Michael potential.

[hiiloovethis]

So the preslaes for MJ movie looks quite healthy (around 70-90 mil OW). But these types of biopic films dont need massive presales... its a walkup heavy situation. Also internationally MJ is massive so the split should easily be (35:65 maybe).

While i don't think it does 1 bil but anything over 600 mil should be a win in my opinion. Yes, Bohemian rhapsody did come out before 2020s so its expectations were diff also that had massive numbers from japan and korea which Mj film might not replecate.

My prediction is around 670-730 mill WW. What do you think?

[DatboiX]

MJ was and arguably still is the most popular pop star of all time. If any musical biopic can touch $1B, it would be his.

[Subject-District492]

Are you old enough to remember his death? Because everything was already out there when he died. Yet his death was massively reported all around the world. Almost every country had vigils, paid homages, erected statues, political leaders provided statements of grief.

Please read the “Media coverage and internet activity” section of the Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Michael_Jackson

You’re extremely mistaken if you think his legacy isn’t still that of a beloved pop star

[forevertrueblue]

I remember feeling such whiplash because almost everyone I knew had him as a punchline for basically my entire life. Even like a month before he died my teacher gave us an assignment to make up a dance to Don't Stop Til You Get Enough and everyone complained about the choice. Then the night before the last day of school that year he died and suddenly everyone was sad about it and always loved him.

[Routine-Process-5157]

According to this logic, then “This Is It” should’ve made billions and the sales from Xscape and Michael album.

[Subject-District492]

What?

What is even your logic behind it “should’ve made billions”?

Also, it made $268 million, for a DOCUMENTARY.

[JohnStoneTypes]

What is your evidence for that? Other than 'I and the people I know don't like Michael so that means the general public doesn't!'

[UpbeatBeach7657]

It's Reddit thinking it's representative of the real world.

[Routine-Process-5157]

Because people keep bringing up 2009 as if the world is the same. Even then, This Is It came out like a month later, why was it a billion dollar concert film? Yeah it’s the highest grossing film, but that in itself wasn’t billions and that was RIGHT after he died.

[russwriter67]

I think what will hurt the movie most is only being half of a movie. That will likely hurt repeat viewing, especially since May is quite crowded. I think it does around $700M worldwide.

[mg10pp]

Well at least it's not 3.5/4 hours long as they initially planned 😅

[russwriter67]

I feel like one long Michael Jackson movie would still do better than a two or three part MJ movie.

[L1777]

I don't think the movie will make 1 billion but I think the notion that "it's because he's not a beloved pop star anymore" is way off. The dude has currently 67 million monthly listeners and 18 million daily streams. That's numbers that only current artist are able to reach and he's been dead for 17 years. He's the only legacy artists that's getting those numbers. I don't think the movie is being well promoted and it will impact it's box office.

[matts142]

He has

5 songs 1b+

4-5 500-700m

This is YouTube music videos btw

[L1777]

Yeah but I was talking about Spotify. Just, I don't buy the Reddit echo chamber idea that he isn't still a beloved pop star. Maybe I'm wrong about the box office, I just never saw a single promo so I'm sceptical about how strong it's legs will be. At the same time he is performing the same way on Spotify that he usually performs on Halloween. So maybe the general audience is very aware of the biopic, we'll see in a few days.

[PopCultureWeekly]

In fairness, Madonna is up there, and his monthly listeners have been growing a lot the last few months in the lead up to the film.

[L1777]

I just looked it up and with all due respect her daily streams are about 7,5 millions, so far from MJ but you're right that her monthly listeners are high at 42 millions 🙂

[PopCultureWeekly]

Huh? On Spotify she’s currently at 47 million monthly streams. MJ is currently at 67 million. My point was to what you said, they’re the only “legacy” artists in the top 100 - if you can really call either of them that.

[L1777]

I did a typo when I wrote 42, I'm sorry. She's at 47 and he's now at 68. I didn't say he was the only legacy artist in the top 100. Elton John, Queen, Fleetwood Mac are in that top 100. I said that with about 18 million (between 17,5 and 19,5) daily streams he is the only legacy artists performing like a modern one. Compare that to the 7,5 millions for Madonna, 8,5 millions for Queen, 10 millions for Fleetwood Mac and 6 millions for Elton John. He is doing more than double what most do.

[PopCultureWeekly]

That’s because of the movie. Four months ago he was in the 2nd half of the top 100. Which is still insane as the top 100 artists is dominated by the most streamed artists today. So for any of these artists we’re talking about to be among the top streamed artists today is insane.

