Latest on MJJC

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

AlwaysThere said:
So word on the street is Diana Ross pulled out of the movie last minute for reasons unknown, further complicating matters and forcing filmmakers to scrap her already-shot scenes altogether. I believe the actress who was cast as her issued a statement, but I can’t find it at the moment.

Honestly, the fact that the movie is even semi-coherent is something of a miracle. The Chandler issue was the estate’s fault, but Diana deciding to back out is insane.
Click to expand...
Do these people not sign contracts allowing the filmmakers to portray them on-screen? Or is anyone just allowed to remove their depiction whenever they feel fit?

What if Katherine Jackson suddenly decided a month ago that she no longer wanted to be depicted? Do they have to remove her character from the film? It currently makes hardly any sense why Diana would've pulled out. Her son Evan was even at the premiere
 
The French fans are awesome. The reaction I'm seeing at the theaters in France is so lit and fun.

I wish I could see the movie in France. I already know my theater here in the U.S. will be lame.
 
AlwaysThere said:
So word on the street is Diana Ross pulled out of the movie last minute for reasons unknown, further complicating matters and forcing filmmakers to scrap her already-shot scenes altogether. I believe the actress who was cast as her issued a statement, but I can’t find it at the moment.

Honestly, the fact that the movie is even semi-coherent is something of a miracle. The Chandler issue was the estate’s fault, but Diana deciding to back out is insane.
Click to expand...
I dont believe this is true to be honest. Kat Grahams post isnt the most direct either.

Will wait and see what else comes out- cos we know more will.
 
NjiRLQMuttSPeUpioo5qU7WCRmZKjB-lgWyQHjqqZfBv5iNpW6szF8N5cyLOqE2gzAAkQDLmDLBfFmynz6-H-HQc.jpg
 
So far, we know critics hate it.

The fans seem to have mixed reviews from what I'm seeing on here and a few other places. Of course we will be more nitpicky. I think perhaps they should have just done a 3-4 hour movie instead of splitting it into two parts but it is what it is.

Maybe release part 2 on streaming.

However, casual fans/general public seem to like it overall from what I've been seeing although some are saying it was too short.

I will leave my review after I see it tomorrow.
 
AlwaysThere said:
So word on the street is Diana Ross pulled out of the movie last minute for reasons unknown, further complicating matters and forcing filmmakers to scrap her already-shot scenes altogether. I believe the actress who was cast as her issued a statement, but I can’t find it at the moment.

Honestly, the fact that the movie is even semi-coherent is something of a miracle. The Chandler issue was the estate’s fault, but Diana deciding to back out is insane.
Click to expand...
How could Diana even back out? It´s not like she decides what the Estate films!

I don´t understand how she could be left out though... The movie was rushed and should have been a three parter instead. There is simply to much material to properly portray every important aspect. I think even Thriller and M25 was rushed.
 
Cinnamon234 said:
Maybe release part 2 on streaming.
Click to expand...
I actually think the opposite. Now that we know what people are mostly complaining about (the lack of trials), the sequel could be a massive hit if the creators take that feedback to heart and show the full story behind the allegations! Plus, the second movie could be packed with iconic moments: the 1993 Super Bowl, the HIStory statue and all the album hype, the Sony protests, the court cases... It could be a really intense and dramatic film if they play their cards right.
 
IMDb ratings are currently in 7,6/10. A much closer to reality rating then the shitty critics in RT.

IMDb - 7,6/10
Letterboxd - 3,6/5

And honestly, that is it. The movie is exactly what these ratings show. For some, a bit more and others, a bit less. But in general, that's the true rating of this film.
 
Billie Jean 78 said:
I don´t understand how she could be left out though... The movie was rushed and should have been a three parter instead. There is simply to much material to properly portray every important aspect. I think even Thriller and M25 was rushed.
Click to expand...
The only way to do that is a TV movie like with the 2017 New Edition Story on BET. It was 3 nights and a separate 2 night biopic for Bobby Brown's solo career with the same actors. So a 5 night miniseries movie, with 2 hours each night (maybe 90 minutes without the commercials). The hip hop group Wu Tang Clan has a 3 season TV show. I remember there was a TV show in the early 1990s about Elvis Presley's early career.
 
KOPV said:
Now that people are seeing the movie, my old post (above) should make more sense to you guys.

A handful of my older posts will make sense now.
Click to expand...
Do you have more info you can share about what they are discussing for part II? Or what will they put into the story, when do they plan to start working on it for real. Anything?
 
renan_antonio_95 said:
IMDb ratings are currently in 7,6/10. A much closer to reality rating then the shitty critics in RT.

IMDb - 7,6/10
Letterboxd - 3,6/5

And honestly, that is it. The movie is exactly what these ratings show. For some, a bit more and others, a bit less. But in general, that's the true rating of this film.
Click to expand...
3.6/5 is basically an A on Letterboxd. Most films average around the 3 star mark, so this is absolutely good news.
 
Just came back from the movie. All I can think is what a missed opportunity it is! Michael is so much bigger and better than this. I'm a diehard fan but nothing touched me. I enjoyed the songs - Jaafar did his best but MJ is MJ. He's inimitable. Any fan could've written the movie to be more hard hitting. I really don't get why its so surface level. Forget the cut out parts - what's there makes no impact. Instead of the repetitive Joseph scenes, they could've included the catalog, buying Neverland. They show Neverland like a chekov's gun but it never fires. Sigh. I miss Michael so much. I wish he were here.

Edit: I'm also mad they didn't go into more detail on the vitiligo. It was a massive missed opp argh!!!
 
Last edited:
mjfan05 said:
Just came back from the movie. All I can think is what a missed opportunity it is! Michael is so much bigger and better than this. I'm a diehard fan but nothing touched me. I enjoyed the songs - Jaafar did his best but MJ is MJ. He's inimitable. Any fan could've written the movie to be more hard hitting. I really don't get why its so surface level. Forget the cut out parts - what's there makes no impact. Instead of the repetitive Joseph scenes, they could've included the catalog, buying Neverland. They show Neverland like a chekov's gun but it never fires. Sigh. I miss Michael so much. I wish he were here.

Edit: I'm also mad they didn't go into more detail on the vitiligo. It was a massive missed opp argh!!!
Click to expand...
Neverland, getting more into vitiligo will be in the second part.

We must remember, this movie only goes up to Michael being 25 years old. Of course we know he has done so much by then, but honestly, he is just a very very young adult there. Part II we'll get to see Adult adult Michael. haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top