The film demonstrates how biopics often trade historical nuance for commercial sentimentality, prioritizing a polished myth over a complex reality. It proves that for mass audiences, emotional resonance is a far more valuable currency than factual accuracy.
Installieren Sie unsere Erweiterung an, um sofort in jedem Video zu suchen
The MJCast 190: Michael Biopic RoundtableHinzugefügt:
The following is a presentation from the MJ Cast, the internet's premier podcast on all things Michael Jackson.
I'm a black American. I am proud of who I am. Together, we can make a change in the world. I want TO SEE YOU.
>> I like to take sounds and put them under the microscope.
>> There's a driving bass. You become the bass. Let the music write itself. I don't sing it if I don't mean it.
>> Welcome to the MJcast, your source of news, discussion, and interviews on the King of Pop.
Hello and welcome to the MJcast, your source of news, and discussion on The King of Pop. I'm your host, Sean Chapel, and this is the moment we've all been waiting for in the MJ fan community, the release of the much anticipated biopic, Michael, and I'm joined by our team here at the MJ cast. I'll introduce everyone in just a moment, but first, we've got to set the stage. Michael hit the theaters this week, marking a major moment from MJ fans after years of anticipation and a surge of excitement that really built in the weeks leading up to its release.
As we are recording this, the film has been an official release for less than 48 hours, and it's already blowing past even the most optimistic projections.
has taken in around hund00 million globally in a single day, putting it on track to claim the biggest opening weekend ever for a biopic. The film distributed by Lionsgate, produced by Graham King, and directed by Antoine Fukqua, opened across more than 80 countries worldwide. Even though the film has faced a wave of negative reviews and press coverage, audiences are still showing up in large numbers.
Critics haven't exactly embraced the film, but one thing that keeps coming up is Jafar Jackson's performance as Michael Jackson, and that's where we're going today, breaking down his performance along with everything else the film gets right and where it may fall short. So, there's a lot to get into, and I know everyone here has thoughts, so let's not waste time. So, we have our usual cast of characters from around the globe, plus one new addition to the MJ cast team. So, let me start with Elise Kapron on the West Coast. Welcome, Elise. How are you?
>> Hey, Sean. I'm so good. I'm so happy to be here. It's been a few months since I've been on this show as a voice and I am really, really jazzed to have this conversation and uh can't wait to talk more in detail about all of this exciting stuff.
>> Good to have you back on at least. Happy to to hear your voice >> and yours.
>> Yes, thank you. Also based in Australia, let me introduce Charlie Carter, our audio engineer and part-time co-host.
Charlie, how are you doing?
>> Engineer, I've got a promotion. Thank you. I'm doing all right, Sean. How are you?
>> Uh, I'm doing great, man. I'm excited.
>> Good, good. Can't wait to hear your thoughts on this.
>> Oh, I got a lot of them.
>> Is there anything special going on in your world there, Charlie? Oh, I know what you're hinting at.
Yes. Yes. Yes.
>> I don't want to I don't want to say it because I don't want to embarrass you if you don't if you don't want me to say it.
>> No, no, you go ahead. Well, basically on the the 26th of April, 1986, the world's worst nuclear disaster to that point happened in Chernobyl. The following day, I arrived in northwest Germany. So, some people say that explains a few things. I say get stuffed.
So, yes, big four on Monday.
>> Good deal.
>> Should we all sing happy birthday?
>> That's up to you.
>> Yeah, happy happy birthday, Carter. And also, thank you for Carter is uh is signing in very early his time as well.
So, thank you for that.
>> Thank you all.
>> Yes, big happy birthday wishes are in order for you. So, everyone who's listening, send Charlie some good vibes and love and happy birthday wishes via social media.
>> Thank you very much. I've very much appreciated it.
>> All right. And then from the UK, we have the incomparable Charles Thompson. Charles, how are you doing?
>> I'm all right, thank you. How are you doing?
>> Doing well. Doing well. Everything going good in your world >> thus far? Yep. Touch wood. Everything seems to be all right. That might be MDF actually, but anyway. Yes, fingers crossed.
>> All right. Good deal. Good deal. And I know you have a lot of thoughts on this, so I'm excited to hear your opinion.
Yes.
And finally, I'm excited to formally introduce our newest podcast team member, Simon Wilkkey, who has been working with us for the last six months and doing amazing work on the audio editing front. Simon is joining us from the UK and we are delighted to have you join us uh on our team uh Simon. So, welcome. How are you doing? And tell us a little bit about yourself.
>> Hey Sean. Hey team. And it's lovely and wonderful to call you a team. Um longtime listener of the show for many many years. Uh contributor to many Q&A episodes. um and always asking and telling Jamon to one side if you ever needed anybody to help um I'd be more than willing because I'd love to give back and here I am. So, thank you for that welcome Sean. You've been tremendous on the show so far and it's been tremendous to help out even if it's been in the background. Um and it feels wonderful and like being home to finally be on an episode. Bit of quick background for me. I've been an MJ fan since I was 7 years old in ' 92.
those that are mathematicians can can do the work and do the sums on that one.
It's amazing to finally be here and I've spent many years with many of the cast of this show in my years going backwards and forwards in longer car journeys or trips abroad and it's time to give back and so any opportunity um I'll be here to help and uh very very humbled and joyous to be part of the team and to finally be on. Well, let me be the first to thank you for your help in lifting the load on me with the regards to the audio editing and uh for the great work that you've done so far. Look forward to more.
>> And Simon, I think you're being too humble. You also should mention you have your own podcast, which is great. Um, and you have gotten some guests, which I'd love for you to talk a minute for a minute about, but you've gotten some enviable guests we would love to get on our show.
I don't know if you want to say just a quick line or two about that. Oh, the MJ cast was uh definitely a pivotal and uh an inspirational piece for me. Um I heard a list of like-minded friends and fans talking to those that created the thing they love. You know, we can't talk to Michael, but we can talk to those who we worked with in the studio. And I've been a big fan of the band The Cause from Ireland for many, many years. and I've been to many concerts with people all over the world following whole tours etc. um and enjoying the music and there wasn't anything really to bring the community and fandom together. So I decided to basically copy Jamon and Q's blueprint and launched Causecast. So yeah, it's it's basically just a copy, but it it really lends to uh me already knowing your format and how to edit how Jamon wishes and uh um so that's good.
But yeah, it it it's led me to not only approach people that have worked with uh Michael in the studio in the past, but just g giving me a better understanding um of the music industry in the mid '90s specifically um and what it really took to hone the skills of everybody, the whole um the family of people that are required to create a I guess a breakthrough hit, whether that be an audio engineer or a cinematographer or an editor or a master or mixing. Um, it's been it's been quite a wild journey. But if you want to see some of the host of the names uh that I've been able to interview that cross over, you can have a look at that obviously on the website uh causecast.com.
But I'm sure we'll go into that further down the line at some point.
>> Yeah. And I just want to reiterate as well that it's been great to have you on the team, Simon, and we're excited to now officially get your voice on the show on this episode. So really h happy to have you here.
>> Really happy to be here. Thank you so much.
>> Yeah, good deal. Good deal. And again, welcome, Simon. We're we're excited for you uh to be on the team. So, with that being said, I I know this film is going to spark a lot of discussion because there's so much to cover. So, I want to jump right into it. So, uh I want to go around and get your overall impression of the film, uh your gut reaction, um and then we we can have an organic uh discussion from there. uh because I know there's just so much to discuss. I know I I've talked to people and friends who have seen it now three times and um and and so there's a lot that people are are looking at and looking for and trying to digest. So I just want to jump right into it. So let's just go ahead and open it up. What's your overall gut reaction and impression of Michael?
>> I think for me I enjoyed it a lot more than I thought I would. Um, but I think that's possibly because I went into it with an open mind in that there are two ways of looking at this, similar to the musical. There's one way looking at it where um, you know, you're looking for an accurate telling of Michael Jackson's story, and there's another way of looking at it where it's a piece of entertainment. And I think if you're looking for a truly accurate representation of Michael Jackson's story, you're not going to get it from the musical or the biopic. But if you are looking for a piece of entertainment, the musical and the biopic are fantastic. Um, and I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more than I thought I would. And we'll we'll dig into the details a bit further in the show. But that was my overall feeling.
>> Yeah, I I feel fairly similarly. I have seen it twice so far, and I'm hoping to see it again this weekend um for the third time. And I will say in advance, all my responses in this conversation are probably going to sound a little bit bipolar because in my two viewings, I won't go into detail yet, but my first viewing, which I thought I was going in with no expectations. I understood some of the limitations around editing things like that. I knew it was not for the mega fans.
I This is a strong word, but I'm going to say it you guys. I kind of hated it.
Other than Jafar, I kind of hated it. I felt there were humongous problems with plot, with the montagey feeling, with kind of almost infantilizing MJ in some ways. We'll go into all that stuff, but I really I almost didn't want to come back and see it a second time. I was like, "Gh, I'm done with this movie. I don't know. I don't know. I'm just really not. This is not for me." um the second time, 24 hours later, and I tried very hard actually not to obsessively think about it, not to talk to other people too much about it. I just thought, I'm just going to go see it again. I almost didn't go. And then I thought, you know what? I've got the tickets already. Childc care is taken care of. I'm just going to go. And I sat down. And I don't know what was different about the second time. But the second time, I just let go of everything. I just forgot about my critiques and I just decided to completely just feel the moment and enjoy it and kind of go through the experience as MJ Greatest hits fever dream and I loved it and had the best time of my life and I want to see it more times. So I had a weird I can't quite wrap my head around the huge difference in my two experiences so far. We'll dig into that more later in this conversation, but those are my that was my um it's kind of the the living um example, I think, of what you just said, Charlie Carter, then yeah, there are two different ways to kind of look at this film and I had both completely different experiences with each of my viewings.
>> That's so interesting.
>> At least I kind of u I saw it once last night and I I kind of went into it with the mindset of, you know, there's two ways I can I can view this. I can view this as the the super fan or I can view this as the regular guy seeing a movie.
So, I decided that I would be the regular guy seeing a movie. And the super fan will be back in in the back of my mind. I'm I'm going to notice some things. I'm going to nitpick, but I'm not going to say anything. I'm going to actually enjoy it. And I absolutely had a great time.
And I think part of it was, and again, we'll probably talk about this later, the the audience, the the theater audience was just electric. It was there was a I went at 10:15 at night and it was about 90 95% uh full and there was a lot of, you know, feedback during the movie. There was clapping. Then at the end, people were hanging around and dancing. Um, and so it was you you just you you had a good time whether or not you you like the film or not. And so, um, there was only one point where I I I leaned over to my wife and said, "That was wrong." And I I but after that, I didn't say anything else. I, you know, all the inconsistencies and inaccuracies, I kept it to myself and just enjoyed it. I I was really just kind of blown away by just like I said the energy um of the of the film and of the movie. And there's some things that you know I now that I've it's been over 12 hours um I've had a chance to kind of sit back and think about it. But uh and and and make a list of all the things that I I didn't like. But for the most part, I really did enjoy it. I loved it.
Um, we'll go back and see it again. Um, just to kind of like again be the super fan and watch it from through that lens.
>> I walked in ready to hate it. Um, I was expecting very little of it after the very troubled production that's happened and then the reviews came out obviously and we knew the reviews were going to be bad whether it was good or bad, but the reviews were so bad I just thought, "Oh my god, what is this going to be?" And I think because I went in with such low expectations, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. Um, I went last night in my local cinema. Um, which was it's about 400 seater. It was about 90% full.
Um, not with MJ fans with hats and t-shirts, just with normal people. Um, uh, you know, like regular casual fans.
And um I was listening to people as I was leaving and comments I heard from people as I was leaving were people saying it's one of the best films I've ever seen. People saying I'm definitely going to come back and see that at least once more. Um people saying uh I really can't wait for part two. Um I didn't hear anyone saying anything negative. I I certainly have issues with it and primarily omissions. I didn't really don't care about all this sort of very minor timeline issues and all that kind of stuff, but I felt like this was the estate's one big chance to humanize Michael in a very effective way and they've kind of dropped the ball.
There's just is as somebody used the word montage about five minutes ago that that's exactly how the film feels at times. Just like a kind of bizarre montage which has almost no plot at times. I mean the whole thriller era section is just like what the hell, you know, just sort of wafted around like a bit of pollen in the breeze. that old Mottown 25 is happening and now we're on the video set for thriller and there's no context or explanation to any of this at all. But um the film is quite short.
