Michael | April 18, 2025 | Michael Jackson biopic | Lionsgate | Graham King and the Jackson estate produce

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

4 hours ago, CoolioD1 said:

casting a relative was probably the smartest move since it was always gonna be a tricky one to cast. surprised to hear the film will actually tackle the pedo accusations. good luck to 'em, i guess.

They will probably briefly mention that there were allegations without implying any guilt whatsoever. Would the Jackson estate really authorize the music rights for a movie that would make MJ look like a terrible person? The movie could jump around in time a lot to skate around his diciest moments.

 

 

 

4 hours ago, grim22 said:

 

Smartest way to avoid the casting minefield that any Jackson project brings with it. Hopefully the kid is a good enough actor and dancer.

Maybe they'll use AI to do MJ's physical transformation. If they're smart the movie will focus on the Off the Wall/Thriller years where the nephew's resemblance would be the closest to how Michael really looked.

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by BoxOfficeFangrl

[AJG]

Bring back Flex Alexander in whiteface(?).

 

The definitive Michael.

 

 

 

[filmlover]

This definitely reeks of a "nobody else wanted the gig" casting. Understandably so tbh.

[Eric Prime]

 

[Box Office Hit]

 

[Jonwo]

I assume Universal is paying a portion of the budget in exchange for OS rights. Weird that Lionsgate is keeping Japan but not UK but I wonder if Universal wanted UK distribution and Lionsgate didn't argue.

[Firepower]

Could be huge if done right.

[movies!movies!]

 

[dudalb]

On 10/3/2023 at 12:50 PM, Firepower said:

Could be huge if done right.

With the Jackson estate calling the shots,chances are this will be whitewash..no joke intended.

[interiorgatordecorator]

why is this movie called "michael", if youre already using his first name why not go all the way and call it Michael Jackson?

[CoolioD1]

plus it's disrespectful to this classic

 

[4815162342]

43 minutes ago, interiorgatordecorator said:

why is this movie called "michael", if youre already using his first name why not go all the way and call it Michael Jackson?

 

Because Michael Jordan and Marvel threatened to sue if they called it MJ

[grim22]

Post by @culturecrave

View on Threads

I wonder how much it will actually get into the court cases

[filmlover]

Clearly not even attempting to give it the aura of an awards contender with this date.

[WorkingonaName]

Gonna be a massive Easter with this and Resurrection. 

[Boxx93]

This should have been a two-parter. There's no way you can squeeze Michael's entire life into one movie, even if it's 3 hours long.

Edited January 12 by Boxx93

[dudalb]

3 hours ago, Boxx93 said:

This should have been a two-parter. There's no way you can squeeze Michael's entire life into one movie, even if it's 3 hours long.

They probably don't want to deal with Michael's entire life...for obvious reasons with the estate calling the shots.

[DAJK]

As long as it's "good" (crowdpleasing) and Lionsgate is somehow able to mount a blockbuster ad campaign ala Bohemian Rhapsody, I don't see why this can't come close to that movie domestic and worldwide.

[wboxoffice]

Just as I was looking to see if Taylor Swift’s concert has surpassed MJ’s This is It that was at 261 million WW, I see that MJ jumped all of a sudden from 261 million to 516 million?  An update 15 years later?  An error? A hack?  I don’t get it.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt1477715/?ref_=bo_se_r_1

[Avatree]

20 hours ago, DAJK said:

As long as it's "good" (crowdpleasing) and Lionsgate is somehow able to mount a blockbuster ad campaign ala Bohemian Rhapsody, I don't see why this can't come close to that movie domestic and worldwide.

Because Bohemian Rhapsody is literally the exception to the rule? There is no other musical biopic that comes anywhere close to BR. Assuming that any musical biopic about a similarly giant artist will be the same doesn't really make any sense.