Jump to content
This Site Uses Cookies. If You Want to Disable Cookies, Please See Your Browser Documentation. ×

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Mashinka said:

Extraordinary that with so much evidence from testimonies and actual film footage anyone would ever seek to defend him.

There is no  footage of Michael Jackson assaulting a child.  There is no testimony from Robson and Safechuck,  just unsubstantiated allegations designed to be revolting,  shot with melodramatic camera angles,  editing and background music.  When these two gave actual testimony,  in court,  under oath and under penalty of perjury,  they swore adamantly that Michael Jackson had never behaved inappropriately toward them.  Robson was Jackson's first defense witness and withstood hours of probing questioning from a tough examiner.  The court transcripts are readily available.  What's extraordinary to me is how so many sophisticated,  intelligent people are so totally invested in a false narrative.  There seems to be an existential need to believe that a man,  known for his kindness and generosity as much as for his artistic genius, was a monster so heinous he deserves to be pilloried  even ten years after his death.

Link to comment

There is however a great deal of footage of Jackson with the children involved,  adult males do not hang out with other peoples children.  How no one ever drew attention to his perverse behaviour is quite shocking.  From the testimony of the parents his enablers, entourage, call them what you will, actually colluded with his assaults on these kids.  The whole thing stinks.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, dirac said:

In France Robson and Safechuck are getting sued by fans under France's defamation of the dead legislation.  The spokesman for the Jackson estate speaks wistfully of how nice it would be if we had such laws in the States - imagine, yet another avenue for intimidating accusers!

 

The dead can't intimidate anyone.  Debunking a liar is not intimidation.  If you have any knowledge of Safechuck and Robson being intimidated or threatened by the Jackson estate or anyone else please share it.  

Edited by On Pointe
Additional thought
Link to comment

I'm just catching up on this, too. Wheeldon uses the dubious term "balance" several times in the interview. Balancing dark forces against rational and light ones doesn't really seem to work – and we can see the results of twenty years of such attempts in the political arena. Wheeldon:

Quote

The recent documentary is very believable, but our position in making this show is that we’re trying to make a show that’s balanced... / we’re not judge and jury. In our process, we’re facing it pretty much head on, but we’re also studying the many facets of Michael Jackson.... / And paint a balanced picture. Yes, lean into the complexities, lean into the darkness but ...

Another biography problem: While I've never followed Jackson's music and career that much, only the effect on its fans, I did find his surgeries and skin whitening treatments very disturbing. Who did he want to be, to represent? What was his attitude towards his black heritage? Who did he become?

From a 2009 Rolling Stone article on Jackson's legacy:

Quote

“The reason black folk never turned their backs on him,” says Georgetown professor Michael Eric Dyson, “is because we realized he was merely acting out on his face what we collectively have been tempted to do in our souls: whitewash the memory and trace of our offending blackness.” Still, we struggled to understand why. Some have said he no longer wanted to see his father in the mirror, but there seem to be deeper forces at play.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/michael-jackson-black-superhero-71199/

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Mashinka said:

There is however a great deal of footage of Jackson with the children involved,  adult males do not hang out with other peoples children.  How no one ever drew attention to his perverse behaviour is quite shocking.  From the testimony of the parents his enablers, entourage, call them what you will, actually colluded with his assaults on these kids.  The whole thing stinks.

Adult males play with and "hang out" with children all the time.  Especially when those children and their parents are guests in their homes.  You may find it perverse,  but it's not a crime.  There is still no evidence,  no proof,  no footage of Jackson assaulting children.

Edited by On Pointe
Grammar
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, Quiggin said:

I'm just catching up on this, too. Wheeldon uses the dubious term "balance" several times in the interview. Balancing dark forces against rational and light ones doesn't really seem to work – and we can see the results of twenty years of such attempts in the political arena. Wheeldon:

Another biography problem: While I've never followed Jackson's music and career that much, only the effect on its fans, I did find his surgeries and skin whitening treatments very disturbing. Who did he want to be, to represent? What was his attitude towards his black heritage? Who did he become?