There was scope to make it longer and put more plot in it. And that's kind of my issue with it really is just is that there's not a lot to it. There seems to be a lot of stuff missing. But the general audience reaction is I mean incredible. Um, it's just it is the number one film in the world right now and it looks like it's on on course to break records. So, you know, they've done something right, but um yeah, we'll get more into the detail as we go on. Simon, what was your initial reaction?
I think much as anybody else, you know, there's the the hardcore fan and there's the things I'd love to see and that I want to see, but I I really really because I knew we were doing this episode as well, I wanted something positive to be my first episode on, you know, to say something that's really uh lovely and um welcoming. Um, I I really tried to make sure that I was open-minded, definitely open-minded, but it really it really was an experience that I found tremendously confusing because there was no storytelling.
Nothing really leads into anything other than maybe the first 20 minutes of the film. Um, after that, I'm floundering around wondering what on earth is going on. And and I I sadly have to say that I agree with your first watching's response at least that I just don't like this. I'm just confused. Um I went to the the first day that you could see the preview. So last Wednesday just gone. Uh me and my partner went uh 6:30 in the evening and there was three other people in the cinema. Um, and I I I remember seeing the credits just start to roll and me and my partner both looked at each other and we mouth, "What the [ __ ] was that?" at each other and we're like, >> I was so glad I saw it with someone else because I just left so confused. So confused. Yeah. We we'll get into details of of why that confusion may be there, but um I wanted to be in that place that you were with your second viewing at least where I could just, you know, tap out a bit and just enjoy some music and this is fun. I saw the musical twice in London and loved the storytelling at least was a little more complete even if the ending of the musical is quite sudden. This is just a bizarre mess of editing sadly.
That's my view.
>> I I have that really resonates with my first viewing. Absolutely. I had a friend who immediately texted me. He knew I was seeing it and said, "Did you see it? Did you see it?" And I had to call him as I was leaving the theater and I was not in a good mood and I said, "There is no story here. I can't believe there's no How can there be no story? It feels like they filmed all these really wonderful, lovely, nostalgic throwback scenes that that just feel like they have been pasted together with no rhyme or reason and no narrative throughine.
And my friend said, "But but there's the Jackson family story." And I said, "Well, yeah, sure, there's the generic family story. We all know that it's just not adding anything new to whatever, but there's no dramatic throughine really."
But I will say though somehow I did I really did feel so if you felt that way and you've only seen it once like the second time I just I felt an emotional journey in my heart that that somehow I latched on to that I didn't the first time and that was also kind of a confusing experience into itself.
>> That's really weird encouraging. Um very very mixed feelings about seeing it again at the moment. Maybe this conversation will help. Um I one of the things I I went to the cinema with thinking was well if the worst comes to the worst I can just close my eyes and just listen to the music that I love and I've known I know every beat for so long. Um and it was the worst I've ever heard the music sound in my life.
>> Uh which is bizarre. You know the trailers before the show uh were were fine. Some of the interludi music before the actual film played was fine. and the sound system I was remarking on with my partner sounded brilliant. And then every time a song came on and this film, it sounded like a weird mess um of audio edit as well as video edit. Um we'll get more into that into into the detail, but um yeah, I that was my get out clause if it was a bad film was to at least enjoy the music and and I didn't. So for me the the the nar and again I don't want to do this but I I feel like I I just I I just can't escape it. You know they they say that comparison is the thief of joy. Um but I just kept coming back to an American dream and the narrative in American dream was very clear. It was very thorough. Now, of course, we had 4hour, you know, was a 4-hour miniseries, so they had a little bit more time, but again, just the Gary years, uh, the Mottown years now. Then then they they big jump from from, you know, Michael and Puberty to him singing Human Nature in in the studio. Um, but again, we we got a chance to really kind of flesh out characters. We got more uh of Joe Jackson. We got more of Katherine Jackson. We got more of Germaine. We got more We got more of everything. It's just that storyline was very cohesive now that we have Michael. And then you look at Michael, it's it's it's just way too choppy. I agree with everyone. It's just it's way too choppy. Uh I'm not even going to start to get into the little nitpicking that I have with Michael and Gary with an afro. um or Never Can Say Never Can Say Say Goodbye uh being performed in 1968. Uh and then then they had the nerve to put a little disclaimer in the credits that you know clarified that Never Can Say Goodbye was written in 1970 by Clifton Davis and performed that year. So then if you had the time to do that, why not just you could have I mean they performed Big Boy, right? they just could have substituted that song in and then saved Never Can Say Goodbye for another segment or another scene. Um, so I I I can go on for days cuz those type of things, you know, they irk me. And so I I kind of put those to the side, but again, just that it just it did not feel like they had a story in mind. And for me, for biopic, um the bar for me is Rey, uh and Jamie Jamie Fox's betrayal.
Um and the story and in that story, they did a phenomenal job of telling us who Ray was, telling us, you know, uh why he became who he came. They allowed us to see his genius, and they allowed us to see, you know, his demons and the trauma that caused it. And so we didn't necessarily get a chance to see that here. And so whereas, and I know we'll talk about Jafar's performance later, whereas I think Jafar's performance as Michael um is equivalent to Jamie Fox's performance as Ray, um the story um really just left me uh disappointed. Uh left a lot to be desired.
>> There's a lot of interesting points that you guys have brought up there. Sorry, excuse my voice in this episode, ladies and gentlemen. I'm battling a bit of sickness. Elise said that she felt differently about it on the two separate times that she went to see it. So, that's interesting to me cuz I've only seen it once so far and I don't really feel the need to go and see it again as much as I did enjoy it. And part of that is because of the gaps in the plot and it is a montage of Jafar performing and performing very well. And we'll get into his performance later, different Michael Jackson moments. Um, we all knew before this movie was released the legal issues that had been faced by um, you know, replicating and dramatizing parts of Michael's life that they contractually weren't allowed to do and they should have been aware of that before doing it.
But anyway, that's a different conversation as well. So, we all knew that this was going to be half a biopic if that's the case. And as we know, Graeme King was the um producer of Bohemian Raps City. Now, for those of you that went to see that, I don't know if you had the same reaction as I did, but mine was pretty similar when that finished to Simon's reaction here in that when Bohemian Rapsidity finished just as they were going out on stage on at Live Aid in 1985.
I literally sat in my chair as the credits were rolling, turned to my wife, Jess, and looked around a little bit and I went, "Is that it? There's still six years of his story left yet. And with um the Michael biopic, you know, spoiler alert, it ends on him going out on stage on the bad tour. And you're still thinking, hang on, this is 1987.
There's, you know, 22 years of his life story yet to be told. Um, part of that is the shortsightedness of them not reading through a contract that they had and and part of that is leaving the door open for a part two. But yeah, it didn't feel to me like there was any kind of cohesive story um to the biopic. And in many cases, they will argue it doesn't need to be if this many people are going to go and see it to enjoy the music. And um I did enjoy the music. Uh even knowing that it it could have been better. I I really did enjoy it. So I'm actually surprised at how positive I am about the movie even though I have no intention at this stage of going to see it again. I also saw it on Wednesday at the IMAX here in Sydney um with a group of friends. Shout out to Marie and and Loretta as well. A side note, we should maybe speak to Loretta one day. She uh if any of you have watched the footage of the history tour show from the Sydney Cricket Ground. Loretta was the lady that Michael brought on stage with him to sing to during um She's Out of My Life.
>> Put that one in the notes for future episodes.
Yeah. And I was speaking to her after the uh I met her at Brad Sunberg's event last year and speaking to her afterwards and she's just got so many stories. Um I don't know if she'd like to come on to the MJ cast at all, but I can certainly ask her, but she was brilliant to speak to. Um and she loved it and and everyone that was there because they are super fans really really loved it. Um, and like I say, I enjoyed it more than I thought, but that I do have some nitpicky and negative thoughts which we will dig into as the episode goes on.
Uh, but yeah, that that it's interesting to me that at least specifically you that you felt differently the two times that you saw it and are going again for a third. And Charlie, I just did want to make one super brief comment that um to your point about where it ends in this film, I felt that they're very blatantly setting a planting a lot of seeds specifically for the next film.
>> Yeah, absolutely. I guess for the for the next film, there is some of the footage that they can use that they have already shot. Um, I mean, one of the first promo shots that we ever saw of Jafar Jackson as Michael was, um, you know, in the white shirt singing Man in the Mirror from the Bad or Dangerous era. So, we know that they've got something later in Michael's life to to give us. It's just a case of when they do that >> and having us pay twice to see that as well. Well, also, I mean, my takeaway personally, I came out of the cinema thinking there is absolutely no way they're going to make part two because, you know, I was just thinking, what is part two going to be? What what is it going to be? Cuz it was all downhill from there. So, how do you People were walking out of the cinema at the end of this film in a kind of a euphoric state.
I mean, the people were so happy and excited on their way out of the cinema.
How do you take the second half of Michael's life and career and do that again? People are going to be walking out like suicidal. So, I just don't know how you could make a part two that is in any way tonally similar to the part one that we've got. Um, I mean, it it it makes a kind of a nebulous statement at the end of the film. says something like his story continues, but it doesn't say wait for part two. It doesn't say part two is coming. We've been reading that uh or certainly I've been reading that um there are reports that Antoine Fukuqua after the whole debacle with the contract and um having to scrap a massive proportion of the film and start rewriting and re-shooting was so pissed off that he basically remade the film under protest and refused to leave his van. There's a story that's in circulation that he was directing the film from inside a van because he didn't want to deal with the estate or Graeme King anymore.
And >> and they called him Vantoan Fukqua.
>> Yeah, exactly. Yeah. He everybody started calling him Vantoan instead of Antoine. So, it's very difficult to imagine him coming back to film part two if these stories are true. In which case, how do you figure that out when half the film is already shot? Do you have two directors? It's just very difficult. It's a very difficult thing to navigate. And I came out of the cinema thinking I mean everybody on the way out I was listening to people. They were all saying, "Oh my god, I can't wait for part two." But I was just thinking there's no way that's happening. I mean, if it if this thing makes two billion, maybe they will, but I just do not see how they could possibly do that. What's the ending?
What's the euphoric ending of part two?
Charles, do you think they do do you think they can use part two to really push and I I hate to to to refer to it as pushing the narrative, but really sell the story that Michael of Michael's innocence, portray Michael's innocence.
>> I mean, they could try >> and and and and the impact that it had on his life that eventually led to his his death.
>> Well, that's what I'm saying. I mean, that essentially is the story, but >> it's not quite the happy, clappy, feel-good film that we've all just been out and seen and that the general public are loving and coming out of the cinema singing and dancing to. Do you know what I mean? So, it's a >> it's a very difficult cell. Um, so yeah, I just don't know how I don't I'm struggling to see what the story would be that would be sailable, but um, you know, maybe they'll try. I've seen a few interviews where Graeme King has been asked about it and he's very evasive. He's not he is not saying, "Yeah, we're really excited for part two." He's kind of going.
Anyway, we've made part one. You know, it's kind of like it nobody seems that sure that this is going to happen, and I'm definitely unsure that's going to happen.
>> Well, Charles, I'm I'm so glad. I'm kind of wish I was a betting man. I'm not a betting man, but one thing I do remember saying to my friend Marie as we were walking out uh is that I the word that was going through my mind was nebulous.
when we're talking about bits of the the storyline and I sort of off the c cuff said I reckon Charles Thompson will also say that parts of the dialogue were nebulous and you just did so I kicking myself that I didn't place a $50 bet with the tab >> I'm sorry that I've become so predictable that's not quite what I meant but um but you're absolutely right and uh we will dig into that one thing I just want to say as well um we we asked earlier on about what we learned learn what we took away from the the movie. I mean, I learned I I never learned what an absolute legend and how pivotal John Branka was to Michael's success. That was one thing I learned.
>> Oh man.
>> And the the wonderful selection of different wigs that he wore as well in his lifetime. They were incredible wig work this film. Incredible. Incredible wig work.
>> Yeah. How do we feel about the John Brana portion of this this film? Should we should we go into that now or?
