Latest on MJJC

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

If this is true it seems like the cut happened after the October 2025 delay, it's not what caused it. I won't be surprised if it gets revealed later that the biopic is being delayed to 2026.

Edit: Nvm I found a post that uploaded the entire article without the paywall, that was the reason for the delay lol.
a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-s3aiodpvyvee1.jpg

a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-vcr4uipvyvee1.jpg

a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-sakcxmpvyvee1.jpg
a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-0c4fzqpvyvee1.jpg
a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-861tuvpvyvee1.jpg
a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-2z37mzpvyvee1.jpg
a-dark-secret-has-imperiled-the-new-michael-jackson-movie-v0-idyov1qvyvee1.jpg
 
Last edited:
If this is true, just release the movie as it is and pay some damages to the still living greedy Chandlers, the movie will make so much profits its worth it, and on top of that the truth needs to be HEARD! F*** the Chandlers!
 
Last edited:
Damn, damn, damn... So even after all the releases that were out to destroy Michael's name they are telling us that Michael's hands are tied even when deceased???

Legal question though... if they are not allowed to name Chandler, does this mean they cannot use his first name only either? Or do a DS and use a fake similar name, e.g. Shandler...

Of does it mean they may not use the story either?
 
I don't believe that source first of all.

But in any case, they should do something about undoing the damages caused by this settlement and work to undo it. I think biopic money will give them the push and leverage they need to get Jordie Chandler to speak up, willingly or otherwise in court. Am I missing anything else?
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
I don't believe that source first of all.

But in any case, they should do something about undoing the damages caused by this settlement and work to undo it. I think biopic money will give them the push and leverage they need to get Jordie Chandler to speak up, willingly or otherwise in court. Am I missing anything else?
Click to expand...
Speaking of which... if the Estate did decide to go against the settlement... and if Jordan decided to sue... wouldn't that mean he would have to come out from the hiding and give up his anonimity that he enjoys these days?
 
It's definitely a weird story. There's just so many parties involved. Estate, Lionsgate, Universal, etc... I really can't believe something like that wouldn't be fact checked a hundred times to see any possible legal issues with it.

Plus, how come there is only one guy in the world who has the entire script (outside the production team) of a possible billion dollar movie that could easily be leaked at any moment?

The reshoot would probably cost more than a legal action (?), which would actually be very unlikely to happen from the Chandlers. I don't know, sounds a bit fake to me. Maybe there will be reshoots for another reason, but this one is just hard to believe.

We'll see if another source (a reliable one) comes out with this information as well. Until then, I'm not buying it.
 
It's an incredibly ridiculous notion to me that they all "just forgot" about the settlement.

The years of research etc that went into this movie with everyone and their mother looking over it to make sure everything is good and they just forgot about this??
 
I don't have high expectations for the movie if I'm honest I'd rather have new live concerts history tour Blue ray and Ghosts
 
No way this is true, honestly it's just people trying to tarnish the film before it's release with baseless made up rumours. Tabloid Junk.

One of the first things they would check is the legality of the film's story in terms of any agreement reached with the Chandlers, that'd be done before casting and way before filming had even begun

I doubt they'll be any reshoots at this point, as they'd be too costly to justify
 
How could they be this stupid with this big budget without checking if there were any legal restrictions on dramatizing Chandler and his family in a movie? For such a massive part of Jackson’s life you think they would’ve done a lot greater research behind it and even looked at the settlement/fine print.

If they can’t get something like this right, it doesn’t give me much hope for the rest of the film.
 
My heart absolutely sunk at this news this morning, if indeed true. More than anything, heartbroken that Michael will never have a chance to hear his side of the story heard, even after his death.
Not only a likely less quality resulting film would come from this, but this would have finally been the launching point for mainstream audiences on the fence on the allegations to seek the truth.
 
Without the Chandlers, a biopic makes no sense. If the part is missing, the estate can leave the film in the drawer. As much as the name Michael Jackson is electrifying because it is associated with incomparable art, the accusations still cling to the name.
 
SmoothCriminal1995 said:
No way this is true, honestly it's just people trying to tarnish the film before it's release with baseless made up rumours. Tabloid Junk.

One of the first things they would check is the legality of the film's story in terms of any agreement reached with the Chandlers, that'd be done before casting and way before filming had even begun

I doubt they'll be any reshoots at this point, as they'd be too costly to justify
Click to expand...
That would mean relying on the capabilities of Branca, who we all know is inadequate and only out for himself. Cochran negotiated the terms of the settlement and has long-since passed, along with Chandler's father. So it makes sense that the terms fell through the cracks. Remember in the Diane Sawyer interview, MJ himself said his is forbidden to talk about the terms of the agreement and was later sued (unsuccessfully) for the few things that were mentioned. This is 100% true and happening. I doubt it will be released in 2025.
 
I find it extremely hard to believe that they could simply forget about this agreement. I mean the most important part of the movie is where they cover the allegations.

Are you telling me through hours and hours of script building, estate discussion and all the other legal matters it was never discussed?

Before all the money thrown at the movie $150 million budget, it never cropped up?

Will be hilarious if we end up getting a trailer at the Super Bowl so we can give a massive **** you to this fake news.
 
I thought branca wasn't involved in Michael's life during 1993 accusations? Was he around screwing Michael still during that time?

It just makes me sick if this is true that we still have to skate around the first accusations and Michael never got to really defend his self.
 
Are there any legal experts on this forum? If so, here are a couple of questions:Ž
I. Did the settlement forbid Michael in person to talk about it or anybody else too? I mean Geraldine Hughes talked about the case too and as far as
I know she was never sued. Who is bound by the settlement???

II. If they did a DS on the names, would they be able to get away with it? Would Michael personally be able to make a DS-type song about Jordan and/or the Chandler family?

III. How likely do you estimate Jordan to come out of the shaddow of anonimity because something like this? I mean I don't think he even goes by his name anymore nowadays, why would he even bother?!

And connected to III...

IV. Could this be a secret plot to finally force Jordan out of the hiding???
 
Last edited:
Spidey said:
That would mean relying on the capabilities of Branca, who we all know is inadequate and only out for himself. Cochran negotiated the terms of the settlement and has long-since passed, along with Chandler's father. So it makes sense that the terms fell through the cracks. Remember in the Diane Sawyer interview, MJ himself said his is forbidden to talk about the terms of the agreement and was later sued (unsuccessfully) for the few things that were mentioned. This is 100% true and happening. I doubt it will be released in 2025.
Click to expand...
The movie was a bad idea in the first place. I’m done with it.
 
I agree with some of the others, feels like a massive kick in the teeth if true and will mean the film will make a much lesser impact on the way we want MJ to be seen.

The story needs to be raw and real. It would have been the best way to finally get the truth out there to the masses.

Just use a John Doe and fck Chandler. This would bring him back into the spotlight and he doesn’t want that.
 
Billie Jean 78 said:
III. How likely would it be for Jordan to come out of the shaddow of anonimity because something like this? I mean I don't think he even goes by his name anymore nowadays, why would he even bother?!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Exactly! I don't think he would ever do that. And honestly, if sued, how much money could the estate/producers actually lose on this?
Chandler is living his "another" life. If someone has anything to do with this, is Robson/Safechuck/Reed.

Also, how convenient... the guy who says that he has the script from day one is now telling another story that the script is now going to be almost completely changed in its storyline. I call BS.
 
Renan_Antonio said:
This could all go away if the Estate (or the Production company) would just come forward and say if this is true or not. I don't get why they just let this turn into a big mess and let people with weird impressions of the movie.
Click to expand...
I don't think they would want to say if its true and its not always the smartest thing is business sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top