MJ: The Musical will begin this December; opens February 2022- Page 3

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 12:34pm

Kad said: "uncageg said: "I mean, it is obvious that the sordid part of his life is what a lot of people want to see. Yes, it is quite possible to write a show about his professional life. This is an entire show about a certain part of his life. They don't have to touch on the charges or what happened in his bedroom. And who's to say who decided what part of his life they wanted to write about. And I really can't fault his estate for not wanting all of that brought back up again. That wasn't all he was.

And for the record, I think he and the people around him made a BIG mistake allowing those kids to sleep over and hang around with him. My thoughts on what may have happened with those kids are lengthy but I will say that he made a big mistake being who he was. And Zion24 you are correct, I don't want to see a musical about it. As I stated above, Professionally that was a time in his life that I am interested in. Not what was going on with him personally. There is possibly a really good story about why he broke away from Quincy Jones and decided to go in the direction he did with his music. I hope Nottage can pull it off. We started hearing and seeing all of the sexual allegations after Dangerous came out. So if people are upset that they may not include all of the sordid stuff that has been reported constantly over those years, don't go see it. It is that simple. I am not sure exactly how it goes, but I suspect the creatives approached the estate and got the ok to do the show. So it seems the idea from the start was to cover this particular part of his career. I just don't understand why so many here don't understand that. Well, actually, I do. Just my thoughts."

I think pretty much everyone here understands it. But the allegations and Jackson's behavior have cast a huge pall over his life, and defined the last decade plus of his life. It is virtually impossible to sidestep it if you're doing a work about Jackson's career as an adult in the time era they are presumably exploring. Hell, considering the abuse he suffered as a child, it'd even be hard to sidestep it if you were exploring his career in the Jackson 5, as that undoubtedly deeply affected how he would grow up. It's an integral part of Jackson's life and character. You cannot just excise it so people can happily watch actors dance to "Thriller" and not expect some pushback."

I agree with a lot of what you posted but the first allegation came out in 1993. (Dangerous was released in 1991) I am assuming this show will cover the years between "Thriiler" and "Dangerous". Why bring up allegations that surfaced after the time being covered? He was never legally charged but he has been found guilty by many in the public. Well, the court of public opinion may just lose out on this and not get what they want. And the creatives can cite that he was not found guilty and didn't feel they needed to focus on it. An that is their choice. It has been so long ago that I don't remember when the first person that accused him said this happened. If it happened after Dangerous then why even bring it up? If it was happening before or during the timeline being covered and we had heard about it then, yes, it should be addressed. Kad, I am wondering if what looks like flashbacks will touch on his abuse as a child.

 

[Alexander Lamar]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 12:38pm

After the first couple of weeks the houses look wide open. 

[Kad]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 12:50pm

Jackson was very publicly palling around with kids during this time- Neverland Ranch had been opened and outfitted with amusement park rides and a zoo- and the first allegations surfaced during the Dangerous tour. It was very much part of his public image. Even if the allegations emerged just out of the frame of focus of this show, they're inescapable. It's like making a film about Ted Bundy before he actually killed anybody- the later actions will color everything.

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 1:08pm

Kad said: "Jackson was very publicly palling around with kids during this time- Neverland Ranch had been opened and outfitted with amusement park rides and a zoo- and the first allegations surfaced during the Dangerous tour. It was very much part of his public image. Even if the allegations emerged just out of the frame of focus of this show, they're inescapable. It's like making a film about Ted Bundy before he actually killed anybody- the later actions will color everything."

Noted. But the bottom line is that they are not focusing on it and there is nothing we can do about it. And even if they decide to allude to it, people still won't be happy. So for those upset that they aren't, just don't pay to see the show. I will be there to see it next week and form my own opinion after seeing it.

 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 1:10pm

Everyone with a brain understands they won't be discussing the baseless allegations against him. Don't go to the show if you don't care for the material, it's really not that difficult.

[Moderator]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 3:34pm

The moderation team wanted to clarify something in response to comments made in another thread which were off topic. This conversation is being permitted only as reference to the aspects of a performer’s life which are being dramatized on stage. Topics, debate, discussions, and conclusions outside of that continue to be against the board's rules.

While we know this is not ideal, it's the best solution we have for the moment. Should the conversation prove to not be viable within our set rules, we may have to remove posts and further limit the conversation. Some posts may need to be edited to conform to our rules, in which case we will note they have been edited by the moderation team.

We never want to remove a post unless we have to, and we appreciate your continued cooperation.

As always, we welcome your feedback via DM to the moderator account or to [e-mail].