>> Well, and you know what? It's it's I'm glad you brought that up because I just had a conversation this morning with uh with someone about that and I I mean it it didn't he didn't center himself as much as I thought he was, right? I thought there was going to be more of John Branka, but it wasn't. And so, I think for me that was a bit of a relief that, you know, we did not get an overwhelming uh amount of screen time from that character. So I I guess I went in thinking that it was, you know, we were just going to get Brana. Like I I feel like we had more Bill Bray um than we had John Branka. And so um you know that that's just that was my take on that. Well, the the first note I made to myself in that film and know we didn't have massive amounts of John Branker and I understand that and and I want to preface what I'm about to say with the the knowledge that John Bracker did make some very good decisions for Michael Jackson during his lifetime. Did some very good work for Michael Jackson during his lifetime. And even you could argue he'd made some very good decisions after Michael's death as well. But he's also made some terrible ones uh which are very questionable which we won't get into here. But the first note I made during the movie was the Bill Bray character hinting to Michael, get your own team, get a good lawyer. And I thought, okay, well, this is the setup for where John Branker comes in and saves the day. And the John Branker character was inserted in at times where critical decisions were to be made um with regards to Michael's success. uh and he did posit himself um that you know these decisions may or may not happen if it weren't for John Branker's presence. Having said that though there's one glaring emission when it comes to John Branker's contribution to Michael's life which is not mentioned in any way, shape or form during the movie despite it being the era that the movie was set and that was the purchase of the ATV catalog with the Beatles music and and all the rest. I thought, well, hang on. That is the single most profitable thing during Michael Jackson's lifetime that John Branka did for Michael Jackson and it's not mentioned in the movie. I'd have thought that that would have been, you know, to be fair to him if this was, you know, a big solo circle jerk for John Branker.
That would have been his biggest selling point. But he didn't or they didn't include that in. And I I'm just curious as to that because many could argue that as well as the the um the accident with the Pepsi commercial, the purchase of the ATV catalog was sort of the beginning of Michael's problems for the rest of his life and the and the fight for the value of that catalog. I'm going to venture a theory here, right? My theory is that the reason a lot of this film seems to have no plot is because a lot of the plot revolved around John Branker. And after the [ __ ] up over the settlement contract, I suspect there was a big falling out and that there almost a spiteful tit for tat situation has gone on and they've just cut most of John Branker out of the film. They couldn't cut him out completely because Miles Teller is one of the only like properly famous people in the film. But my suspect, so for example, Mottown 25 in this film just happens. It just we're just watching the film and all of a sudden it's Mottown 25. No buildup. Nobody mentions what Mottown 25 is. Nobody mentions the amazing decision that Michael made to say, "I will not participate unless you let me be the only artist on the bill that does a non-Mottown song." And how he turns that performance into basically the second most famous thing he ever did, apart from the thriller video, that none of this is mentioned. And I suspect it's because in the first iteration of the film, maybe we had Michael and John Branker go, "Oh, I don't know if I should do it." Well, Michael, you should do it, but you should tell them you'll only do it if you can do Billy G. So, probably that's why that's gone. And similarly with the thriller video, because again, no context. So, we just suddenly were at the thriller video that you know, and then we're not and then that was that and you're just going, "What the [ __ ] This is this is a worldchanging thing. This is arguably the most important thing Michael ever did in his career. Certainly the most influential thing he did in his career in terms of the music industry. And it just sort of flies past with no context at all. And it's such an important story because the record label refused. They said, "You're insane. We're not paying for this.
You're an idiot. If you think this is going to be helpful, if you think this is going to make money, you're crackers.
The the album's already been out for 2 years." So Michael said, "Well, if you don't believe in it, I believe in it."
And he did it himself. He did it without the record company's support, and it turned into the most important thing he ever did in his career. And in this film, we get none of that. None of it at all. And you're just going, why? This is not a logical decision. This is a decision which does not make any sense at all. Uh from a writing perspective, from an editing perspective, this is insane. It's demented. So, there must be a reason that that's all missing. And I suspect it's because maybe this was a Brankerheavy portion of the film and they have fallen out with John Branker.
Maybe that's that's the theory that I'm advancing. Uh >> I think those are brilliant points, Charlie. Truly, that makes so much sense. Yeah, that even from just my first viewing, at least in my mind, I can be I can understand why I'm so confused. I could be like, "Oh, okay. If I if I paint the brush of it's it's bits of John Branka's amazing story that have been taken out, that would make a great deal of sense."
So, yeah, great thoughts on that.
>> So, let's talk a little bit about Jafar.
What do you think of his per performance as Michael?
>> Well, performance versus writing. So, I think he does a great job of embodying Michael physically um and vocally.
The the the makeup is a bit I mean it's the the the hair and makeup on this film I think is brilliant. Apart from the consistency of Michael, which is just all over the place, Jafar looks completely different from scene to scene to scene. You you go to Mottown 25 and in the close-ups he looks absolutely nothing like Michael at all and then you go to Victory Tour or the Burn or something and all of a sudden he does again. It's is wildly inconsistent. But he personally does a great job.
However, I do think the character is not particularly well fleshed out. It's a very simplistic and almost martyr like portrayal of Michael which is I well look this is what I kept thinking of when I came out of the cinema last night right there's there's an episode of the Simpsons basically where everybody thinks that there's this alien that's coming to Springfield once a week and it turns out is actually the local power plant operator Mr. Burns who has a a natural green glow cuz of all the years he spent in the nuclear power plant and he gets dosed up once a week with happy medication and then he wanders through the town glowing and going I bring you love, I bring you peace. And that is kind of the impression that I was left with of of the portrayal of Michael in this film. He comes across almost like a simpleton, like a village simpleton who is just like, I need to shine my light.
I believe in peace and love. And it's like this is so 2D. It's almost cartoonish.
It's kind of pathetic really. The the way it's been written. Um I thought that the whole Peter Pan thing is really poorly executed. And this is what I was talking about when I said earlier that my problems are really about omissions.
So you have this very strange storyline that keeps recurring through the film of Michael just being obsessed with this Peter Pan book in a way and it comes across almost like he's in love with Peter Pan or he has a crush on him or something whereas you know clearly the intent was to suggest that he wants to be Peter Pan which is what he said himself but there so but there's no context for it. So, we get one scene where Michael says to Catherine, "I can't make friends my age because all they want to do is take pictures of me."
But beyond that, we don't really get much of an insight into the way that adulthood was forced onto Michael as a kid, which is something you could have done really easily. You could have um you could have, you know, dramatized the moment that he recalls in various interviews about recording at the Mottown studio and looking out of the window and all the other kids are playing in the park across the road while he has to work. You could have shown him having contracts foisted in front of him as a kid or whatever, but there's just there is a lack of depth to the character, which I think is almost entirely due to a lack of contextualization of what's happening in the film. Um, and so I think Jafar does good work with what he's been given.
Um, however, the way the character comes across in the film is almost caricatururish and kind of, you know, kind of it's sort of uncomfortable the way that it he they're sort of beating you around the head with the idea that he was just this saintly martyr character who just wandered around hospital wings and loved his pets and, you know, It's just it's 2D. It's just a very cartoonish portrayal. And um I again I don't I don't know how much of this is a writing issue and how much of this is an editing issue because again it's it's so kind of you know potato print that you can't imagine that a professional writer would have written it in this way. So, I saw an interview with um Screen Rant, I think it was, where Antoine Fukqua said that the they were editing the film up until a few days before it premiered. So, my sneaking suspicion is that somewhere on the floor of the editing room is a good film and uh and they just ran out of time. It seems like they had four cuz we know the film when it was first cut together was 4 hours. It seems like they had 4 hours of material, not enough time to edit it into a film and this is the sort of that will do edit or that's going to have to do edit. I just kind of feel like it's been cobbled together in a rush.
It's probably an editing issue rather than a writing issue. But yeah, you know, you know, well done Jafar. But it's the way the film is constructed is sort of ridiculous really in terms of the way Michael it kind of it's it's uncomfortable the way that Michael is um present. Elise you used the word infantilized I think earlier. Um is this kind of what you were getting at as well?
>> Yeah. So this this is absolutely my uh number one issue with my first viewing and an issue I continue to have even through the more enjoyable second viewing is absolutely I feel like they are infantilizing him in in an effort I think this is related to to kind of the seeds they're planting in the first film for what they have to go through in the potential second film as well to to the point of like all this depressing stuff we're going to experience. They want to build our, you know, empathy with Michael, right? Um, and in the process, I feel that they go way, way overboard.
Uh, and yes, I completely agree with everything you say, Charlie, about him being two-dimensional um, and literally infantilizing him. He We see no sense.
We've got no sense at all of his adult life. We see a flash of Studio 54. There was stuff going on over there. He did like go on dates with people. there's he acts like just such a such a child. It just it's unfortunate. Um and uh and I I I see what they were trying to do with doing the Peter Pan stuff with his relationship with his pets. Um even with some people are going to hate me for saying this, but even with going to visit the children at the hospital, which I loved, do not get me wrong. I am so glad that's in the film, but they go, it feels almost desperate how far they go with some of that stuff. The over-the-top showing the Peter Pan book like six times through the movie. Um, you're like, number one, it shows a from a storytelling angle shows a distrust of the audience where I'm like, we got guys, we got the point two times ago.
Uh, but you keep showing it to us. Um, and and number two, it just it doesn't allow for any space for any real character development. And I felt very bad. Also with the pets, I was like, uh, people were laughing and going a with when we meet Bubbles, but dude, Bubbles should not be in that film. I am sorry.
Um, the CGI Bubbles.
So, >> okay. So, I I just let me jump in because that's exactly what I thought.
Did anyone else think the bubbles was CGI?
>> Oh, 100% all of the animals were CGI.
The snake, the llama, Bubbles, the I'm pretty sure there was some other animals in there as well, but my issue with the bubbles thing. When did Michael actually get Bubbles? I mean, there was a timeline thing. I don't think he got Bubbles as early as they depicted in the movie.
>> Well, no, he he did not. And then also, and this is just an aside, but when he when they brought Bubbles to the house, they wake up, you know, Joe and Catherine and Latoya. And then Tito and Marlin, like Tito and Marlin didn't live there for at least 10 years because they were married and with children and in their own homes. And so that's one of those things where it's like, okay, you're substituting Tito and Marlin in there for Randy and Janet, which we can talk about later in terms of their omission, >> the disappeared Jackson siblings.
>> Exactly. So you so you substitute the two who are married with kids as if they they're living in this house at Havenhurst and he you're waking them up.
So, um, no, Bubbles came during the Thriller era, but I think they are intro they introduced him the off-the-wall era.
>> Yeah, that I mean, the CGI animals, there was a bit of comic relief in them a bit later in the movie and that there's an image of Joe Jackson incredulous about something and then the shadow of a giraffe just walking behind him in the background, which I thought was hilarious.
>> Well, no, I mean, it is it's funny. I thought I thought it added this like lightness to it that actually was really helpful, but it's taking the place of character development that we so need in this film that you just think what are we losing by like CGI bubbles, you know, and also again in the same way that there's there's the way the Peter Pan thing is handled is so hamfisted that it almost comes across like Michael like has a crush on Peter Pan. You keep seeing these shots of him, you know, looking longingly at the book and running his fingers over pictures of Peter Pan and stuff and he's sort of going, "What what is this? This is kind of sending totally the wrong message actually." And he again there was a a scene cuz you get this sort of you get this scene where um Michael brings twi he goes out toy shopping and he comes home to his family and says, "Guys, I bought Twister. Can we all play Twister?
And they're all going, "No, I've got a date with a woman. No, I've got a date with a woman." And Michael's like, "Oh, gee, yeah." And he's he's clearly has no interest in women in this film, which is never explained, and leaves it open to the suggestion that he has some kind of alternate sexuality. And then the next thing you see is him laying on the floor with bubbles a stride him. And you're sort of going, "What the fuck?" You know, this who thought this was a good idea? It's kind of almost implying that Michael has some kind of romance with the monkey. So, it's the way the film is put together. There were some really uncomfortable moments with the way it's been put together where you could feel a kind of an anxiety going through the audience in the cinema and that was one of them. Um, >> with his llama as well, not just Bubbles.
>> Oh, yeah. When he's nuzzling the llama.
What the [ __ ] is that? Yeah. It's all very It's very [ __ ] Oh my god. It's just, you know, there is some real bad work in this film. I've got to say real real badly put together segments. I >> I I think they really wanted to and they tried to do that to humanize him. Um but I think they went just a bit overboard with it. Uh but the other thing that I I saw a glimpse of was the fact that and we'll talk about Coleman Domingo's betrayal of Joe uh later. But I think we got a chance to see that Michael is truly Joseph's son, right?
There was a level of toughness. There's a level of ruthlessness in Michael that we all know um in terms of business-wise um during that whole Brana scene, right?
you know, we saw, you know, a shift from all of the infantilizing, all the Peter Pan in that one scene where Michael clears the room and now he is taking control himself. Um, and so I I felt like I needed I needed to see more of that because that's who Michael really was. Michael for as much as as much as he had a he was so much he was filled with so much anxiety around Joseph, he was his son, right? And he he learned some some some of the tricks of the trade from Joseph that benefited him as he was taking control of his life.
