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

According to Clause 10, as shared by @StellaJackson, they can't discuss the allegations or allude to them in any capacity.

What I'm failing to understand is, where is the official statement? The Estate are leaving it up to the media to create whatever false narrative they see fit. The estate needs to put out some kind of statement quoting Clause 10 and simply say...

"It's not in the film, we want to talk about it, we aren't allowed to talk about it"!!
John Branca being such a clever lawyer and missing to see this in advance... Why oh why would the Estate (Branca) not formally step away from the biopic? Then it would just be Lionsgate producing a movie and Lionsgate have nothing to do with Clause 10! Seriously, there would be no one to blame, much like we are not to blame for discussing the case. Would that not have been an option or might that not be an option for the second movie?
 
I'm not sure but I believe Branca said that they didn't want to do a rebuttal documentary after LN and chose the biopic format to combat all allegations..

I have no idea why they think a Hollowood movie would work better than a documentary though..
 
Do we really have to make a guess at the profits every time we mention the movie?! It gets very tiresome.
No we don’t, and I think 1$ Billion might be an overly optimistic estimate anyway, but my point was that since the studio and estate have made clear that they want the film to gross that much, having a short and snappy title for it can only help.
Actually, song titles are quite common. Possibly the most common.
I didn’t say they weren’t common. I said having a one word title, especially using the artist’s first name, is better if one wants a film to have a lot of commercial success. Using long song titles not so much, in my eyes.
 
We know they filmed Dangerous era stuff even if they end up not using them. He seems to look pretty accurate in that MITM photo.
Yes but that was before all the reshoots due to not being able to include the 93 case.

That MITM picture looked fantastic but based on what we’ve seen in the trailer, Jaafar doesn’t look quite as good as that on film.
 
Why oh why would the Estate (Branca) not formally step away from the biopic?
Exactly. I am not saying that biopic has to be a rebuttal, no, but not showing it might look (for some people) like sugarcoating his path. Maybe at least they can make a huge warning before the movie saying that certain parts of Michael's life cannot be pictured due to legal stuff.
 
Matt already said that the movie takes a good amount of creative liberties
 
According to Clause 10, as shared by @StellaJackson, they can't discuss the allegations or allude to them in any capacity.

What I'm failing to understand is, where is the official statement? The Estate are leaving it up to the media to create whatever false narrative they see fit. The estate needs to put out some kind of statement quoting Clause 10 and simply say...

"It's not in the film, we want to talk about it, we aren't allowed to talk about it"!!
Michael alluded to them pretty strongly in HIStory and on the Diane Sawyer interview though.

I know EVANStory lawsuits were filed as a result, but nothing came of that lawsuit right?
 
For a movie that comes out in April , is there enough promo? I wonder if it could possibly be pushed back an extra month? 🧐

Rumours of a trailer to be show at the Super Bowl , then only 2 months until the movie is released. I feel there needed to be more hype.
 
For a movie that comes out in April , is there enough promo? I wonder if it could possibly be pushed back an extra month? 🧐

Rumours of a trailer to be show at the Super Bowl , then only 2 months until the movie is released. I feel there needed to be more hype.
the movie already has enough hype, literally everyone knows about it, even those who are very far from listening to MJ
 
Clause 10 of the settlement, which I have linked to below, states what they can and can’t cover.
Meh, it doesn't matter. All you gotta say is the film isn't being made by Michael or anyone who represents him.

Like, if I was making a film about Michael, I would include whatever the hell I wanted to include, and nobody would be telling me otherwise.

Same goes for the biopic. Just call it unofficial and you're fine.

Didn't inform myself in that section but couldn't they just show the allegations and the impact it had on him without stating their names? Like Michael hearing the news, being told to simply settle it and pay. Continue into HIStory and Invincible and then go in detail into the 2005 trial
Yes. They definitely could do it that way.

But again, the estate don't want to talk about the allegations. It doesn't fit their agenda to whitewash everything.

I didn’t say they weren’t common. I said having a one word title, especially using the artist’s first name, is better if one wants a film to have a lot of commercial success. Using long song titles not so much, in my eyes.
I don't know about you, but I have never decided to watch a movie based on the length of the title, and I have never liked/disliked a movie based on the length of the title.

I like the movie "Lion". But I also like "Ghost In The Shell: Stand Alone Complex - Solid State Society".

On the other hand, I don't like "Saw".
 
Meh, it doesn't matter. All you gotta say is the film isn't being made by Michael or anyone who represents him.

Like, if I was making a film about Michael, I would include whatever the hell I wanted to include, and nobody would be telling me otherwise.

Same goes for the biopic. Just call it unofficial and you're fine.


Yes. They definitely could do it that way.

But again, the estate don't want to talk about the allegations. It doesn't fit their agenda to whitewash everything.
But it is being made by people who represent him so they can’t. And they do want to talk about the allegations, which is why they originally had a movie that had it as it’s main plotline.
 
Matt who?

has Matt seen the movie? I doubt it, so his claims are worthless.
Matt Forger, who not only worked with Michael since April 1982, but is also thr technical consultant on the biopic and was on set. He also stated, after I asked him directly, that the song titles we didn‘t know of in the trailer, are not actual song titles and those tracks were never done or considered for Thriller
 
Matt Forger, who not only worked with Michael since April 1982, but is also thr technical consultant on the biopic and was on set. He also stated, after I asked him directly, that the song titles we didn‘t know of in the trailer, are not actual song titles and those tracks were never done or considered for Thriller
Weird.....Why would they put them on if they not real songs🤦‍♀️
 
Idk if this has been asked or answered yet, but do we know who any of the actors are gonna be? I know Jaafar and I know ppl know the actor for Quincy but other than that idk if we have that information out or I’m just blind.
Like who’s gonna play the parents and siblings and other people Michael worked with and other celebrities or people he hung out with like Diana and Brook and Madonna? Do we have any other actors that we know for certain? And why aren’t they being so public about it? I don’t usually pay attention to credits and actors and things like that but usually they tell us these things when a trailer or teaser comes out don’t they?
 
Idk if this has been asked or answered yet, but do we know who any of the actors are gonna be? I know Jaafar and I know ppl know the actor for Quincy but other than that idk if we have that information out or I’m just blind.
Like who’s gonna play the parents and siblings and other people Michael worked with and other celebrities or people he hung out with like Diana and Brook and Madonna? Do we have any other actors that we know for certain? And why aren’t they being so public about it? I don’t usually pay attention to credits and actors and things like that but usually they tell us these things when a trailer or teaser comes out don’t they?
 
I must say I've had a change of heart and I'm no longer excited about this movie at all, instead I dread it because I'm sure it's going to be used against him.
 
I'm sorry I just a think there's too much against it between production disasters, allegations omitted, accusers literally waiting to use the biopic time to go on the media (cascios included), backlash from close relatives and all the estate litigations (included a trial in ****** 2027) . the same estate that couldn't bother to clear the air about that photo with Epstein and who we all know does more damage to MJ legacy than good literally produced this movie.

haters and anti mj media are going to have a field day with all of this. "the year of Michael" my ass
 
I understand your reasoning, I do, and it can be disheartening.

Here is my take on this: MJ detractors will do what they're going to do regardless of a biopic being released. They have been doing so during MJ's lifetime and they will continue to do so now and in the future. Anything pro-MJ, big or small, triggers them. The estate has been going against Michael's wishes for a long time, the Cascios will continue to lie and exploit as they've done for years, same goes for Wade, James & co. Despite the numerous rebuttals out there, the verified materials, the legal documentation that exonerates Michael and the factual documentaries that debunk LN and such, there are people who only go by their first impressions, the ones that were shaped by the initial tabloid propaganda. Nothing has changed on this end, sadly.

I will echo the sentiment of one of my favourite TikTok creators who advocates for MJ's innocence and who has dedicated her profile to exposing lies about MJ (@ICandAndIWill): I do not see this biopic as the *best* way for justice to be served or as a way to properly tell Michael's story in its entirety and in great detail; I see it as a good way for Michael's music and innovation to reach broader audiences, especially younger generations that have not experienced the initial wave of tabloid propaganda.

Why do I not see this biopic as a way to vindicate Michael per se? Two reasons:

1. This is a biopic, not a documentary. And it's a Hollywood production. No biopic has ever portrayed with utmost fidelity the life of the icon it focused on. Artistic liberties and embellishments will be taken, things will dramatized, others will be sugarcoated, others misrepresented, others overlooked entirely. I repeat, this is not a documentary. Any movie, be it a biopic or an "inspired by true events" production (emphasis on INSPIRED) will not reflect the absolute reality.
2. I am well aware that many people out there cannot understand the difference between biopic and documentary, so they will probably assume that this biopic is actually Michael's real story and will refer to the movie as a source material for their beliefs (so many people watch a movie about someone or something that happened in the past, and consider it the absolute truth). Others will not believe a word of it, not even the parts that are true or represented properly.

However, the good part is that a biopic of this magnitude will showcase how Michael's musical genius reshaped the music industry and how it continues to do so to this day. I'm a 1992 kid, and though my parents familiarized me with Michael's work from a young age and I adored his music since I was little, I never got to experience his brilliance firsthand, I never got to attend one of his concerts, I never felt the thrill of seeing the world be captivated by his music as it did back in the 80s. Of course, I've basically watched every video I could find of him, but I believe the people who've been to his concerts or participated in his shows will confirm that watching a YT video or a DVD of his concert is *not* the same as experiencing it live. This biopic is as close as many of us will ever get to experiencing Michael on such a large scale simultaneously; incredible acoustics, seeing the costumes in clearer detail, the dance moves performed by his very nephew who trained extensively to achieve this. Bottom line is: for me, this biopic is a great way to experience Michael's music again on a global scale. I know my nephews and nieces are equally excited, and even my coworkers. We know the truth about Michael, we're going for the incredible music and seeing just a little bit more of him on the big screen. If anyone deserves this, it's Michael.

Apologies for the lengthy comment. Rant over. 😅
 
Last edited:
For me , the original movie that included the 93 allegations would have been an epic masterpiece that was raw, gritty and really fought back against the allegations whilst telling the story exactly how it was.

This cookie cutter version that has been reshot several times over may be a bit of a mess and all over the place sadly.

It’s just my thoughts and I hope I will be completely wrong but I do have doubts.
 
Back
Top