‘Michael’ Electrifies the Box Office: 5 Reasons Bad Reviews Couldn’t Derail the Michael Jackson Biopic
by chanma50
‘Michael’ Electrifies the Box Office: 5 Reasons Bad Reviews Couldn’t Derail the Michael Jackson Biopic
by chanma50
18 Comments
Two simple words: Michael Jackson.
Because when critics give passes to movies like The Marvels to “own the chuds”, critics lose their influence.
Michael Jackson is essentially bulletproof. No matter what negative,evil, or disgusting things they try to put on his name he’s just too legendary and iconic for people to really care. Especially after he’s already passed.
in todays world where pedophelia doesn’t matter huh?
[deleted]
Because he’s the king of aura!!
I mean it’s still flopping despite its $217 million dollar opening…
It’s Trump’s America
Audiences want a good time at the movies and this provided it.
Is it so hard for this sub to understand that maybe just maybe, most people just have bad taste ?
I don’t why this sub refuse to accept this and still obsessed in believing in this la la land where box office means quality….
It’s kind of early days for an argument like this, isn’t it? If it has great legs, sure, yeah, the critics whiffed it. But while audience and critic tastes don’t always align, critics *are* very good at predicting if a movie like this has staying power. If people wanted a concert movie playing the big hits and they got it, great, but you either need to do that exceptionally well or have something else worthwhile going on too to justify repeat viewing, or to generate greater buzz.
Michael Jackson was an absolute joke in the 1990s and early 2000s. It took him dying to rehabilitate his rep as a cool guy.
The King of Pop remains on his magnificent throne!
I’ve seen on this sub many messages comparing the Michael movie to Super Mario Galaxy, because they are both “bad movies that make money anyway because of fanservice”.
But I think this is disingenous and it’s more honest to compare Michael to Super Mario Bros. Bros and Michael are not bad, they are SIMPLE. Straightforward plot that anyone can follow and is still following the rules of good writing and good characterization.
Ehy, I’m italian and I saw Michael in English and me and my husband stopped looking at subtitles because the movie was super easy to follow even in another language. Both movies pair an easy story with tons of fanservice and crowd pleasing scenes that give fans exactly what they asked for, and voilà you have 2 very well liked movies that critics don’t like.
Galaxy instead has a non sensical plot, Mario is not characterized at all (so bad that even people with zero literacy skills can tell) and it’s not giving fans what they want (like completely botching the Rosalina character). Adults get bored after the 50th action scene that has no reason to be there while little kids still like it. That’s why Bros was critic-proof and Michael also will be, while Galaxy is not and the bad WOM is hurting its box office numbers. With Michael critics were basically just judging how honest the movie is in portraying Jackson’s controversies, not how good the movie is in a vacuum. It’s a story of a kid defeating his evil father. Was everything real? Maybe not. But the story was engaging to watch.
Because the people who want to see a Michael Jackson movie don’t care if the narrative is weak or if it has the depth of a puddle, they just want to listen to the music and look at the cool dance moves
Here’s my thing about the people who think the accusations against mj were true, you can feel however you wanna feel about him, but I’m curious as to why they didn’t show the same smoke for Elvis or rock bands from the 70s and 80s?