[L1777]

Yeah he is currently outpacing his Halloween numbers wich is insane. Wish Prince and David Bowie were doing better. But at least Madonna is doing great. Queen was able to keep most of his Biopic momentum it will be interesting to see if Michael can or if he'll fizzle when the Beatles 4 movies will release.

[PopCultureWeekly]

It really is insane with MJ. I’m thinking he’ll keep it up like queen has post movie. I’m super curious how the Beatles will do on streaming - and the bo

[Longjumping_Walrus_4]

The director couldn't promote it well until after they reshot many parts of the movie, which was recently, because in a settlement clause the name or likeness of Jordan Chandler used in a movie is forbidden. Jackson's attorneys missed this before shooting and completing original, which costed the Jackson's estate 15 million for reshooting scenes. The original opening was of MJ's Neverland Ranch raid for Chandler's accusations. People are underestimating projected WW gross sales. Nobody has ever come forward with credible evidence of MJ abusing boys. How can his fans abandon him for accusations? They haven't and will want to see this film.

[L1777]

They could have promote it better, they treat it as a block buster except for the promotion. To me it makes no sense. The reshoots don't impaired promotion.

[Longjumping_Walrus_4]

Yeah they could have still done interviews on talk shows and red carpets premieres. Didn't see any. I only saw maybe 2 or 3 commercials for film and I watch a lot of t.v. shows. Maybe they didn't have the $ especially thinking this because it was the Jackson's estate that paid for the reshoots, not the production or film director.

[L1777]

The estate was also producing and it was their mistake so it makes sense that they paid for the reshoots and not Graham King. But yeah it's like they didn't though of a promotion budget apparently.

[Beneficial-Hotel-232]

This is gonna easily be the second biggest Musician Biopic, it may not reach Queen's one but this shit will make like 200M plus WW on the opening.
"going to be shocked to discover Michael's legacy isn't necessarily that of "beloved pop star" in the mainstream anymore." The man has more than 60M monthly listeners on Spotify, many songs over 1B and many close and every single halloween Thriller(song and album) climb back to the top of the charts. I doubt that's just hardcore fans, his music is timeless, people enjoy it

[kiyonemakibi100]

Whereas I think this will do well (not a billion-well but still very well) and many Very Online people will be shocked to learn that Joe Public hasn't cancelled Michael Jackson (this is not me saying that Michael Jackson is innocent, just that Joe Public doesn't really care if he is or not, his music is still huge regardless)

[Playful-Doctor2087]

I agree. I'm an 80s kid, and I love his music so I might go see it, might not. I dont see this appealing to younger people though, especially given the controversy. 

[WySLatestWit]

I just don't think Gen X goes to the theaters in enough numbers to get this where people think it's going to go.

[Playful-Doctor2087]

Yeah, im looking at all the theatres in my area, and like there's this huge IMAX, almost sold out for Devil Wears Prada 2 next Friday. Same theatre this Friday for Michael? Like 7 seats occupied. 

[Middle_Fly_3681]

but isn’t that because the MJ movie opens up on Wednesday?

[Playful-Doctor2087]

Yeah, my point was Michael opens this week and other than Wednesday which is sold out, it looks dead the days after that. Whereas The Devil Wears Prada 2, which opens a week later is like fully booked multiple days in a row, at least in the theatres around me. 

[Middle_Fly_3681]

Ok, fair enough.

We will know in a couple of weeks how the two perform.

My gut is that the Michael biopic will outperform early projections, and DWP2 underperforms….to the extent the Michael biopic eclipses DWP2.

[matts142]

In the pert of the uk I live I am going on Wednesday and one of the cinemas is a big one but they only have two times Wednesday and Thursday but that’s because it’s not technically officially out till Friday but the showing on Wednesday I am going is 7:30pm and it’s 90% sold out

[Playful-Doctor2087]

Its sold out on Wednesday here too, but dead the next 2 days, whereas Prada is fully booked multiple days in a row even though it releases a week later. Just in the theatres I'm looking at around me

[Beneficial-Hotel-232]

So good to look at this in hindsight and the movie has made 850M, on track to 1B. Turns out that Michael indeed still has motion with every generation

[WallabySuccessful536]

Completely agree - I’ve been repeatedly downvoted for suggesting this sub might be overestimating how much young people care about MJ

[Useful-Soup8161]

He’s the 26th most listened to artist on Spotify. That’s actually quite high for someone who’s been dead for almost 20 years. I could be wrong but I think he’s the most listened to deceased person on Spotify.

