Latest on MJJC

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

kreen said:
Even without the anti-MJ bias some reviewers have, and their (defensible?) opinion that the movie would have been better had it been something other than a hagiography, the writing was on the wall that this wouldn't be a good film. Half of it had to be reshot mid-production, and it was obvious the template chosen by the studio/Estate was the commercially-successful but artistically-dreadful Queen biopic.
Click to expand...
The only people saying it's not good are biased critics though and they aren't even reviewing the film or any artistic aspects of it, they just trash it because it doesn't portray Michael as guilty.
 
apple🍎 said:
1- Is there too much Branca?

2- Is Toy a big character? Does she have a story arc?

3- Do they skip over a lot of Bad era or there's some screentime dedicated to it?

4- Is there a lot of Off The Wall era on screen? I heard they cut off the Studio 58 scenes...

5- Do we get the Jermaine left the band drama?

6- Do they pretend Rebbie, Janet and Randy don't exist?
Click to expand...
1 - Not as much

2 - No

3 - Just the Bad performance

4 - Yes

5 - mentioned

6 - Yes
 
kelley said:
The only people saying it's not good are biased critics though and they aren't even reviewing the film or any artistic aspects of it, they just trash it because it doesn't portray Michael as guilty.
Click to expand...
That’s not entirely true. Plenty of reviews are pointing out that the movie is just incredibly bland and doesn’t really do anything that every other standard biopic does. There’s a ton of abject nonsense out there for sure, but it seems like a common complaint between positive and negative reviews is that the script is weak, even separate from the whole “should the allegations be addressed” conversation.
 
Harun said:
Michael Jackson's movie has one of the lowest review scores of all time for a blockbuster, and after reading the reviews every single one without fail prominently highlighted how angry they were that the sexual abuse allegations were not included prominently
Click to expand...
We get it you're a guilter and want the world to bellieve mj was a pedo.

Give it a rest already. Leave us alone. Go back to that reddit sub where your kind lives.
 
I might be a conspiracy theorist lol, but I feel the legal stuff is BS and Branca just made them do a feelgood biopic like he aways planned to do..

..and never counter the allegations with a movie or documentary ever again
 
Last edited:
i’ve seen many reviews atp that are extremely contradictory to one another, either its an empty jukebox movie or an in-depth, carefully constructed film, all ik is i’m watching it tomorrow at 7pm and am very excited. i love film nd i really hope that this is a genuinely good origin story. i imagine it’d be tough for anyone to top one like “Ray” (which i think is phenomenal)
 
I wish they would have included a scene showing what is to come in part 2 and show what mj thinks of this (you know what), (before the credits, like back to the future part 2, no casual remains seated until after the credits).
Even if part 2 ended up not happening they would have at least adressed it
In a world like it should be this wouldnt be necessary.
 
Victorious said:
I might be a conspiracy theorist lol, but I feel the legal stuff is BS and Branca just made them do a positive MJ movie
Click to expand...
It's not bullshit. We know they shot the raid etc and anyone can look up the settlement and see they can't do it. The only part that may not be true is them finding that out too late. They may have always known and decided to risk it, until the Cascio stuff happened and the studio got cold feet. But the estate really wanted to cover it.
 
RodSerling said:
The sequel needs 700 millions to be secured.
Click to expand...
It's not as simple as that...

Plus, dangling a sequel carrot like this is just something people do to make you watch their movie or play their videogame.

Cinnamon234 said:
Who cares honestly? Who are these people that their opinions matter so much? These are a bunch of "Leaving Neverland" fans.
Click to expand...
They're people who want a biopic to be a biopic, I guess. They want MJ's whole life story, including the interesting bits.

Crushing those allegations once and for all could be so satisfying to watch, wouldn't you agree?

Cinnamon234 said:
Let them be angry.
Click to expand...
I don't think any of them are angry. They're just voicing legitimate concerns.

Cinnamon234 said:
There are other celebrities who've had biopics that have been sanitized and I didn't hear anyone complaining.
Click to expand...
Bohemian Rhapsody never tried to make out that he didn't have AIDS. It would have been attacked and ridiculed in that case.

The difference being Queen fans don't dismiss and hate on those who don't like the move.

Cinnamon234 said:
Why on earth would a biopic that ends with the "Bad" era cover the controversies anyway? That makes zero sense.
Click to expand...
The question is, why the hell would a biopic end with the Bad era?

kelley said:
We get it you're a guilter and want the world to bellieve mj was a pedo.

Give it a rest already. Leave us alone. Go back to that reddit sub where your kind lives.
Click to expand...
So ****** childish.
 
StellaJackson said:
It's not bullshit. We know they shot the raid etc and anyone can look up the settlement and see they can't do it. The only part that may not be true is them finding that out too late. They may have always known and decided to risk it, until the Cascio stuff happened and the studio got cold feet. But the estate really wanted to cover it.
Click to expand...
part of my conspiracy theory is that the actually did know already and the raid footage was just for show, or to possibly use in the future. But not for this one!
 
