Latest on MJJC

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

Well i think this is the best idea if true! Thats all i want to know now. So to joe public it introduces them to Michael we knew but also even the one we dont!
 
R1chard said:
Doesn't everybody? I'd want my songs to be huge too. Doh.

But you're talking about what MJ wanted. I took issue with the wrong choice of words, ie I was responding to the use of the word deserves. It's very different. This movie doesn't deserve anything.


If they didn't have an opinion on MJ by now, this won't sway them, lol.


Been a fan since the mid 80s. I considered going to the trial but I was unemployed at the time and couldn't justify the flights and a lengthy stay in hotels. Do I pass your "fan test"?

Anyway, getting back to it, they're actually two different things. You can separate the art from the artist. Lots of people like music from Oasis or the Sex Pistols, yet they think of those bands as idiots. The same even for R Kelly. Even Beatles.

Either way. MJ's music speaks for itself. The movie won't have any impact on that.


It doesn't matter to me. And yeah, it's "on me", whatever that means. Either way, you don't get to decide what's important to me.

All I really want is a good film. Something that I'll enjoy watching. Not something that you will enjoy watching, or something that other people I've never met will enjoy watching. I can only speak for my own tastes.

I want an enjoyable and fun and accurate movie, but I have no idea if it will be any of those things. If you're taking my indifference to a Hollywood movie as a personal attack on yourself, or on MJ, then that's "on you", to use your phrase.

I don't care if my friends and neighbours and colleagues like it, or even whether they've seen it. That's literally a crazy thing to care about. And caring how much money it puts into the pocket of Frank Giustra is an even crazier thing to care about.


No, An American Dream was the J5 biopic. I'm talking about Man in the Mirror from 2004.


I find it sad you're trying to live your life based on the success of others. Get some self-worth!


Get over it. It doesn't matter what was "tarnished". Just listen to the music. If that makes you happy, why care about anything else? It's all just noise on the periphery.
Click to expand...
Man in the mirror 2004? Really? You’ve used that abomination of a movie as an example that Michael never liked a biopic about him 😂

Flex??? Come on man
 
R1chard said:
Doesn't everybody? I'd want my songs to be huge too. Doh.

But you're talking about what MJ wanted. I took issue with the wrong choice of words, ie I was responding to the use of the word deserves. It's very different. This movie doesn't deserve anything.


If they didn't have an opinion on MJ by now, this won't sway them, lol.


Been a fan since the mid 80s. I considered going to the trial but I was unemployed at the time and couldn't justify the flights and a lengthy stay in hotels. Do I pass your "fan test"?

Anyway, getting back to it, they're actually two different things. You can separate the art from the artist. Lots of people like music from Oasis or the Sex Pistols, yet they think of those bands as idiots. The same even for R Kelly. Even Beatles.

Either way. MJ's music speaks for itself. The movie won't have any impact on that.


It doesn't matter to me. And yeah, it's "on me", whatever that means. Either way, you don't get to decide what's important to me.

All I really want is a good film. Something that I'll enjoy watching. Not something that you will enjoy watching, or something that other people I've never met will enjoy watching. I can only speak for my own tastes.

I want an enjoyable and fun and accurate movie, but I have no idea if it will be any of those things. If you're taking my indifference to a Hollywood movie as a personal attack on yourself, or on MJ, then that's "on you", to use your phrase.

I don't care if my friends and neighbours and colleagues like it, or even whether they've seen it. That's literally a crazy thing to care about. And caring how much money it puts into the pocket of Frank Giustra is an even crazier thing to care about.


No, An American Dream was the J5 biopic. I'm talking about Man in the Mirror from 2004.


I find it sad you're trying to live your life based on the success of others. Get some self-worth!


Get over it. It doesn't matter what was "tarnished". Just listen to the music. If that makes you happy, why care about anything else? It's all just noise on the periphery.
Click to expand...
You’re free not to care — nobody is trying to decide what’s important to you. The pushback comes from repeatedly framing other people’s investment as irrational or tied to their self-worth. That’s not what anyone is saying.


Public perception absolutely shifts over time. We all watched the change in general sentiment around Michael even from short clips circulating online after 2019. Most people sit somewhere in the middle, and projects like this do influence how the broader public understands an artist. That’s simply how cultural narratives work.


Suggesting that appreciating or caring about an artist’s legacy means someone is “living through others” is a mischaracterization. Enjoying or valuing cultural impact has nothing to do with personal self-worth.


We’re on a Michael Jackson forum - You're belittling people about their adoration for Michael while spending your time on a Michael Jackson forum... There is irony there. — people are here because they care to varying degrees. I share perspectives and information that fans may find interesting and generally appreciate. You’re welcome to approach it purely as entertainment, but dismissing others for caring more about the legacy is unnecessary.
 
Last edited:
Blues_Away2023 said:
Man in the mirror 2004? Really?
Click to expand...
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.

KOPV said:
You’re free not to care — nobody is trying to decide what’s important to you. The pushback comes from repeatedly framing other people’s investment as irrational or tied to their self-worth. That’s not what anyone is saying.
Click to expand...
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.

KOPV said:
Public perception absolutely shifts over time. We all watched the change in general sentiment around Michael even from short clips circulating online after 2019
Click to expand...
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".
 
R1chard said:
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".
Click to expand...
I’m getting behind this movie because it’s an official MJ product , just like an album release or broadway musical.

This is a big budget production that will use all Michael’s music , some scenes filmed on location at Michael’s former properties and starring his nephew.

If you can’t differentiate between this and the upcoming film then we’re all doomed.


There’s no point in trying to argue with you tbh
 
For someone who does not care about something, he sure spends a lot of time writing that he doesn't. Also if the person only cares about what he thinks, why did he bother joining a fansite to read what other people think about whatever. That does not make any sense. The same person who says there is no such thing as New Jack Swing, alternative rock, go-go, or neo-soul because he can't identify it, when plenty of others can. 🤣
 
@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.
 
R1chard said:
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".
Click to expand...
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.
 
I love how the campaign is relating the Michael (movie and man) to black heritage, with the teaser date, the marching bands thing, the Fuqua interview. So I would guess and hope that themes like the MTV struggle would be portrayed. But that would be out of the timeline that everyone's expecting, right?
 
Richard is quickly becoming one of my favorite users here.

6pJNYBYSMFod2.webp
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
I’m getting behind this movie because it’s an official MJ product , just like an album release or broadway musical.
Click to expand...
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.

Blues_Away2023 said:
If you can’t differentiate between this and the upcoming film then we’re all doomed.
Click to expand...
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?

SmoothCriminal1995 said:
Would people be happy if we got a soundtrack that featured the songs in the film plus Hot Street and Dreams Away?
Click to expand...
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.

someplace_else said:
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?
Click to expand...
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.

KOPV said:
I never claimed that liking an artist means liking every work about them, nor that anyone is obligated to care about popularity or success.
Click to expand...
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.

KOPV said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.

KOPV said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
R1chard said:
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.
Click to expand...
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 🤷.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top