With regard to my thoughts on Jafar, I you know, I'd seen from the stills and the trailer um what the visual side was was going to look like and how he was going to move in part. And um I was like, well, I'm not going to be able to suspend belief enough, but as I said before, if I close my eyes and maybe listen to the music, I can I can get there enough to en enjoy this performance. Um um but surprisingly contradictory to what I said earlier I thought Jafar's performance was the physicality of his performance was absolutely incredible. Um I think he gave probably 110 120% of what was asked of him. I think they told him hi we need you to do AB and C and he went away and did his homework through the night so that next day on stage he was more than ready jaw-droppingly ready. Was I able to suspend belief enough when seeing him perform that I I thought there's a glimpse of Michael or I feel Michael or I I I see that he's being Michael? No, I I didn't. Was I put off by his his vocal performance um of Michael's voice? No. I I thought that was really acceptable and accepted it straight away. Brilliant. Um seeing him perform the various routines, I thought he was tremendous. his the physicality to which he brought the role was superb and I if I had to see the film again it would be to watch him actually act. He's a tremendous talent.
Um I think it's just everything he's currently in and amongst within within the context and what he's been told to say with dialogue and what's been shown us through editing has really let this performance down. Um, but he himself, wonderful, incredible. That was the best part of the film for me was seeing this man act to this level with within the physicality of embodying somebody else.
Um, you could tell he was giving it his heart and his soul.
>> I absolutely concur with that. I mean, one thing that, um, Charlie Thompson and I both get criticized for at times is negativity. And we've both openly said that when it comes to Michael Jackson impersonators, there is not anyone out there that comes even remotely close to being, you know, allowing you to suspend belief for a moment that it's actually Michael Jackson in front of you. Jafar's performance as his uncle is outstanding.
that the the moves are this the closest I've come to suspending belief that and like you say his his ability to bring Michael Jackson um out in a way that no other impersonator can is is something that deserves massive credit. Um, I seem to be the only one that is of the the thought that the voice that was used in that is at least partially AI generated because some of it is just far too accurate. I've never even heard anyone do a good Michael speaking voice, let alone uh, you know, the dancing and the singing and all of that. I think Jeffrey Perez is probably the closest when it comes to a singing voice, but I've never heard anyone do a good speaking voice.
So, I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I I'm sort of convinced at this stage that a lot of the the Michael speaking voice was AI generated. Um, I might be wrong. Feel free to prove me wrong. And I just want to just go back to something Sean said there about Michael being Joseph's son and showing tremendous strength and things like that. Um, I agree. Now, in the opening 10-15 minutes of the movie, which spoiler alert is a very very tough watch if you haven't watched it already, I found it very very difficult to watch those particular scenes depicted of of pretty much just, you know, Michael saying something maybe marginally out of line and then basically being thrashed with a belt by Joseph. I found that incredibly difficult to watch the, you know, the screaming child. It just it it it did something to me. I didn't didn't like it. Didn't like the way it made me feel. But when we talk about Michael's strength in some of the books, I think in Jay Randy Terabarelli's book, there's an account of after a beating one time, Michael turning around and and saying to Joe, "If you beat me one more time, I'll never sing again." And I felt like that they could have possibly inserted that in the movie to show that Michael had that strength, even as a child, to occasionally stand up to Joseph. Um, and that could have quite nicely led into the part as an adult where he's then trying to find his own independence and trying to move away from Joseph and the and the rest of the family to do his own thing. Do you guys have any similar thoughts or do you reckon?
>> Yeah, I mean I think I love I wish he had said a line like that. I agree with you. Um, also agree that oh my god like yeah him being beaten um especially when he's holding the belt himself in the bathroom or whatever and looking at Joe.
Oh my god. As a parent especially, I'm going to feel I'm going to get teary right now talking about it. But um I almost feel like if they had had that line in there, he would have been standing up to him too early. They de It's like they delayed him standing up to him as long as they possibly could, which plays into everything I just said with like the almost like over innocence they lean into. Um so I don't know if that would have completely fit that narrative, but I would have loved to have seen that. And I want to emphasize too, I absolutely love Jafar's performance as well. I thought he was also outstanding with what he had to work with. I would I hope we get to see more from Jafar Jackson. I think he did an incredible job. I'm curious about that question you brought up on the um if they did kind of AI his voice at all because there were even moments where he like his voice kind of would stumble in the same way that Michael Jackson did and I just thought how could you how could you even recreate that even as a amazing actor. Um I don't know the answer but he is he is really is quite incredible even if his voice even if his face does kind of change a bit. I thought they did a pretty good job with his noses throughout time too more or less. Um, I I thought it was pretty convincing.
>> I think they did pretty well as well. I mean, there were sometimes with the the dialogue, like you know how Michael would sometimes, ironically, that's the word I chose. He wouldn't say the s on the end of the word like sometime. He'd be sometime I do this or sometime I do that instead of sometimes. I noticed that they they kept the s on when Jafar said I I picked it out one time in the movie. Um, I'm happy to be proven wrong if it's not AI. It's just it sounds too good. You know what I mean? And not just the speaking voice. Um I actually thought during the Thriller dance section, I was watching the legs of of all the dancers and if there's such a thing, it seemed a little bit too crisp, like possibly there was some AI enhancements to some of the dancing scenes there. Again, I might be wrong.
>> I think you're right. I think that there's a couple of moments where they sort of jump up and then they land. I I thought either it was kind of CGIed or possibly they'd filmed it slow and then um sped it up.
>> There was something about it that didn't quite look right.
>> Yeah, maybe that was it. But um there was definitely an alteration made >> on the the whole issue of Joe, the the portrayal of Joe.
I actually thought I I noticed at the end of the film that all most of the surviving siblings and one of the deceased siblings listed as um executive producers and I kind of I although Joe certainly doesn't come across well in this film I did think that they still soft soaped him a bit. So, you get that one scene where he very savagely beats Michael, but that is a scene where Michael defies him in some way. And to present what Joe did to the kids in that way, it kind it really does downplay what a terrible abusive person he was. Cuz this is not somebody who whipped his kids because they smashed the window or who whipped his kids because they dropped a glass and it broke. This is a guy who, according to Michael, used to stand over his children and have them rehearse dance steps with an iron cord in his hand and if they missed a dance step, he would beat and whip them with an iron cord. So, this is it is a level of savagery which is just horrific. It's just absolutely horrific abuse that that he was subjected to. And that wasn't even that wasn't even the extent of it. He used to beat them with switches. He used to lock them in cupboards. He used to climb in through their window at night with a a mask on and pretend he was going to murder them.
I What the [ __ ] is that all about? He used to cheat on their mother brazenly while they were on the road and sort of make them complicit in it, which is a terrible thing to do to your children.
And so you have this portrayal of Michael. You can see throughout the film, Michael is clearly very uneasy around his father and sort of slightly scared. But again, in Michael's own interviews, he says, "I was so terrorized by my father that even into adulthood, if I found out I was in the same place as him, I would involuntarily throw up. I would regurgitate." And that level of trauma is not represented in the film. And again, you get all this sort of wishy-washy Peter Pan stuff, but it sort of isn't really properly contextualized.
So, Michael just kind of comes across as a weirdo because the extent of the trauma to which he was subjected is not really properly depicted. the consequences of that trauma and the way that they play out in his in his personality and demeanor and decision-m doesn't really make sense in the film.
Um, and it's just a real narrative failure. I think it's interesting cuz Sean, you mentioned earlier, you brought up Ry, and to me, Ry is like the definitive um biopic. It's just a it's just a perfect film. And the people that made Ry were actually the people that were originally in negotiations to make the Michael film. Um, but reportedly, uh, Graham King got in touch with the estate and said, "Those guys will make you a couple of hundred million, but I'll make you a billion."
So, they went with Graeme King instead.
And I I really wish they'd gone with the Ray people because I'm sure we would have got a much better film.
>> I I think that was Taylor Hackford uh that did Ray. Um, >> yeah.
>> And as far as Joe, um, and I've spoken about this before, you know, and I I I don't make excuses for for Joe. Um, but I felt like in this this this movie, he was pretty one-dimensional. Um, and I think that was very disappointing. Um, because I think they really just set out to make him the antagonist and and and it was just it was too over the top for me. Uh, and what I was hoping for, and I know we talked about this in the trailer episode, uh, was a little bit more nuance, and again, I come back to the, um, the American dream, uh, you know, and Lawrence Hilton Jacobs. And if you take those two portrayals of Joe, um, you find that you it's his character is a little bit more, there's more to it, right? You you don't, again, you see the brutality. You see him actually in in in in American Dream, you know, having the affair. um on Katherine and you know everything that we that we know about Joe uh we got to see at American Dream uh and in this one it's just he's just like someone said to me this morning he's like Scar from the Lion King, right? That's that's how I that's how you view him um in this movie. Um, and so that's that's kind of disappointing.
And it was interesting that it was it was so obvious that the the scene in the movie where uh they fax him uh his termination letter um and when he got it, the audience, the theater audience started to applaud. And so I mean I I get it from that standpoint like, okay, Michael has finally reached that, you know, independent level where, you know, he's fighting firing Joe. Um, but it just it was it that did not sit well with me because it just there was so much more to it, right? And and that just kind of symbolized the fact that they made him into just an evil character. Um, and whereas they went overboard like I think they went overboard on both characters. Went overboard on Michael in terms of this Peter Pan narrative and then they went overboard on on Joe like this. Again, I'll use this the scar from the Lion King narrative. They they went overboard on both and where they could have a good story, a good narrative could have met somewhere in the middle. Um, in terms of humanizing both of them, >> that that was another moment of comic relief I found as well. And when he gets the facts, terminating him, and when he finally confronts Michael with it, the first thing he says was, "I was thinking about getting this framed. I thought that was a funny line at all."
>> Yeah. Yeah. I like that one as well.
Yes. Um, >> there is no evidence that that actually was the way that happened. Is that right? The facts. I mean, >> I don't know, but if if it didn't h happen that way, it's just more evidence of a well done Brana scene. But, um, Sean, it's >> funny. I liked it, but >> I I thought it was a by letter. I thought it thought it was something by like either a letter or it was delivered. Um, I just thought like fax machine in the early 80s, I guess. I I don't know. I didn't I if someone can tell me when fax machines became a thing but um yeah I I thought it I thought it was by letter if that's what I thought.
>> I I would have thought that he would need to have it as physical paper for a legal reason anyway.
>> Right.
>> Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm wrong. Oddly enough, I really didn't I walked into this film really thinking that I wouldn't see the beating as quite so obvious as we saw it. I thought it would be to one side or some, you know, some screaming or we'd see a belt and then it would cut to the next screen, but to sit there and just watch somebody portraying a young Michael physically be beaten again and again and again with others watching in the scene was I found so disturbing. And then every time Joe was then on screen again, I was definitely tense. I was like, whoa, are we am I going to be subjected to seeing that again? What like what's going to happen?
It really put me Yeah, it was like you said Sean, it was too it was too dark too soon and too much of a caricature of that darkness, but for me, it definitely warranted its certification of 12 here in the UK. And I definitely wouldn't have wanted my 10-year-old daughter to see it, however much she may like, Michael.
>> Yeah. But, you know, it's so it's interesting that in American Dream, there were two scenes like that, one with Marlin and one with Cheeto, right? Um, and he didn't he didn't use the belt on Michael, but he those there were two scenes there where you had that um again with them giving the beating and the crying and the kids are sitting around crying because you know they they have to to watch this. But then you you you contrast that with there's a scene where Joe is walking through they're walking I guess they're shopping um with Catherine and he's talking about dropping Marlin from the group and you know they have this there's this real human moment there where you know he's talking about wanting them to to to to be their best and Mara's not living up to it and Catherine's kind of standing up to him um and saying no and so do you have those moments there in American Dream where he he is brutal like that.
You see that, but then you have sort of an explanation as to why he's that way.
Again, I'm not making any excuses for it, but you begin to understand his motivation and the fact that that's how and I think he did say that in American Dream. That's how I was raised. That's what worked for me, right? And and so you begin to understand that here it's just he he stands over him, he he beats him, and that's it. And it's just all the one-dimensional stuff, and it's just it was just too much. And that's again, that's why um it just it you're right when he came on screen, you know, it's just like you you knew there was a lot of tension there. Um you can feel it.
