'Leaving Neverland' (Michael Jackson sex abuse documentary) coming to HBO this spring (4 Viewers)

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,477
Reaction score
57,876
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Online
The film details the stories of two boys (now men), James Safechuck and Wade Robson (who is now an accomplished choreographer), their sexual relationship with Michael Jackson, and the repercussions of that relationship in their lives. The film debuted recently at Sundance, and it is four hours long. The Jackson estate and his supporters fling expected insults at the film, and have apparently threatened the director and the two men who allege sexual abuse.

But from what I have seen, the reviews are that it is credible and done in a "sober" style . . . rather than a sensationalist, click-bait style you might have anticipated. And it sounds like what is presented is a credible story of inappropriate behavior, and blame to be shared by not only Jackson but those who enabled the entire arrangement, including the boys' mothers. Slate called the film "devastating." Of course, it is, by nature, one-sided. The Jackson estate or his defenders are not allowed to present a counterpoint . . . but the film certainly seems to confirm what most people suspected based on what was clearly unusual behavior, strongly suggestive of something inappropriate.

The film will premier for the general public on HBO this spring. How will it impact Michael Jackson's legacy?

Here's a review from Vulture:

Those who go into Dan Reed’s Leaving Neverland expecting a sensationalistic, data-dump exposé about Michael Jackson might be surprised to discover something quite different. Over the course of its four-hour running time, Reed’s film — which premiered at Sundance on Friday and will show on HBO this spring — focuses intently and intimately on the experiences of Wade Robson and James Safechuck, two men who say that Jackson sexually abused them for years, when they were children. Reed takes his time, however, interviewing these men and their families, giving them the space to soberly detail their experiences.

We’re so used to the fast cutting of contemporary documentaries that seeing one that allows its subjects to speak at length has a rather bracing effect: It gives us the chance to look into their eyes and decide if we believe them or not. The film’s extended running time also allows Reed to explore areas of the story that might have gotten short shrift otherwise. Among those interviewed are Safechuck and Robson’s mothers, who eagerly took their kids to see Jackson and who, despite some initial concerns, seemed to willfully ignore what was going on. Now, years later, the men still seem to have trouble forgiving their moms for not protecting them at the time. Indeed, the most powerful part of Leaving Neverland comes in its closing half-hour, when, years after Jackson’s death, Robson and Safechuck finally open up to their families about the abuse they suffered. An ordinary-length film would not have been able to include all that.
https://www.vulture.com/2019/01/leaving-neverland-sundance-michael-jackson-abuse-dan-reed.html?curator=MusicREDEF

The Slate review: https://slate.com/culture/2019/01/leaving-neverland-review-michael-jackson-documentary-sundance-abuse.html

And from Variety:
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,477
Reaction score
57,876
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Online
Entertainment writer Joe Vogel, in Forbes, writes that we should be careful about presuming Leaving Neverland is true. Jackson's relationships with minors were widely investigated and scrutinized - and no wrongdoing was ever found. And there are elements of the Robson timeline that bear further consideration about his truthfulness and motivations in making the film:

It is tempting for the media to tie Jackson into a larger cultural narrative about sexual misconduct. R. Kelly was rightfully taken down by a documentary, and many other high-profile figures have been exposed in recent years, so surely, the logic goes, Michael Jackson must be guilty as well. Yet that is a dangerous leap—particularly with America's history of unjustly targeting and convicting black men—that fair-minded people would be wise to consider more carefully before condemning the artist. It is no accident that one of Jackson’s favorite books (and movies) was To Kill a Mockingbird, a story about a black man—Tom Robinson—destroyed by false allegations.

The media’s largely uncritical, de-contextualized takes out of Sundance seem to have forgotten: no allegations have been more publicly scrutinized than those against Michael Jackson. They elicited a two-year feeding frenzy in the mid-90s and then again in the mid-2000s, when Jackson faced an exhaustive criminal trial. His homes were ransacked in two unannounced raids by law enforcement. Nothing incriminating was found. Jackson was acquitted of all charges in 2005 by a conservative Santa Maria jury. The FBI, likewise, conducted a thorough investigation. Its 300-page file on the pop star, released under the Freedom of Information Act, found no evidence of wrongdoing.

