t1mber
Proud Member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2023
- Messages
- 183
- Points
- 93
… MICHAEL WILL RETURN …
or
… Michael’s story will continue …
or
… witness Part II of Michael’s story …
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
… MICHAEL WILL RETURN …
or
… Michael’s story will continue …
or
… witness Part II of Michael’s story …
There will absolutely not be a 2nd film within the next year. It hasn't even been greenlit, let alone in pre-production!Concerning they call this the year of Michael, I think the second part should come along in octobee imo, but maybe thats wishful thinking
John Branca is a producer on the film. It’s made with the estate.Exactly. It's what I said 30 pages ago. Once it says on screen "A Lionsgate production", then you can include whatever the hell you like.
Nothing about a leaked song list, SDCC announcement of Part 2 or future 40th anniversary releases are in any way true
Yet people are hyping themselves up over nothing.There will absolutely not be a 2nd film within the next year. It hasn't even been greenlit, let alone in pre-production!
Are you sure?There will absolutely not be a 2nd film within the next year. It hasn't even been greenlit, let alone in pre-production!
Right the studio didn't know about the Chandler settlement despite the media throwing it in everyone's face for the last 30 years and it being available online for over 20 years. Sure....That was the 1994 settlement, which wasnt brought to the studio’s attention until they learned about the Cascio situation. Then it was a case of “what else don’t we know”?
"Soon" in movie terms does not mean wrapping and editing a big budget film within 12 months.Are you sure?
“While we’re not yet ready to confirm plans for a second film, I can tell you that the creative team is hard at work making sure that we’re in a position to deliver more Michael soon after we release the first film,” Adam Fogelson, chair of the studio’s Motion Picture Group, told analysts Nov 6th during a call after releasing Lionsgate’s second-quarter financial results.
They were reassured by the estate that there were no issues with including the allegations. The studio didn’t know about the Cascio allegations either. When they found out about the latter, they wanted to know what else they weren’t being told. That’s why the film had a 12 month delay and major reshoots that removed all scenes relating to it. Unless you can show me a statement where the estate or the studio denied this.Right the studio didn't know about the Chandler settlement despite the media throwing it in everyone's face for the last 30 years and it being available online for over 20 years. Sure....
Congrats you are a sheep who blindly believes anything the media "reports" even when its absolute nonsense.
@mods Can we please make a new thread for all the people who want to complain about the biopic and make their doomsday predictions without dragging down the rest of us who are excited?
April last year."Soon" in movie terms does not mean wrapping and editing a big budget film within 12 months.
When was "Michael" originally supposed to be released again?
They never confirmed it either.They were reassured by the estate that there were no issues with including the allegations. The studio didn’t know about the Cascio allegations either. When they found out about the latter, they wanted to know what else they weren’t being told. That’s why the film had a 12 month delay and major reshoots that removed all scenes relating to it. Unless you can show me a statement where the estate or the studio denied this.
This wasn’t another ridiculous claim about Michael though. This was a damaging story about their product. They could have sued if it wasn’t accurate. If it was false, you can be sure the studio would have shot it down and simply said the delay, script rewrite and reshoots were for some other reason. We know for a fact that they shot stuff for the allegations and they won’t be using any of it. We know they can’t use any of it. It’s not difficult to see what happened here, and the reporting lined up.They never confirmed it either.
The burden of proof is on the one making the claim.
The estate is not actually required to respond and disprove every wild claim the hostile media puts out there. Belloni and the people who started those claims should prove it, not just refer to nameless "sources"
Hum, but the footage could "accidentally" leak...We know for a fact that they shot stuff for the allegations and they won’t be using any of it. We know they can’t use any of it.
I was about to say that myself. I don't mean to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but let's think about it for a minute: The estate now has the golden opportunity to tell their version of events, but Fuqua, Lionsgate, and co. are oblivious to the terms of the 1994 settlement. It's painfully easy to anonymously leak anything these days...but if no footage is shot, there won't ever be anything to leak. Just sayin.'Hum, but the footage could "accidentally" leak...
We don't know that they can't use it, it's a rumor started by a famous MJ hater Belloni.We know for a fact that they shot stuff for the allegations and they won’t be using any of it. We know they can’t use any of it.
How do you know that those songs are not gonna be in the movie?It's concerning that there's no smooth criminal, they way you make me feel, we are the world.
If writing his name (or not) makes the difference between making a good movie and a shitty one...But does it say executive produced by Branca and McClain?
We all know the best films have nothing to do with any estate.John Branca is a producer on the film. It’s made with the estate.
In a parallel universe, a Michael Jackson biopic would even be called Smooth Criminal.If I was a casual fan or someone who just enjoys cinema, I’d be going in to the movie expecting to hear MITM, Smooth Criminal, Dirty Diana etc. All the classic hits.
That’s what I expect from a Michael Jackson movie.
It’s all good and well saying that they will be in part 2, but it’s not the point. Many will expect this one movie to contain them all.
That's what I was thinking. "No, please let's not have a balanced conversation, I prefer living in an echo chamber!"We might know in a few months what actually went down, but for someone to call for a thread for separate "negative" discussions is beyond hilarious.
Exactly. It won't be a personal reflection on Michael if the movie sucks. It won't somehow detract from his successful career or the quality of his music. Good grief.This is a production of The Estate - not Michael Jackson. The Estate who has treated fans with contempt since he died. Why should ANYONE who uses this forum approach this with wild enthusiasm from an artistic standpoint?
Yep - a MJ biopic that ignores the allegations, doesn't mention LMP and doesn't include Smooth Criminal will be incomplete. It's a total cop-out.People need to relax about how personally they are taking legitimate criticism and concerns of what has been revealed so far. A substantial amount of Queen fans LOATHE Bohemian Rhapsody, so you will also need to get your heads around that because the writing so far is on the wall.
I meant in the trailorHow do you know that those songs are not gonna be in the movie?
There's not many songs in the trailer, that doesn't mean they're not gonna be in the movieI meant in the trailor
We do know that though. The settlement is very clear.We don't know that they can't use it, it's a rumor started by a famous MJ hater Belloni.
No one can sue "journalists" when they hide themselves under "one of our sources" (hello Diane Diamond).
Like a hypothesis it seems quite logical but it's not a fact and wasn't confirmed by anyone.