And and I guess I could understand why when that scene happened, the the audience broke out in the round of applause. um because that's what they were going for. But then there was also the other scene where after Michael was burned um and he was in the hospital and they were asking and Joe went and asked him like when will he get back when when will he be able to perform again? And again that scene makes it appear that all Joe cared about was getting him back on stage to make money. Now, now that may be a part of it, but I think the point that people miss is that he knew his son. He knew that the best way for him to to heal um and to be who he is is to get on that stage and to perform. And so I saw that I I immediately picked up on the fact that Joe knows his son and he cares about his son. He loves his son and he has a has a he has a different way of showing it. But I think that question because of the way he portray was portrayed comes across as I only care about him getting back on stage to make money. Not the I know my son and my son needs to do this. He wants to do this and in the back of his mind that's why he's fighting me so much because he wants to do it on his own terms. And so that's kind of where I the rub is for me with the character because you you you're portraying him in though in that way but there's another part that you're not you know you're not allowing to come through.
>> Well he also says in that scene the stage is where he lives which I think is to your point as well. There is that kind of duality going on.
>> Definitely. Definitely. And that the the other side of it is it's not like they don't show others sometimes standing up to Joe in the movie. Like for example, after the Mottown 25 performance and Joe comes in saying, "Oh, you know, the Jacksons are back and you know, it's great for the Jacksons and blah blah blah."
>> And the character playing, I'm pretty sure it was Tito sort of went up to him and went couldn't give him one night, huh?
And I thought that was an interesting line to try and sort of someone actually say to Joe, just leave him alone for a little bit.
>> Right.
>> I want to say a couple things about this. First of all, kind of to follow up with everything you're just saying right now. For me, the most powerful line of the entire movie is between Joe and Michael a little bit later when Michael's kind of finally really standing up to him and looking him in the eyes and then he says, you know, going forward, do you want to be surrounded by yes men your the rest of your life, which of course is also foreshadowing, you know, everything's to come. I I found that deeply powerful. It also really I think encapsulates that duality of like how maybe awful Joe has been and that he does need to break free but in a way you know there is protection there is family there too.
There are bad things to come right without that family unit. Um but I'm also it's interesting to hear you guys and Charlie you made some really great Charlie Thompson. you made some really great points earlier too about the fact that we're not seeing so much of the actual truly horrible stuff Joe did and yet that I'm also hearing Sean and Charlie Carter you saying that it was very very upsetting to actually see the beating in the beginning. So, I'm just trying to kind of pose a maybe question here is perhaps then they were trying to kind of find this middle ground by going ahead and showing the beating, throwing us off right at the beginning of the the movie so that we would feel that tension throughout without maybe going maybe it would have felt so over the top if we had continued to see just how truly horrible he was.
Um, even like his affairs, I actually felt when we meet Susan Depos, I actually felt a weird like sexual energy in that scene when they're talking backstage. I don't know if you guys noticed that as well. So, I don't I don't know if they're trying to suggest some of those things through those moments. Um, but couldn't didn't either didn't have the time or just didn't want to completely go over the top in that particular aspect. I don't know. But Simon, why don't you chime in?
>> Yeah, I think I I felt that too. Um, I think I think the audience was supposed to feel that. It's very hard to tell with some of these scenes without dialogue, which is which is mad. You know, he's looking he's he's in theory looking at her, but we're as the audience also watching the performance to one side. Is this a business opportunity that he's savvy to for the family and this is their next step? Or is he does he have a sexual interest and that's why he's so I don't know enamored or awakened to this apparent opportunity? Is it a opportunity for himself or is it a bigger opportunity for the family? Um, and then it's kind of dropped. We don't see anything else and then, oh, it's an opportunity for the family that that ultimately happens as we know. Um, and we're shown, but it it just wasn't clear enough. It just wasn't clear enough. It feels like one of many dead ends. That's that was what I came away with. Vitiligo. They talk about Michael's vitiligo for about 7 seconds in this film. He's like in a doctor's surgery. The nurse says, "Oh, is it spread?" And he says, "Yes." and then it's just never mentioned again.
You know, that is something that would have been so easy and actually helpful for this film to properly explore. And it's not like we have to have a whole film about visa, but for it to just sort of pass by in 7 seconds or whatever it was, maybe it was 12 seconds. Let's be generous. But it's just like, you know, just sort of skimmed over in such a cursory way. But then we get all this time of Michael giggling with a CGI monkey. Do you know what I mean? It just feels like deci bad decisions have been made in terms of what to include and what not to include. And there's so many kind of dead ends. You get the Barry Gordy relationship where you clearly see Michael sort of seeing in Barry Gordy a father figure that he doesn't have in Joe where he puts his arms around him and then you just never see Barry Gordy again. to say is like, "Oh, he's the new father figure. Oh, he's gone." You know, it's it just sort of sets things up and then doesn't complete them. And again, this may be an editing issue. It may be that there is more to that and it's still on the floor somewhere. But, um, yeah, it just felt like one of many alleys that the film kind of started to walk up and then we just cut to something else and it never went anywhere. I will just briefly say that that was one thing I felt I noticed on the second viewing um is that a lot of these dropped things I mean Barry Gordy I real I agree he like is hardly in the movie and it feels weird but even stuff like um the vitiligo uh on the second viewing I actually noticed at least I think I noticed like kind of subtle references at least like showing it more times than I realized they did on the first viewing. So stuff like that, I could kind of see them trying to work into the more subtle contextual storytelling a little bit more than I noticed the first time around, which gave me perhaps a bit of reassurance in them at least making an effort to um to weave things in.
Yeah, I think I remember seeing a maybe a glove pull down a little bit or some kind of ruffle of some kind of fabric against skin that the shot lingered on for a bit, but there was you could I don't think you could see Michael's face at that moment. I think we could only see the skin. So again, the audience was left to >> I guess summarize what that actually meant, but it could easily be missed. It could easily just be like, "Okay, well this doesn't really why are we being shown this? I don't know. I don't know any of this." So at least you you you brought up um Barry Gordy. Um and again I I for me Jafar kind of really carried the day for this movie. Um you know not you know the storyline notwithstanding.
I think Jafar was um outstanding. Um but let's talk about some of the other characters. Uh Neil Long as Katherine, Loren Tate as Barry Gordy. Um, Kendrick Samson is uh Quincy Jones and we've already talked about Miles Teller as John Branka. But what are your what are your thoughts on those characters?
Like what did we cuz I feel like we did not for as great an actor as Loren Tate is we got him in what two scenes. Um, Neil Long as Katherine.
She didn't really feel like the Catherine that we've heard about in Michael's life. again the Catherine that we saw in American Dream. So I I just want to get your take on what you guys felt about those characters and and also the Bill Bray character. I mean it felt like there was almost no character development for anyone. Um Barry Gordy appears and disappears. Susan Deass appears and disappears. Bill Bray is there in most scenes not doing anything.
Um, I suppose Coleman Domingo obviously gets a lot to do and Nolong does, you know, with what she's given, she does a great job. She has a couple of emotional scenes, but the film kind of just feels dominated by recreations of music videos and um, performances. I suppose the only notable thing that I came away that I sort of remember is Mike Meyers popping up as um Yetnikov, which was um again a sort of a potato print version of a of a story line there that lasted about a minute and a half.
But um you know, >> I loved that scene though. I thought that was great.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. But it would have been nice again to see the consequence. So, you know, he makes the phone call.
We never see Michael on MTV. We never learn about the fact that the introduction of Michael to MTV actually saves the channel, ends up be becoming its saving grace, makes it all his money. So, it kind it feels like another dead end where it's like we're setting up this plot. Oh, it just doesn't go anywhere. So um I mean I'm struggling to think of anyone really apart from common Domingo apart from Jafar who is given much to do that is worth remarking upon.
I just can't really think of any anyone in the film that that had a a lot of dramatic stuff to do. Am I have I just got a [ __ ] memory or >> No, I think you nailed it. Nailed it.
Yeah, I totally agree with you and I I I actually liked Nia Long's kind of subtle like quiet performance that I actually found to be very powerful ultimately.
Also, she's like the most gorgeous woman in the world. She that bone structure is amazing. Um but um I actually liked her performance a lot and her approach to it. Um and I thought it was nuanced in interesting ways and felt very like real and I felt very connected to her. But for sure agree with you on the rest. Um, and especially, oh my gosh, the poor Jackson siblings are just like who are such an essential part of the story are just shadows. I just felt so bad for the real people they're based on watching this just, you know, I mean, God, I don't know. They were shadows.
>> Yeah. Nong did a great job as Katherine.
was I think they tried to portray her in in line with how Michael saw her in terms of, you know, a very loving and calming influence um that he could turn to in in times of need or or when he needed just a little bit of balance in in um in in the advice that he was getting. He he'd turn to her perhaps. So, um I think that they deliberately portrayed her as that sort of soft character. um one scene in particular where she's standing up next to Joseph and a little bit sort of tense there thinking right all right well how's he going to react to that I hope he doesn't react with violence cuz that would just be a devastating scene to see um as for Barry Gordy I felt like the scene where they had him directing Michael in the studio you know childhood Michael in the studio it seemed like Barry Gordy a little grumpy in those scenes. And I might well be wrong, but my the everything I remember reading about Barry Gordy in those sessions and anything he had to do with Michael was that he was very again very calm, very soft, very like fatherly, which then leads to childhood Michael in the movie going up and giving him a hug in front of Joseph. Um, so yeah, I don't know if it was just me, but he just seems to be like, "Stop moving your feet. You're doing it again." It's like just calm down, mate.
>> Did you notice also Quincy does that?
Quincy when they're recording together, he says, "Stop moving your feet." And it's like, >> "No, that's the opposite of what happened."
>> They had that in the trailer, too, which I'm like, "Yeah, everybody was like, "That's not how that >> I I thought that that was going to foreshadow later in the film of him moving his feet and being accepted moving his feet and giving his all and look, Michael's really just being himself and he's free to be." It just never happened.
>> Well, that's never went right. I I'm I'm more than happy to believe that it happened in the the Mottown sessions where they told him to stop moving his feet and they have that a precursor to and actually that scene in the movie when you have the full context of the movie when Quincy said it, it did come over as a little bit more of a joke than a an instruction.
>> So, you know, maybe it was a development of uh of Michael's character inside the studio. Um and it was done pretty well cuz I it didn't stand out to me in the movie as much as it did in the trailer.
when you see the trailer and like the are you talking about? Everyone knows that Michael Jackson would dance and clap and spit and do all sorts of crap in the studio while he was recording.
What? Why would you tell him not to move his feet? You know, we all got a little bit animated about that, but in the full context of the movie, maybe it was more of a a light-hearted throwaway line.
>> So, what are we to make of the Diana Ross character being cut?
>> For legal reasons, according to the actress that played her, she put something out on Instagram saying, "My character was cut out for legal reasons." I mean >> that might be just be that Diana Ross didn't give her permission. She just withdrew her permission in the same way that you know Paris and Janet and others just said, "Hey, don't want to be in it." Maybe it was just as simple as that.
>> So Janet, Randy, Revy were not included.
Um what are we to make of that omission?
Did it Did it stand out to you um as much as it did for me in terms of Janet and Randy?
>> 100% 100% it did for me. Maybe not for you, Charlie, but it did for me. But it was a glaring I won't say a glaring omission because it was a choice. It it was the the people involved choice. And so it's almost as if they couldn't be put in the movie. We all know they're part of the story and therefore that's why it's a a pretty massive hole. Um but it I don't think it's due to an oversight from the people making the movie.
>> I just what what would they be doing in the film? Okay. You know, I mean, the siblings that are in the film are not really doing anything. So, I mean, Janet in the Jackson 5 days was a toddler. Um, by the time this film effectively ends in 1984, she's still not really gone anywhere.
Um, I mean, what what do what do we want to see her doing in the background of what scene? Do you know what I mean? I just I didn't feel her absence. I didn't feel there was anything massively important that having her in it could have contributed um particularly except for the fact that you do think of a movie like this basically gets in the history books right like people going forward they now believe that a fax was sent to fire Joe right they now believe this they now believe that so in this reality there's one female Jackson sibling you know and I think that is a bit weird But I think you're right, too. They would have just been shadows slashwisps in the air as well and wouldn't have added anything necessarily, but it just felt a little bit weird to me to keep, you know, to continue to see Latoya bouncing into the scenes, but no one else.
