![CDS_IMMORTAL_2069_PR](https://dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/CDS_IMMORTAL_2069_PR-e1340811603740.jpg)
The immense cheesiness of the show is embodied in this overblown campy moment from the show, which is lip-synched.
Michael Jackson Immortal did something no other Cirque du Soleil show has ever done: Bored me.
Cirque truly is a magic-maker, having almost single-handed reinvented the concept of the circus, turning it into something unmissable rather than might-as-well. The trick of Cirque shows is that they combine the simple elegance of feats of athleticism with beauty and muscularity, while employing cutting edge technology in startling ways. Its best shows — Ka and Love, two of the permanent shows in Las Vegas — seamlessly wed plot, engineering and the human form.
Immortal does none of that. Yes, there are some pyrotechnics (the best of these, an indoor fireworks display, comes too little, too late) but the entire production feels conceived as an after-thought, some second-tier acts tacked on to boring choreography and muddled production values.
![CDS_IMMORTAL_6440_PR](https://dallasvoice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/CDS_IMMORTAL_6440_PR-e1340811866998.jpg)
The one truly great Cirque moment: An aerial pas de deux.
The failure is most stark in the opening segment of Act 2, an aerial pas de deux using Russian straps while a track of Michael Jackson’s voice sings “I Just Can’t Stop Loving You.” It’s the best routine in the show: A simple, clean, well-paired use of music, theme and spectacle. It’s one drawback: The image of the acrobats, projected onto a huge curtain behind them, is cluttered with fairy-dust-like special effects — contrails that extend the motion, as if the contortions of these two bodies were not enough. The thing about Cirque is, such beauty almost always is enough, and Cirque should know that by now.
But that’s the least of it. If the CGI add-ons in this one segment are a distraction, for most of the remainder of the show they are visual pollution. One routine features a floor contortionist positions on a giant book, bending herself into mind-blowing pretzels. At least, I think so: The writing on the book, combined with fast-cutting video and flying graffiti overwhelm the image to the point you can barely see the performer. It’s symptomatic of most of the acts in this show.
Some of the acts are downright ugly, even stupid. And over-sized glitter glove is meant to move as if a hand were inside it, but looks more like a epileptic is having a seizure in a straightjacket. The huge sparkly-socked shoes are equally dumb, and move without any of the anti-gravity grace of Michael himself.
Another weakness is the way they music frames the action. The genius of Love, which employs exclusively the music of The Beatles, is that you do not have to be a Beatles fan — not even a little bit — to be gobsmacked by the stagecraft. The songs weave a storied tapestry that rely entirely on the music. Immortal, by contrast, is first and foremost a tribute show to The Gloved One. Basically it proceeds chronologically through his life, with video clips of old Jackson 5 cartoons and TV appearances before moving on to his videos. As a result, we can chart the plastic surgeries and development from adorable sprout to talented weirdo. You pretty much have to be a Jackson fan to like this show; it preaches to the choir, and is not interested in converts.
For much of the audience, that seemed to be OK. But you could sense from the tepid reactions to many of the numbers that many were newcomers to a Cirque show, and were simply puzzled by what they were watching. Tons of pre-recorded tracks of Michael himself crooning away as cast members lip-synched. Then it would become live performance, with on-site musicians singing. Many of the songs were truncated, including the Act 1 closer, “Thriller,” which should have blown the audience away going into intermish, but merely felt abbreviated and silly (there was no red leather jacketed Michael clone doing the zombie dance, either — what, are those moves copyrighted?).
Jackson’s music holds up well; despite the length of his career, his music has never felt time-sensitive; “ABC” and “Black and White” are clearly from different stages of his musicianship, but neither feels dated or relic-y. He was a master entertainer, and consummate performer — nowhere more evident that in the video of young Michael singing “I’ll Be There” with the confidence and personal style of Tony Bennett (he was 10).
But Jackson was also a controversial figure in his personal life (and, in light of the recent Sandust-up, a creepy guy when it came to children), and much of the imagery in Immortal — the Neverland Ranch, Bubbles the chimp — only remind us of his weirdness. It made me itchy.
