Latest on MJJC

New UK MJ TV Documentary coming in 2017 with Earnest Valentino? Airs Sunday 26/03 9pm Channel 5 (UK)

Earnest Valentino is the most creepy MJ impersonator ever. Makes me want to throw up everytime. A complete travesty of what MJ ever looked like, sounded like, moved like, dressed like.
 
Another piece of bullshit which totally fails to tell the truth about the Chandlers. Evan and June became more and more concerned
about Jordie sharing a bed with MJ? Really? Evan put MJ in Jordan's room, he bragged to Carrie Fisher that they shared a bed
he had no problem with it at all. As for June MJ slept over in her home dozens of times , she obviously had no concern
about MJ sleeping in Jordan's room.
They also say nothing about who Jordan's so called description originated with his father No mention of Gutierrez
no mention of the 20 dollar demand etc. they don't find anything strange with June and Evan profiting from
the claim that their son was molested either.
And what is that about MJ going to vacation with two kids and Lisa being mad about that?
Mark Lester's lies. Eh. Debbie would not want a kid with that guy, she didn't even know him.

Garbage.
 
Last edited:
Snow White luvs Peter Pan said:
I think Navi looks creepier but I haven't seen the doc, so I don't know how Earnest was made up but I've seen previous pics of them.
Click to expand...
Navi looks "creepy" in his stage persona, but that's over exaggerated for the stage, I assume. Earnest probably is too. I do think Navi's pictures in the still photos for the upcoming biopic are very natural. The pictures Earnest posted were good too. And didn't Earnest double in "Who Is It?" He's had some nice shots of himself as Michael. That's about the best things I can say about impersonators.

Thanks for posting this on YouTube. I'll watch it tonight.
 
barbee0715 said:
Navi looks "creepy" in his stage persona, but that's over exaggerated for the stage, I assume. Earnest probably is too. I do think Navi's pictures in the still photos for the upcoming biopic are very natural. The pictures Earnest posted were good too. And didn't Earnest double in "Who Is It?" He's had some nice shots of himself as Michael. That's about the best things I can say about impersonators.
Click to expand...

No, that was E'Casanova in Who Is It. He was the only impersonator that resembled Michael at least quite a bit. But not today as he gained a lot of weight I just learned while googling pics of him.
Valentino worked as a standin for the HIStory teaser hence he ended up with an exact replica of that outfit (also done by Bush).
As for Navi I never thought he looked anything like Michael. Never did. There are impersonators that look even creepier, yes, but that doesn't help. I agree though, that the make up artist did a decent job on Navi judging by the screens posted.

949678.jpeg

Valentino and Michael

966918.jpeg
268373.jpeg


444257.jpeg

E'Casanova then and today
 
redfrog said:
Another piece of bullshit which totally fails to tell the truth about the Chandlers. Evan and June became more and more concerned
about Jordie sharing a bed with MJ? Really? Evan put MJ in Jordan's room, he bragged to Carrie Fisher that they shared a bed
he had no problem with it at all. As for June MJ slept over in her home dozens of times , she obviously had no concern
about MJ sleeping in Jordan's room.
They also say nothing about who Jordan's so called description originated with his father No mention of Gutierrez
no mention of the 20 dollar demand etc. they don't find anything strange with June and Evan profiting from
the claim that their son was molested either.
And what is that about MJ going to vacation with two kids and Lisa being mad about that?
Mark Lester's lies. Eh. Debbie would not want a kid with that guy, she didn't even know him.

Garbage.
Click to expand...


IMO you're being a bit harsh.
Let's be realistic.
This show was a 2 hour overview of MJ's life, it was NOT intending to exonerate MJ - that would be a two hour show in itself. This show was done with more sympathy toward Mj's life than another shows I have seen produced in decades so I think there is really very little to complain about.
 
MJTruth said:
IMO you're being a bit harsh.
Let's be realistic.
This show was a 2 hour overview of MJ's life, it was NOT intending to exonerate MJ - that would be a two hour show in itself. This show was done with more sympathy toward Mj's life than another shows I have seen produced in decades so I think there is really very little to complain about.
Click to expand...

I agree that that it was done with more sympathy toward Mj's life than other shows but that doesn't say much since other shows
have been absolutely horrible.

Everything they said about the Chandler case was wrong, except the numbers in the settlement.
June and Evan were not getting more and more concerned about their son sharing a bed with MJ. Evan got pissed off
after MJ cut him off. He had no problem with them sharing a bed or hanging out with each other quite to the contrary.
He was bragging about it. They also made it sound like MJ wanted sleepovers with Chandler when in fact
it was the other way around Chandler wanted sleepovers with MJ and kept nagging his mother to let him sleep
in Mj's room.

The confrontation where Evan tried to take his son away from MJ never happened! It made Evan look like a concerned father
trying to protect his son. Nothing could be further from the truth. Evan desperately wanted to meet with MJ
so he could blackmail him , he was pissed off that MJ no longer talked to him.

They made it sound like Jordan just told the police how Mj's body looked totally ignoring that it was his father
who speculated about Mj's body. They failed to point out the obvious: if the photos had supported Chandler's claims
MJ would have been arrested.

The black dude said we will never know. Perpetuating this myth that unless you were in the room you cannot possibly
know who lied Chandler or MJ. In fact unlike most sex crime allegations in this case the evidence that Chandler lied
is overwhelming. Anyone who says we cannot know simply fails to do research.

They made it look like MJ offered money to the Chandlers , when in fact the Chandlers demanded it from the get go.

They also, once again, ignored the girls like MJ was only hanging out with boys, one of the big lies about his life.
It was also not the LAPD which did the strip search but Sneddon's henchmen from the SBSD. Nobody from the LAPD
ever claimed that they saw the photos, not even Dworin.


So it's not merely about not telling the full story. It's telling the opposite of what happened which is inexcusable.
The truth about these details of the case could have been told in a few minutes! Instead they wasted
minutes to tell lies and keep the very same myths alive which made the Chandlers look like the innocent party
when in fact MJ was.
 
Last edited:
You make some good points. Unfortunately TV screenplay writers, producers, directors etc are not going to do the level of research it would take to get all those facts straight. They would usually base the story on a book (as in the case with the upcoming show featuring Navi) or most often tabloid newspaper stories.

It could have been much, much worse. I don't think the intention was for the show to be malicious in any way, and it wasn't really. Yes it could have been more accurate but until a knowledgeable MJ fan reaches a position of influence in the media (either by being "in the trade" or by being a trusted and properly used advisor) the true story won't be told. I had hoped that it would have happened by now but I guess we still have to wait.

IF somebody writes a book that exposes the myths surrounding the MJ allegations, and IF that book becomes a global bestseller then perhaps somebody will be willing to buy the rights and turn it into something we want to see on TV. Given the attitudes of most publishers I can't see that happening any time soon.
 
I haven't gotten around to watching this yet. I might. First time I saw a clip, I closed the window - that impersonator reminds me of Kayako from The Grudge. *shudders*
 
What a huge mess this is. IMO the acting all around was bad and my gosh at that impersonator. I can't stand his voice. He sounds like a woman. I swear that upcoming lifetime movie better be worth watching come May.
 
respect77 said:
It is sad that our standards have become so low due to the constant abuse MJ endures by the media that something that doesn't outright declares him guilty is seen as "positive" when it is still full of inaccuracies and innuendo.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think so.

I think expectations expect this to be a dramatisation of Aphrodite Jones' Conspiracy or a fan-made drama only showing a glowing representation and that won't be the case. It has to be balanced. There was strange behaviour and innuendo (like I said, the shutting the bedroom door scene was uneccessary).

I didn't feel in any way that it presumed guilt. I felt that it showed MJ never grew up properly (I agree) and that he demonstrated behaviours that were outside the norm (I agree).

My riposte to your comment about our standards being low would be to respectfully say that even when we get a fan-made glowing documentary (Off The Wall), many fans are not satisfied with that.

Or to put it simply 'many fans are not satisfied'.
 
respect77 said:
I am sorry but expecting to tell the truth shouldn't be seen as "fan-made drama showing a glowing representation". The truth is the truth. Period. What Redfrog said above is simply the truth. Not fan-made drama, not biased glowing representation. There are sources to support everything he said in that post and none of those sources are fan-made. In fact, all it takes to read none other than the Chandlers' own book. Hardly "fan-made drama".