>> Yeah. And, you know, for me, it's it's um I think part of is as fans, we we know too much, right? We we know how much uh you know, Janet and Randy was around um during that time, right? So I I think of the scene where he was going to the studio um creating demos. Well, we know that Randy was pivotal and during those times where he was the one that was, you know, playing the instruments for Michael that. So those demos came out, especially during the Destiny offthe-wall years, right? So uh Randy and Michael were in the studio recording and Janet for that matter as well. Um, and and then also the, you know, just the dynamics in in the home, right? Like you said, Latoya's constantly popping up. Well, I think Janet was there as well. So, I I just think that that really and then also the victory tour uh scenes where they were doing uh working day and night uh and and then there's the the the conga solo and they kind of hinted at it and they showed it and then cut away real quick. Well, we know that's Ry's part, right? and and and there was such a an energy between Michael and Randy.
And so to have not have him there um really just for me as a fan and and a fan of the Jacksons um just as much as Michael, that really for me just kind of threw it all off. That just I I could not enjoy it as much as I wanted to because I knew Randy uh was such an important part of Michael's life during that time.
Can I just pose a question to everyone on the call? Um, I was on the phone to Jamon, I think yesterday, and we had a discussion about how the film seems to be almost afraid to address the issue of race and racism, which is such an incredibly important part of Michael's story in terms of the way he was treated by the M. Well, for Off the Wall, I mean, nobody mentions in this film that Off-the-Wall is the becomes the biggest selling black album of all time. Nobody mentions that despite this, he still can't get on the cover of a mainstream magazine, that the Grammys snub him.
Nobody mentions that the fact that all this sort of prejudice and snubbing happens is the motivation for Thriller.
thriller is motivated by Michael's fury at institutional racism and his determination to go out and create something that will break down racial barriers and it's just kind of it's it's all sort of just wafted over. Um >> well yeah the only time it's mentioned is in that that room with um the Mike Myers Walter Yetnikov um is literally the only time it's mentioned.
>> Like you said the main time race as is mentioned really is any part of this struggle of this journey that we're supposed to be seeing >> is when two lead actors who are white are pivotal in this very short scene.
It's just not good enough. But uh but but the one thing that I did notice um again it's one of those things where I I was nitpicking but you get to that scene right and he's talking about being a proud black American and wanting to you know you know be on MTV yet when you go back and you look at the Jackson 5 concert scene and again as an aside at the height of the Jackson 5 success you had them performing at a county fair.
That's that's that's another thing that kind of bothered me. Um, but even at that county fair, the crowd was white.
Then you get to the triumph tour and then the audience is white. And then you show the victory tour and the audience is white. But we know that the Jackson 5 crowds back then were black, predominantly black. Same up until the Triumph Tour. it only switched. It only changed during the victory tour. And so that was something that really kind of stood out to me, right? That you didn't you did not show that that Michael and the and the and the Jackson brothers like their their core audience was black and that's why he was really trying to uh you know break through um and cross over cuz but but what you showed in the film was completely different. So, it just was kind of confusing for that scene, right?
If anyone else was paying attention to that, I don't know if anyone else picked up on that.
>> Yeah, I I saw the same and and I saw the missed opportunity in the Mottown 25 performance that they reenacted. You you did have a predominantly black crowd viewing, which was wonderful to see, but then you missed the opportunity of him performing with his brothers to a black crowd. And seeing the response from that that crowd, >> it's just a shame. It's just a shame that that was missed. It's such an oversight and you know on your first viewing you can see that predominantly only white people are in the crowd in each of succession of the the performances that are reenacted. It's it's just a sh it's such a shame. It's it's it's a real missed opportunity for for cultural understanding and heritage and you know underlining the a very real struggle that this man we love had.
>> Yeah. They do unfortunately really create this connection that like the more successful he gets, the whiter his audience gets and yeah, that's you're totally on point with all that. I I agree and it's sad and I I I know they were trying to make some certain point and it it totally comes off the wrong way. I think there's also though one thing that I did think came across as slightly unfair is the nose job which seems to be almost entirely laid at the door of Joe Jackson because once 20 years ago he called Michael big nose but when you know clearly there was a lot more going on than that. We know that the Jackson 5 are a global sensation who knock the Beatles off the top of the charts and end up breaking a record and they can't get on the front of a magazine because people say black faces don't sell magazines. We know that Michael um is invited to an awards ceremony by uh Tatum O'Neal who then has to uninvite him because her management tell her there's no way you're going to a public event with an N-word. Right. We know that um Offthe-Wall is completely sidelined by the Grammys, which was clearly racist, is the biggest selling black album of all time. It's a massive sensation. And still because of his race he is being um unfairly treated. And we also know even into the late '7s and the 80s the KKK used to go and pick it outside Jackson's concerts and certain hotels would not let the Jacksons stay in their establishments because they were worried that if they did the KKK would come and trash the hotel. We know even at the height of Michael Hall's kind of off-the-wall thriller fame, he is actually the victim of a racist uh gang attack in a store, he goes shopping one day with Bill Bray and Bill Bray just walks up a different aisle and the next thing you know, Michael's on the floor with these skin heads kicking seven shades of [ __ ] out of him. Right?
So the, you know, so when Michael goes in to get his nose done, all of this context is gone. All of this context is missing. And it's kind of all laid at the the door of Joseph Jackson.
And it just feels like the film is afraid to go there for some reason. I don't know if they're thinking maybe in Trump's America, the mass market is not going to like it if we say racism is bad. I don't know. But it just felt again like a massive omission um and a real problem for me.
>> Yeah. The the contradiction was was the problem for me. Right. So, right the the those all of those things needed to be or should have been at least alluded to a little bit more. U but just the fact that you know you you you you tried to whitewash you know those early years with those crowd scenes. Um, and then you get to the thriller uh the thriller uh years and he's trying to break through. Well, you just showed us that he had already broken through, right? He had those audiences. So, what what were you trying to accomplish there? So, I I agree with you that they probably did not want to touch it uh in this political climate right now because it may have just turned it may turn people off.
>> It's easier to just make Joe the villain and have it be a personal journey, right? that you know that at least that's a great point, right? It's it's it's it's easy to right make him that one-dimensional um villain um instead of really kind of getting to the heart of what he went through, you know, all of it, the racism and all. Well, I think that also yeah, that just yeah, they have they continue this whole idea too of just like him being kind of this back to kind of the comment I made about infantilizing him, this angelic, you know, pure everything. I mean, talking about all that stuff, yeah, complicates the whole story in uncomfortable ways, right? And this is a movie where they don't want us to be uncomfortable, right? They want us to um you know just see see Michael as the the the the angel who was getting his in that that scene in the pool getting his songs from the heavens, right? They don't talk about process at all in this movie except maybe the little cards he puts on the wall perhaps a tiny bit. But um but they're they're leaning into that and and that it just all came to him, you know, like the angels sent it down, God sent it down and and that's it. And he was a pure being in the midst of, you know, whatever else and there's not there's nothing else that exists, right?
We just have to believe in that and that's that is unfortunate. I agree.
I love everything you guys have said about all of this. It's so important.
It's such an important part of a story and I fully agree. missed opportunity there.
>> I mean, that's not to say that they haven't had really good attention to detail in other areas. I mean, I was listening to Brad Sunberg's podcast last night that he had with Jared, uh, you know, about their experiences watching the movie, and they noticed things like um, you know, the microphone that was used in the studio scenes being the correct one that Michael actually used um, and and the speakers that Bruce Woodian had being the correct speakers.
So there is that attention to detail in other aspects of the movie. So that's why I suppose it's I annoying is probably the wrong word, but it's the one that spins to mind.
It's a little bit annoying that there's not the same attention to detail when it comes to a story line and actual events.
>> Yeah, I know it's the same attention to detail when it came to the televisions that were shown of the various eras as well. All Sony branded, lovely Sony Trinitrons or PVMs in the studio. um all period correct and you're like yeah that that that's all very correct and well researched and they've built the the sets really well. I think we're just missing the stuff that that's on the cutting room floor that brings it together that you know the level of detail and forethought and money that must have gone into filming other stuff that just wasn't used for whatever reason.
>> So we'll still hope for that director's cut.
>> Right. Exactly. So I want I just want to come back to Jafar and and in particular um with this next question for you guys like did the film connect with you emotionally um did Jafar's portrayal connect with you in an emotional way um or was it more through nostalgia?
>> Nostalgia for me >> I would say there were two moments for me that really emotionally had impact.
The first was the beating near the beginning that was deeply shocking and genuinely stirred up emotion and the other which would no one's mentioned yet but the I thought the Pepsi burn was handled extremely well. um very very dramatic really did underline the severity of what happened and how truly horrible it was because again that sort of skated over a lot of the time as though it's a nothing when in fact it was a completely lifealtering um event. So I thought those two things were handled very well. Beyond that, I can't really say that it moved me particularly, but um it was a massive nostalgia hit and um I truly I went into this film thinking I was going to completely hate it. So for I came out, you know, I went in having read the critics were all giving it one star. The um super fans were all giving it five stars. I came out thinking it's probably a threest star movie, but um that's two stars more than I was expecting. So I I came out feeling positive in that regard.
>> You guys heard it here. Charlie Thompson came out of the film feeling positive.
>> I wasn't expecting this, Charlie. No, actually overall, Charlie, I I am I am I thought you you you've been more positive this conversation than I was anticipating. Yeah, definitely.
>> That was my first thought when he first started to speak. I'm like, "Oh, okay.
Well, good, good, good, Charlie."
>> I mean, I I'd agree with everything that Charlie said there. I mean, for me, it was absolutely a nostalgia thing. It was it was effectively going to see someone performing Michael Jackson music from the early part of his life. Um, I agree that they handled the Pepsi burn part of it very well. Speaking to Marie and Loretta and and people outside afterwards, they they were talking about the that burn scene and how hopefully that illustrates to people who aren't quite aware of the severity of that burn. like they know the burn happened but they don't realize as Charlie said that it's so lifealtering and that that's what led to him having uh you know the prescription medication the demoral the you know the whatever um and I think it was briefly touched upon as well about the implants that they have to to put in and have to change regularly as well. Um and Loretta made the point that that burn incident happened on uh I can't remember the date but it was a it wasn't long afterwards at all. it was a matter of a couple of weeks afterwards is the scene where Michael was at the Grammy Awards with, you know, an armful of Grammys. Um, she said, she sort of fact checked it that the dates between when he was actually in hospital suffering from these burns and when he was back out in public again looking, you know, like nothing had happened with an armful of Grammys was relatively short. And you think of the intense pain that he would have been under while going through all of that as well. Um, so yeah, I hope that that was brought to light.
>> I reacted to Jafar, as I said previously, just to commend his his acting ability. That that's I I was like, "Yes, this this guy's fully for it. I I can get behind that. I I really enjoy seeing the physicality of what he's doing." Um, the only part that I and and yes, the the beating and the burn scene, they were dramatic scenes and tense scenes. Um, but the the only part that I really felt a twinge of nostalgia for was when I first saw the the intro to the old MJJ Productions video where we see Michael's legs walking along and flicking out the uh the sprinkles and then standing on the the toes uh which is then changed to um Optimum Productions for this >> Michael's legs in inverted commas.
>> Yeah, in inverted commas. Um that that was the bit where I was like, "Oh, I'm in for this ride." That's that was a nostal nostalgia hit to see that that section um to that that little just call back and I was like, "Oh, wow. That this I'm in I'm in for something great here.
Let's but but that didn't fu that didn't come to fruition sadly." Ironically, that very thing is something that many of the mainstream reviewers have used as a reason to hate the film because they Yeah, they cite they say, "Oh, well, it opens with realizing like this is an estate production, so why should we like it or trust it?" It's crazy. I agree with you that I mean, seeing that Yeah.
his feet. Oh, god. I just It makes me emotional. which it should because that's the only part that that's the only piece of Michael you see in this whole film.
>> I know. I know. And it's so and that brings me right back to my childhood and I I love that so so much. For me, the whole thing was a bit of a nostalgia train and trying to find these moments.
The on the first viewing I was not emotionally connected at all to any of it. The second I kind of found that path to that, but it was very much me trying to kind of find those moments that I could kind of Yeah. relive like growing up and watching Michael and seeing the real videos of him and um trying to find those moments within Jafar. Uh for sure I did want to I did just go and fact check actually the Charlie Carter the point you made about the burn and the Grammys and you are right it was exactly one month later. That is wild.
>> I did not realize that.
