that? BS. But I do actually believe this happened because the estate has pulled shit like this before (the Cascio tracks, hello?He had a shady deal with the Cascios, no matter what their tracks had to be on the album). Then Universal threatens to pull the plug on distribution (which we know it did happen). Of course they were going to be hesitant on the reshoots, they're dumping a lot of money on this movie. I was going with the flow on the news about this movie, because I do know a lot of things get twisted, but something was smelling foul and Branca just ousted himself with this interview. This is all so amateurish and I'm sorry, it was expected from the estate. At some point no one will want to work with the two John's.
 
As usual the way Branca's interview was reported in here did not match what was actually said in the article. He actually did a fairly good job defending Michael for once. He even referred to the accusers as "extortionists" and "creeps"

knigofpop said:
I don't see anything in that article where Branca confirms the film will end with the Bad tour? Can somebody point me to the part where he says that?
Click to expand...
Because he didn't. It is no where in either of those 2 screenshots.

knigofpop said:
"We're not out to declare Michael's innocence" is scary though... That's exactly what this film should be doing. That's all I wanted really.
Click to expand...
It sounds scary until you keep reading.

He affirmed Michael's innocence and said the movie will tell Michael's story, and not the "creeps" who spread lies about him. To me that means that instead of them going on the defense and trying to convince people Michael was innocent, his innocence will be written into the script, so that we the audience will SEE he is innocent, not just told.

At least that's how I interpreted what he said. And if that's the case, I am very happy. Because the best way to debunk the allegations is to simply show what actually happened.

Branca also reaffirmed that the estate has no intentions to settle anything, which is Good news.

dam2040 said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1984563739027194131

Branca interview with the Financial Times

Film sounds like a disaster the more I hear about it. Ending at the Bad Tour is not what I wanted
Click to expand...


I need to point out some suspect things about this Financial Times article.

For one thing, if they talked to Branca directly why are they still referring to "sources"?

"According to people familiar with the matter, Universal considered exiting the project as an international distributor, so the estate is swallowing the entire cost of the reshoots......"

So in other words. BRANCA did not confirm this, nor did any actually named Universal representative. If he had, they would have said "according to Branca," But they did not. Nobody finds that odd? Why didn't they ask Branca directly about these reports?

Either they DID ask him, and didn't like his answer so they didn't print it and chose to continues spreading the negative rumors

OR

They didn't ask him, which is odd.

But we know one thing. Brance did NOT confirm any of these claims about universal almost exiting or the estate footing the bill for the reshoots, because if he did, they would have certainly referenced him as the source.

But instead it's once again attributed to an unnamed "source"

Please do not legitimize everything in that article just because Branca is quoted in it. That fact that they can't reference Branca as a source for these claims despite speaking to him directly should clue you in that the claim is NOT confirmed.
 
kelley said:
As usual the way Branca's interview was reported in here did not match what was actually said in the article. He actually did a fairly good job defending Michael for once. He even referred to the accusers as "extortionists" and "creeps"


Because he didn't. It is no where in either of those 2 screenshots.


It sounds scary until you keep reading.

He affirmed Michael's innocence and said the movie will tell Michael's story, and not the "creeps" who spread lies about him. To me that means that instead of them going on the defense and trying to convince people Michael was innocent, his innocence will be written into the script, so that we the audience will SEE he is innocent, not just told.

At least that's how I interpreted what he said. And if that's the case, I am very happy. Because the best way to debunk the allegations is to simply show what actually happened.

Branca also reaffirmed that the estate has no intentions to settle anything, which is Good news.




I need to point out some suspect things about this Financial Times article.

For one thing, if they talked to Branca directly why are they still referring to "sources"?

"According to people familiar with the matter, Universal considered exiting the project as an international distributor, so the estate is swallowing the entire cost of the reshoots......"

So in other words. BRANCA did not confirm this, nor did any actually named Universal representative. If he had, they would have said "according to Branca," But they did not. Nobody finds that odd? Why didn't they ask Branca directly about these reports?

Either they DID ask him, and didn't like his answer so they didn't print it and chose to continues spreading the negative rumors

OR

They didn't ask him, which is odd.

But we know one thing. Brance did NOT confirm any of these claims about universal almost exiting or the estate footing the bill for the reshoots, because if he did, they would have certainly referenced him as the source.

But instead it's once again attributed to an unnamed "source"

Please do not legitimize everything in that article just because Branca is quoted in it. That fact that they can't reference Branca as a source for these claims despite speaking to him directly should clue you in that the claim is NOT confirmed.
Click to expand...
Genuine question - Do you actually listen to MJ's music or do you just like responding to articles/posts about the controversial aspects of his life?
 
SmoothGangsta said:
I wish Branca would just stop talking
Click to expand...
He's been on such a downward spiral for me that he has now hit rock bottom for me. His arrogance is astounding - all those little bits and snips of quotes over the years just all point in the same direction, and the quotes in that article are just dogshit IMO.
 
innuendo141 said:
Genuine question - Do you actually listen to MJ's music or do you just like responding to articles/posts about the controversial aspects of his life?
Click to expand...
I actually do

But Michael's music and talent doesn't need defending

His name and innocence does.

You may be fine with sticking your hand in the sand and just bopping along to Thriller and Billie Jean

But I am more concerned with JUSTICE.

Michael is the victim of several heinous crimes and these crimes indirectly led to his early death.

I will never never stop fighting for him to get the justice he deserves.

Forgive me for caring, but I hope you realize if it wasn't for fans like me, Michael would have been erased and cancelled in 2019.

Some of us vowed to never be caught off guard again, which mean we must be vigilant because his enemies are still out there plotting and planning and you listening to thriller will not change that.


And to answer your question, YES I listen to his music, ALL his music from every age and I guarantee you I have listened to more of his catalog than you have and can tell you more about him than you can.
 
i find very hard to believe that someone who literally is financially responsible for creating this movie, and that would be the first in line to suffer the financial blow of said movie not doing good, would hoop on such a outrageously bad interview just to smear said movie and create bad PR around it.

i don't like branca but i mantain my case that some of this reads as heavily edited or manipulated. the journalist is a guilter after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top