All this might be forgivable if the Cirque-ish acts were up to par; they are below. Granted, the one-legged dancer — I am not making that up — is revelatory, and the bodies on many of the male athletes will get your heart racing. But it all felt second-string, like Cirque has grown weary of innovation and has sent their contract players out into the provinces to soothe the rabble while the kings dine in Vegas. I’m not biting, milord — not even for the King of Pop.
Final show of Michael Jackson Immortal tonight at the American Airlines Center.
It’s unfortunate that we live in a society which tears apart an artist’s life while they’re alive and makes a martyr of them after their death. Hopefully Michael is resting more peacefully than he lived, under the intense heat of the media. Who was the man in the mirror and behind the television screens? I addressed MJ’s legacy with a portrait on my artist’s blog at https://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2011/06/in-memoriam-king-of-pop.html Drop by and let me know how his music affected you. While you’re there, we’ve posted the Top 10 music videos of All Time from the King of Pop!
This article has done something no other article has ever done: Bored me.
“But Jackson was also a controversial figure in his personal life (and, in light of the recent Sandust-up, a creepy guy when it came to children), and much of the imagery in Immortal — the Neverland Ranch, Bubbles the chimp — only remind us of his weirdness. It made me itchy”.
Mr. Jones, the only part of his life that was controversial was his refusal to conform to mediocrity and accept the status quo where African American artists were concerned. He was a pioneer, paving the way for so many of today’s popular music stars and entertainers. If being a creative genius makes you weird, we’re in deep trouble. You are so incorrect in your accusatory statement about him being a “creepy guy with children.” Nothing could be further from the truth. He loved children. Neverland was created almost completely for children–to give them a special day of excitement, escapism, and pure joy. And it was all FREE! You obviously don’t know much about Michael Jackson and granted you may have attended the concert out of curiosity, or because you were required to do a rievew, but you are poorly informed when it comes to who he really was. Michael Jackson was a huge target for grifters and extortionists. If you cared enough to look into the truth about the accusations in 1993, and then again in 2003, you will easily understand that it was extortion in both cases. The difference between the two incidents was that the Santa Barbara County DA used every trumped up charge he could muster in 2003 in the hopes of finally “getting Michael Jackson.” He was innocent and ultimately found NOT GUILTY of 14 criminal charges by a conservative Santa Maria County jury. Believe what you want, but you really owe it to yourself to learn the truth. Finally, I had never before seen a Cirque du Soleil show until I saw Michael Jackson – The Immortal. I loved it! It was pure magic and delivered on everything a person would come to expect from such a high class venue. I hope people don’t make their decisions about attending based solely on your review. If they do, they will miss an truly exciting, one-of-a-kind show.
This revew is interesting. It’s the most negative that I have read and it’s clear from some of their comments that the person writing it has not time for Michael Jackson. I wonder if this tainted their view of the show?
I agree with the author. I am a fan of both MJ and Cirque, and it is with heavy heart I report that the show honored neither.
The most revelatory sentence of this so called review is this: But Jackson was also a controversial figure in his personal life (and, in light of the recent Sandust-up, a creepy guy when it came to children), and much of the imagery in Immortal — the Neverland Ranch, Bubbles the chimp — only remind us of his weirdness.
(And this, in an LGBT publication!)
If helping children all over the world with visits and money to orphanages and hospitals…if giving his life to his art…if lovingly raising three beautiful children despite the pressures of immense fame…if never saying a unkind word about the profoundly nasty judgments by ignorant jeernalists that engulfed him daily…if bringing joy to billions around the world is weird, then I want to be weird, too. Arnold Wayne Jones, I now have a judgment about you, too, but I’ll follow Michael’s example and say only that you’re misinformed–about just about everything about Michael Jackson.