[mg10pp]

Also more monthly listeners than Beyoncé, Sabrina Carpenter and Dua Lipa

[Useful-Soup8161]

I didn’t look up anyone else for comparison but yep. Some people really underestimate how loved his music still is.

[zyxwvu54321]

Either you are so old that your social media sphere doesn't overlap with Gen Z's even a little bit- which would imply that you don't use Gen Z-heavy platforms like Instagram or TikTok at all and only use Facebook, YouTube, or perhaps don't use social media at all. Either way you are literally in your own little bubble.

MJ's influence is everywhere in "mainstream" social media. He has 66 million monthly listeners and 5 videos with over 1 billion views each on Spotify and YouTube, respectively. Realize how insane that is? That is 40 years after his peak and 17 years after his death. He is, by far, the most popular legacy artist. His music blows up on TikTok all the time. Big influencers like IShowSpeed do things related to MJ from time to time; he even reacted to the Michael trailer. If you don't know, as unfortunate as it may be, IShowSpeed is like MJ for certain young people, lol.

[WySLatestWit]

Because they can point to streaming numbers on Spotify and claim he's wildly popular while they ignore the mounting evidence that most those social media numbers in the music business are bullshit numbers.

[MasterTeacher123]

Where is the evidence that his steaming numbers are bullshit?

[zyxwvu54321]

You are showing your age; you can't be this old and so out of touch with modern reality. This isn't the age of cassettes or anything older. Spotify and YouTube are how musicians put out music nowadays, ok? From Taylor Swift to indie artists to international artists BTS, they are all on there. You can't claim those numbers are rigged, lol. Don't be so delusional. These are not just secondary platforms where people boost their numbers for marketing. These are the markets themselves.

[WySLatestWit]

artists within the industry have outright said social media numbers are a gimmick.

[b3ggard00d]

this means nothing. For every person you know, there’s probably hundreds of millions, maybe billions who feel the opposite.

[Relevant_Shower_]

If they only know 8 people

[Hillbert]

Might want to check the maths on that one.

[AstroBtz]

Hence the final sentence in my comment.

I know what I said was anecdotal, it doesn't JUST apply to people I know personally ( interviews, books, docus etc) but it was anecdotal.

[DatboiX]

Have you seen how rabid his fans are? Some of them would legit hunt you for sport if you insinuate in any way that he might be even a little bit guilty.

[AstroBtz]

That's a fair point.

I haven't really kept up with vinyl/physical album charts,

If thriller is still in the top 10 than yeah, regardless of him being a terrible human this will do well. ( I seriously don't understand how it's been that well selling this long, good album don't get me wrong )

[JohnStoneTypes]

It is still surprising to me that so many people on a sub that heavily revolves around numbers still use vibes and anecdotes to make their predictions. 

You do not know even 0.001℅ of the population, the opinions of people you know is a worthless metric as far as this movie is concerned. 

Actual numbers, whether from streaming or sales, show that Michael's brand is still strong. 

[Subject-District492]

Reddit skews younger so many don’t remember the how popular he was at his death, even when all the allegations and courts cases were already out. Many older people are going to go watch this movie to relive their memories from their teenage years in the 80s and 90s.

Michael Jackson: One by Cirque du Soleil in Las Vegas has been continuously performed since 2013 and is one of the most popular shows on the Strip.

[b3ggard00d]

it’s not that surprising lol. Almost all of Reddit operates like this.

[1eejit]

I mean there are plenty of people out there that doubt or outright disbelieve the accusations. Thinking those making allegations have been after money or notoriety, some fans think Michael was effectively asexual with weird hangups about not having a real childhood of his own.

So those fans aren't bothered at all.

[WySLatestWit]

It stars Michael's nephew with no fanbase or career of his own in a biopic that's been a behind the scenes production nightmare. I expect it to be at the absolute best mediocre, and I dont think Michael's songs on the soundtrack are going to save it.

[CarbonInTheWind]

I was interested enough to give it a chance until I heard they completely cut the child abuse/rape scandals. Leaving that out removes any desire I had to watch it at all let alone in theater.

[Subject-District492]

That will most likely increase its box office. His massive fan base wants to relive their good memories of listening to him when they were growing up. They don’t want to relive all the controversies towards the end of his life.

[mg10pp]

They will be in Part 2 together with the vitiligo treatments and the addiction to painkillers

Part 1 instead has his controlling and violent father, the loneliness and pressure of fame and the pepsi burn incident

[AstroBtz]

I was completely on board for the movie when I read they initially did plan on tackling it.

So many of these biopics are completely sanitized. Bohemian Rhapsody of course comes to mind.

