‘Emancipation’s Antoine Fuqua To Direct Michael Jackson Biopic For Lionsgate; John Logan Script & ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’s Graham King Producing With Estate https://t.co/lkt5rsmx1l

— Deadline Hollywood (@DEADLINE) January 18, 2023

Jaafar Jackson is portraying his uncle Michael Jackson in Lionsgate’s upcoming biopic “Michael,” directed by Antoine Fuqua.https://t.co/iyrbINCALy pic.twitter.com/8TUJqgleYc

— Variety (@Variety) January 30, 2023

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Didn't Elvis, Bohemian Rhapsody, and Straight Outta Compton all do the same thing?

Plus, nobody actually knows what happened behind closed doors, so it would always require artistic license anyway.

The only thing that can really be portrayed "accurately" when it comes to the allegations is stuff that's publicly known, such as the trial itself.

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Know Your Enemy said:

---

This is going to be more unwatchable than the Freddie Mercury whitewash movie.

---

Movies that win 4 Oscars normally do suck.

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Didn't Elvis, Bohemian Rhapsody, and Straight Outta Compton all do the same thing?

---

Know Your Enemy said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Know Your Enemy said:

---

This is going to be more unwatchable than the Freddie Mercury whitewash movie.

---

Movies that win 4 Oscars normally do suck.

---

If you know anything about Freddie & Queen you'll know that movie was a load of horse**** that was so factually incorrect in order to dupe the masses into thinking it was a great story. Clearly it worked.

---

Quote:

---

"The Michael Jackson Movie Wants to Change Your Mind"

An exclusive look at the script for 'Michael,' currently in production, reveals the first Jackson estate-approved piece of entertainment that directly addresses the child molestation allegations against himand seeks to cleanse the entertainer's image 15 years after his death.

by Matthew Belloni

Back when he was alive, the attorney Howard Weitzman and I used to chat from time to time about Michael Jackson. Howard was one of the many lawyers that represented Michael over the years. And after Jackson died in 2009, Weitzman managed the many, many litigation matters for the Jackson estate, a massive client that his old firm still represents today, three years after his own death.

Howard was a true believer in Michael's innocenceor at least he always said he was a true believerdespite all the bad optics of paid-off accusers, a criminal trial over seven counts of alleged child molestation, and, in 2019, the incendiary documentary Leaving Neverland, in which Wade Robson and James Safechuck described in explicit detail being groomed and molested as children by the so-called King of Pop.

Like many, I never knew what to think about Jacksonyes, it all looked terrible, and the Leaving Neverland guys seemed pretty credible, despite the obvious incentive to profit off their notoriety, and the fact that they had both previously testified for Michael. But M.J. was never convicted of any crimes, and, when we talked, Howard always had great excuses for Michael's weird behavior and evidence that each accuser was out for money or fame or revenge or something. I often pointed out that Weitzman collected millions of dollars in legal fees in exchange for his beliefs, but Howard also represented O.J. Simpson, and let's just say that privately, he did not offer the same full-throated defense of that former client.

Anyway, in 2019, sometime after Weitzman had filed a $100 million lawsuit against HBO over Leaving Neverland, I was approached in my capacity as editor of The Hollywood Reporter to partner with a major filmmaker on a Jackson documentary series. The filmmaker wanted to use THR and Billboard articles and talking-head experts in the series, and possibly even snippets of Jackson's big hits. He knew that music was a long shot, considering the estate would need to approve, but he also knew I had good relationships with both Howard and the Ziffren Brittenham law firm, home of music lawyer John Branca, one of Michael's executors andexcept for brief periods of estrangementperhaps his fiercest defender in both life and death. Might I ask Weitzman or Branca if there was any scenario in which the estate would allow the limited use of Jackson's music as part of a journalistic inquiry into what made Michael the man he was?

So I called up Howard… and it was a very short conversation. If this project planned to even mention "the allegations," he told me, the estate was out. And, he continuedand this part I remember very clearly"Be careful," he said. "I love you, but I'll sue the **** out of you."


Estate Planning

That message was received (the doc project went nowhere), and it has explained a lot of the estate's activities since Michael died of a drug overdose while attempting a comeback tour after his criminal trial (he was acquitted in 2005 after being accused of abusing a 13-year-old boy at the Neverland Ranch). Branca and estate co-executor John McClain have meticulously managed Michael's assets, erasing nearly $500 million(!) in debt and generating billions of dollars from new projects designed to also restore his image. There was the rehearsal footage tribute movie, This Is It, which grossed $268 million in theaters in late 2009; a pair of hagiographic Cirque du Soleil shows (Howard made sure I saw the very strange Michael Jackson: One shortly after it debuted in 2013 in Vegas, where it is still playing); and MJ, the Broadway musical, which the Times review called "a grind of obfuscation, a case of willfully not looking at the man in the mirror." Fans didn't care. That show, which open in February 2022, has grossed $172 million so far, according to the Broadway League, and it just debuted in London.