From a 2009 Rolling Stone article on Jackson's legacy:

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/michael-jackson-black-superhero-71199/

Michael Jackson suffered from vitiligo,  a skin disorder which causes the skin to lose pigmentation.  He did not "bleach" his skin.  In some people it is stable, like Michaela DePrince,  who has had the same lesions on her body since childhood.  (She felt that she could pursue her dream of becoming a ballerina when her mother told her that her spots weren't noticeable from the stage.)  In other people it is progressive until it affects the entire body.  Jackson started wearing his trademark sequin glove when the white spots on his hand began to spread.  He explained  his condition,  and it was confirmed by his autopsy,  but some people stubbornly refuse to believe it.  

Jackson always proclaimed pride in his black American heritage.  Actions speak louder than words - he funded college scholarships for black students and gave more than a million dollars to Fisk University.  He always uplifted black people in his videos,  especially black women.  He was respectful of black cultures in Africa and Brazil where he remains very popular.

Link to comment

It could be that Wheeldon and Nottage believe that a mere jukebox musical is beneath their talents.  Based on that interview in the NY Times,  they want to produce something deep,  a meditation on the Michael Jackson created by the mainstream media.  But it is hardly their place to "balance" light and dark or serve as judge and jury.  Jackson faced a real judge and a jury that found him not guilty of any of the charges brought against him.  (Ultimately the stress of that ordeal killed him,  but that's not enough for some people.  They want to destroy his legacy too.)

The natural audience for this show will be made up of Jackson fans,  not New York social critics.  Wheeldon and Nottage are making a basic show biz mistake if they think the Jackson fan base wants to see a show that suggests that he sexually assaulted children.  But they might win an award for it.

Link to comment

A reporter from Variety got kicked out for asking awkward questions.

Quote

 

Before Variety was barred from the carpet, Darrington offered some salient advice to theatergoers.

“Bring your open eyes,” he said. “Bring your humanity. Bring your awareness. Bring your pain. Bring your doubt. Bring your fears. It doesn’t matter. Bring all of you to the theater.”

 

Just don't bring your brain, I guess.

Link to comment

The whole idea of a Michael Jackson musical that is "essentially an authorized biography" (as the above-linked NYT piece calls it) seems kind of ridiculous. I'm a little surprised artists of Wheeldon's stature got onboard. (That said, I've never much liked Wheeldon's work.)

Link to comment
10 hours ago, nanushka said:

The whole idea of a Michael Jackson musical that is "essentially an authorized biography" (as the above-linked NYT piece calls it) seems kind of ridiculous. I'm a little surprised artists of Wheeldon's stature got onboard.

This has been more or less my reaction...

Link to comment

Knowing full well that the Jackson family had been involved and that the show therefore would not be any kind of deep dive into the troubling aspects of Jackson’s career, I went to see it because I loved his music and dancing and wanted to see what Christopher Wheeldon would do with it in terms of direction and choreography. It was hugely entertaining and the audience response was enthusiastic.  Kudos to Wheeldon and to Myles Frost (who plays Michael Jackson).  The dance numbers were incredible.

Link to comment

In reading the comments to the NY Times review of the show,  I was astonished by claims of choreographer Vincent Paterson that the choreography that he created for Smooth Criminal and for Thriller with Michael Peters is used in the show with no compensation to him or Peters' estate.  They barely received a mention in the credits and Paterson was not invited to the premiere.  This is shocking behavior on the part of Wheeldon and the producers.  Choreography is intellectual property.  This show is going to be a smash hit,  and Paterson and Peters should get paid.  Even a 1% royalty on a show that sells out on Broadway is enough to make the recipients very comfortable financially.  I hope Paterson doesn't have to sue,  but if he does,  Wheeldon doesn't have a leg to stand on,  no pun intended.

Link to comment

Jackson's collaborators didn't get due credit? Quelle surprise, given the intent of this show. If it's any comfort to them, Wheeldon's (and Nottage's) profits are ill-gotten gains IMO, since this particular Jackson project should never have seen the light of day.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, volcanohunter said:

All the more reason to hope they lose their tainted profits in court.

"The representative revealed that the show’s principal cast members weren’t prepared to answer questions about controversies surrounding the late musician."

What?

The cast members are there to perform their roles. It's not their job to attempt to answer questions about Michael Jackson's behavior.

