The Official 'Michael' Bio-Pic Thread

I just hope they realize that the only reason why people are happy with the first movie being a "celebration" of Michael is because this was accurate for the time period covered by the first part. But this would NOT be acceptable for a part 2. They need to find a way to put the truth out there about 1993, just skipping it won't do. This is their one chance to correct the false narrative and let the public hear the Evan Chandler recorded phone tape, so if they don't do EVERYTHING in their power to make that happen, they can expect a lot of angry people. When they say, "We've tried, but the settlement agreement..." I just want to tell them exactly what Michael told Walter Yetnikoff when they wouldn't play his video on MTV: "You haven't tried hard enough." In the best case scenario, they need to either find a loophole or get Jordan Chandler to agree to be depicted. In the worst case scenario, Graham King should do a separate short film on his own to cover just the 1993 allegations without the estate. But skipping the Evan Chandler recorded phone call is not okay with me, not when it is the strongest piece of evidence that Michael was innocent. If the estate cares at all about Michael's legacy, they will not let that phone call be forever buried as if it never existed. You're a lawyer, Branca, find a way.

Got lots of love for you, etoile and I agree with a lot of your points but, I think it’s a bit presumptuous to say that

“the only reason people are happy is….”

You can’t possibly know that?
I know many people who just wanted to watch a positive movie, and hear music LOUD, from the greatest artist who ever lived. I know I wanted that, more than anything.

There may be some people, like me, who are tired of hearing about the PROVABLY WRONG allegations. We’ve had decades of it.

I know he’s innocent. I don’t need anymore proof.
I would probably not have gone (even if I could) to watch a film that (would have to) spend AGES trying to explain the complexities of the chandl3r case and why it’s bullsh1t - mainly to peoples in cinemas who already know he’s innocent.

You can make any film you want that includes hours and hours telling MJ’s side.
The media/press will deride it as lies.
MJ haters/guilters will say it’s ’one Sided bull’

Each to their own, as they say, but I’m enjoying the positivity and MASSIVE success of this film.

I’m also enjoying that it’s annoying a lot of doubters. 💪😂

As I said at the start though, etoile,
It’s all said with love for you 😉
 
I don't care if part 2 talks about the accusations. I think It s too soon for part 2 and should be more appropriate for the third movie ( at this point, not everything has to happen chronologically).
The goal of these movies was not to make Citizen Kane again, but to sell the brand Michael Jackson, by making a movie worth to be watched with the scenic performances.
It s surely not to justify the injustifiable, or to destroy the brand.
People won't pay a tickets to watch that sad story of a superstar falling an all-time low. People wants to see feel-good movies.
 

Here is the full text:

Who will direct ‘Michael: Part Two’?: I teased this yesterday on The Town, but it’s true: Michael producer Graham King has floated the idea of stepping in to direct the sequel, once it’s officially greenlit. That might sound nuts given that King has zero directing credits, but he was very hands-on in coordinating the reshoots and assembling the final cut after legal issues required a total overhaul of the first film.

Plus, if King and Lionsgate want Michael: Part Two to shoot later this year for a 2027 release, that will require replacing Antoine Fuqua, who directed Michael but is committed for the rest of this year to Netflix’s big-budget Denzel Washington epic about Hannibal (the general, not the cannibal).

Fuqua shot a bunch of additional musical performances and long sequences at Neverland Ranch (hence why Ron Burkle, the owner of Neverland, is a credited executive producer on Michael). That footage was not used when the original three-hour story was truncated to end in 1988, but given his familiarity with everything, King might make sense to step in and direct, with Fuqua serving as a producer, rather than King bringing in another filmmaker to combine the existing footage with new stuff. (Ironically, that’s exactly what happened on King’s Bohemian Rhapsody, when director Bryan Singer was fired and replaced with Dexter Fletcher for the final few weeks of filming.)

Fuqua isn’t the only Michael talent with scheduling issues, of course, so punting the shoot until 2027 may still happen. A follow-up film will also require negotiating new deals with all the principals, who, now that Michael opened to a massive $219 million worldwide, have tons of leverage.

And unlike on the first film, whose budget ballooned due to a legal oversight by the Jackson estate, co-executor John Branca is unlikely to want to foot the bill for the additional footage needed for a second film. (A rep for King declined to comment.)

And speaking of ‘Michael’ pay…: Nia Long, who plays Jackson’s mother, Katherine, in Michael, is quietly fighting Lionsgate over her compensation on the movie, according to three sources.

Long had a “favored nations” clause in her contract, meaning she could not be paid less than her co-stars, and she is said to have learned that both Colman Domingo and Miles Teller earned more than she did. Not great, if that’s true.

She’s now threatening to take the studio to mediation over the discrepancy. Before you note that Long appeared far less in Michael than Domingo, remember that the movie changed significantly from what she signed on for, and in the original script I read, Long’s part was bigger, including a key scene at the end of the film. Lionsgate declined to comment, and reps for Long did not respond to my email."
 
I don't care if part 2 talks about the accusations. I think It s too soon for part 2 and should be more appropriate for the third movie ( at this point, not everything has to happen chronologically).
The goal of these movies was not to make Citizen Kane again, but to sell the brand Michael Jackson, by making a movie worth to be watched with the scenic performances.
It s surely not to justify the injustifiable, or to destroy the brand.
People won't pay a tickets to watch that sad story of a superstar falling an all-time low. People wants to see feel-good movies.
After ’93, how do you make that a feel-good movie without basically rewriting reality?
 
Luiz Fernando
@Luiz_Fernando_J
·
4h


But not even #TheDevilWearsPrada2’s record breaking opening is overshadowing KING OF POP #MichaelJackson in Europe!In #Italy’s #BoxOffice, music biopic #MICHAEL grossed $883k on 2nd THU, going actually up (!!!) +8.1% from first THU, reaching $11.1M 9-day cume and crossing the 1M admissions mark, hitting 1.2M moviegoers to cinemas.Second weekend poised for a historic hold never seen Post-Covid out of holiday corridor.
 
Luiz Fernando
@Luiz_Fernando_J
·
4h


But not even #TheDevilWearsPrada2’s record breaking opening is overshadowing KING OF POP #MichaelJackson in Europe!In #Italy’s #BoxOffice, music biopic #MICHAEL grossed $883k on 2nd THU, going actually up (!!!) +8.1% from first THU, reaching $11.1M 9-day cume and crossing the 1M admissions mark, hitting 1.2M moviegoers to cinemas.Second weekend poised for a historic hold never seen Post-Covid out of holiday corridor.
Never been so proud of my Country before
 
i'm french but italian too my aunt live in
Bologna.
I hope your aunt went to watch the film. (I'm joking)

Nice! I left my country 10 years ago and I'm currently living in the UK but I do go back quite often to visit family and enjoy the good weather.
 
Back
Top