Latest on MJJC

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

OnirMJ said:
According to The MJ Cast Charlie Thomson. He didn't provide any sources. But he claims that he has some very reliable sources close to the production. He couldn't name his source. He said that them not knowing about the settlement clause is bullshit and that the only reason for the reshoots is Cascio extortion case against the Estate that was kept secret from Lionsgate. According to him, that pissed off Lionsgate and they decided to reshoot the complete 3rd act and possibly remove everything regarding the allegations and end the movie in 1992 instead of 1993.
Click to expand...
Charles Thomson is a fraud who also said MJ wore a fake nose and invincible sucked because no one believed the Peter Pan man child would be in love
 
dam2040 said:
Charles Thomson is a fraud who also said MJ wore a fake nose and invincible sucked because no one believed the Peter Pan man child would be in love
Click to expand...
I know. I'm just giving the context to what Stella said. Charlie Thomson is the only one who claims that that's the real reason for the reshoots and delay. He didn't provide any source for his story though. It was more like "trust me bro".
 
OnirMJ said:
According to The MJ Cast Charlie Thomson. He didn't provide any sources. But he claims that he has some very reliable sources close to the production. He couldn't name his source. He said that them not knowing about the settlement clause is bullshit and that the only reason for the reshoots is Cascio extortion case against the Estate that was kept secret from Lionsgate. According to him, that pissed off Lionsgate and they decided to reshoot the complete 3rd act and possibly remove everything regarding the allegations and end the movie in 1992 instead of 1993.
Click to expand...
Why can't they tell his story through to the end? I get that there are some unpleasant (to say the least) things that happened from 1993 on but his life and his career didn't end there and he certainly had some good things happen as well.

Constantly trying to erase the last 15 years of his life is disingenuous and once again, leaves the project open to major criticism. The same criticism that everyone spouts about MJ the Musical - it doesn't address the allegations and tries to whitewash his life.

I don't know if it's true that they will leave out the allegations now or if the movie will end in 1992 or 1993 but not telling his full story is not the best way to go, imho.
 
But the guy had dinner recently with Thomas Mesereau.. so maybe that's his source that can't be named. Or Taj who is often guest on The MJ Cast. I'm not saying it's true. Just saying that it might be.
 
LiveItOffTheWall said:
Why can't they tell his story through to the end? I get that there are some unpleasant (to say the least) things that happened from 1993 on but his life and his career didn't end there and he certainly had some good things happen as well.

Constantly trying to erase the last 15 years of his life is disingenuous and once again, leaves the project open to major criticism. The same criticism that everyone spouts about MJ the Musical - it doesn't address the allegations and tries to whitewash his life.

I don't know if it's true that they will leave out the allegations now or if the movie will end in 1992 or 1993 but not telling his full story is not the best way to go, imho.
Click to expand...
I agree. But that's the script they decided to go with. The original script ended in 1994. I don't know why they decided to end it then. In my opinion it's stupid decision. But the fact is that they cannot, at this point, change that. They can reshoot the ending and change/remove some details in the third act. But they cannot write the new script and shoot additional 15 years of his life with the original cast and release it this, or even next year.
 
Charles Thomsons opinions on Michael is controversial, but the man is not a fraud, he would not make some bullshit up about the film, that's just being overdramatic, although I'm on the optimistic side, I take everything with a grain of salt and I do not believe the MJCast would lie and spread lies if they didn't think it had any credibility to it.
 
My guess it that the studio is waiting for the Cascios' threat of new allegations to be taken care of somehow before any promotional campaign starts. Because, if a Leaving Neverland-like expose breaks out during the movie's promotion, they might have to withdraw the film and lose their entire investment.
 
kreen said:
My guess it that the studio is waiting for the Cascios' threat of new allegations to be taken care of somehow before any promotional campaign starts. Because, if a Leaving Neverland-like expose breaks out during the movie's promotion, they might have to withdraw the film and lose their entire investment.
Click to expand...
but what difference would that really make? An expose is already out there, with Leaving Neverland 2. Also, the Cascios are the ones behind fake songs, so it would be more of the same.