Being balanced and fair isn't to appear middle-ground at any cost (even if the middle ground representation isn't the actual truth) - it is to represent the facts as they are which this documentary simply did not do. It is not about expecting a fan made drama, it is about expecting the truth. Is that really too much to ask for? So much so that even fans like you consider the desire for a truthful representation a "fan-made drama"?
Click to expand...

Not quite sure what a 'fan like me' is?

Of course, I'd love a film to fully proclaim Michael's innocence and play the Chandler step-dad audios etc. But maybe my expectations are lower than yours.

Also, the allegations were only part of this drama. It wasn't 2 hours just on this so only so much can be dedicated to it.

I never said I thought this was brilliant & perfect, just that it was good & relatively balanced which I stand by, especially for a Channel 5 documentary.
 
respect77 said:
Well, you are a fan, aren't you?

My point is that truth is the truth, it is not a "fan made drama" and there is no need to go aim for some false compromise in the name of appearing "balanced" when the actual truth isn't in that false compromise. In this case specifically, what Redfrog wrote in his post is true. So if they had time to address those things then why not represent the truthful version why did they instead put some false and distorted version of the story there? Probably because they were too lazy to research. You may be OK with it because it is Channel 5, because it is low budget or whatever, but I don't think fans deserve to be accused of wanting "a fan made glowing representation" just for having a bit higher standards and preferring the actual truth to some false "middle ground" compromise.
Click to expand...

Okay, I see your points. So, we'll agree to disagree as they say :)

I'd just say that these films aren't made for fans, they're made for the general public, and I know what you're going say...that shouldn't stop the truth being the truth. And you're right. But I don't think it bent the truth that dramatically that people should be disgusted. That's all.
 
It was decent up until the part about the allegations. I stopped watching then, couldn't be arsed listening to totally inaccurate info on the subject. Wouldn't say it's as bad as previous documentaries channel 5 have done, it definitely was more posting positive and sympathetic towards MJ.
 
MichaelD said:
No, that was E'Casanova in Who Is It. He was the only impersonator that resembled Michael at least quite a bit. But not today as he gained a lot of weight I just learned while googling pics of him.
Valentino worked as a standin for the HIStory teaser hence he ended up with an exact replica of that outfit (also done by Bush).
Click to expand...

He used Valentino for the HIStory trailer???!?! And ECas for 'WHo IS It'?? I already heard that he used somebody else's hand for earth Song.

I could understand using a double for the Dangerous Tour finale, or even some of the Pepsi commercial sequences, but what was the justification for Earth Song, Who Is It and HIStory? It's freakin ridiculous.

It's not as if he was Tom Cruise or Jason Statham filming an action flick.
 
MichaelD said:
No, that was E'Casanova in Who Is It. He was the only impersonator that resembled Michael at least quite a bit. But not today as he gained a lot of weight I just learned while googling pics of him.
Valentino worked as a standin for the HIStory teaser hence he ended up with an exact replica of that outfit (also done by Bush).
Click to expand...

He used Valentino for the HIStory trailer???!?! And ECas for 'WHo IS It'?? I already heard that he used somebody else's hand for earth Song.

I could understand using a double for the Dangerous Tour finale, or even some of the Pepsi commercial sequences, but what was the justification for Earth Song, Who Is It and HIStory? It's freakin ridiculous.

It's not as if he was Tom Cruise or Jason Statham filming an action flick.

MJ was perfectly happy to dangle himself from a cherry picker or jump out of a 'toaster' on tour, but didn't want to stick his hand in some dirt or couldn't be bothered to walk/march with an army. Huh?
 
MJTruth said:
He used Valentino for the HIStory trailer???!?! And ECas for 'WHo IS It'?? I already heard that he used somebody else's hand for earth Song.

I could understand using a double for the Dangerous Tour finale, or even some of the Pepsi commercial sequences, but what was the justification for Earth Song, Who Is It and HIStory? It's freakin ridiculous.

It's not as if he was Tom Cruise or Jason Statham filming an action flick.