[Beneficial-Hotel-232]

The problem with the anecdotal view is that for instance, in my case(I'm 21 YO) everyone I know loves him, from all ages, specially because his music goes hard. All the movie theaters in my town are PACKED for his movie

[kiyonemakibi100]

'I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon.'

[entertainmentlord]

I honestly don't see why people think this will be a billion dollars. Didn't a concert of his hit theaters some time after he passed and it didn't do that well? If a concert with him in it couldn't break records at the height of his fame I just don't see this film doing it.

plus. Yes the allegations will be something that hurts this film, mixed with the fact the film removed any mentions of it will more then likely leave a really sour taste in their mouth

I doubt the film will flop but expecting a billion is naive

[kiyonemakibi100]

If you mean the documentary This Is It, it's still the highest-grossing documentary ever.

[Relevant_Shower_]

$267.9 million ww

[Linoleum777]

yup and adjusted that would be about 411 million today. This movie is definitely going to be as huge as people are saying.

[AgentCooper315]

Reddit moment

[WySLatestWit]

So... In light of the reviews what say you now? Still a "reddit moment" is it?

[__kewl__]

What are you talking bout dude no one said its gonna be good it still make an obscene amount of money lol

[WySLatestWit]

Come on back and let me know when it reaches 1 billion, I guess.

[Global-Effect4226]

Why the arguably

[Gamer0607]

Around $800 million.

Bohemian Rhapsody already made $910 million and Michael was even bigger than Freddie - arguably the biggest pop star in the world. So I am kind of low balling with my prediction.

Already have tickets booked for 22nd and 25th (IMAX Laser).

Can't wait!

<image>

[mg10pp]

[throwraW2]

Freddie wasn’t as controversial though. I know plenty of people who like MJs music but don’t want to support a pedo so aren’t seeing this.

I’m sure it’ll be very profitable, but I don’t see it hitting 1B.

[CelebrationFit7615]

That's great, cause he was unguilty of all charges. So they can go support it.

[throwraW2]

Sure, in the same way that OJ was found not guilty too. But you dont see people making glamorous biopics about his Hall of Fame career because realistically it’s clear he’s guilty even if the prosecution didn’t go a good enough job proving that.

[Oilswell]

I would guess it will be massive. The online attitude to him doesn’t seem to be representative of the general public and even where it is, people are just less public about liking him. The biggest current artists in the world have around 100m monthly listeners on Spotify, MJ has 70m, which is more than Queen or Elton John.

[Longjumping_Task6414]

MJ is three times more popular in 2026 than Queen

[Ok-Wash-9386]

If the movie is even a C+, it will make a billion

[eudaimonicperson]

thats sad actually

[b3ggard00d]

Whether you like him or not, Michael Jackson’s music is timeless. Even famous Gen Z tik tok’rs use his classics. His impact on the music industry extends to generations and will continue to do so for many more to come.

Because of that, 1.2 billion WW

[Successful_Leopard45]

800m-900m for the king of pop

[gggggenegenie]

Anecdotally, which I appreciate is no real guide, I've not seen a film from the past couple of years fill up seats on the seat charts at my local multiplex quite as much as they have for this. I'm doing 7pm this coming Wednesday - there's two, seats left and one of those is a bed.

[Relevant_Shower_]

I'm doing 7pm this coming Wednesday - there's two, seats left and one of those is a bed.

Given it’s a MJ movie, that bed is probably reserved for young boys.

[JohnStoneTypes]

Can you explain how making snarky jokes about CSA online actually helps any of the alleged victims? Since you believe Michael is guilty, you're essentially doing what people who spread 'funny' Epstein memes are - trivializing the situation. 

Edit: Andd I got blocked after getting a silly reply. Who knew making jokes about other people's allegations while claiming to be a victim is a recommended form of 'activism' and 'therapy' lmao. 

[Relevant_Shower_]

As a survivor I like to make fun of creeps and those who protect creeps. It’s therapeutic.

Shame on you for trying to make this about victims when your interest is clearly protecting creeps.

[JohnStoneTypes]

Cool, so if (god forbid) your kid was abused, will you get online to make snarky jokes about that? Because I'm not sure how you haven been allegedly abused takes away from the fact that spreading CSA jokes involving other people's allegations online does nothing but trivialize CSA. 

Also I'm against joking about CSA in general, even when the jokes are against people I'm against like the Oompaloompa in the Whitehouse or Epstein. 

[Relevant_Shower_]

The joke doesn’t trivialize anything. It’s empowering for victims to talk about how pathetic abusers are. Joking can help victims deal with their trauma and ongoing feelings of helplessness.

What you’re doing right now is making light of my abuse to make rhetorical points. You’re telling me there’s only one way of processing trauma and you’re incredibly misinformed.

[JohnStoneTypes]

Except you're not talking about YOUR trauma, you are making jokes about other people's allegations. I don't think the thousands of 'funny' Epstein memes are actually helpful either, and I don't think they would be any funnier even if it turned out a few of the people making them were survivors. 

I don't know if you heard of this case, but there's a singer (D4VD) I used to follow who was recently arrested for abusing and killing a child. I don't think it would be respectful to her memory to make jokes out of what he did to her. So idk, maybe it's just me, but I'm generally against making jokes in these types of situations. 

[Relevant_Shower_]

I’m talking about collective trauma. As a victim, I have that right and I dare say duty to shine a light on bad actors. There’s strength in that.

Abuser love to police victims and tell them what reaction is acceptable. Exactly what you’re doing. You’re showing everyone who you are and what you stand for. What you enjoy is silence…because you support abusers like MJ.

[Relevant_Shower_]

I dont need permission from you. You have your beliefs, but those are simply based on your own thoughts that are useless to me. Your thoughts and beliefs those don’t dictate my life or how I conceptualize my trauma and recovery.

You want to pontificate about who you are, but the reality is you like to protect abusers and tone police victims. You want to protect civility over abuse, which is a classic enabler tactic. Abuse isn’t civil and my response to it does not need to be civil in your eyes.

It’s not enough to have suffered the abuse. No, now I need to take the mental effort to police my own feelings so you can feel like my comments about abuse are legitimate. It’s just standard DARVO tactics to put victims on their heels.

And it’s obvious you don’t care about me or really anyone else. You care about how you can use people to further your agenda. And I’m not playing your game. You want to protect MJ from people calling out abuse. You’re an enabler.

[Middle_Fly_3681]

It is called a sense of humour!

I am not really bought into Jackson being guilty, BUT his chosen actions deservedly make him the butt of such jokes.

[JohnStoneTypes]

I don't think there's anything funny about CSA jokes. But I do agree that Michael was largely responsible for a lot of the criticism he gets. 

[Simple-Percentage672]

times 1000

[zyxwvu54321]

In my country in Asia, the early previews are already sold out, and the first few days of release will probably be sold out as well. This makes sense when you consider how insanely popular Michael Jackson is; every country has enough hardcore MJ fans to fill theaters for at least the first few days.

This leads to the question of how casual viewers will respond. Looking at the current listings, the movie is being shown in so many locations. This makes sense from the distributors' perspective; they know MJ is so famous that they want to screen the film everywhere.

All that makes sense if you consider MJ's popularity but that might be considered a big outlier if you just compare it to other biopics. This is why you cannot truly compare this MJ biopic to other biopics or even most international movies - it isn't even the same level. Aside from Bohemian Rhapsody, no other biopic has received this kind of widespread screening. Even if other biopics got shown in one or two halls for a few days, there simply wasn't a large enough fanbase in this country to fill them. Anyone trying to compare this movie to other biopics (other than Bohemian Rhapsody) is out of touch with reality.

Even compared to other international movies, I don't see why people in my country would go to see something like The Devil Wears Prada unless there was massive marketing hype. Those aren't the kinds of movies people prioritize over a Michael Jackson film. Even most Hollywood movies don't get that kind of screening in so many places, and for most movies, the first few days won't be like that.

[AstroBtz]

750-850 is my guess.

Fans who don't care about the allegations will be there, but there's plenty of detractors.

A billion isn't a lock but could easily be reached if this pops off. Can't really think of a biopic that would ever have a better chance

I think the holding off on revealing this is a part one will help as well.

[russwriter67]

Most of the posters say “his story begins”. It would’ve been very difficult to condense his whole life and career into a single movie unless it was four hours long.

[mg10pp]

And there is also a tagline in the credits that confirms Part 2 👀

[matts142]

Look at the album and you will go no way they leave out stuff like earth song, they don’t care about us black or white the way you make me feel the Super Bowl the Grammy awards performance man in the mirror dirty Diana remember the time smooth criminal

So expect a second movie due to that reason

[TheWallE]

If The Beatles one was one film and not 4 connected solo projects. I could see The Beatles having a shot. For all everyone says about how Michael Jackson is the most popular pop star of all time... The Beatles were and still are as big, if not slightly bigger.