MJ will always be a target for that kind of stuff to come out. So I don't see anything like that affecting the movie when it comes out in a bigger way then LN already has.
 
kreen said:
My guess it that the studio is waiting for the Cascios' threat of new allegations to be taken care of somehow before any promotional campaign starts. Because, if a Leaving Neverland-like expose breaks out during the movie's promotion, they might have to withdraw the film and lose their entire investment.
Click to expand...
I certainly hope that isn't the case because the only way that situation is going to get cleared up any time soon is if the estate meets their monetary demands (which they won't). So, I can't see that situation being resolved anytime in the near future. If they are waiting on that, don't expect to see the biopic before 2030 😂
 
StellaJackson said:
The original delay happened when Lionsgate found out about the Cascio settlement. This is also what triggered the reshoots.
Click to expand...
There is no settlement with the cascios. When did they file a lawsuit to be settled?

Even if the story in fiancial times is true. There was no settlement for any claims made by the cascios. The estate simply purchased the rights to cascios life story. That is no settlement as no claims have even been made yet.
 
AdhesiveAaron said:
Is this actually true? I haven't been keeping up with that.
Click to expand...
No it's not true. How can there be a settlement when there was no lawsuit to settle.

Stupid fans are doing the media dirty work for them, while they sit back and laugh.
 
OnirMJ said:
According to The MJ Cast Charlie Thomson. He didn't provide any sources. But he claims that he has some very reliable sources close to the production. He couldn't name his source. He said that them not knowing about the settlement clause is bullshit and that the only reason for the reshoots is Cascio extortion case against the Estate that was kept secret from Lionsgate. According to him, that pissed off Lionsgate and they decided to reshoot the complete 3rd act and possibly remove everything regarding the allegations and end the movie in 1992 instead of 1993.
Click to expand...
LOL and I heard from sources close to production that charles is wrong about it having anything to do with the chandler scenes.

And Charles himself even said that was ridiculous and made no sense. He was just reporting what was said.
 
kelley said:
There is no settlement with the cascios. When did they file a lawsuit to be settled?

Even if the story in fiancial times is true. There was no settlement for any claims made by the cascios. The estate simply purchased the rights to cascios life story. That is no settlement as no claims have even been made yet.
Click to expand...
It was a settlement that was dressed up as a “life rights purchase”. They were paid a lot of money in a legally binding settlement which prevented them from making public claims.
 
Well, according to Deadline, the movie will most likely be delayed and split into 2 parts. Oh, and here's another take on the allegations - the estate didn't want anything regarding the allegations in the movie and when they found out they were included, they were the ones who demanded the rewrite/reshoots.

Are we having fun yet?? Lol!

Edit: Roger Friedman is also now reporting two 2 hour long movies being released in 2026.
 
If they're ending the first movie on a positive note then it'll end with him at the 1984 Grammy Awards. If they're going with the dark ending route then I'm guessing it'll end with the news of the first allegations breaking.

Apparently they're both releasing in 2026 according to the Showbiz source? Guessing Part 1 is going to be released in April 2026 and Part 2 in October 2026.
 
Last edited:
Friedman used to talk a lot of shit about a Michael for years but then suddenly turned into pro MJ.

Let’s be honest, a delay and the film split into 2 parts 100% makes sense!

Unfortunately I can’t see both hitting that 1 billion mark each though in sales
 
StellaJackson said:
It was a settlement that was dressed up as a “life rights purchase”. They were paid a lot of money in a legally binding settlement which prevented them from making public claims.
Click to expand...
You can't settle a claim that was never made. There was no lawsuit filed and therefore nothing to settle.
 
LiveItOffTheWall said:
Well, according to Deadline, the movie will most likely be delayed and split into 2 parts. Oh, and here's another take on the allegations - the estate didn't want anything regarding the allegations in the movie and when they found out they were included, they were the ones who demanded the rewrite/reshoots.

Are we having fun yet?? Lol!

Edit: Roger Friedman is also now reporting two 2 hour long movies being released in 2026.
Click to expand...
Lol, I think the media has lost control over their lies. They can't keep them straight anymore.
 
kreen said:
No he's not. He's a huge fan but he's not a MJ hagiographer who refuses to ever criticize their idol. He has good takes that he bases on the fact he refuses to put on rose-coloured glasses when looking at MJ's career. And Invincible did suck.
Click to expand...
Invincible did NOT suck. MJ's personal life sucked at that time (his health, appearance, media circus surrounding him, Sony boycotting him and wanting his catalog, bad management). Album was fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top