Seriously? You actually wrote “in light of the recent Sandust-up, a creepy guy when it came to children)” and expect to get away with this? This makes me FURIOUS! Why don’t our laws protect people from drive by journalism? For your information, a conservative, all white jury in Santa Maria issued a SCATHING evaluation of their D.A. in 2005 when they returned a clean sweep of 14 not guilty verdicts in the Jackson case. Clearly, the case should never have gone to trial, as evidenced by the verdicts, the reports from the Children and Family Services, the FBI report, and the previous grand juries who looked into this matter. Your reckless and irresponsible “journalism” should be a criminal and civil offense. Slandering the dead, while his elderly parents and 3 minor children are grieving the anniversary of his death is just despicable. Don’t look surprised when you get hit by the karma bus. Say what you want about the show, but keep your mouth shut about an innocent man who artistic and humanitarian achievements deserve nothing but praise.
Mr. Jones, I agree with your opinions of the Cirque show that was supposed to honor Mr. Jackson’s life and musical contributions. I, too, was quite disappointed, and at times during the show almost felt as if it were a parody. I must protest, however, to your comment alluding to the Sandusky case. Please, sir, in the future, exercise your First Amendment Rights in a more intelligent way by foregoing use of the terms “creepy” and “weirdness” when referring to Mr. Jackson. If not for that one paragraph in your article, I would have decided to read more reviews of yours. Now that I know the flavor of your opinions of people who live “outside the box”, I’ll definitely avoid your reviews.
Arnold, I’m not sure what event you attended, but the audiences at Immortal in New York City and Las Vegas that I witnessed were hardly “tepid” or unsure. The house rocked with applause and appreciation at both venues.
I feel sorry for you. It must be hard, getting all “itchy” about someone else’s weirdness. Still, it’s a bit surreal given you are writing for a marginalized group in our society. Just where you think you might see a glimmer of enlightened discernment…you find a load of unimaginative, insight-free, timid, discouraging, and generally witless drivel. Outright homophobic, really.
Mr. Jones, it is obvious that you don’t know much about Michael Jackson. Your snide comments about Jackson, the man, and the comparison to the Sandusky case is evidence that you (as a writer) have never researched for yourself any of the allegations leveled against Michael Jackson in the past. He was acquitted in 2005 of all charges filed against him by a ruthless, unscrupulous and corrupt District Attorney in Santa Barbara. Beyond that, the FBI and Child Protective Services investigated him from 1993 to 2009 and found nothing to support any allegation of wrongdoing. In 16 years there were two complaints of wrongdoing, and both were attempts to extort money from one of the wealtiest celebrites of all time. There was no pattern of abuse, as in the Sandusky case. There were no monetary demands from any of the boys who testified at the Sandusky trial. Go back and read the trial transcripts from 2005 and see for yourself how baseless these allegations were. You condemn Jackson for being “different”–weird to use your word. How myopic of you. Have you ever looked into the lives of other visionary geniuses? They may also be called “weird” according to your definition of the word. It is also interesting to note that your opinion of “The Immortal Tour” lacks the imagination necessary to truly appreciate Cirque’s creative vision. Obviously, many people all over the world who have seen this production disagree with your opinion. If you were bored, it may be because you are too narrow-minded to fully understand and appreciate the subtleties of artistic vision.
It would seem, Mr. Jones that if you aspire to be a writer or even a critic, you might want to stay current in your information especially about pop culture. (Is that your venue?) Are you ignorant or just lazy in your research? Apparently you don’t know that Jackson was prosecuted by a rabid D.A. determined to keep his Santa Barbara neighborhood white who took the word of criminals with a history of extortion. Nobody who is guilty is acquitted on 14 (FOURTEEN) charges. What you have done here is a disservice to the culture, to the writing profession and to your readers. Your “review”: just recycled all the tired old, sensationalist and false tabloid swill that “reporters” fed the naive public during Jackson’s life. They too were extortionists of a kind because all increased circulation and made money slandering one of the most prollific artists and humanitarians of the twentieth century. It was racist and the biggest, longest and most vicious case of public bullying this world has ever seen. Congratulations; you just joined the bullies.