>> Credit to Loretta for that one cuz she was the one that brought that to my attention. So guys, what did you guys think about the music throughout the the the movie? Um because they kind of seem to drop in like, you know, some some Jackson 5 songs that people don't um aren't familiar with. Um I know they they use the instrumental from one song, We Got a Good Thing Going from Michael's Ben album. They use cuts from uh The Gamble and Huff Years, Keep on Dancing, Enjoy Yourself. um you know so what did you guys think about the music that was used throughout and also some of the performances?
>> I think um if uh I think there was overall a pretty good mix of of music that was used. Some people I've already didn't necessarily like the uh the broken down parts of some of the songs in some of the scenes. But I did I think that accented it quite nicely like um you know want to be starting something was sort of broken down in in stages as well. Um what I thought was interesting is towards the end of the movie we had the full song of human nature and bad um when Jafar was performing as Michael the full song. Now I don't know if that was the original intention or if that was a symptom of um you know we've had to remove so much from this movie but we need to add something in to to fill it up a bit. I don't know. What did you guys think?
>> I found it really really odd. um the full performances. I I found myself looking at my watch three times because there was so much crowd footage that just obviously didn't look real. Very very poor CGI, but um there was so much lingering on people's faces that weren't Michael or anybody that was actually playing or accompanying him for the scene. It was very very strange. Um yeah, just just odd. I I I felt that really dis disjointed from it. Um it didn't feel like I was obviously watching Michael, but it it also felt like almost is this full performance of human nature supposed to be telling us that this is the theme of the the film.
And and then in my back of my head, I was like, well, maybe they're going to cut this part out and then use it as a music video.
Very strange. Just it didn't just didn't gel with me. Didn't gel with me at all.
It was the editing choices felt like they were the editing choices of somebody from the 80s.
Sort of weird slow-mo lingering and very strange. Very strange. But that's just my two cents.
>> I I had a very different reaction. I actually loved the two final performances. Um, and I really liked actually the way they were filmed and edited and kind of the high speed and like go giving us some of the closeups.
Um uh I'm not sure why. Yeah, it's funny. My reaction was so different from yours, but um it they did feel a little bit pointless on my first view, but I still enjoyed them and I just enjoyed watching Jafar move so well like his uncle. Um still not quite Michael Jackson, but getting pretty darn close.
Um and they they did make some interesting changes which I know a lot of fans have have noticed. Um, for example, in the Victory Tour performance for Human Nature, he's doing the dancing from Wimbley, which is strange. I kept watching it and I was like, I know he wasn't doing those moves like at that time. So, that was a little bit um it doesn't matter to a casual viewer, but that was threw me off a little bit as a bigger fan. Um, uh, but still, even with that, I enjoyed it. And I will say the second time I saw the movie, I actually had a different interpretation of them putting those two backto back stage performances um at the end of the movie. And for some reason, again, like the second, as I mentioned before, kind of watching it the second time, I was just in this kind of don't care about, you know, let some of the inaccuracies go, let some of the, you know, holes in the in the plot go.
Just kind of finding an emotional flow.
this uh this Michael Jackson greatest hits FIFA dream as I mentioned at the beginning and just kind of accepting that and in that viewing those two backto-back performances somehow really hit me in a very powerful way of watching his transition and watching him do this final performance with his brothers even if it wasn't completely historically accurate um and then immediately going into bad which represents presents this next phase of his life and also represents that line that Joe says about now you're about to go into a space where you just have a lot of yes people around you and seeing um feeling almost the chaos the wonderful freedom the beauty in Jafar's performance um during the bad segment um also that that song even even the song bad can I know some people kind of write off that song as a little bit like dorky clownish. Some people don't like that song, right? And it for me I felt the power of his independent, you know, yap to the world and it he feels Jafar conveys this beautiful freedom and joy in that performance that I think is just a sign of him finally being himself, but we know there's ominous stuff to come. So, I don't know.
Somehow the second viewing, those two performances just hit me very hard and I really really felt it and it felt like the perfect way to wrap up the movie and I was totally there emotionally >> and you know at least I I I that scene where he talked about you know having Yes around you that mean that and then again right having that freedom during the bad that bad performance I think that really was a setup for a part two right? Um because this this is what you wanted right now.
You're going to get it. And and so but I think those I think >> I love that performance. I mean it was I I I'm one that I have the my appreciation for the song Bad has grown over the years and I was actually just loving that performance. Um I I was really into it. Again, it was one of those moments where I forgot that that was Jafar. Um, and I really thought, you know, it's just like they talked about, he embodied Michael during that performance. But I also want to go back to I really love the uh although it was kind of weird in a sense, but the don't stop till you get enough recreation. I really love that. Um, there was a part where he turned his head though and it seemed like his head was a lot larger than his body um for a second there. I don't know if anybody else picked up on it and that was just me. For those who go back and watch it again, just watch the the the Michael that's in the middle when he turns his head. It's like his head is seemed slightly a lot bigger.
But I don't know. But I actually love that performance. And I think throughout the the movie, I I just love how the brothers talked about this about how uh Jafar really embodied Michael. And I that's what I walked away with um in this. That's why I said no matter the flaws, I think Jafar did a phenomenal job just in terms of, you know, Embody in and Michael and those performances really just um coming alive and just popping out on the screen. I want to ask this question though. Uh was Jafar and Coleman Domingo's performances Oscar worthy? Oh, I I don't really have a great understanding of uh what is and isn't Oscar worthy, so I I don't know if I can answer that. I do just want to just quickly go back before the rest of the team answer that. I just want to make it clear I did enjoy the human nature and and bad performances on there. I I just found it interesting that they were there as full songs where the rest of the movie it was other than the Mottown 25 performance, it was mostly snippets of songs. Um, but yeah, definitely enjoyed those. Um, and and to have it come on the back of maybe a week ago, the Michael Jackson estate released a brand new music video, official music video for Human Nature, uh, where Michael at Wembley in the Bad Tour was projected onto the walls of the video in some kind of new styled modern dance interpretation.
Um, and then immediately have the biopic come out. We had Jafar's doing exactly the same moves but dressed up for the victory tour um, was also interesting.
But as for Oscar worthy acting, I don't know, but that's a hell of a debut from Jafar Jackson, it's possibly worthy of a nomination at least. I don't know. What do you reckon?
>> I don't think they I don't think either of them were given enough to get respect from the Academy just knowing what the academy looks for personally. But I think they both did a amazing job with what they had to work with.
>> But Ramy Malik won for Bohemian Raps City. So anything is possible.
>> Right. Right.
>> Because that was not worthy. That was totally unorthache.
That was not a performance. Right. So you know, >> were the worldwide media against Freddy Mercury in the same way they seem to be against Michael Jackson? though.
>> I think that would be incredible press if that happened.
Absolutely. And I'd be fully fully behind it. I'm not saying that it wasn't Oscar worthy. But um and and I would certainly be behind it if if he did if Jafar won an Oscar. Definitely. That would be really wonderful. Um but I think yeah, would would mainstream press allow that? would with those that actually hold the keys to the power to to to hand that over want to put a spotlight on this film and that portrayal of that particular person. I can't see it happening sadly.
>> What I could see happening is snubbing Jafar but giving the Oscar to Coleman Domingo for his brutal portrayal of Joe Jackson. And then I think that sends a message from the media.
>> It sends a message but I think I I think to alluding to your comments earlier about him being quite one-sided as a character. I I don't I can't see the Academy wanting to award in the context of the writing um that character and that portrayal of that character an award like that.
>> Yeah. You know, it wouldn't surprise me um it would not surprise me at all. Um if you if you know, if you if I had to choose one, I I think Jafar. Um but I I think I agree with Elise. I'm not sure they were given enough um to there was not enough of a story, enough of a narrative to really kind of uh justify that. But again, I think from a pure sending a message um about what type of characters we want to honor, Joe Jackson, uh Coleman Domingo's Joe Jackson uh fits that mold, right? Uh, I think that, you know, they would want to honor him for his portrayal of Joe Jackson for no other reason that it's it's a negative character, right? And I think that's a a narrative that, you know, as in the black community that we talk about, like if you look at the the black actors who have been honored, look at the roles that they were honored for. going all the way back to Hattie McDaniels, uh going back to Denzel Washington, um and even um Halib Berry, like those are not always positive characters. Um and so >> that's an incredibly good point. Yeah, >> it it would not it would not surprise me if they gave him a nomination and actually gave him the award. Um, and I agree with you. They would not, you know, as much as I would love it and would want to want him to to be nominated and win, uh, I don't think they would do that for Jafar.
>> Yeah. Also, just in terms of him being unproven. I mean, well, now proven, but yeah, brand new guy on the scene, I I don't really see it happening.
>> So, let's talk a little bit about the the the negative reaction from the media. Um, and I think we all kind of know why, but uh, do you think the negative reaction was about the film itself? At least you just kind of talked about you kind of referenced that. Um, or was it about Michael as a subject?
>> I think that I tried not to look at the mainstream reviews cuz like us all, I knew they would be terrible. I got sucked into reading a couple. Um, and as we know, some a bunch of the reviewers were also referencing them not addressing the allegations. We know that doesn't make sense because now that the timeline for this film doesn't even get there. Um, but uh but I have to say the couple that I looked at, I taking taking away maybe certain biases some of these people have, I have to say the Roger Roger Eert.com review was particularly devastating and I unfortunately read that one. Um, then I just stopped reading. I read like one more and I was like, I'm not going to look at these right now until I see the movie myself.
But um but uh but I have to say it also kind of wasn't wrong in some ways that it did reference the montagey feel. It did reference, you know, kind of a lack of um character development. It it wasn't completely off base. It did completely pan Coleman Domingo's performance, which I deeply don't agree with. Um, one little bit of hope I found from that devastating review, however, which I would apply maybe to other really bad mainstream reviews as well, is that review at least, and if you're not going to like the movie, at least it ended with this. It said, "You're better off going and watching Michael Jackson's real clips, real videos, real performances." And I thought, "Okay, this is terrible. This is devastating.
crushed me to read. But at least maybe there is a chance that it might still bring people back to go and watch what the real Michael did and there is some value there.
>> It gave me a little bit of hope. In fact, that was one of the points that the people I was with made as well is that um I mean, we'll get on to the reviews side of it in a moment is that in the credits where it just basically said his story continues or whatever. Um and they they pretty much just had a blank screen with the rolling credits.
Why not put some footage of real Michael there in concert, whether it was a bad concert, victory concert, uh you know, why not put the real footage of Michael there rolling over the credits. have give people some reason to stay in their seats at the end of the film because pretty much as soon as you get to the credits like you sit there in the movie theater or whatever and you're waiting for something and there's nothing. It's just the credits and then it's done.
>> You're so right. That's crazy. And people would stay there too because then they would would think, oh, let's compare what we just saw to like how closely Jafar really was to the dance moves. And people would eat that up. H Yeah, you're so right.
>> Yeah. And even in the background scenes, I was looking in the background of, you know, clips and news clips and there is no archival footage used in any scene. I don't I I just don't it doesn't make any sense to me that there's there is no there's no Michael there.
>> No, especially as they own the rights to that footage.
>> It's an estate movie. They can surely use this this real footage. Um, but with regards to the reviews, I avoided them basically because I I I go back to what Charlie said a couple of years ago when we were talking about the musical coming out and I think he said and and Charlie correct me if I'm wrong that on opening night um he was he was watching Twitter or something like that and within minutes of the uh you know opening night performance ending these negative reviews had been posted like within minutes fully written articles. So, which clearly proves that they'd been written in advance. And I sort of had the same feeling that that was going to happen with the Michael movie in that these critics are they've they've had these articles stashed up for weeks, months, however long, waiting for the right time to or you know, right time from their point of view to release it.
And I've just avoided all of it. I've not clicked on any of them, positive or negative to be fair. And um yeah, I I see even the the director whose name we won't mention about the false mockumentary from 2019 has also he reared his ugly head and and started making comments about it as well. And and you just think that it's opportunistic vultures that are are trying to capitalize on what is a very vastly positive Michael Jackson release with their own negative stories to try and, you know, score some points.
And I I I I really do think that's just with anything Michael Jackson moving forward. It's been in in the past and moving forward, they're always going to be the media is always going to uh it's going to be a media hit job, right? I I don't think they want Michael to uh get the positive press. They don't want um to see him ever, you know, get back to the his heights of popularity that he experienced back in the 80s. So, I think that's just always going to be the case.