The Part 1 reviews I frankly expected with Fuqua's original structure with the allegations dismantled into 2 parts; despite the truth of Part 1's content (as far as I know of the movie so far), it's going to be considered "whitewashed" without including the allegations. The only thing that I'm taking to heart with the reviews is the alleged undermining of Joe's abusive behavior. They better not underplay his abuse, or at all make it justified. The Jacksons thrived in spite of it. Brad Sundberg's recent story of Joe's visit to the studio during the Dangerous recording sessions tells it all, in terms of the aftereffects for Michael:

EDIT:
(3:45-11:12):

I know that Michael and Joe reconciled during the 2005 trial, but in this modern era, I really hope the Jacksons' narrative that Joe's abuse was "for the good of the family" is not entertained at all.
 
Last edited:
R1chard said:
It's not as simple as that...

Plus, dangling a sequel carrot like this is just something people do to make you watch their movie or play their videogame.


They're people who want a biopic to be a biopic, I guess. They want MJ's whole life story, including the interesting bits.


I don't think any of them are angry. They're just voicing legitimate concerns.


Bohemian Rhapsody never tried to make out that he didn't have AIDS. It would have been attacked and ridiculed in that case.

The difference being Queen fans don't dismiss and hate on those who don't like the move.


The question is, why the hell would a biopic end with the Bad era?


So ****** childish.
Click to expand...

"Concerns" lol. What a joke. These people aren't voicing any concerns.

They aren't concerned at all.

This is just about their hate for Michael.

This is not constructive criticism. This is coming from a place of hate and anger for some. The reviews have been filled with vitriol. Have you read some of them? One called him a pedophile. That's showing concern? That's constructive criticism?

No one is asking for blind praise but come on. A lot of these reviews from critics are just bashing MJ. Quite unprofessional actually.

These people are obsessed with a man that's been dead for many years now. I've never seen anything like it. To be that angry and hateful.

They do not see him as a human being.

This is a biopic btw. Not a documentary.

There is only so much they can cover in a 2 hour biopic about someone like MJ who was a complex individual that lived quite a life. That cannot be covered in a 2 hour biopic. That's why there is apparently a part 2 coming where the controversies will be addressed.

Perhaps that will satisfy the critics (not that I care) and yourself as well.
 
R1chard said:
The question is, why the hell would a biopic end with the Bad era?
Click to expand...
Not all biopics are about a person's entire life. Nowhere Boy is about John Lennon's teenage years. So that would not include him getting shot. The Jacksons: An American Dream does not go to the 2300 Jackson Street album, even though it existed when the movie was filmed. The recent Bruce Springsteen biopic was mainly about the recording of a specific album (Nebraska) in the early 1980s.
 
There are plenty of more balanced reviews online (including random YouTube film review channels) giving the film 3 or 4 stars and praising Jaafar & Coleman's performances. Its interesting that Questlove praised it for bringing humanity back to Michael but some of these reviews say it lacks depth (which to be honest for a 2 hour film including music videos & live performances is not surprising). Any criticism from legacy media for it not including the allegations is just dumb given they know about the reshoots (but how in the hell did the Estate mess up so badly with that).

These reviews below just highlight how biased the legacy media are - I mean the BBC headline is that it's 'barely a competent day time TV movie'?! I'm looking forward to watching it.



 
Harun said:
I'm also in Paris, primarily responsible for this shit. It's your damn father, fine that you have problems with estare or whatever, but get your damn ass in gear and stop being so negative about it. Of course the press picks up on this kind of thing. Your cousin and your brother are also involved, as is Janet, who keeps her mouth shut. I’m so angry right now And what about the damned press? There were no child abuse scandals until 1984, and the film only goes up to that point. I hate this world. We won't break the billion mark.
Click to expand...
Shut up!
 
variety.com

‘Michael’ Review: The Thrill Is Not Gone, as a Surprisingly Effective Middle-of-the-Road Biopic Conducts Michael Jackson’s Electricity

In an effective middle-of-the-road biopic, Jaafar Jackson nails the look, the moves — and the mix of delicacy and steel that made Michael who he was.
variety.com variety.com

deadline.com

'Michael' Review: Jaafar Jackson Channels His Uncle In Musical Biopic

A review of Michael, the long awaited biopic of Michael Jackson starring his nephew Jaafar Jackson and Colman Domingo as the demanding father Joe.
deadline.com deadline.com

www.billboard.com

Questlove Says ‘Michael’ Biopic ‘Captured the Soul’ of Jackson, But He Had a Few Timeline Quibbles

Questlove gave his review of the upcoming Michael Jackson biopic, which arrives in theaters this week.
www.billboard.com www.billboard.com
 
Last edited:
Summaries of critics.
editorial.rottentomatoes.com

Michael First Reviews: Flashy and Nostalgic, but Safe and A Little Hollow

Critics say Antoine Fuqua's biopic is great when Jaafar Jackson is performing as his uncle, but there isn't much substance to the rest of the film.
editorial.rottentomatoes.com editorial.rottentomatoes.com

Does not sound so bad overall. Unfortunately, the big news papers want to write in-depth about Michaels life. So they have to focus on potential negative phases of his life. Because what else do they know about him.. Ny times, financial times, etc. all with negative reviews.

I really think the producers should announce a potential part 2. And hopefully they will also include all parts of MJs life there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top