These projects all have something in common: They ignore the allegations against Jackson that consumed the final third of his life, focusing instead on his rise to stardom and that amazing music. That's been the estate's whole strategy, of course. And it has worked. Even as Leaving Neverland reignited the outrage, with Oprah doing an entire special with the accusers and some radio stations pulling MJ from their rotations, the estate has chugged along spectacularly. A recent court filing said its assets were valued at around $2 billion. Sales and streams of Jackson's music jumped 37 percent from 2020 to 2023, according to Luminate. (Outside the U.S., Jackson is even more popular.)

Just last month, Branca sold half of Jackson's recorded music and songwriting catalog to Sony in an incredible arrangement that valued them at $1.2 billion and allowed the estate to continue to control how they are exploited. When that deal was announced, a triumphant Branca told the Times, "As we have always maintained, we would never give up management or control of Michael Jackson's assets."

That's clear. So it's no surprise that Michael, the big-budget feature biopic that is currently in production in and around Los Angeles for release next April, is every bit as adulatory toward its subject. If you really, really love Michael Jackson, this movie is for you. (Feel free to blurb that, guys.) But given the estate's involvement, I must say I was surprised when I recently read the screenplay. I figured the moviewritten by John Logan (The Aviator), directed by Antoine Fuqua (Training Day, The Equalizer), produced by Graham King (Bohemian Rhapsody), starring Jaafar Jackson (Michael's nephew and Jermaine's son), and distributed by Lionsgate (U.S.) and Universal (international)would similarly steer clear of the pedophilia stuff. There's already so much drama in Michael's upbringing: the shot to stardom with The Jackson 5; the trauma at the hands of his abusive father, Joe (Colman Domingo), that, at least in the Jackson mythology, led to his obsession with plastic surgery; the painkiller addiction after his fiery accident on the Pepsi commercial set; the embarrassing skin condition; and the lack of an actual childhood that manifested in his bizarre innocence and lifelong love of being around kids. Maybe to avoid criticism, the movie would flick at the abuse claims, I thought, or the "noise" around Jackson as he became weirder and weirder.

That's all in Michael. But this is not just that. If the script as written ends up onscreenwhich is a big caveat here because words and scenes are often changed during shoots, and not everything goes in the final cutthis will be super controversial. It's basically the first major piece of estate-approved entertainment that directly engages with the allegations against Jackson. And it not only engages, it wants very much to convince you Michael is innocent.


The Script

Out of respect for the filmmakers and the creative process, I don't want to reveal too much here, especially since the content could change. But given the serious allegations against Jackson and the fact that this movie will reach millions of people with a specific version of events, right around the time when litigation between the estate and the Leaving Neverland accusers is expected to go to trial, the contents of the script are clearly important and newsworthy.

Amid a boom lately in musical biopics, both Lionsgate and Universal think this movie could do Bohemian Rhapsody numbers, and potentially more. That movie got to $910 million worldwide in 2018, and Jackson was a much bigger star than Freddie Mercury ever was. Executives at both studios engaged in robust debates about whether to take this project on, I'm told, and both have already started planning a unique comms strategy for potential backlash. Sony Pictures, a logical partner for the film, given it released This Is It and its sister company owns part of the music, didn't even bid due to its executives' misgivings about the optics.

So, what's in it? The Michael script opens with Jackson staring out from his Neverland bedroom as the police arrive to strip search him, part of the 1993 investigation into statements about Jackson's anatomy made by Jordan Chandler, the 13-year-old boy whose molestation claim led to the first legal circus and an eventual $20 million settlement. The script then goes to great lengths to minimize and downplay the actual claims and eviscerate the Chandlers, including that infamous recorded phone call where Jordan's father says his real goal is to destroy his ex-wife and Jackson's career, and the well-being of his son is "irrelevant to me."

There's Branca (Miles Teller) and Johnnie Cochran discussing the claims as an "extortion" attempt. There's also a lengthy and pretty grueling scene of Jackson actually being strip searched and photographed totally naked while surrounded by cops and lawyers. "This assault, this scorching trauma, will shake him to the core and never leave him," the script reads. The clear message: Michael was the actual victim here.

That may be true. I'm not pro or anti Jackson, and I don't profess to have studied the details of the cases. But others have, and many have come to very different conclusions about Jackson's behavior. It is strange that Michael is never depicted alone at night with children, which even his defenders admit happened a lot. The script describes Jackson as "uniquely comfortable around kids," and at one point, Branca says, "It's not the kids I'm worried about, it's the parents. He's opening his door to tons of people we don't know. And there's a lot of greedy people in the world." Later, Michael laments to his lawyers, "I tell the truthand it doesn't matter. I've been around kids my whole life, but now they've turned it into something ugly."

Again, it shouldn't be surprising that the estate wants to launder M.J.'s image. That and making money are kinda the only reasons the estate exists. What's interesting is how aggressive the script is in this pursuit. There's no real interrogation of Michael's defenses other than his eccentric lifestyle "looks bad," no perspective of the accusers is offered, no bad details included. Only the Chandler situation is dramatized; there's nothing about the later criminal investigation and trial, or the Robson and Safechuck allegations, or the myriad other claims against Jackson. The takeaway from Michael is that Michael Jackson had an abusive father who caused him to become a horribly insecure yet harmless Peter Pan, constantly reliving the childhood he never had. And ultimately, that was weaponized by bad people trying to exploit him.

That's a deliberate choice by the estate, after 15 years of silence, to go on the offensive. It's pretty clear to me that the executors, as well as Graham King, the lead producer, and the other talent involved, are motivated to answer the critics in this film. Maybe they're true believers (the filmmakers all declined to comment), or maybe the same Weitzman caveats apply here. King and the others stand to make millions off this project, and King shares a law firm, Ziffren Brittenham, with the estate. Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised to see them in the press defending Jackson when the movie comes out.


"The Truth Is Very Different"

Obviously, the Jackson critics, and even some regular fans who followed the cases closely, are gonna feel differently. Dan Reed, the Leaving Neverland director, wrote a piece for The Guardian last year ripping "the total absence of outrage accompanying the announcement of this movie." Robson and Safechuck aren't in the script, but I asked Reed this week if he was surprised that it seeks to shoot down abuse claims. "I didn't expect my film had that kind of impact where they would want to make a movie to rebut the allegations," he said. The picture it paints is of a childlike, caring man. But, Reed added, "the truth is very different."

Meanwhile, there's another wrinkle. As I mentioned, an appeals court ruled last summer that the Leaving Neverland guys can resume their lawsuits against Jackson's companies for failing to protect them from abuse. There was a hearing in L.A. last week, and the Robson and Safechuck cases were consolidated. The accusers are pushing for a trial date early next yearbefore the April 18, 2025, release date. The estate's lead litigators, Jon Steinsapir and Tom Mesereau, obviously don't want a high-profile trial as the movie is heading to theaters.

"The defense game is to delay," John Carpenter, the lead attorney for Robson and Safechuck, told me last week, promising new revelations during the trial. He's afraid the "work of fiction" film might impact a jury's impression of Jackson. Steinsapir responded that the estate is "focused solely on winning these cases (again) in a court of law, where truth is determined by actual evidence rather than uncorroborated salacious allegations." And, he added, "when that evidence is presented, we are certain Michael Jackson will be vindicated once more."

At the same time, the estate is still in arbitration with HBO over Leaving Neverland. Remember, that's not a defamation case (you can't defame a dead person). The estate is arguing the film breached a non-disparagement clause that HBO signed back in 1992, when filming Jackson's tour. HBO declined to comment on the status of that case, which is proceeding as Reed finishes his follow-up to Leaving Neverland, called After Neverland, about the legal fight between the accusers and the estate. He hopes it will be on Channel 4 in the U.K. and elsewhere by the end of the year, well in advance of the movie. (HBO has nothing to do with this one.)

All of which means the Michael Jackson molestation media circus could return to town just as the estate is putting out its biggest and most aggressive effort to clear Michael's name. And it's a big effort. Lionsgate wouldn't tell me the exact production budget, but documents filed to win a state tax credit revealed $120 million in planned "qualified spend" in California. (King is going for authenticity in the shoot; billionaire Ron Burkle is even letting the production film at Neverland, which Burkle bought in 2020.)

That doesn't include above-the-line fees for talent, and it's not clear whether it includes music rights, a substantial expense here. I counted about 20 M.J. and Jackson 5 songs in the script, and at least five separate montage sequences set to his music. One source says the net budget is around $155 million (minus the incentives), which would place it among the most expensive musical biopics ever made.

But I'm not worried about this movie making money. It's gonna be huge, and to be honest, most M.J. fans don't care about any of this, especially outside the U.S. Plus, perversely, the controversy around the trial or the new Neverland movie may actually help sell tickets. Michael Jackson's appeal has always included a freak-show element, so maybe it's smart to lean inand, as we now know, they're trying to change some people's minds in a way that Michael himself was never able to achieve while alive. We'll see if they pull it off.

There is one big disappointment here, at least for me: My buddy Howard Weitzman isn't in the script, despite being around Michael a lot during those fraught days in the '90s. Apparently the filmmakers asked Howard if he wanted to be included, and he died before they got a response.

---