U and I and I do believe that there is um I won't even say a hint of racism, but I think it is very rooted in the fact that um Michael was a black artist who became the biggest artist of all time. Right. I don't think there's an artist right now that can compare. Um now, u I don't think there's ever been an artist as big as Michael Jackson. And I think that still rubs some people the wrong way. Um, and I think that's always going to rear its ugly head. It's always going to surface. So, like you, I did not read I read one um from local Detroit newspaper. Uh, he gave it a a B minus. Uh, and that's it. I didn't I I I knew it was coming. Um, I knew uh that director was going to rear his his head and then one of his subjects uh put out a video as well. So, uh I I knew it was all coming. Um but I think you're right.
I'm not gonna give it any oxygen. Um I hope the movie is extremely successful.
Um just despite despite them, despite their efforts, right? And it's that's been the case with typical with with Michael that anything that that they put out about him or on him, um it's usually successful, um after all the media and the press has panned it.
Um, and so it's just for me, I I think that's what's what we have come to expect and what we should expect moving forward. But I also think we should call it out that I think it really does it is rooted um in the fact that he's a a black artist and he's a black man and it's rooted in racism.
>> Yeah, I totally agree. And sorry Charlie just before you you jump in there and the other thing that that fans do and it goes back to what we were saying a few years ago with the negative press about you know commenting some of the fans are very very well verssed and very very um you know cohesive in their arguments against the um the negative stories in the comments but by merely commenting on it or even viewing it you're actually giving it the oxygen that they desire.
So, I've seen some fans and they're very good and they're very um correct, factually correct in what they're saying in the comments to defend Michael, but they don't realize that they're actually giving that um uh you know that article the oxygen that they're craving. And if you just don't engage with those negative articles whatsoever, use your comments and your time and your energy on the positive ones to say yes, I agree or this is what I thought they could have done better. give the positive articles the oxygen and then overwhelmingly people will start writing the the positive articles because that's where they'll get the hits and the payments. Sorry, Charlie.
>> Yeah. So, clearly is racist. It's explicitly racist. And a few years ago, we had the Elvis biopic was released.
Elvis who famously publicly dated 13 and 14year-old girls and then ended up ended up marrying one of them. There was not a single review in the British press which said anything about the fact that he was a pedophile. There was nothing that said don't go and see this film because he was a pedophile. If you buy a ticket you're supporting a pedophile. There was nobody saying should there be a biopic.
There were no think pieces. There was nothing. And that double standard is applied consistently. But nothing Michael Jackson can happen without this being brought up. Whereas Elvis Presley or for example David Bowie films have been released about David Bowie both documentary and narrative. Um uh and they are you know David Bowie has been accused serially of um sleeping with underage girls which is rape because you cannot consent if you're underage.
So David Bowie is a serially accused child rapist. Nobody brings their armp when a David Bowie film is released.
Whether it's documentary or narrative, the media is extremely selective about who it wants canled, who it doesn't want cancelled, whose allegations should be taken seriously and whose allegations shouldn't be t taken seriously. And the way that this film has been attacked by the media is clearly a concerted industry-wide effort to destroy the film. And I noted there was um there was an article that came out either this morning or yesterday and it was by the independent and the headline was something like um movie goers defy critics as Jackson biopic is a hit something like that and I thought well isn't that a Freudian slip isn't that a Freudian slip defy not ignore defy. So you can't defy a review, but you can defy an instruction.
So it's almost like a tacit admission that these reviews were specifically designed to try to stop to try to kill the film, to try to destroy the film. If you're saying that by buying a ticket you are defying the media, you're accepting that the media was trying to instruct or control the public not to see the film. And in that sense going to see I was talking to Sama Habib about this the other day who's obviously a friend of the podcast and he was saying that it's created a situation in which to support a Michael Jackson related product has become a political statement because when you go out and buy a ticket to this film you're not just saying I want to listen to Billy Gan. You're saying I believe in the rule of law.
You're saying I believe in the presumption of innocence. I believe in the sanctity of a jury verdict. It becomes a political statement to go and see this film and you're also saying I don't believe in fake news. I don't support racist legacy media. So you're kind of the media is forcing the public into a position where they have to take a side. And what the public has done in this case is it has taken aside as it always does. This this [ __ ] has happened to Michael Jackson since Thriller, right? It started before the allegations ever since Thriller.
Everything he releases. Oh, what a fall from grace. What a pile of [ __ ] What a disappointment. This is going to be the thing that ruins his career. Blah blah blah every time. And it always turns into a gigantic success except for Invincible. But um in this instance, the public really has voted with its feet. So I've just been sent some data just now by Summerhabib.
This is the number one film in the world already.
It is the number one film in 65 countries.
in 63 of those countries is the biggest ever opening for a biopic. It is currently slated to take $200 million worldwide in its first weekend. It is the biggest opening ever for a Graham King production. It's the biggest opening ever for an Antoine Fuqua film.
It's the biggest opening ever for any biopic. And it's also the biggest opening ever for the screenwriter John Logan, which is important because John Logan wrote a James Bond movie. He wrote Skyfall. So for Michael to outperform a Bond movie is absolutely extraordinary.
So this film has absolutely embarrassed the media. The success of this film is a complete slap in the face for the media. It's a humiliation.
And that uh that headline is is oh so apt defied the critics the public certainly has >> and I think that's a great way to wrap up this discussion of Michael. Um at the end of the day I think we all want anything related to Michael Jackson to be successful. Uh, and I think what you just read to us, uh, Charles, was was proof that there is an appetite for Michael Jackson. There will always be an appetite for Michael Jackson. Um, and um, I'm I'm just very glad that despite the its flaws, um, that this movie is setting records in just the first weekend. Um, and so I'm I'm I'm I'm extremely uh excited. Um, and I can't wait until Monday morning when the final tally is in. And I think that will be um a big middle finger to the press and to the media um from from Michael Jackson and Michael Jackson fans across the world.
>> As you say that, Sean, Jafar Jackson has just posted as well um an image on his Instagram saying, "Michael, number one movie in the world." Yeah. Ex.
Excellent. And that's again I think we all knew this um and I think I think you as you said earlier that we need to give oxygen to that right um and call out you know the hypocrisy when we need to call out the hypocrisy but at the same time we need to make sure that we need to give oxygen to the positive things about Michael this movie again with even with you know it's not perfect but again it's enjoyable and I enjoyed it and obviously millions around the world uh enjoyed it as well. So that was a great discussion uh ladies and gentlemen. Um there was really a lot to unpack there and I I think we hit it from just about every angle and so at the end of the day this is clearly a film that's going to keep people talking and whether it's the record-breaking box office the divided critical response or the standout performance from Chafar as Michael Jackson there's no question it's making an impact. So, as we wrap up, huge thanks to the entire MJ Cast team, uh, including our newest member, Simon, um, for bringing the energy and and the insight today. Uh, this was a fun one.
What do you guys think?
>> This was fantastic. It was so great to connect with you guys on this. Um, and Charlie Thompson, your comments were so brilliant. Thank you for make bringing us back kind of to the core of what all this really is about ultimately. Um and yes, get out there and see it. This is, you know, there's a whole separate conversation to to talk about with in terms of like supporting the estate. I know people have, you know, mixed feelings about that, etc. But end of the day, we're making a much larger statement about, as you guys said, the enduring legacy and interest in Michael Jackson, and that's so, so crucial. That said, we don't want to stop having these real conversations which can include positive and negative opinions. Um, we always want to keep the real story, I think, in focus on everything we do at the MJ cast. And I thank all of you guys for all the brilliant insights you bring. I feel so lucky to know and work with all of you. I also want to give shout out to Jamon. Um, and Jamon, we love you and miss you and would have loved to have you as part of this discussion, too. Um, I also want to let listeners know that um, we do, this is not the end of this discussion. There's a lot to unpack here. I think we just scratched the surface in this chat. Um, but at the MJcast, we are going to be doing a a couple more episodes around uh, discussions related to the biopic.
We don't want to exhaust you guys on it, but but we have some other um I think kind of angles and perspectives that you guys will find really compelling that we're going to be releasing as well in the coming weeks. So, please do stay tuned for that. Um but thank you all and thank you Sean so much for for your great hosting of this conversation too.
This was really really fun.
>> No, thank you. I appreciate it. Um and of course we want to hear from you. So, uh tell us you know our listeners tell us what you think of Michael. Um what worked for you? What didn't work for you? Um uh we'd love to to as as Elise just said as we're going to continue this conversation. So um this is again a monumental moment for the MJ fan community. So we want to hear back from you. So uh make sure you leave us a comment um wherever you listen uh to this podcast. So with that being said, um Elise, where can the followers of the MJ cast find you?
You guys can find me oh mostly on Instagram and Facebook these days at ElCapron. I do try to check our MJcast email and social media messages as much as I can as well. Um, so you can find me there, too. I apologize if I'm slow these days. Parenting's kicking my butt, but trying my best. So, um, and our email, I should say, since I'm the primary person checking there is the mjcasticloud.com.
>> All right. Thank you, Charlie Carter.
Where can um our listeners find you?
>> I usually hanging around an airport like a weirdo. Um no, I'm on Instagram, Alpha Charlie Photos, uh is the best place to find me. I am on Twitter X, whatever you want to call it. Um Charlie W Carter as well. Um I do have a personal Instagram, which is the same, but I don't usually accept people I don't know that on on that. So if you do want to follow me, um Alpha Charlie Photos on Instagram is the way to go. All right, Charles Thompson, where can our listeners find you?
>> I'm on Twitter as CE Thompson and I'm on Instagram as CE Thompson Jouro.
>> All right. And Simon, where can our followers find you?
>> Best place is probably I'm everywhere, but probably Instagram. Um, Simon Paul Wilkkey is the tag name. and uh Wilkey spelled W I L K I E. Um Sean, well done on hosting this. It's been an wonderful experience to have you in mission control. And uh just the others of you, thank you for having me on my first episode. It's it's been tremendous.
>> Welcome to the team, mate.
>> Yes, thank you.
And you can find me on Instagram at shan.shackleford. You can also find me on Facebook. Also on Twitter at SAS Shackleford or SA Shackleford. Um I'm also on Blue Sky and um Threads, but I don't check that one as uh check those as often. So um if you would like to connect with us, um you can connect with us at the mjcast.com.
Uh we do have an account on Blue Sky, Facebook, Instagram, Xthreads, and YouTube. And if you have uh if you have feedback on this Michael Jackson podcast episode, we'd love to hear from you. Contact us at the mjcasticloud.com um or find a link to our many social networks on the njcast.com.
And with that, this episode is a wrap. Keep living off the wall.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Just want to say a quick thank you to all those who've reached out to to wish me happy birthday already. It's very kind of you and I'll see you all soon.
>> Elise.
>> Oh, stay bad.
>> Simon, do you want >> Yeah. Here we go. I've been thinking about this. It's not religious, but keep the faith.
>> Yes. Yes.
>> Love it.
>> This has been a production of the MJ Cast. If you enjoy the MJ Cast, please consider rating, reviewing, and sharing it. The MJ Cast is produced by Elise Kapron, Charles Thompson, Charlie Carter, and Shaun Shackleford. This episode was edited by Simon Wilkey.
Intro and outro music by Dan Voboos.
If you'd like to contact the makers of this podcast, please visit our website at www.themjcast.com.
Ähnliche Videos
TailorShop (2021) - An Award-Winning Short Film
gsp222
149 views•2026-06-04
Maa Behen Review by Baradwaj Rangan | Madhuri Dixit, Triptii Dimri, Dharna Durga, Ravi Kishan
GalattaPlus
4K views•2026-06-04
Maa Behen Review: Madhuri Dixit, Triptii Dimri, Dharna Durga film is a deliciously chaotic dramedy
indiatoday
1K views•2026-06-04
It Takes Two 💞
barefootandindependent
1K views•2026-05-31
These Doctor Who episodes worked brilliantly with the Doctor barely there
lovarzi
574 views•2026-05-31
Maximum Pleasure Guaranteed: We speak to David Gordon Green and David J. Rosen
GogglerMY
211 views•2026-05-29
🎬 Across the Line (2000) 4K | Brad Johnson Neo-Western Thriller 🔥 | Crime & Border Justice
BabelWestern
734 views•2026-05-30
An Anime For Every Letter In LGBTQIA
KrisPNatz
2K views•2026-05-31
Trends
Why Batman Lets The Joker Live 🤨
zackdfilms
9222K views•2026-05-30
They're Complete Trash
penguinz0
558K views•2026-06-04
The Murder of Deputy Caleb Conley
MidwestSafety
810K views•2026-06-04
I Bought FAKE HopeScope Merch (and paid a subscriber to give it a makeover) | Hopeful Hauls
HangWithHopescope
158K views•2026-06-04