MJ was perfectly happy to dangle himself from a cherry picker or jump out of a 'toaster' on tour, but didn't want to stick his hand in some dirt or couldn't be bothered to walk/march with an army. Huh?
Click to expand...

You clearly misread/misunderstood my post, Valentino was used as a standin (not a stunt double!), meaning he was hired to do the preparatory work. Hours of getting the setting right, lights, installments, testing angles etc. No need for MJ to be there for this so he can show up when everything is ready and the actual filming begins. This is common use in filming related project. There were standins used for every short film, a standin doesn't have to be a lookalike, sometimes it's just enough to have someone with similar measurements and clothes/colours (see making of SIM, there was a woman wearing MJ's coat). Or Black or White, They Don't Care about us (Darrick Morgan was used as a standin in both) - and most likely with almost every other short film Michael appeared in. Obviously they never ended up in the final short film, except for Valentino in the HIStory teaser. Just a shot from afar if memory serves, probably by mistake. Even the HIStory CD booklet pictures a scene from the teaser that features Valentino and not MJ (the long shot, not a close up).

E'Casanova ended up in the final clip of Who Is It on purpose since Michael didn't have time to finish it. E'casanova can be seen in the car and helicopter shots.

Never heard about the hands in Earth Song though.
 
Last edited:
MichaelD said:
You clearly misread/misunderstood my post, Valentino was used as a standin (not a stunt double!), meaning he was hired to do the preparatory work. Hours of getting the setting right, lights, installments, testing angles etc. No need for MJ to be there for this so he can show up when everything is ready and the actual filming begins.

Obviously they never ended up in the final short film, except for Valentino in the HIStory teaser. Just a shot from afar if memory serves, probably by mistake. Even the HIStory CD booklet pictures a scene from the teaser that features Valentino and not MJ (the long shot, not a close up).
Click to expand...
Where did you get this information from? :nerd:
 
Here's Michael with Valentino. I wonder if he ever freaked out himself watching up close impersonators thinking he never looked like that (not even in the Invincible years.)

73955c3474192421773e795d2a728279.jpg
 
respect77 said:
It is sad that our standards have become so low due to the constant abuse MJ endures by the media that something that doesn't outright declares him guilty is seen as "positive" when it is still full of inaccuracies and innuendo.
Click to expand...


Thats what I'm saying. I'm legit saddened by some of the comments I'm seeing in this thread from fans. Because it doesn't outright bash Michael, that means we should applaud it? Despite it being full of mistruths, inaccuracies and flat out lies? No, I don't think so. This doc was crap.
 
MJTruth said:
He used Valentino for the HIStory trailer???!?! And ECas for 'WHo IS It'?? I already heard that he used somebody else's hand for earth Song.


I could understand using a double for the Dangerous Tour finale, or even some of the Pepsi commercial sequences, but what was the justification for Earth Song, Who Is It and HIStory? It's freakin ridiculous.

It's not as if he was Tom Cruise or Jason Statham filming an action flick.
Click to expand...

Uhm, what? It'd be best to research, get your history accurate first, and stop believing every little rumor you hear, especially when it comes to Michael and using stand-ins or doubles for his short films. Michael never used a substitute for Earth Song, nor did he sub out his hand for a simple mound of dirt.
 
E Cas was also in the car shot in Who Is It...
 
Electro said:
Earnest Valentino is the most creepy MJ impersonator ever. Makes me want to throw up everytime. A complete travesty of what MJ ever looked like, sounded like, moved like, dressed like.
Click to expand...

There is no need to be so rude. This is a human being you're talking about and a fellow MJ fan just like you and me. You're entitled to your opinion but to insult a man like this is not very nice. He has impersonated Michael for 43 years and has succesfully done so to the best of his ability. Mind you, he is the ONLY impersonator that actually seems to care about what Michael actually stood for: wanting to help spread the message to care about our planet and to love one another regardless of race, religion, gender or conviction. Not your cup of tea? Fine, but no need to be so mean.
 
I have to say all MJ impersonators creep me out. I don't know why and I don't mean disrespect to them on a personal level. It just sits so uncomfortably with me. It cheapens what made Michael so special.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top