Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: Michael Jackson; Searching For Neverland

  1. #31
    The thing is with the heavy drugs he was taking, even if he could've been revived that time, he probably still wouldn't have lived much longer as propofol is so dangerous that he was basically playing Russian Roulette, and the This Is It schedule was so demanding that he could've ended up collapsing on stage or something. He just was not in a good place at all at the end of his life, physically, mentally, or spiritually.
    Last edited by Kae-Leah; 05-31-2017 at 04:55 AM.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Kae-Leah For This Useful Post:

    Danileevan (05-31-2017)

  3. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    37

    Favorite
    Album
    Bad
    On another note. What's the name of the song that plays in the film? It sounds an awful like MJ(when Mike and his kids are playing go-karts and dancing in house).

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Liverpool (United Kingdom)
    Age
    21
    Posts
    2,903

    Favorite
    Album
    Invincible
    Quote Originally Posted by mjjvibe View Post
    On another note. What's the name of the song that plays in the film? It sounds an awful like MJ(when Mike and his kids are playing go-karts and dancing in house).
    I think it's a song by Ne-Yo???? Not too sure. But you have to take into account that Lifetime weren't allowed to include any music from Michael's discography.
    The same goes for the upcoming Bubbles film.

    --- Merged Posts ---

    Btw did anyone notice the short cameo of Michael in this film???

    When they announce Michaels death, you see footage showing the TII press conference, which you see Navi as Michael, then about 3 seconds of the real Michael.



    I wonder why they bothered.

  5. #34
    Hmm....What an interesting topic of conversation, here. I, too, have seen the recent movie about Michael that aired on “Lifetime” a few days ago. While this film was somewhat better than “Man in the Mirror,” and yet had quite a number of mistakes in it (such as the impersonator/actor who portrayed Michael sounding nothing like him at all, being the most obvious one), it will never be as good of a film as the mini-series, “The Jacksons: An American Dream.” The actors who each portrayed Michael at different ages and stages of his life (especially, Jason Weaver and Wylie Draper) each did a wonderful job in “American Dream.” That mini-series was mostly accurate, with far fewer mistakes. But, by far, the very best films on Michael are neither scripted nor acted out, documentaries such as, “This Is It.” What do any of you think?

  6. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrinvincible View Post
    Btw did anyone notice the short cameo of Michael in this film???

    When they announce Michaels death, you see footage showing the TII press conference, which you see Navi as “Michael,” then about 3 seconds of the real Michael.




    I wonder why they bothered.
    MrInvincible, while I don’t think the “Neverland” film (that was just broadcast on “Lifetime”) was SO bad, that it was on the same level as “Man in the Mirror” — And, I think Navi did a somewhat better job at portraying Michael, in spite of his accent (one of the most obvious mistakes in the movie), than Flex ever, ever could (as I think Navi’s background as a “Michael Jackson” impersonator had given him somewhat of an advantage, yet, the public is seeing him as an actor in a film, for the first time) — It could have been a lot better than it turned out to be.

    By the way, I didn’t really notice any clips of Michael in the “Neverland” movie, that showed his early March of 2009 announcement of “This Is It.” I’d have to look for that cameo clip, next time, if and when the film is re-broadcast at another, later date. The film did show quite a bit of Jermaine at his announcement of Michael’s passing, though. And, did anyone notice that Navi held up his opposite hand to what Michael actually had held up, in the scenes showing the “This Is It” announcement? Wasn’t Michael actually right-handed? Plus, Navi didn’t get the exact wording right, of what Michael really said at his press conference.
    Last edited by DDFF22552255; 06-04-2017 at 12:52 PM.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to DDFF22552255 For This Useful Post:

    Mrinvincible (06-04-2017)

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by toomuch View Post
    ....Anyone else ever noticed that MJ had a really unique leg to torso ratio (for a man at least) as his anatomical structure is much closer to that of a womans than a man.



    To be more accurate a mans body that is hybridized in parts with a womens, notably at the points that would've elongated during a pubertal growth spurt.
    Now they say your test/estro ratio is set in the womb and is evidenced by the ratio of your 1st and 3rd digits:




    MJ (who had really really big hands in comparison to his frame) was naturally testosterone dominant so in that sense was much like his brothers and the proclivities this brings (See Jermaine Uncle Dad for example) yet he wasn't. Not at all. Now when I discovered this it not only added credence to the "MJ was given female hormones to extend puberty" rumours that kicked around for so long but also explained a whole load of other things that stand out in stark contrast to his siblings (body proportions, mentality, sensitivity and overall vibe) because if Joe did bang him full of estrogen during the time his nuts should've been dropping it. I don't trust Murray as far as I can throw him but he did mention a similar thing:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...is-voice-high/
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrit...d-been-8439967

    Whether this was intentional or accidental as he sought out ways of dealing with his acne is up in the air but if the body provides the body of evidence then its very very clear that there was some form of tampering at a critical juncture in his development that left him how he was. See also:

    https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/artic...ons-castration

    But then the autopsy states the larynx wasn't remarkable and yet the sounds it made were. Either way MJ gets his controversy and people talking even after he's gone but I really do think that behind the scenes this guy had the most miserable existence ever known to man.
    I guess, people will keep on trying to come up with their own ridiculous, downright crazy ideas about Michael, don’t you think? I see something VERY familiar with a certain “theory” discussed in a previous thread, here.

    http://historycontinues.com/forums/s...o-stay-boyish!

