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?

  • BradleyUffner@lemmy.worldEnglish
    233·
    8 days ago

    I thought everything against MJ was pretty much determined to be completely fabricated by a physiologist convincing kids that they “remembered” things that never really happened?

    • Tiral@lemmy.world
      173·
      8 days ago

      I personally think he didn’t do anything. I think he was weird as hell and people took advantage of it. People who are incredibly talented tend to be really different personalities. Look at great composers and painters.

    • Tattorack@lemmy.world
      1315·
      8 days ago

      That’s…

      OK… Let’s practice some Occam’s Razor here. What do you think is the most likely answer?

      • MJ was inappropriate with children.
      • A psychologist devised an elaborate plot where he managed to somehow make multiple children remember something that didn’t happen.