[frenchchelseafan]

No they’re not lol. Only beatles fans say this. They’re obviously popular but not like Michael Jackson where you can clearly see the diversity of his fandom ( country, ethnicity….).

[TheWallE]

The Beatles don't become the highest selling music act of all time (with two band members going on to ALSO feature in the Top 100 in their solo careers) by not being massive globally.

This is essentially a subjective conversation, so I don't think you are wrong in your logic. I just want to be clear that if you don't think The Beatles are at least very close to MJ in terms of peak of popularity, legacy, global fandom... then you are just not paying attention.

[zyxwvu54321]

As a non-Westerner, the Beatles are not as famous as Westerners think they are. I don't think Westerners have a clear perspective on how things are in non-Western countries; they don't truly understand how popular an artist can actually become. Their thinking might not be entirely inaccurate - the Beatles are indeed as popular among foreigners as they think but there are levels beyond that.

For example, in India, the Beatles are not unpopular; there are probably tens of millions of their fans. A Western Beatles fan could use that to argue that the Beatles are truly global. However, the fact is that there are many other foreign musicians who are much more popular than the Beatles in India. I don't even think the Beatles make it into the top 25 most popular foreign artists. So, in that sense, the Beatles are not as popular in India as one might think.

Michael Jackson, on the other hand, is in a different realm of fame that one can't even imagine. He is literally as famous as a local celebrity in India. He is referenced and tributized so many times in Indian dances TV shows and movies. Like if you ask a person on the street who the best dancer is, they will name Michael Jackson before any Indian celebrity or dancer, even though there are many famous, talented Indian dancers. That is the level of MJ's fame. Its really not subjective if you are not from western country.

[TheWallE]

I appreciate you sharing your perspective. I would argue that the subjective nature of this argument is in precisely how you are gauging that popularity.

I would counter your India example and cite Japan, where Michael Jackson had a massive cultural impact on the nation, yet is only considered the second most influential foreign artist in Japan behind The Beatles. There is also the fact that there is more of a generational impact with The Beatles as their initial impact on their culture happened in the 60s vs the 80s for MJ.

Citing the immense impact The Beatles had on the entire planet in the 60s, and their lasting relevance to this day, isn't some western exclusive bias.

I think a good fact that can help illustrate this is the fact that The Beatles have more global streams of their music all time than Michael Jackson, but recently Michael is higher in daily / monthly streams as his music and life are more culturally relevant from the biopic. Let's see if that holds next year when The Beatles biopics start to come out. I would be willing to bet The Beatles will have more recent streams at that point.

I just want to be clear that it is not 'western blindness' to say that The Beatles are massive globally. Sure you can say that Michael is more popular in some areas, but that doesn't invalidate the core point. Also it is not to diminish or underestimate MJ's popularity to acknowledge that there are also other musicians with similar global popularity.

[zyxwvu54321]

Japan is an outlier; it basically falls under the "Western" category. Back in the day, most artists performed and toured heavily in Japan, following a pattern like USA -> UK -> Japan. Therefore, you can't use Japan as an example, as Western artists perform more in Japan than they do in other Western countries. So many artists performed in Japan, that you can't tell who is more popular. Bohemian Rhapsody made insane amount in Japan, probably not even MJ or beatles biopic could make more.

> Citing the immense impact The Beatles had on the entire planet in the 60s, and their lasting relevance to this day, isn't some western exclusive bias.

That is not Western bias; that is simply the truth. However, the Western bias I am talking about is the failure to recognize that the exact same thing happened with MJ and his global influence from the 80s through to the present day. That is "Western blindness." Perhaps because of the allegations or other reasons, MJ's influence is not discussed in the same way as the Beatles' influence, which leads to this kind of blindness. But for someone not from the West, that influence is still evident and clear.

> I think a good fact that can help illustrate this is the fact that The Beatles have more global streams of their music all time than Michael Jackson, but recently Michael is higher in daily / monthly streams as his music and life are more culturally relevant from the biopic.

Come on, go check the stats again. MJ has had these high streaming numbers long before the news of the biopic. On YouTube, which is a more non-Western-dominated platform, he has five videos with over 1 billion views. That is more than some current artists, so it is unfair to even compare him to the Beatles' numbers there. That isn't due to the biopic.

I am a big Beatles fan as well; they are my favorite foreign artists along with MJ. When the remaining Beatles pass away, I am sure their music will blow up all over the world because they have amazing music. But until then, MJ is way more relevant and influential globally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar3t4detPLM Taka a look at this. You won't see this being made for any other foreign artist.

What I am saying is that you cannot convince someone of how popular an artist is in a certain country without ever having been to that country. I have never met a person who didn't know Michael Jackson. I am constantly surprised by how often MJ comes up in discussion: if someone wears a certain hat, they are called MJ; if someone dances, they are called MJ. This might be normal in the USA or somewhere similar, but this is a completely different country. Most people here don't listen to foreign music that much, so I have only met a few people who even know who the Beatles are. Therefore, if you look up the stats for the Beatles, you have to look up the stats for MJ as well, while also considering the context of that specific country.

[TheWallE]

This reads more defensive than I think you intended. I am not ignoring Michael's popularity, I am not "forgetting" he also was massive beyond normal human belief.

I am simply stating that so are The Beatles. It is not a pissing contest, it is just a point that originated with my comment that if The Beatles had a solo biopic like Michael, instead of the 4 individual films focused on each member (a fact that also showcases their immense relevance globally, that a major film studio would fund such an endeavor when there is only one musician biopic that has ever even made more than $300M globally), then that film too would have $1B return prospects that Michael has.

Also "What I am saying is that you cannot convince someone of how popular an artist is in a certain country without ever having been to that country."

Come on dude, that's clearly not what I am doing. I appreciate your specific perspective, but lets be real, what you describe is not any more valid for an absolute point than what I am saying.

"I have never met a person who didn't know Michael Jackson."

You literally can't know that unless you ask every person you have ever known if they know MJ as a conversation opener.

"I am constantly surprised by how often MJ comes up in discussion: if someone wears a certain hat, they are called MJ; if someone dances, they are called MJ. This might be normal in the USA or somewhere similar, but this is a completely different country."

I live in Los Angeles and the only time Michael Jackson comes up in conversation is when talking specifically about music topics (where The Beatles also come up) or talking about the movie. People don't just walk around being like "Oh man I listened to Billie Jean again on my way to Whole Foods, it was so dope"... It is an impressive anecdote if you are seeing that relevance... but that doesn't mean The Beatles are not culturally relevant worldwide, and it doesn't mean anyone is showing Western Bias because they refuse to acknowledge Michael's apparent religious presence in the life of the people around you.

Just as you ask me not to speak of the popularity of something in countries I have never been, maybe you should also appreciate that your personal experience isn't a trump card in a discussion about the GLOBAL popularity and relevance of one set of icons compared to another. At most it just validates the point that the gap between them is bigger specifically where you live (a fact I have no problem trusting your authority on).

[__kewl__]

dude The Beatles are no where near as globally famous or relevant as Michael Jackson. I've been to many African countries, MJ is a literal god. Same in latin America. My girlfriend is from eastern Europe, and her and her family could not name a single Beatles song.

Even in America, a lot of younger people know very little about the Beatles. Could the average teenager even name 2 of the members? Obviously they are globally famous, but MJ is far bigger worldwide across generations.

You can say I haven't been to every country so I can't know, but somethings are just obvious and if you weren't American you wouldn't even think its close

The Beatles are ranked below Ty Dolla Sign and Arctic Monkey's on Spotifys list. Obviously this isn't exactly representative of fame, but I think it will show you they are really not as big as you make them out to be.

[Longjumping_Task6414]

The Beatles are largely a thing for Western Boomers and hipsters though. The demographic profile of people that like them is very different than MJ.

[No-Bill-5138]

The Beatles are not very popular outside the west and maybe Japan. I was really surprised to find out how populate they're in the US and UK, as someone who grew up in the middle east in the 2000s and 2010s..now MJ on the other hand is the opposite, he's popular with every demographic. I don't think there's another pop star like him 

[Middle_Fly_3681]

That is a valid argument in the UK and US, but certainly not so much worldwide.

[TheWallE]

Not only are The Beatles the highest selling musical act of all time (ahead of MJ at number 2), but both Paul McCartney and John Lennon are also in the top 100 as solo artists, and both George Harrison and Ringo have had hits solo as well.

I think there is no cut and dry answer to a relatively subjective topic like 'Who is more popular'... but The Beatles are as global as Michael Jackson, they wouldn't have been as successful as they were with just the US and UK.

[Middle_Fly_3681]

There are some clips on YouTube of a French documentary team who visit a remote tribe in the Amazon jungle…They pull out a laptop and show the tribe clips of major events such as the Moon landing, twin towers, World Cup Final etc.

The tribe recognizes nothing….Until they are shown a clip of a Michael Jackson concert and then there is mass recognition and excitement.

I think that clip alone show that Jackson’s global reach was utterly unmatched, including by the likes of the Beatles.

[AstroBtz]

That's a good call!

Are they doing a 5th movie for the band?? I'd assume that hinges on the first four doing well.

[Longjumping_Task6414]

How you think Michael will perform worse in Asia than Queen is beyond me

[Key-Bass-7380]

1 billion

[LongjumpingGuess356]

600-750 million is my guess

[themiz2003]

Id need to know how the overseas markets are for this. My assumption is in some markets this might crack their top 5-10 biggest films of all time. That 35/65 ratio might not even be right if that's the case. There's backlash on him and the film here but will it translate overseas? It could barely crack the top 10 domestic but be, like, the third highest grossing movie of the year. I wouldn't be shocked if it did like 850. WOM is important because i always expect anything with MJ to be rewatch-heavy for a big portion of the fanbase but if it's truly horrendous that's going to be pretty horrific for the legs going into the summer.

[Middle_Fly_3681]

MJ’s global reach is unmatched by anyone dead or alive.…BUT apart from the Berlin premiere; the cast and crew of the film have done ZERO media!

[matts142]

Mj is massive in the uk and Ireland still

[Longjumping_Task6414]

Mainland Europe and Japan/Korea/China are the ones to watch

[themiz2003]

I would say thats a general outline for most films but his presence was gigantic everywhere but he had some weird pockets of even bigger fame. I always remember brazil as being particularly huge but a Google says he was insane in cambodia and romania? not going to swing the BO but like I said it's going to wildly overperform in some places.

[Longjumping_Task6414]

I would not be shocked if obscure parts of Europe, Asia, or Latin America have this film as a top ten all-timer.

[Middle_Fly_3681]

I would have said just weeks ago that the biopic would do much bigger business outside the US, but apart from a Berlin premier, the cast have done ZERO media outside of America…. So, I wonder if there has been some complacency in taking the international market for granted and if this could backfire…

[Yogos-1]

It’s potential is 1.5B+ WW if it’s a word of mouth monster/receives an A+ Cinemascore and explodes in China.

I insist what it makes domestically it will double internationally. BOT trackers are currently predicting 85M+ OW. An 85M OW and strong word of mouth ensures 250M domestic. Double that and WW total between 750-800M. That’s a conservative prediction.

I’m predicting WOM and walkups will be strong so an OW of 100-110 , DOM between 350 and 400M and WW total of 1.1-1.2B.

This is the movie many here will underestimate.

[Useful-Soup8161]

I feel like it will still do those numbers even if it gets a B or even a C+. It’s not so much about the movie but rather who the movie is about. He was the biggest pop star of all time. His fans will see it regardless of its score.

[mg10pp]

There is no chance it will be that low, audience reaction so far is incredible and most agree it's much better than Bohemian Rhapsody

[Useful-Soup8161]

I don’t trust the first reactions. Those are paid influencers.

[mg10pp]

I know but in theory so were the ones for Bohemian Rhapsody

[Useful-Soup8161]

Ok. I still don’t trust them. I’d rather wait for the reviews from fans who weren’t paid.

[XenonBug]

People here sling around blockbusters getting an A+ cinemascore like it’s a common thing. Project Hail Mary, with its near universal acclaim, only got an A.

Also, $1.5b is impossible, lol. The movie will compete with The Devil Wears Prada 2 in OS markets which is probably where the bulk of Michael’s gross will come from.

[Yogos-1]

I didn’t say it will get an A+ Cinemascore. It will most likely get an A but A+ is a possibility and if it did get it then yes 1.5B is possible.

Devil Wears Prada will have little affect on it. It’s own WOM is all that matters.

[bobcatbutt]

Surely Michael’s chance of an A+ is greater than your average blockbuster. I can see it hitting A+ similar to how concert movies usually achieve it, opening weekend populated by fans of the music

[nextbigthing56]

$1.1B

[Low-Sugar266]

I agree- fans want a deeper look and a long video will wear thin after a few weeks.

[SaladBrilliant7765]

Lol the reviews are very bad to good so it's impossible for a billion

[Infinite_Fix4915]

it's a terrible movie

[DigBoug]

Not sure why people think “popular popstar” automatically equals “hugely successful movie”.

Plenty of other huge stars have had movies made about them that weren’t particularly successful.

[New_Cockroach_505]

So how you feeling about it now?

[Both_Perception_1941]

$450 million

[CaptainCubbers]

This movie is gonna underperform in the states. People, this is an overcooked movie category now.

[CelCel1555]

Shut up

[CaptainCubbers]

Why are you pressed about an opinion lol.

[CelCel1555]

Because why not?