    Here are some of my previous views, on that subject matter:

    First of all, the link you posted is nothing but the latest “new” version of a very old story. It’s an ancient piece-of-garbage rumor that has been circulating around the Internet ever since Michael had passed, and had probably been in existence (in some form, or another, only changing the circumstances of “who did what to him, when”) dating back to when he first came fully out of puberty in his late teen years.

    Because of this type of speculation concerning his voice and how it eventually ended up having sounded like it had, everything from questioning his gender to negative assumptions being made about his personal life has been the subject matter of “tabloid” gossip.

    This time, it involves a doctor; Though he may be quite expert in the field of medicine he specializes in, he absolutely does NOT have the medical training, expertise, knowledge nor understanding of anything - be it physically, mentally or otherwise, for that matter - about Michael Jackson at all, whatsoever, to base his personal opinion on (and, more importantly, not one single shred of solid evidence to back up such ridiculous, outrageous, far-fetched claims as he makes), regarding the subject matter of his book.

    What this doctor was trying to promote, at the time, is not based on fact, but only states his views speculating as to what might have happened to Michael during his youth. The article posted on the Web site - a review of the book’s content - is factually wrong. Rather than bring the truth out, and come forward with it, the book’s author merely puts out a “new” twist on an old LIE:


    Was Michael Jackson Castrated to Insure his 3-Octave Voice?”

    “A few years after his death, news linking late King of Pop Michael Jackson with abuse of prescription drugs made the rounds again, as a French doctor alleged that Michael Jackson owed his legendary three octave voice to chemical castration.

    Alain Branchereau, an opera buff and professor of vascular surgery at Timone University Hospital in France's Mediterranean port of Marseille, told the French News Agency AFP that he discussed Jackson’s unusual range with colleagues and they deduced that the Pop Star might have been accidentally castrated through medications used to treat acne - a condition Jackson suffered from at the age of 12.

    Experts say that Jackson might have used Cyproterone – a drug used widely for the treatment of acne in the sixties and seventies and until the development of leuprolide, cyproterone was one of the few drugs used to treat precocious puberty. It was also used in animal experimentation to investigate the actions of androgens in fetal sexual differentiation. Cyproterone is an anti-androgen, which works by suppressing the production of testosterone – the male hormone.

    A 1966 experiment investigated a 'homosexual model' looking at the effect of anti-androgens on sexual behavior and preference. Speculations became rife that the prolonged use of the drug might have been deliberately inflicted on the then teen-star as a means of protecting his vocal assets. In the opinion of Alain Branchereau, Jackson had the ‘voice of a castrato!’ ”
    ——, I only quoted the article, itself. This is a review of a book, written by an author who only has expertise in his particular medical field, not by someone whose word, or personal opinion, is to be taken at face-value as solid, credible “proof” or evidence (of whatever it was, that either may or may not have happened to Michael when he was a child - according to his view) and shouldn’t be questioned, just because he is a doctor.

    That’s equally just as bad as saying, ”Michael’s voice was a ‘fake,’ a ‘put-on,’ an ‘act’ - just so he could create an ‘image’ for himself.” The reason why I referred to this article, calling it “a ‘new’ twist on an old LIE” in my previous comments, is because of the fact that some form, or variation, of this same ridiculous lie has been in existence - at one time or another, but told in different ways, using different circumstances - ever since Michael grew up out of his childhood/adolescence and showed the obvious physical signs of his having become a MAN.

    Though his voice didn’t change nearly as drastically as some (even posters on this board, to be honest) would like to believe it had, it - without any doubt or question - absolutely DID change, however slightly the degree. He never again would sound quite exactly like he did as a young boy, yet, his voice always maintained its “young” sound; As his Lower Range expanded, he didn’t “lose” his Upper Range completely.

    People make up stories about him, still, to this day. All his adult life, they have, and will continue to. Why go over every single statement and claim made in this article, the doctor’s book and everything related to it, if what I have read of it is already known and proven to be false? That would make no sense at all. The book, the review article, and everything else related to it, it has no credibility, not even in one sentence of it.
    What I said and I meant, ——, was that other controversial topics and subject matter, from other threads (and your, my or anyone else’s personal points of view on them) should have been left with those particular threads discussing [other controversial] issues, and NOT carried over to, nor ever brought up in, this one.

