Latest on MJJC

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

Jordan Chandler's silence must come to an end. He should realize that he is not making the same mistake as his father, whom he despises, and further damaging Michael's image.
 
The press fact-checking of news about Michael Jackson is the worst possible thing. I don't think this happens to any public person in the same way. One article and everyone adopts it without questioning it. In his last article, Friedmann also took the script he supposedly read as fact, even though he should know better. He sat with Branca and Graham at the premiere musical, who explained to him that the biopic doesn't ignore the accusations.
 
bluemoon7 said:
What happened? :eek:
Click to expand...
I'm not up-to-date on the thread but I've noticed there's all kinds of noise about an article by Matthew Belloni and another one by Roger Friedman. I haven't read either one in full and don't want to post them but I'm guessing they are probably upthread somewhere. Basically, it is alleged that the film cannot proceed bc there is a legal stipulation that the Chandlers cannot be depicted in any film about Michael's life. As far as I can understand it, the issue isn't that the producers didn't know about the 1994 settlement (of course they did!) but that they 'forgot' about this specific clause.

I'm not even going to do a deep dive into this. I'll see if it blows itself out. I still think it could just be someone stirring the pot to make trouble.
 
zinniabooklover said:
I'm not up-to-date on the thread but I've noticed there's all kinds of noise about an article by Matthew Belloni and another one by Roger Friedman. I haven't read either one in full and don't want to post them but I'm guessing they are probably upthread somewhere. Basically, it is alleged that the film cannot proceed bc there is a legal stipulation that the Chandlers cannot be depicted in any film about Michael's life. As far as I can understand it, the issue isn't that the producers didn't know about the 1994 settlement (of course they did!) but that they 'forgot' about this specific clause.

I'm not even going to do a deep dive into this. I'll see if it blows itself out. I still think it could just be someone stirring the pot to make trouble.
Click to expand...
Thank you, @zinniabooklover

Ok, that does sound like "much ado about nothing"! 😅
 
Hot_Street said:
Jordan Chandler's silence must come to an end. He should realize that he is not making the same mistake as his father, whom he despises, and further damaging Michael's image.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it be awesome if Jordan Chandler actually came out and reached out to the estate, telling them the truth? And that’s the real reason they’re reshooting! What a dream scenario!
 
zinniabooklover said:
I'm not up-to-date on the thread but I've noticed there's all kinds of noise about an article by Matthew Belloni and another one by Roger Friedman. I haven't read either one in full and don't want to post them but I'm guessing they are probably upthread somewhere. Basically, it is alleged that the film cannot proceed bc there is a legal stipulation that the Chandlers cannot be depicted in any film about Michael's life. As far as I can understand it, the issue isn't that the producers didn't know about the 1994 settlement (of course they did!) but that they 'forgot' about this specific clause.

I'm not even going to do a deep dive into this. I'll see if it blows itself out. I still think it could just be someone stirring the pot to make trouble.
Click to expand...
Exactly! I also think this is the reason the estate is ignoring this - it's the right move, for now at least imo.
 
I believe the "news" of reshooting the 1993 is true, giving the fact the date was postponed I think the Estate had some doubt about the legality of the script's content about the case according to the arrangement of 1993.
 
Hot_Street said:
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.
Click to expand...

Hmm I see it the other way around: invoving The Chandlers in any way is asking for (legal) problems, imo the allegations can be touched upon perfectly well without mentiong anyone by name or even hinting at one of the accusers
 
Even the articles themselves are saying it's only a rumor. PEOPLE quotes a source that says these headlines are false and Inflammatory. Just don't believe it.

And yet, no matter how many times the guy made songs about the system, the press, about being manipulated, so many fans just come right along and think "Oh no! I have to believe this!"

We're doomed as a society, in the hands of man. They would destroy us all, as profit. And we wouldn't even seem to get it.
 
Mister_Jay_Tee said:
Even the articles themselves are saying it's only a rumor. PEOPLE quotes a source that says these headlines are false and Inflammatory. Just don't believe it.

And yet, no matter how many times the guy made songs about the system, the press, about being manipulated, so many fans just come right along and think "Oh no! I have to believe this!"

We're doomed as a society, in the hands of man. They would destroy us all, as profit. And we wouldn't even seem to get it.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if i believe anything about it, it's still nice speculating about the subject though :)
 
SmoothCriminal1995 said:
Regardless of the reasonings behind the reshoots, the fact they are happening almost 12 months on from the filming finishing (May 2024 wasn't it?) Is somewhat concerning.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Filming was done by the end of May. Sure, re-shoots are normal but do they typically happen this late in the day? I would have thought not. With an original release date of April 2025, surely any re-shoots would have been done last year? So the bit I do, sort of, believe is a partial re-write of the script - which, of course, raises the question of why it's needed. I still think it's possible someone is just stirring up trouble but it's also confusing!

SmoothCriminal1995 said:
Hopefully they release a teaser during the Superbowl to ease any fears
Click to expand...
I wasn't bothered about this before, now I am. 15 days to go, I think. :unsure:
 
This is just speculation, but maybe there's a disagreement over the director's vision and the estate (maybe they just need to ad more scenes with Branca😂) . A similar situation just happened with the Prince doc (by Oscar-winning filmmaker Ezra Edelman). The doc is finished, and according to insiders amazing - but will probably never be released (not saying this will happen to our biopic!).
 
librariangirl:) said:
This is just speculation, but maybe there's a disagreement over the director's vision and the estate (maybe they just need to ad more scenes with Branca😂) . A similar situation just happened with the Prince doc (by Oscar-winning filmmaker Ezra Edelman). The doc is finished, and according to insiders amazing - but will probably never be released (not saying this will happen to our biopic!).
Click to expand...
I heard that the title of the film will also change: John Branca's Michael
 
librariangirl:) said:
This is just speculation, but maybe there's a disagreement over the director's vision and the estate
Click to expand...
See, again, I would have thought that was something that would have emerged last year and they would have addressed it then. Just me, speculating. :unsure:

librariangirl:) said:
(maybe they just need to ad more scenes with Branca😂) . A similar situation just happened with the Prince doc (by Oscar-winning filmmaker Ezra Edelman). The doc is finished, and according to insiders amazing - but will probably never be released (not saying this will happen to our biopic!).
Click to expand...
Isn't it supposed to be 9 hours long? Or was it 5 hours? I know it's really long.
 
zinniabooklover said:
zinniabooklover said:
See, again, I would have thought that was something that would have emerged last year and they would have addressed it then. Just me, speculating. :unsure:
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Yeah true especially since the MJ estate seem to have more control, so they could have handled any issues during filming. In contrast, the Prince estate wasn’t as involved during production and is only blocking it now.
 
My last whiff at a crackpot theory is this rumor is directly tied to the Leaving Neverland folks trying to ignite some sort of debate in the general public, possibly force the Chandler's into speaking on the subject in some sort of way. It's really just subversive subterfuge but it suits nobody but the media smearing MJ's name, in whatever way. Can't maintain a positive outlook.

It won't work out if that's the case though.

 
zinniabooklover said:
Sure, re-shoots are normal but do they typically happen this late in the day? I would have thought not. With an original release date of April 2025, surely any re-shoots would have been done last year? So the bit I do, sort of, believe is a partial re-write of the script - which, of course, raises the question of why it's needed. I still think it's possible someone is just stirring up trouble but it's also confusing!
Click to expand...
I wouldn't worry much about reshoots. They've probably received negative feedback from test screenings - these things happen with many movies.

For instance the next Marvel movie, Cap4, will premiere this February. They did reshoots for the forth or fifth time 2 month ago.
 
Fuzball said:
I wouldn't worry much about reshoots.
Click to expand...
oh, I wasn't worried. Just trying to make it make sense, lol. :D

Fuzball said:
They've probably received negative feedback from test screenings [...]
Click to expand...
ooh, I didn't even consider test screenings. Now I'm wondering if people have to sign NDA's if they attend one? :unsure:

Fuzball said:
For instance the next Marvel movie, Cap4, will premiere this February. They did reshoots for the forth or fifth time 2 month ago.
Click to expand...
oh, that's interesting. I had no idea they would do re-shoots that late in the process. It's making a bit more sense now!
 
Blues_Away2023 said:
middle of the road biopic ending before even a hint of the first allegations is suicide. That Friedman article is even worse and makes it sound like An American Dream extended version , how boring.

I remember when he was among the worst MJ haters and would be constantly writing negative things about Michael….it’s weird seeing him almost pro MJ these days
Click to expand...
Is he really pro-mj, now that the cascios have turned on MJ? He is friends with them.

I think we should take anything he says now with a grain of salt.

that article he wrong is filled with nonsense that basically parodies what Belloni wrote and some of it is blantantly untrue

Branca certain DOES know about the settlement and the original story belloni put out puts Branca in the scene TALKING ABOUT THE SETTLEMENT

so which one is it? One minute branca was there with johnny cochran, the next minute he never knew about the settlement?

GTFO roger

Also roger claims the biopic comes out in november in that the article another lie.
 
Moviefan2k4 said:
I personally doubt all of this is true, since Evan Chandler killed himself the same year that Michael passed, and Jordan's mother June had been married to a man named Dave Schwartz even before they met Michael. As for Jordan himself, he said for many years that Michael never touched him, and he was so hurt by both his parents' roles in the scandal that he emancipated himself from them. During the 2005 trial, Jordan released a statement saying that he'd legally fight any attempt that forced him to testify against Michael, and lead defense attorney Tom Mesereau also said he had witnesses who knew Jordan, that were prepared to co-operate if Jordan wound up telling his story. After his father's death, Jordan pretty much disappeared, to the point that his mother and sister couldn't even reach him. Accusatory director Dan Reed also tried tracking him down to support Wade Robson & James Safechuck's allegations, with no such luck. So if anyone is behind this new lawsuit, I'd have to imagine it would be June or Dave Schwartz - they're the only ones with a motive.
Click to expand...
This is not true I have hard evidence that he was with his mother sister and his whole family just a few months ago as well as evidence of them with him when LN came out too.

They lied about not being able to reach him.

Jordan has not disappeared and he and his family members have not stopped befriending people who like MJ either. I've seen it within the past year.
 
Media rumors and reshoots on one of the most anticipated this year, what a shock 🙃

"11th hour changes" or re edits are not that uncommon for historic movies.
Of course that is easy to exploit for those in the business of inciting mud fights in teacups.
Right, Friedman is friendly with Cacsios, that can't be forgotten...
 
Hot_Street said:
Jordan Chandler's silence must come to an end. He should realize that he is not making the same mistake as his father, whom he despises, and further damaging Michael's image.
Click to expand...
He may not speak but his anonymity may soon come to an end even if the estate caves and cuts him out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top