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

[someplace_else]

@R1chard Don't you think it would be great if the Biopic was successful considering the possibility that could lead to more/new fans, especially younger generations?

I think that's an important point...huge success means Michael, his legacy, his music will live on. Maybe his music or things he said will have a positive influence on some people. Or help them in a way...I think that's also an aspect to consider.

I agree that I don't care about how much money the people who produced the film will get. But regarding Michael's legacy it would definitely make me happy when many people watch the Biopic and help to carry his music and his messages into the future.

Not all of them, of course...but still...I feel like Michael is a great role model when it comes to how people should treat each other, the environment, etc. - something that's important in today's world. He definitely influenced me in some points and I am certainly not the only one.

 

[Fuzball]

.

 

[Hot_Street]

As you might have seen on social media, Nia Long and Colman Domingo recently shared posts about gearing up for press interviews, signaling that the media campaign for the upcoming Michael biopic is officially underway.
The buzz intensified when Los Angeles journalist Dominique Brielle Fluker posted one of her interview question cards online and fans were quick to notice a potentially revealing detail.
The card read:
“In the final scene, when Michael leaves the Victory Tour, we see a deep … desperation and vulnerability from Joseph. Where did you draw the inspiration … emotional moment, and how did you prepare to deliver it so powerfully?”
Though part of the sentence was cut off, the meaning was clear enough to spark speculation. If the question indeed refers to the final scene, does that mean the film concludes with the Victory Tour?
For weeks now, rumors have circulated that the movie’s narrative arc would culminate around that pivotal moment in 1984, a turning point not only in Michael’s career but also in his relationship with his father, Joseph Jackson. The emotional weight described in the question certainly aligns with what many fans imagine would be a powerful closing chapter.

Speculations “Michael” Will End with Victory Tour - MJVibe

The buzz intensified when Los Angeles journalist Dominique Brielle Fluker posted one of her interview question cards online and fans were quick to notice a potentially revealing detail.

www.mjvibe.com

 

[KOPV]

So there you have it. Are you saying there's a MJ biopic you don't think is good, and that you don't care if it's successful?

This is gonna be interesting.


Let me see if I can help with the predicate logic. What you (and others) seem to be saying is:

1. If you like a work of art (eg a song) you must like the artist as a person
2. If you like an artist, you must like all 3rd party artworks based on them
3. If you like any work of art you must care about whether it is successful/popular

I can confirm that all of the above statements are false.


I honestly had to look this up to find out what you meant. I guess Leaving Neverland?

Again, for all of the reasons given before, I don't know or care about any of this stuff. I don't watch TV news or read garbage like Twitter or any of the gossip magazines. One celebrity talking about another celebrity is NOT news. It's a cancer that's killing the brains of millions of people. I don't need to know who is accusing who of whatever. I really cannot stress this enough: None of that matters.

MJ went through a trial and came out not guilty. Great. That's the end of the story. Now he's dead and therefore that fact can never change. I won't be devoting any of my precious time worrying about "public perception" or "cultural narratives".

I'm going to respond to this than for the sake of keeping the thread on topic - I'm moving on..

That isn’t what I said, and those premises don’t reflect my argument. I never claimed that liking an artist means liking every work about them, nor that anyone is obligated to care about popularity or success. You’re arguing against positions nobody presented. The point was much simpler: cultural projects influence how historical figures are understood by the broader public, and many fans find that meaningful while others don’t. Both positions are fine.

You personally don’t care about public perception or cultural narratives, you’ve made that clear. Others do. It just means people engage with art and legacy differently.. Many also view Michael Jackson’s legacy as larger than entertainment alone. For many people of color, his success represented barriers being broken and opportunities expanding that previously limited access and visibility. Because of that, discussions about his legacy aren’t only about one individual, but about the broader cultural progress his career helped make possible.


To get back on topic: I hope you enjoy the film for the reasons you may watch it, and the same goes for others who hope large success for the film.

The movie was most definitely made with love.. One thing that was very important was capturing the essence of who Michael Jackson was. While "die hard" fans will have to deal with creative liberty decisions that have inaccuracies - I believe outside of that.. And the obvious waiting for what is to come after part 1, people will be happy.

 

[Billie Jean 78]

Speculations “Michael” Will End with Victory Tour - MJVibe

The buzz intensified when Los Angeles journalist Dominique Brielle Fluker posted one of her interview question cards online and fans were quick to notice a potentially revealing detail.

www.mjvibe.com

If that were true... wouldn't the remaining part of Michael's life to be portrayed in the second part be disproportionately long?
Would such a decision make the second part longer than the first one?
Would we have enough material for a three parter??