    What does any conversation pertaining to other threads on this board have to do with the excerpt from Dr. Branchereau’s book, and his making false assumptions about someone whom he never even met (having been Michael Jackson), much less someone who never was one of his patients, who ever came to this doctor to seek treatment from him of any kind?

    Whatever physical or other problems Michael had, they were not part of Dr. Branchereau’s field of medical expertise that he specialized in, anyway. So, ——, why else would he make these claims, except for the simple fact that, there was the issue of his getting paid quite a bit of money to write a book using Michael’s name in a negative way?

    Also, this book excerpt, you have to remember — as well as its review — do absolutely nothing, except give a new “spin” on one of THE oldest, most persistent rumors ever to have circulated around, as to how Michael’s adult singing-voice became the way it was; Just that certain aspects and “details” of the story have changed over the years — ever since he grew up out of childhood, puberty and adolescence (Then, a story was made up, “explaining” why his voice was still as high-pitched and so soft-spoken as it was, for an older teenager who became an adult, fully-grown MAN.) — as to how such changes in the story occurred, supposedly, “Who did what to him; How, when and why did they do it?,” etc. His lifestyle was questioned as well, because of the sound of his speaking-voice.
    Last edited by DDFF22552255; 06-24-2017 at 06:51 AM.

  9. #37
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    748

    Favorite
    Album
    Music & Me
    Thank you for those links DDFF, will read that thread and contribute later.

    Just watched the movie now and must say it seemed quite real to me and quite good for a Lifetime effort. What was the deal with Raymone Bain? She seemed to be a ball breaker par excellence and came across like she had a mentality to pimp MJ. Overall the movie really did hammer home how MJ had painted himself into a corner with his "Earn like a millionaire, spend like a billionaire" lifestyle and at the constantly flowing hot sauce. Also what was the script with MJ going on date or having a physical relationship with a real life woman?

  10. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Gender
    Male
    Location
    Pennsylvania, US
    Posts
    73

    Favorite
    Album
    Bad
    Michael's face was very masculine though pre-surgery once he entered adulthood, and it did change from when he was in his younger teens.

    The book did detail various dates with two different women Michael allegedly was seeing, (one happening at night in Washington D.C near the Lincoln Memorial, when he was vacationing in Virginia), as I recall, one of the women went to his funeral and met up with the bodyguards (allegedly). Could be true, hard to believe, but the two main bodyguards who wrote the book were fairly trustworthy sources, by and large excusing some of the more obvious inflating of their role and position in Michael's life (but hey, that could be true too given MJ's position at that point in his life).

    It is very rare that you see a positive book written about a public figure written by their bodyguards, for what it's worth.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Vega For This Useful Post:

    toomuch (08-03-2017)

  12. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    748

    Favorite
    Album
    Music & Me
    That was one of the things I liked about the movie as it felt like it rang true and it painted a very real and human picture of MJ with all of his unstable nuttiness captured quite well. I'll have to take a peek at the book at some point. One bit that was crazy in the film was when MJ was walking around spending 40K on presents and his bodyguards hadn't been paid for months and then when he did cut a check he stiffed them. They always say that when when a white man dies he lives a will but a brother dies and he leaves a bill

  13. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by toomuch View Post
    Thank you for those links DDFF, will read that thread and contribute later.
    You’re welcome, TooMuch. I only noticed that the links you
    had recently posted are very similar to those leading to the “Boyish” thread:


    MJ (who had really really big hands in comparison to his frame) was naturally testosterone dominant so in that sense was much like his brothers and the proclivities this brings (See Jermaine Uncle Dad for example) yet he wasn't. Not at all. Now when I discovered this it not only added credence to the "MJ was given female hormones to extend puberty" rumours that kicked around for so long but also explained a whole load of other things that stand out in stark contrast to his siblings (body proportions, mentality, sensitivity and overall vibe) because if Joe did bang him full of estrogen during the time his nuts should've been dropping it. I don't trust Murray as far as I can throw him but he did mention a similar thing:

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbi...is-voice-high/
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrit...d-been-8439967

    Whether this was intentional or accidental as he sought out ways of dealing with his acne is up in the air but if the body provides the body of evidence then its very very clear that there was some form of tampering at a critical juncture in his development that left him how he was. See also:

    https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/artic...ons-castration

    But then the autopsy states the larynx wasn't remarkable and yet the sounds it made were. Either way MJ gets his controversy and people talking even after he's gone but I really do think that behind the scenes this guy had the most miserable existence ever known to man.
    Last edited by DDFF22552255; 08-16-2017 at 10:48 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •