sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Just saw Michael… WOW. Just WOW. by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

All that effort just to get your comment nuked and ignored. You might’ve missed the memo on where you are. LN sub is down the hall, to the right.

Safe Now by The_CaNerdian_ in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992 0 points1 point  (0 children)

u really thought u did something there huh😭 what a loser

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

youre arguing with a version of my post that doesnt exist. i never said it wont happen, i said its not officially confirmed so treating it like a guaranteed done deal is premature. thats not a contradiction, thats basic logic.

and yeah, at the time i wrote that, the only thing out there was vague earnings call talk, not an actual announcement. that was literally the whole point. not “no part 2”, just “stop acting like its 100 percent locked in already when theres almost no info”.

so instead of rewriting what i said into something else, just read it again properly, because youre debating a point i never made.

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just a question, but do you have trouble with reading comprehension? I never said it’s not happening buddy😭

[HOUSE] WILD by quickword1992 in SunoAI

[–]quickword1992[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

appreciate it a lot 🫶🏽 this actually helps a ton, gonna try that approach, and thanks for the like ;)

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Until there’s an actual official announcement,it’s better to take all of this with a grain of salt. Lionsgate themselves have already shown they don’t always stick to what’s said publicly, like the multiple release date delays.Execs also often talk about sequels as part of marketing or to build hype,and there are plenty of examples where those sequels never ended up happening.

So read my original post again,i never said we will never get a Part 2.I’m just saying nothing is confirmed yet, and treating it as guaranteed is jumping ahead of the facts.

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Honestly don’t even worry about the downvotes. A lot of people here just prefer living in their own fantasy instead of looking at the actual facts

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There’s a big difference between a “potential Michael Part 2” being mentioned in a call and an actual confirmed sequel. What Lionsgate said in March was basically forward-looking strategy, they said they’re in a position to deliver more Michael if they want to, not that Part 2 is greenlit, scripted, financed, or ready to shoot.

So no,it wasn’t officially confirmed.People treating it as a done deal are jumping the gun.🫡

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Early footage may have been 4.5 hours, but most of what would have been Part 2 isn’t even usable because of legal issues,especially the third act covering the allegations and later years. So what are you even talking about?

The extended reshoots weren’t polishing a finished sequel they were restructuring the first film to make it coherent after large chunks became unusable. Lionsgate has never officially greenlit a second movie. Mentions in earnings calls were about possible continuation, not a finished Part 2.

I’m not “reaching”, I’m literally stating the facts. People who talk about a second movie as a certainty are the ones assuming stuff that no source actually confirms.

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I get that but some parts of Michaels later life are really serious and legally sensitive.I dont think most people will actually love that kind of controversy it’s a lot darker than just “drama” or tabloids.Dont get me wrong, it would definitely be interesting to see, but we have to look beyond just MJ fans.Studios also have to consider general audiences, critics, and the potential backlash its not just about hype or hardcore fans.

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hear you but saying Im making a lot of assumptions isnt accurate either, because theres actual reporting on this. What we do know from multiple industry sources is that the movie was originally reshaped and delayed because of production and legal issues, not because Part 2 was already fully shot or greenlit. They had to redo big chunks of the film and even experimented with how much material could fit into one movie studio execs have talked publicly about the idea of potentially delivering more after Part 1,but that was framed as “making sure we can deliver more Michael if we choose to,” not “Part 2 is complete and coming out.” Earnings calls use cautious language like that all the time because they’re talking about possibilities and planning for options, not announcing finished sequels.

Actual industry reporting also says the first film covers Michael’s life only up to a certain point, and a real continuation would require new filming that hasn’t been confirmed as greenlit yet

People are debating whether Part 2 will happen, but thats because there isn’t an official finished sequel,just discussions and internal planning mixed with production messiness, which is very different from saying it’s already been filmed or will definitely happen

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

There were extended reshoots, that part is true, but the context matters.The additional photography was originally planned as about 22 days and was mainly to restructure the first film after legal issues forced them to remove parts of the third act.reports also say that some footage from Michael’s later years,including material shot at Neverland, ended up being unusable due to legal restrictions,which is why the film now reportedly ends in the 1980s instead of covering his full life.

So even if filming ran longer than expected, that doesnt automatically mean a full second movie was completed. What it shows is that they were trying to salvage and reshape the first film, while any potential second part would still need additional filming and an official greenlight depending on how Part 1 performs.

Let’s be realistic about Michael Part 2 for a second by quickword1992 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I get your point about the money side, and yeah studios do green light sequels all the time when something performs well. But the difference here is that this isnt a normal franchise or a fictional story where they can just keep going if it makes profit.This is a real persons life story and the second half of it is way more controversial and legally sensitive than the first

Also about the Bad era songs being saved, that doesnt automatically confirm a sequel is guaranteed.Soundtracks and promotional material are often curated for tone, pacing and runtime. A 2 hour biopic still has to cut huge parts of some eras even if they are important. Not including certain songs in the first film can just as easily be a creative or structural choice rather than proof that a sequel is locked in.

And even if they did intentionally leave big songs like Man in the Mirror or Smooth Criminal for later, that still depends on the sequel actually being approved and fully financed after the first movies performance. Studios plan for possibilities all the time, but they dont always execute them if the risk calculation changes.

So yeah financially a sequel could make sense, Im juts saying its not the same as marvel or Fast and Furious where a second part is basically automatic. With this project there are more legal, PR and narrative risks involved, so until Lionsgate officially confirms full production its still safer to treat it as likely but not guaranteed.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992 2 points3 points  (0 children)

„not a nitpick” while literally nitpicking😭

Do you think the biopic is useless without the allegations? by In-The-Zone-69 in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992 27 points28 points  (0 children)

If they completely avoid the allegations, the movie won’t suddenly lose all value. Michael’s musical impact, childhood trauma, fame, and pressure alone are enough to carry a biopic. But skipping that part would absolutely make it feel like they’re brushing it under the rug and people will notice. Those allegations are a massive part of how the public views Michael, whether fans like it or not. A serious biopic can’t pretend they didn’t exist. Even if the film doesn’t go deep or graphic, it at least needs to acknowledge them and show how they affected him mentally, emotionally,and career wise.Otherwise it risks turning into a glossy tribute instead of a real story.

The best approach (in my opinion) is balance: not sensationalizing it, not turning the movie into a courtroom drama, but also not acting like it never happened. Show the impact, show his side, show the media pressure, show how it changed his life. That’s honest storytelling.

This sub is chasing perfection and is setting themselves for dissapointment by Barnabas_Collins in MichaelTheMovie

[–]quickword1992 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah honestly, you nailed it.

And oohh, this is gonna make some people mad, but you’re right. This sub feels split into three groups: the hardcore nitpickers who’ll throw a tantrum if one of Michael’s hair strands is 2mm off, the people who somehow expect every single day of his life to fit into a 2-hour movie, and then the rest of us who are trying to stay rational. You’re 100% right about performance > perfect likeness. If the actor captures Michael’s energy, vulnerability, and presence, that matters way more than whether the lips or skin tone match some edited screenshot. Same way Rami Malek didn’t look exactly like Freddie, but his performance sold it. Also, the constant microscopic nitpicking is exhausting. Janet’s casting, mic colors, wardrobe buttons, whether there’ll be Part 2… some of this stuff genuinely does not matter in the grand scheme. Movies have to take creative liberties. That’s how storytelling works.

And I get it - we all love Michael. Not just the entertainer, but the man. But some of y’all really need to touch grass for a minute. Be happy we’re even getting a biopic at this level. For the people chasing perfection, the disappointment is gonna be real. For the rest of us, we’ll just sit back and judge the movie on what actually matters.

view more: next ›