Latest on MJJC

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

www.facebook.com

Consequence

The Michael Jackson biopic is a glossy, estate-approved portrait that's too afraid to explore the complicated legacy of its subject.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
CherubimII said:
Stevie Wonder Arrives to the 'Michael" movie premiere:

Click to expand...
I find it really nice and positive to see so many long time celebrities coming to the premiere - Stevie Wonder, Smokey Robinson, Usher, ... This really is very positive and I would guess people will acknowledge them rather than acknowledging what critics say. I have never paid attention to any critic when deciding to see anything. They don't really matter to me.
 
I don't care about the reviews or even the biopic that much buy I saw a review calling him ***** in the title. I cannot believe this is STILL happening in this day and age. Something has to be done.

And btw, everyone will pan it, guys - don't know why you guys expected anything else.
 
Any serious reviews from bigger newspapers?

Giving 1/5 is a joke. Even without having seen it.
 
mjfan05 said:
I don't care about the reviews or even the biopic that much buy I saw a review calling him ***** in the title. I cannot believe this is STILL happening in this day and age. Something has to be done.

And btw, everyone will pan it, guys - don't know why you guys expected anything else.
Click to expand...
They are exposing themselves by doing shit like this
 
Even without the anti-MJ bias some reviewers have, and their (defensible?) opinion that the movie would have been better had it been something other than a hagiography, the writing was on the wall that this wouldn't be a good film. Half of it had to be reshot mid-production, and it was obvious the template chosen by the studio/Estate was the commercially-successful but artistically-dreadful Queen biopic.
 
Guys, am I getting this right? The critics trashed the movie just because it didn't cover the molestation and the trials, even though THE MOVIE TAKES PLACE BEFORE THOSE INCIDENTS, and there’s literally a sequel tease at the end?

Are they freaking stupid? Do they seriously not know there’s a second part coming, and they're shitting on the movie because of that???
 
It really doesn't matter what the critics think.
Most people can't tell you what movie won "best picture" for 2025,
and they definitely didn't spend their money to go see it in the theaters.🙄
 
Gonna be completely honest here, all this handwringing over the Rotten Tomatoes score is tickling me something fierce. We all knew some blindly hostile pillorizing is inevitable for a film like this anyway, but I get a strange, antisocial sort of thrill out of knowing this is going to really wind up the more numbers-obsessed parts of this fandom who sleeplessly pore over charts and stats in place of forming any original opinion on the man they claim to stan. Mean, I know. But I've always nursed a special contempt for this vapid, validation-seeking aspect of modern stan culture in general, so as far as this fandom getting a check to the collective ego goes, this is kind of one I'm willing to take on the chin. Especially since Rotten Tomatoes scores are more often than not almost insultingly non-indicative of a movie's actual quality. I mean, have you seen the scores for Bohemian Rhapsody and Elvis? Incredibly flattering for some of the most mind-numbingly soulless vanity projects I've ever seen. (Okay, maybe a bit too harsh on Elvis - it did have its moments. But 77% is still real generous for what it actually is imho.)
 
kreen said:
Even without the anti-MJ bias some reviewers have, and their (defensible?) opinion that the movie would have been better had it been something other than a hagiography, the writing was on the wall that this wouldn't be a good film. Half of it had to be reshot mid-production, and it was obvious the template chosen by the studio/Estate was the commercially-successful but artistically-dreadful Queen biopic.
Click to expand...
I don't think I've ever seen a positive post from you. The fact you've used the term hagiography is rather telling as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top