[Highland Guy]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 4:14pm

Some years ago, maybe 1984, MJ brought his show to a stadium in the city where my husband and I lived.  Friends gifted us with tickets.  We were not particular fans, but decided to go.  MJ gave it his all, but we were mostly bored.  Nonetheless, I hope this musical will be a success for those involved.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 4:28pm

This conversation is being permitted only as reference to the aspects of a performer’s life which are being dramatized on stage. Topics, debate, discussions, and conclusions outside of that continue to be against the board's rules.

Thanks! 

[Zion24]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 8:42pm

Alexander Lamar said: "After the first couple of weeks the houses look wide open."

To be clear, Im not predicting that this won't sell; I think it will, save for horrible notices. I just think celebrating someone (not his music, artistry- this is a story about him by his family) this morally repugnant/unwell is pretty appalling.

but more importantly, uncageg-- i just wonder if you would apply the same standard to {insert problematic person here.} The exception being made for MJ by these producers, writers, directors, etc., is simply disingenuously gross.

[edited by mods]

Updated On: 11/30/21 at 08:42 PM

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 9:34pm

There are also indisputable facts about each case which are still disturbing even if every single other thing was untrue. To call the claims baseless as above is insulting. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 11/30/21 at 10:24pm

JDonaghy4 said: "Alexander Lamar said: "After the first couple of weeks the houses look wide open."

To be clear, Im not predicting that this won't sell; I think it will, save for horrible notices. I just think celebrating someone (not his music, artistry- this is a story about him by his family) this morally repugnant/unwell is pretty appalling.

but more importantly, uncageg-- i just wonder if you would apply the same standard to {insert problematic person here.} The exception being made for MJ by these producers, writers, directors, etc., is simply disingenuously gross."

Maybe someone will. You never know. But again, the creatives, not his family, have chosen the part of his life they want to put onstage. (I am sure with the permission of his family)

Again, don't go see it if it bothers you that much. It is not changing anyone's personal life and your life will go on as usual after it opens. And let's be honest, many people going to see the show will have it in the back of their minds. But if they know what story they are going in to see then they should not have a problem with what they see on the stage. I am one of those people. If anyone wants a musical that covers the part of his life that is being discussed here, go out and raise the money to put on the show you want to see. 

 

Updated On: 11/30/21 at 10:24 PM

[RippedMan]

Posted: 12/1/21 at 12:29am

To call the victims claims baseless, after watching the documentary is..baseless. 

I'm curious to just see the design/direction and all that. I don't think any of us will be surprised if this is a massive hit. 

[BJR]

Posted: 12/1/21 at 8:00am

I don't think anyone is arguing the allegations should come up since the allegations are from a couple years after.

Better question is who decided the range of dates for the plot and isn't that convenient, given the entire enterprise was cooked up by estate lawyers? Rehabbing his image is part of the point, and therefore choosing to remember him at a time before the allegations is the first step.

[Kad]

Posted: 12/1/21 at 9:46am

Moderator said: "The moderation team wanted to clarify something in response to comments made in another thread which were off topic. This conversation is being permitted only as reference to the aspects of a performer’s life which are being dramatized on stage. Topics, debate, discussions, and conclusions outside of that continue to be against the board's rules.

While we know this is not ideal, it's the best solution we have for the moment. Should the conversation prove to not be viable within our set rules, we may have to remove posts and further limit the conversation. Some posts may need to be edited to conform to our rules, in which case we will note they have been edited by the moderation team.

We never want to remove a post unless we have to, and we appreciate your continued cooperation.

As always, we welcome your feedback via DM to the moderator account or to [e-mail]."

You guys need to come up with a better solution ASAP, because all this does is effectively provide further cover to abusers and stigmatizes victims speaking out. (Also, Jackson is long dead and the details of these claims have been public knowledge for a very long time). Every other website seems to have figured it out. And frankly, sending you feedback on this topic is useless. 

Updated On: 12/1/21 at 09:46 AM

[Zion24]

Posted: 12/1/21 at 12:15pm

BJR said: "I don't think anyone is arguing the allegations should come up since the allegations are from a couple years after.

Better question is who decided the range of dates for the plot and isn't that convenient, given the entire enterprise was cooked up by estate lawyers? Rehabbing his image is part of the point, and therefore choosing to remember him at a time before the allegations is the first step."

Well put. And funnily enough, the moderators here have decided that discussion of MJ outside the time frame determined by MJ Estate is off limits, so the attempt to whitewash marches on. 

Again, all you have to do is sub out MJ for any other currently persona non-grata individual whose names we are not allowed to mention and ask yourself if a show about their lives, not addressing controversy, would ever be welcomed with open arms to a major Broadway theater.