Link to comment
56 minutes ago, abatt said:

The cast members are there to perform their roles. It's not their job to attempt to answer questions about Michael Jackson's behavior.

But surely they have to expect the issue to come up. Artists are constantly asked questions about how they square performing the works of misogynists, anti-Semites or sexual predators, or what it's like to portray controversial figures, or how they judge the actions of artists who lived under totalitarianism or occupation.

Link to comment
9 minutes ago, volcanohunter said:

But surely they have to expect the issue to come up. Artists are constantly asked questions about how they square performing the works of misogynists, anti-Semites or sexual predators, or what it's like to portray controversial figures, or how they judge the actions of artists who lived under totalitarianism or occupation.

I imagine they did expect the issue to come up and instructed the artists not to engage.

That's probably what was meant by "weren't prepared to answer": they deliberately chose not to prepare them.

Edited by nanushka
Link to comment
On 2/4/2022 at 1:38 PM, Helene said:

Assuming the claims are true, this is shameless.  I don't understand how the producers thought this wouldn't be litigated.

Unfortunately creators of choreography are not accorded the same respect as writers and composers. And Black choreographers in particular,  like Black blues musicians,  are ripped off routinely.  For example,  Jimmy Fallon gave a slot on the Tonight show to a white Tik Tok influencer who performed the platforms most popular dances,  but never mentioned that all of the dances were actually cteated by young Black kids.  To his immense credit,  Fallon later apologized and had the actual choreographers on the show.

Vince Paterson is white,  but Michael Peters,  Jeffrey Daniel,  and others who worked for Michael Jackson were Black.  Jackson himself created a lot of his iconic moves.  In the New York Times comments on the show,  Paterson expressed anger at Christopher Wheeldon being credited for work he created,   including the pose from Smooth Criminal in the photo that accompanies the article.  (Myles Frost is apparently outstanding in the role,  but in the photo,  he doesn't capture Jackson's elegant line.)

Choreographers must learn how to defend their work vigorously and demand respect,  and payment.  Music clearance firms exist to make sure that all the music used in films,  onstage and on television has the proper permissions and payments to the composers established.  It's time to do this for choreography.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, On Pointe said:

Choreographers must learn how to defend their work vigorously and demand respect,  and payment.  Music clearance firms exist to make sure that all the music used in films,  onstage and on television has the proper permissions and payments to the composers established.  It's time to do this for choreography.

We can all agree on that! I assume the producers had legal advice to make sure they were in the clear with regard to rights, but perhaps not. I certainly won't cry if Wheeldon and Co. find themselves in legal hot water over this.

Quote

To his immense credit,  Fallon later apologized and had the actual choreographers on the show.

Decent of him.

Link to comment

What I don't understand is that with technology today, and the amount of work available on archives and streaming, plus downloads for personal use, that the case of iconic and instantly recognizable and retrievable choreography isn't ligitated more often.  We saw how the Balanchine Foundation from the very beginning stomped on all publicly accessible videos of Balanchine Choreography, and it's not like they have a staff of thousands: we saw entire YouTube channels shut down because of a small excerpt from a Balanchine ballet, and we used to ask people not to post links here, because it was leading the pig to the truffles.

Even a small story:  we had someone come on here and claim that a small company choreographer had stolen Macmillan's Romeo and Juliet and presented it as their own.  I could only reply that without video, there was no way to argue one way or the other, and the choreographer came on the site and provided a video of their choreography, which proved the poster dead wrong.  And that was back in the day of VHS tapes, because there weren't the YouTubes and streaming services at the time, edited to add: or at least used as prolifically, aside from promos.

I could almost see if there was little-known choreography -- little known to the general public -- and it was copied/the dance version of plagiurized, a producer could get away with it, especially if it took a long time to get back to the original choreographer, and, the original concern was from someone, however expert, who couldn't confirm it absolutely, or it never came to the original choreographer's attention at all.  But Michael Jackson?  Even if people think that he did his own choreography, given that he was a movement/dance genius, and most people don't even think that someone else might have created the dances, it would still be so recognizably Michael Jackson, and kids two generations away from 1982 "Thriller" can replicate the choreography, however inexpertly, from memory.  He was nearly 50 when he died, and that's almost 13 years ago.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...