Meanwhile, dozens of individuals who spent time with Jackson as kids continue to assert nothing sexual ever happened. This includes hundreds of sick and terminally ill children such as Bela Farkas (for whom Jackson paid for a life-saving liver transplant) and Ryan White (whom Jackson befriended and supported in his final years battling AIDS); it includes lesser-known figures like Brett Barnes and Frank Cascio; it includes celebrities like Macaulay Culkin, Sean Lennon, Emmanuel Lewis, Alfonso Ribeiro, and Corey Feldman; it includes Jackson’s nieces and nephews; and it includes his own three children.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joevogel/2019/01/29/what-you-should-know-about-the-new-michael-jackson-documentary/?curator=MusicREDEF#178c842e640f
 

guidomerkinsrules

W H A T E V I R
VIP Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
48,519
Reaction score
73,503
Location
by the cemeteries
Offline
I believe survivors
There were tons of ‘satanic panic’ and ‘recovered memories ‘ survivors in the 90s - eventually those ‘memories’ were shown to be coerced

I think we should always listen to and care for ‘survivors’ but we should make sure we get the story right
 

LAhotsauce

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Sep 7, 2014
Messages
2,530
Reaction score
3,890
Offline
When will we get an investigative report on Ed Buck? There is some serious shirt going on around that man noody seems to care much about.

Docuseries on Harvey Weinstein? Woody Allen?
 

slowchild25

happy in the haze
Joined
Nov 14, 2002
Messages
10,566
Reaction score
14,748
Age
39
Location
Lake Charles, LA
Online
Ok that's pretty funny:


The Michael Jackson estate has taken one last swipe at the documentary “Leaving Neverland,” which alleges that the late singer sexually abused boys, by releasing a concert film on YouTube the exact length of the first part of the documentary, which airs on HBO Sunday night.

The Jackson estate’s Twitter account posted a link to the film about 20 minutes into Part 1 of “Leaving Neverland,” announcing that “Live in Bucharest (The Dangerous Tour),” from 1992, would be available for a “limited time.” At two hours and 20 minutes long, it’s the same length as the first part of “Leaving Neverland.”

It doesn’t end there, however. On Monday, a second concert film, “Live at Wembley Stadium” will air the same time as the second part of “Leaving Neverland.”
 

2009ring

SR is my life!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 8, 2011
Messages
11,490
Reaction score
17,422
Offline
I watched about an hour of part 1 last night. All I can say is wow. Yikes. I mean creeeeeeeeeeeeepy.

Jacko had this elaborate bell system set up to warn them if anyone was approaching to avoid getting caught.

And apparently "Jacko" was a good nickname given what some of his favorite activities were. Yuck.
 

SystemShock

uh yu ka t'ann
VIP Contributor
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Messages
8,306
Reaction score
11,112
Location
Xibalba
Offline
I never thought Jackson was a pedophile. I always saw him as the son of an abusive father, who became the bread and butter for the entire Jackson brood and had no childhood to speak of, and as an adult, desperately wanted to be a child and live the idyllic childhood he never experienced.
 
Last edited:

Madmarsha

Love this team!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
17,614
Reaction score
17,962
Online
I never thought Jackson was a pedophile. I always saw him as the son of an abusive father, who became the bread and butter for the entire Jackson brood and had no childhood to speak of, and as an adult, desperately wanted to be a child and live the idyllic childhood he never experienced.
I mean, this is what I "want" to think. But I just don't know. I get the marriage to Debbie rowe. That seems always about her being his surrogate. But that marriage to Lisa Presley? Two people who weren't raised with traditional childhoods and finding a bond as friends so a marriage of "convenience"? Whatever it was, it was odd. I guess I feel like he abused SOME of the boys but not all of them. Obviously he had the perfect set up of a pedophile in order to groom the kids.

I do remember Paris talking about him, though, at the memorial service. It was heartbreaking.
 
OP
OP
superchuck500

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
44,477
Reaction score
57,876
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Online
I never thought Jackson was a pedophile. I always saw him as the son of an abusive father, who became the bread and butter for the entire Jackson brood and had no childhood to speak of, and as an adult, desperately wanted to be a child and live the idyllic childhood he never experienced.
I thought that too, but I also always knew that there was a chance something much more inappropriate was going on.

Apparently in the film, Wade Robson recounts of how Michael Jackson gave him a gold ring in a ceremony where they affirmed their "love" for one another . . . but MJ told him not to tell anyone because no one would understand and they would both go to jail. Robson still has the ring and shows it on camera.

Maybe it isn't true, but if it is, that's all kinds of crazy.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 2, Guests: 2)



Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom