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

[SmoothGangsta]

MJ stuff will always get bad reviews from the people who always give MJ stuff bad reviews, nothing to see there, really.

 

[zinniabooklover]

MJ stuff will always get bad reviews from the people who always give MJ stuff bad reviews, nothing to see there, really.

And sometimes a bad review isn't a bad review. The musical got a 4 star review in The Times but, bc it had a stupid, misleading headline (which would not even have been written by the journalist) lots of people assumed it was a hatchet job. It was actually glowing with praise.

 

[Sawyer Grubb]

I very much doubt it will be the next Godfather and unfortunately, it will be panned by critics also as the media love to put him down. A good trailer does not necessarily mean a good film. Fingers crossed though.

If Jaafar is as convincing as Michael as they say then for us it will be magical. I am very much looking forward to sitting in a theatre watching Michael's magic unfold on screen, the iconic songs and performances. I want the audience to feel the power of Michael as an artist, not the caricature he's usually seen as.

It really takes a good film to make a good trailer

 

[luis98]

Who listens to what critics have to say?

 

[etoile 37]

It sounds like you want a long movie because you are a Michael fan and neglect the opinion of normal people. Dont get me wrong I also would watch it if it is 5 hours. But the movie needs to make a profit and if its too long, people who are on the fence of watching wont go. But the makers probably did their research.

I don't know about you, but when I decide to go watch a movie at the movie theater, I base my decision on how good the movie looks. I've never actually bothered to check the runtime. Ever.

 

[Harun]

What about younger viewers? Are they expected to sit through a nearly 4 hours movie without getting bored?

If a film is too long it can take a serious nose dive in terms of quality and enjoyment. It has to be entertaining from start to finish. You don't want people wishing they had shaved off a extra 30 mins to an hour.

A 3-4 hour movie is a turn off.

Nambla is this you ? Looool

 

[Blues_Away2023]

Nambla is this you ? Looool

shhhh Kelley will be getting excited

 

[MegaMix12”]

MJ stuff will always get bad reviews from the people who always give MJ stuff bad reviews, nothing to see there, really.

Nail on the head!

 

[MegaMix12”]

I don't know about you, but when I decide to go watch a movie at the movie theater, I base my decision on how good the movie looks. I've never actually bothered to check the runtime. Ever.

Exactly.

The comments about the price of admission, the price of candy bars and drinks, and about the potential horror of possibly needing to pee are all hilarious to be honest.

Whether the film is 20 minutes or 3 hours, the price of admission is the same. Same goes for the price of snacks. I usually bring my own. If you need to pee after 5 minutes or 2 hours, I’m pretty sure you’re allowed to go pee lol.

 

[Blues_Away2023]

It's about the quality of the movie, not the length. Unnecessary boring and long winded dialogue won't do this film any favours.

You keep the audience wanting more, entertain them and keep them coming back.

Look at the quality of Thriller compared to the slog that is Invincible Invincible would have been a stronger album if certain songs had been cut.

 

[filmandmusic]

It's about the quality of the movie, not the length.

I don‘t agree because it is almost never the director’s choice that ends up in the cinema, so the director who is in this case the artist fails to bring across his true intention or vision of the film. In almost all cases the director’s cut ends up being the fan favorite version of a film. The lord of the rings extended versions, justice league, blade runner, kingdom of heaven, aliens and so on and on and on.

A director shoots all the necessary scenes and then an editor chops it up because the suits tell him to do so, butchering the vision of the director.

So basically companies cut films because they keep underestimating the audiences willingness to see a longer film. I have yet to see proof of shorter films selling more tickets.

In rare cases a director chops up his own movie for example kill bill. It was intended as one huge 4 hour film but Tarantino thought it was too long for audiences so made it a two parter. Also some director’s have built up such a strong reputation that they usually get freedom to do as they please.

 

[MJImpeccable]

I don't know about you, but when I decide to go watch a movie at the movie theater, I base my decision on how good the movie looks. I've never actually bothered to check the runtime. Ever.

I always check the runtime before watching a movie, cause I think anything above 2,5 hours is too long and I could do other things and barely have time for, unless the movie seems to be extremely great.

 

[DuranDuran]

The comments about the price of admission

Cost does matter for a lot of people. If it didn't, CDs would still sell the same as they did in the 1990s. They don't. People in general are not going to pay for music that can be heard for free online. It's the same for movies. They go to streaming in a few weeks, when decades ago a movie stayed in the theater for months, even up to a year for really popular ones. The mass audience pay to see certain kinds of movies at the theater, mostly IP.

 

[Blues_Away2023]

I don‘t agree because it is almost never the director’s choice that ends up in the cinema, so the director who is in this case the artist fails to bring across his true intention or vision of the film. In almost all cases the director’s cut ends up being the fan favorite version of a film. The lord of the rings extended versions, justice league, blade runner, kingdom of heaven, aliens and so on and on and on.

A director shoots all the necessary scenes and then an editor chops it up because the suits tell him to do so, butchering the vision of the director.

So basically companies cut films because they keep underestimating the audiences willingness to see a longer film. I have yet to see proof of shorter films selling more tickets.

In rare cases a director chops up his own movie for example kill bill. It was intended as one huge 4 hour film but Tarantino thought it was too long for audiences so made it a two parter. Also some director’s have built up such a strong reputation that they usually get freedom to do as they please.

Thanks for that info, very interesting.

Speaking of the editor, it's not been announced who's doing this movie has it?

There was rumours that it was Thelma Schoonmaker.

 

[MegaMix12”]

Cost does matter for a lot of people. If it didn't, CDs would still sell the same as they did in the 1990s. They don't. People in general are not going to pay for music that can be heard for free online. It's the same for movies. They go to streaming in a few weeks, when decades ago a movie stayed in the theater for months, even up to a year for really popular ones. The mass audience pay to see certain kinds of movies at the theater, mostly IP.

The average price for a movie ticket in the UK is between £8 and £10. I’m sure the average working class person who’s either a fan or has an inkling that they want to go to a movie theatre and watch it will be able to. I think this perspective of people being concerned about the cost of a night out at the movies is a bit of a reach. At the end of the day people still want social interaction and they want to go out and enjoy their lives. They want to socialize and be entertained.

I’m not entirely sure what the analogy of buying CD’s in 2024 has to do with anything? If there had been illegal file sharing, Napster, Spotify, ITunes, YouTube etc in the 90’s then I’m sure CD’s would have come to the same innings only much sooner. That’s a no brainier really. Incidentally, vinyl records are selling quite well. People like buying official physical media and paying to see something in the best possible quality, ya know. I certainly do.

The Surper Mario Bros Movie from last year grossed $1,362,027,222. Now that’s a movie that a large part of its target audience are computer gaming wizardy geeks who are the exact type of people who would be in the position of being able to bootleg, stream, and, to quote you “not pay for it when it can be obtained for free online”. Well…… somebody paid for it! A lot of those same people will pay upwards of £50 for a game, get a gold pass for Xbox, buy the collectible figures etc, but nobody can afford a movie theatre ticket? Plenty of people went to see the Barbie Movie. If people want to go they’ll go.

I don’t doubt that superhero movies are amongst the biggest, but if you have something that’s different, compelling, intriguing, highly anticipated, scrutinised over by the media, then I’m sure people will show up to see it. Call it hype, call it FOMO. People want to be a part of something that’s an event. MJ ONE in Vegas has been playing to packed houses for over a decade. The Immortal show toured the world and MJ The Musical is packing the theatre out on a nightly basis on both sides of the Atlantic.

 

[zinniabooklover]

A director shoots all the necessary scenes and then an editor chops it up because the suits tell him to do so,

Well, not quite, I would say. The director works closely with the editor - they usually would be the lead person in the editing process. Once the 'director's' cut is done that's when the producers and the suits look at it and suggest the changes they want to see.

butchering the vision of the director.

The director shapes their vision of the film during the editing process. But, yeah, the suits and the producers (the money people) will request lots of changes, for sure.

So basically companies cut films because they keep underestimating the audiences willingness to see a longer film. [...]

This I do agree with. Totally underestimating people's intelligence, stamina for a longer film, interest in a complex story ...

Speaking of the editor, it's not been announced who's doing this movie has it?

Is the editor usually announced? I've never noticed that. I always look for the editor's name in the credits. That's usually the first I know of them being on the project, lol.

There was rumours that it was Thelma Schoonmaker.

Interesting. I know she's won several Oscars.

I don't know which editors Antoine Fuqua has worked with before. Often a successful film director wants to work with editors and DP's (director of photography) again and again. Bit like Quincy and Bruce Swedien being a team.

The average price for a movie ticket in the UK is between £8 and £10. I’m sure the average working class person who’s either a fan or has an inkling that they want to go to a movie theatre and watch it will be able to. I think this perspective of people being concerned about the cost of a night out at the movies is a bit of a reach. At the end of the day people still want social interaction and they want to go out and enjoy their lives. They want to socialize and be entertained.

Exactly so. People very occasionally moan about cinema costs when they go as a family and the total cost seems a bit steep. But it doesn't stop them going again. Mostly people don't complain. Cinema tickets are way cheaper than theatre tickets or football season tickets or lots of other entertainment prices. Not to mention cheaper tickets being available for daytime screenings etc.

I’m not entirely sure what the analogy of buying CD’s in 2024 has to do with anything? If there had been illegal file sharing, Napster, Spotify, ITunes, YouTube etc in the 90’s

Napster popped up in 1999, I believe. By 2001 it had been shut down, iirc.

then I’m sure CD’s would have come to the same innings only much sooner. That’s a no brainier really. Incidentally, vinyl records are selling quite well. People like buying official physical media and paying to see something in the best possible quality, ya know. I certainly do.

The Surper Mario Bros Movie from last year grossed $1,362,027,222. Now that’s a movie that a large part of its target audience are computer gaming wizardy geeks who are the exact type of people who would be in the position of being able to bootleg, stream, and, to quote you “not pay for it when it can be obtained for free online”. Well…… somebody paid for it! A lot of those same people will pay upwards of £50 for a game, get a gold pass for Xbox, buy the collectible figures etc, but nobody can afford a movie theatre ticket? Plenty of people went to see the Barbie Movie. If people want to go they’ll go.

Indeed. People are social animals, especially after all those Covid restrictions which everyone can still remember.

I don’t doubt that superhero movies are amongst the biggest, but if you have something that’s different, compelling, intriguing, highly anticipated, scrutinised over by the media, then I’m sure people will show up to see it. [...]

 

[zinniabooklover]

Roberto Cavalli has died. RIP.

Which makes me wonder if the film will recreate the WMA's 2006. I know they can't include everything. But it was only his second public appearance, afaik, after the trial ended. And the crowd went wild. Despite nonsense lies being printed in the later editions of the UK tabloids. The crowd went completely crazy for Michael. It would be a good moment to put into the film, imo.

 

[Billie Jean 78]

Roberto Cavalli has died. RIP.

Which makes me wonder if the film will recreate the WMA's 2006. I know they can't include everything. But it was only his second public appearance, afaik, after the trial ended. And the crowd went wild. Despite nonsense lies being printed in the later editions of the UK tabloids. The crowd went completely crazy for Michael. It would be a good moment to put into the film, imo.

Oh my god, that would be amazing, they should include that one for that exact reason you named - first performance on a public event after the trial and the people really did go crazy (I can testify that, I was there). Including Beyonce in the movie would connect it to the younger audience. Besides, he looked very stylish and also the Guiness book would be an awesome moment to mention!!

I am kind of hoping they include Elizabeth I love you as well for the matter of fact - he looked very stylish and it's such a special song and a special moment. Oh, christ, what about You were there? Both were the closest thing to an Unplugged version of Michael.

 

[zinniabooklover]

Oh my god, that would be amazing, they should include that one for that exact reason you named - first performance on a public event after the trial

I think it was his second appearance, after Japan, but you're right. It was a performance even though he didn't really sing (I don't think he needed to but that's just me). And the WMA's was more high profile bc of the Guinness world record thing. Tbh, I had even forgotten that bit, lol. I was so focused on the fact that the UK tabloids originally reported the story accurately and then, in the later editions of the papers, told complete lies about what happened that I forgot all about the award for Thriller sales! But, yeah, you're absolutely right. What a moment!

and the people really did go crazy (I can testify that, I was there).

Wow!

Including Beyonce in the movie would connect it to the younger audience.

And I had completely forgotten about Beyonce. I've said this before but one of my fave moments of the WMA thing is Beyonce's face when the crowd go wild for Michael. I swear she's blown away by the intensity of it. I know she's a performing artist who knows how to add drama to a moment in time but I still think her reaction is genuine. I really do. In any case, yeah, showing Beyonce as part of that moment would be great. It's a long time ago and some people in the general public - maybe even some newer fans - might not be aware of it.

Besides, he looked very stylish and also the Guiness book would be an awesome moment to mention!!

I am kind of hoping they include Elizabeth I love you as well for the matter of fact - he looked very stylish and it's such a special song and a special moment.

I hadn't considered that. Tbh, I haven't given much thought to what I think they should include bc there is so much. But this 'Elizabeth I Love You' moment does tick a lot of boxes and it wouldn't be a very long scene.

Oh, christ, what about You were there? Both were the closest thing to an Unplugged version of Michael.

I honestly can't see that being included even though I would love for that to happen. Show him working with Buz Kohan with so little time to go before the actual performance. It's another scene that would tick a lot of boxes. Sadly, I think it's highly unlikely. Great idea, though. Very cinematic. It has everything.

 

[zinniabooklover]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778955187006427415

 

[SmoothGangsta]

Seems they are going to cover his later years as well then, in some way at least.

Honestly this film has kinda dodged all my expectations for it.

Long film, actually covering his whole life? Not what I was expecting.

Obviously we don't know how it'll be edited and they haven't finished filming yet, but I am feeling a lot better about this project than I was.

 

[zinniabooklover]

Seems they are going to cover his later years as well then, in some way at least.

Agreed. Can't find any confirmation of the Paris casting but @iamveronica777 is usually reliable with info. Don't know anything about Peyton but the age range she usually plays, apparently, is 13 - 17 yrs. She's certainly too old to play Paris as a young child.

Honestly this film has kinda dodged all my expectations for it.

Long film, actually covering his whole life? Not what I was expecting.

I was hopeful bc they put together a stellar creative team, imo. That said, film is not really my jam and Michael's story is so long, so dramatic and so complicated I thought I'd just wait and see how it unfolds. Looking good so far.

Obviously we don't know how it'll be edited and they haven't finished filming yet, but I am feeling a lot better about this project than I was.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I guess we'll need to wait for an official announcement to know for sure

 

[Galactus123]

The film will be 3 hours long and has to be epic because there is so much to cover. If people can sit through 3 hours of Oppenheimer then 3 hours of Michael will be an absolute breeze.

People on here are making me laugh with ‘what if somebody needs the toilet?’ If you need the toilet go to the toilet. Avatar, Gladiator, Laurence of Arabia, Titanic were all epic films. This concept isn’t anything new.

But this isn't Lawrence of Arabia. That also had intermission. This is a Michael Jackson biopic that aims to get the biggest audience it can get. It would be risky to make it too long. Maybe release a extended cut on Blu-Ray/dvd.

 

[Hurley509]

I found Oppenheimer boring and long winded. I also worry if the movie is longer than 2 and a half hours it may affect ticket sales.

 

[Hot_Street]

Seems they are going to cover his later years as well then, in some way at least.

Honestly this film has kinda dodged all my expectations for it.

Long film, actually covering his whole life? Not what I was expecting.

Obviously we don't know how it'll be edited and they haven't finished filming yet, but I am feeling a lot better about this project than I was.

that means they need actors for Mottola, Sneddon, Bashir, Conrad Murray

 

[Blues_Away2023]

But this isn't Lawrence of Arabia. That also had intermission. This is a Michael Jackson biopic that aims to get the biggest audience it can get. It would be risky to make it too long. Maybe release a extended cut on Blu-Ray/dvd.

Thank you, that's what I've been trying to say in my recent posts but I appear to be getting laughed at.

The fans would sit through 10 hours of an MJ biopic but it is not for the diehards in here. It's for the casual fan or general public who have very little knowledge about MJ.

A longer film may hurt ticket sales, the fans want this to be the most successful and biggest selling biopic ever but to do that it has to be within a reasonable running time.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778955187006427415

Hmm...there's really not much of a resemblance. Maybe the casting director should've spent more effort on the search.

 

[Billie Jean 78]

I think it was his second appearance, after Japan, but you're right. It was a performance even though he didn't really sing (I don't think he needed to but that's just me). And the WMA's was more high profile bc of the Guinness world record thing. Tbh, I had even forgotten that bit, lol. I was so focused on the fact that the UK tabloids originally reported the story accurately and then, in the later editions of the papers, told complete lies about what happened that I forgot all about the award for Thriller sales! But, yeah, you're absolutely right. What a moment!


Wow!


And I had completely forgotten about Beyonce. I've said this before but one of my fave moments of the WMA thing is Beyonce's face when the crowd go wild for Michael. I swear she's blown away by the intensity of it. I know she's a performing artist who knows how to add drama to a moment in time but I still think her reaction is genuine. I really do. In any case, yeah, showing Beyonce as part of that moment would be great. It's a long time ago and some people in the general public - maybe even some newer fans - might not be aware of it.


I hadn't considered that. Tbh, I haven't given much thought to what I think they should include bc there is so much. But this 'Elizabeth I Love You' moment does tick a lot of boxes and it wouldn't be a very long scene.


I honestly can't see that being included even though I would love for that to happen. Show him working with Buz Kohan with so little time to go before the actual performance. It's another scene that would tick a lot of boxes. Sadly, I think it's highly unlikely. Great idea, though. Very cinematic. It has everything.

If I may correct you on this one - he did sing on that night!!! True, it was only a couple of line before they cut of the sound, but I very distinctly remember hearing his voice being surprisingly clear and high, he reached sounds I didn't think a man of his age could. I'm not sure if the Guiness world record thing was the element that attracted the insanely high percentage of MJ fans in the audience (estimated 90% I would say were MJ fans!!), or the fact this was the first big thing after the trial, but the evening could very well be a special part from his later years in the movie. The crowd went completely berserk when he appeared!! I almost get teared up just thinking about that night.

EILY and YWT are very special because I estimate these were the only two times he sang to people he trully innerly loved a lot!! It would serve well for showing Michael didn't need special effects, glittery clothes and a complex coreograophy to create a dramatic performance.

These are my thoughts on it, they most likely have their own agenda I guess.

 

[Billie Jean 78]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1778955187006427415

Hmm, wouldn't she be a little to old to play Paris during Michael's lifetime? Could they possibly be aiming to end the movie some years post his passing?? That would be unexpected...