Have people on here actually seen it and would recommend it? I was thinking of going but have been put off by the critics' reviews!

2 minutes ago, Mangø said:

Have people on here actually seen it and would recommend it? I was thinking of going but have been put off by the critics' reviews!

Think the public reviews have been overwhelmingly positive!

10 minutes ago, Mangø said:

Have people on here actually seen it and would recommend it? I was thinking of going but have been put off by the critics' reviews!

The one criticism I can agree with the critics on is that it just doesn't show enough of Michael's life and skips over some big moments (allegations aside). But what they do show is portrayed really well!

7 hours ago, gasman449 said:

The one criticism I can agree with the critics on is that it just doesn't show enough of Michael's life and skips over some big moments (allegations aside). But what they do show is portrayed really well!

And I have to say the actor who plays Michael is very very good! (Michael Jackson’s nephew)

I understand he is the biggest musician of all time but I really don’t think I could possibly watch something that brushes over the child abuse like it was never a thing and it really startles me that his star outweighs SO many people’s will to care about that side of things so much.

The film charts his life up to the Bad era which was 1987. The first allegation was 1993... why would the film mention something that hasn't happened yet?

22 minutes ago, HausofMayhem said:

The film charts his life up to the Bad era which was 1987. The first allegation was 1993... why would the film mention something that hasn't happened yet?

Yeah I was gonna say exactly this!

Tbf the allegations were in the original cut and was going to be where the movie ended originally but were taken out due to some legalities involving one of the victims.

There’s also more about Kat Graham’s role as Diana Ross being completely taken out due to Diana not wanting to be a part of it (that’s another entire story that’s circulating too).

Yeh Jackson is the biggest pop star ever for me whereas Queen are the biggest group alongside the Beatles. But Queen would perhaps be more British?

Thing is weather they were brushed over or cut out, it still amounts to the same thing. Its overlooking a massive part of his life.

But then it does feel wrong (to me anyway) that someone like Jackson is still being celebrated given all the things he has done - even as far as going to paying victims.

I could probably say more... but the posts would probably get removed 🤣 So i'll step back to keeping a gobsmacked silence

Apple

02 Sam Fender & Olivia Dean - Rein Me In

04 Michael Jackson - Billie Jean

05 Olivia Rodrigo - drop dead

06 Alex Warren - FEVER DREAM

09 Michael Jackson - Human Nature

11 Michael Jackson - Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough

12 Justin Bieber - Beauty and a Beat (feat. Nicki Minaj)

24 Noah Kahan - Doors

26 Zara Larsson - Lush Life

38 Prospa & Cloonee - Free Your Mind

42 The Chemical Brothers - Go

44 Bebe Rexha & Faithless - New Religion

45 Madonna & Sabrina Carpenter - Bring Your Love

49 Asake - Forgiveness

54 Zara Larsson - Midnight Sun

55 Alex Warren - FINE PLACE TO DIE

64 Tyla - SHE DID IT AGAIN (feat. Zara Larsson)

73 Zara Larsson & PinkPantheress - Midnight Sun (Girls Trip)

86 Ella Langley - Be Her

100 STELLA LEFTY - Boston

108 Lady Gaga & Doechii - RUNWAY

110 Malcolm Todd - Earrings

112 Ella Langley & Morgan Wallen - I Can't Love You Anymore

174 Temper City - Self Aware

195 Katy Perry - The One That Got Away

35 minutes ago, ElectroBoy said:

Thing is weather they were brushed over or cut out, it still amounts to the same thing. Its overlooking a massive part of his life.

But then it does feel wrong (to me anyway) that someone like Jackson is still being celebrated given all the things he has done - even as far as going to paying victims.

I could probably say more... but the posts would probably get removed 🤣 So i'll step back to keeping a gobsmacked silence

I thought this too... I've seen the film because I see mostly everything but I did have the thought, why make a film about this in the first place? It's like making a film now celebrating Jimmy Savile's career in television. No allegations to cover because there were none at that time, but it also features numerous scenes of Michael spending time with children in hospitals and all sorts. It's the elephant in the room.

29 minutes ago, ElectroBoy said:

Thing is weather they were brushed over or cut out, it still amounts to the same thing. Its overlooking a massive part of his life.

But then it does feel wrong (to me anyway) that someone like Jackson is still being celebrated given all the things he has done - even as far as going to paying victims.

I could probably say more... but the posts would probably get removed 🤣 So i'll step back to keeping a gobsmacked silence

This is how I feel, honestly.

I could watch a film about Donald Trump that stops at him presenting The Apprentice, and stops before his time as a president inciting war but I’d still be aware of what happened after. So I would feel uncomfortable to watch a film of an alleged child abuser and I find it mildly alarming how well his music is doing again, whilst that is a big part of his character. Because I can’t ignore thinking about it myself but I’m just me.

That being said, I recognise we’re discussing probably the biggest musician to ever live and a man with a very interesting story. And I never like to police what people do and don’t listen to when it comes to whether people feel comfortable listening to musicians who have committed crimes - that’s a choice.

I think MJ would have been properly cancelled if he had been found guilty at his trial in the 2000s. Then the timing of his death just a few years later helped to rehabilitate his image.

I usually judge problematic artists on a case-by-case basis and this has always been a particularly difficult one because I adore a lot of his music and grew up with it. Of course he was found not guilty in the eyes of the law but there’s still no smoke without fire, so at worst he was a monster and at very best his boundaries with children were still highly inappropriate. I’m not here to defend him as a person. But I think I am able to separate art from artist because 1) he’s dead so cannot profit from me and 2) his music is so interwoven with my childhood that it brings back happy memories when I listen to it, rather than thinking of any alleged wrongdoing.

I may be flawed on this one and am still reassessing these things all the time but just wanted to add another view as I’ve mentioned enjoying his music elsewhere, so thought it appropriate to clarify my position on the whole thing. Like Rob I respect everyone’s personal choice on the matter.

1 minute ago, Jade said:

I think MJ would have been properly cancelled if he had been found guilty at his trial in the 2000s. Then the timing of his death just a few years later helped to rehabilitate his image.

I usually judge problematic artists on a case-by-case basis and this has always been a particularly difficult one because I adore a lot of his music and grew up with it. Of course he was found not guilty in the eyes of the law but there’s still no smoke without fire, so at worst he was a monster and at very best his boundaries with children were still highly inappropriate. I’m not here to defend him as a person. But I think I am able to separate art from artist because 1) he’s dead so cannot profit from me and 2) his music is so interwoven with my childhood that it brings back happy memories when I listen to it, rather than thinking of any alleged wrongdoing.

I may be flawed on this one and am still reassessing these things all the time but just wanted to add another view as I’ve mentioned enjoying his music elsewhere, so just wanted to clarify my position on the whole thing. Like Rob I respect everyone’s personal choice on the matter.

I was coming to write a very similar post to this but I won't bother now because you have echoed my thoughts perfectly (and more articulately!), this is exactly how I feel. I've always been able to separate art from artist, except in the case of Lostprophets where I massively struggled with it.

13 minutes ago, Jade said:

I think MJ would have been properly cancelled if he had been found guilty at his trial in the 2000s.

Same for the allegations/ paying off in the early 90's - had they happened now

or the dangling of a baby from a 4th floor balcony too.

I was a HUGE MJ fan from 1991 to his death and beyond and I was very fascinated by his otherworldly bizarreness (I don't know what would be a better word). I have listened to his music so much and his whole discography so many times that I don't have any need to revisit it atm. I totally understand all the criticism towards him and his behavior and don't believe he is innocent at all. But I will not go to see the film anyway because I don't find his childhood story interesting and it's so clear to me that the movie has been done ONLY to collect more money for the estate and they will ignore everything that cannot be twisted into a positive perspective in the context of "who is Michael Jackson". Because in the end, Michael Jackson was a tragic representation of fame, fortune and perfectionism completely destroying lives.

Edited Wednesday at 10:494 days by Sour Candy

When did Hot Hits UK last update?

Chemical Brothers up to 33 on Apple

'Go' is absolutely fab, I'm so here for this resurgence!