It’s a movie starring his nephew in the lead role, approved by his estate, and by all accounts it just feels like an attempt to whitewash him. This is a man who was accused of being a serial child molester, settled with a family out of court for $25 million just to avoid a trial (Chandler), and openly admitted he slept in the same bed as kids while he was an adult (Bashir interview), among other things. I don’t really see what there is to debate.
Anything pointing this out gets backlash on movie-related subreddits, which I find wild. It makes me wonder, if Epstein could sing and dance, would he have gotten a biopic too? Would people be defending him like this?
I don’t think it’s fair to compare Jackson to Epstein. Also, he has never been convicted, whereas Epstein was. I feel like “separate the art from the artist” applies and everyone has a different line for that. Like how people still support Polanski despite how despicable he is.
Michael is probably the hardest case of this too.
Its easy not to support, discuss or enable Kevin Spacey because while he was a brilliant actor in a few movies he wasnt irreplaceable. Michael on the other hand was likely one of the most popular and influential musical artists of the 20th century. He was a cultural phenomenon.
A lot of allegations and concerning behaviors absolutely but no convictions and a lot of people who knew him who defend him absolutely. A lot of potential substance abuse or mental health issues but also a lot of financial reasons why people may have alleged things that didnt happen…
Michael is a very grey case.
I don’t really know anything about Michael Jackson other than Thriller, Vitiligo, and the pedophilia debate. I have an easy time not engaging with his art.
yeah some people still like stuff rapists and hate hags make. it’s amazing how people can shut off their brains and consume because it’s easy and comfortable.
Lot of famous, rich, and powerful people haven’t been convicted. Doesn’t mean they are innocent though.
Edit: weird amount of epstein defenders in this thread…
It also doesn’t mean that they are either.
Of course. Just seems really fucking weird in the context of Epstein to be talking about never convicted like there aren’t some massive fucking asterisks involved.
Entirely fair. I’m just tired of this MJ story that wont end
I agree that it’s not fair to compare Michael Jackson to Epstein. Although both engaged in illegal activities, a 16 year old at least has the ability to say, “No, I will not give you a handjob for $200.” The seven and eight year olds Michael abused didn’t have the ability to walk away.
It’s similar to murder charges. Although a highschooler is legally a child, they are still culpable enough for their actions to be tried as an adult. The children Michael targeted would not. The worse part of this situation is that parents voluntarily gave him their children. They should have been tried and investigated.