I certainly hope YOU aren’t the voice of Dallas. I am also not sure what show you were reviewing. We saw the show in MN and thoght it was fabulous. There was nothing “creepy” about Michael Jackson – what WAS creepy is the way the media treated him while he was alive and is still doing so after his passing. Arnold Wayne Jones you are no journalist and you are no better than all the Diane Dimond’s, Maureen Orth’s of this country. A true journalist can review a show without bias or malice, something you have failed miserably at. Misinformed? You betcha.
Clearly this reviewer chose to have collective amnesia with regard to Michael Jackson and his career. I’m reminded of the rev. Al Sharpton’s statement to Michael’s kids on the day of his memorial…”There was nothing weird about your daddy…it was weird what he had to deal with.” It’s true, Michael didn’t have the normal life most people had…he certainly didn’t have a normal childhood-to which he admitted himself. However, he had a brilliant imagination and knew how to use the creative imagination and other gifts he was given. And as for the ‘creepy guy with children’ comment, that is just another in a series of misinformed comments by obviously misinformed people who need to educate themselves to the fact that Michael Jackson was the victim on more than one occasion of extortion attempts by two individuals bent on getting their hands on his money and destroying his reputation and character in the process.
I have just this to say…it’s been three years…it’s time to move on and stop dredging up the old unimportant, untrue, completely irrelevant business about Michael Jackson and get back to reminding ourselves of the facts regarding Michael and his life and career. I therefore offer a resource, a book I’ve written which will be out on Amazon.com sometime in the fall. The book is titled “Kindred Spirits–A Tribute to Michael Jackson, and offers a fact-based fictional account of Michael’s life. I invite everyone interested in the truth about Michael to read my book when it becomes available.
“Michael Jackson Immortal did something no other Cirque du Soleil show has ever done: Bored me.”
Mr. Jones, it sounds like you are responding to your personal hate of Michael Jackson and your review has nothing to do with the “Michael Jackson Immortal” show at all. I’ve heard nothing but positive feedback from several folks who have attended the show and I’m looking forward to seeing the show myself this Saturday night. It’s very sad when a reader can discern venom and hatred in a reviewer’s prejudicial article because it causes the reader to dismiss anything the writer may say in the future that may be legitimate.
As most of the reviews I have read about the Immortal shows have been positive, I was intrigued to read that you found the show uninspiring – until you could no longer resist falling into the tabloid trap of linking Jackson’s name with that of Sandusky. How many times did you review your article to see where you could neatly drop in the words creepy, weirdness and the innuendo about children? This really does cheapen your efforts and makes me think that despite the obsequious language elsewhere, you could not permit yourself to write about his genius without revealing the prejudice you so obviously harbor. Not a good trait in a journalist, and your article will now be consigned to my “junk” folder.
What a sad, boring piece of garbage this article is and its author.I’ve seen the Cirque shows and they are spectacular just as Michael Jackson was throughout his amazing career. It’s such a pity we live in a world were unique personality, genius and total originality is feared and despised. Michael never hurt anyone and was proven innocent yet his name still has to endure the ignorant, bigotry of people who are too intellectually lazy to avail themselves of the court transcripts of the trial and the 17 year long FBI report that totally exonerated this great man. They are posted online people. There is no comparison between the CONVICTED criminal Sandusky and the King of Pop Michael Jackson who devoted his life to helping others and gave away over 300 million of his personal wealth to help old and young, black and white. Michael Jackson wasn’t a molester but he was certainly molested by this evil, dirty, small minded society we live in today. R.I.P MJ.
Talk about the SHOW.
Aside from all the Michael Jackson personal life stories.
The show itself was boreing I have seen four of the Cirque du Soleil shows and this one didn’t live up to the rest. The acts were ok, the dancing was lazy. I had great seats (floor seat less then 10 feet from the stage.)
I could see all the acts and the cast’s face’s. They looked bored. Some of the lights on the costumes didn’t work. The acts not up to Cirque du Soleil. (although the guys on the swing rings (HOT) My gay side came out).
Lets talk costumes, nothing new. What was up with the basketball “dance” routine. BAD BAD BAD. Thriller needed more. It was a let down.
I know that the cast worked hard and I myself couldn’t do what they do, but the concept of the show was not up to Cirque du Soleil.
I had my tickets for months waiting, saw the promo video was excited. Some of the things in the promo video not even in the show.
Would I see it again, no. There are other Cirque du Soleil shows I would see again. Am I happy I did see it yes.
Steven M
Dictionary.com also defines “molest” as “to bother, interfere with, or annoy.” And that’s what this articles just did.
Mr. Jones: In the rare negative review I have read about Cirque’s The Immortal, without exception the writer harkens back to the dark days of tabloid insult and innuendo about Mr. Jackson. You, sir, are no exception to that trend. Your dislike/dismissal/bias about Mr. Jackson muddies your view and review.
As far as The Immortal is concerned, I saw the show in Las Vegas and LA and my experience was quite different. People of all ages, persuasions, cultures and gender celebrated the genius, music, dance and person that was Mr. Jackson. Singing along, dancing, fist pumping, tears and laughter
filled each venue from beginning to powerful finale. Every person clearly ‘got’ what he was about.
Too bad you missed it.
Oh, contare’Mr. Jones: Can tell you that I saw this show in Las Vegas and LA. The audience comprised people of all ages, persuasions, culture and gender…all singing, dancing, fist pumping to Mr. Jackson’s grand music and Cirque’s interpetation of same. Appears as tho you walked in with your own bias that didn’t allow you to enjoy the experience. Your loss.
A sickening piece of typical medialoid trash written by a cheap and tacky excuse for a “journalist” and reviewer! Guessing it means NOTHING that this show is sold out all over USA; has a week’s run in the 02/UK and will be, I’m sure, a hit anywhere else it goes, despite your obvious twisted, biased perspective!
Jones, you simply cannot be expected to be taken seriously when you run with every media tabloid lie that’s been printed about Mr Jackson for the past 15 or so years! You come out just looking like a lazy “reporter” when there is no excuse for this bearing in mind the FACTS are all there for you online to go research! Do your research but until you do, please don’t bother coming out with any more ignorant half-assed sensationalistic trash!!
Well, it’s the number 1 show of it’s type in the US, so I guess you have some weird problem with Michael Jackson?
May I direct you to Webster’s Dictionary and ask that you look up the definition of what the term ‘review’ actually means?! Although the objective of a member of the press should be to give an unbiased and objective overview, clearly you have missed the boat. You should have given your ticket(s) to another member of the Dallas Voice who actually didn’t hold such obvious contempt and disdain for the person who was Michael Jackson. If your objective was to desecrate the culmination of decades of artistic and visual genius then congratulations …. you have succeeded. I only hope that anyone who has not yet had the opportunity to EXPERIENCE the experience that is the Immortal Tour will not read your “review” and hold it as the end-all be-all of criticisms. Not to mention that you have shined great dishonor and disrespect to all of the musicians, singers, dancers and acrobats who bring this show to life in a manner for which Michael would be extremely honored and proud.
If you managed to sit through this entire production and walked away with that mentality and attitude, you have bigger problems in your life beyond hating Michael Jackson. Shame on you.
Sigh, yet another commentator adopting an ad hominem approach to the review of works enacted in Mr.Jackson’s name. This piece is yet another, tragic example of a writer exploiting the tabloid fabricated image of Mr.Jackson’s life, character and legacy to produce for themselves a tidy profit. Firstly, Mr.Jackson was in no way “weird,” “bizarre” or “odd.” What, prey, is odd about choosing to shine your humanity in life as brightly as you possibly can? What is strange about extending to every person you meet the same levels of generosity, love and compassion? I submit that those who take issue with such redeeming character traits are the truly weird ones. This piece is made additionally abhorrent by the parallels the writer draws between the Sandusky case and Mr.Jackson’s life. Mr.Sandusky was tried and convicted of a crime, Mr.Jackson was found innocent by a jury of his peers because he was an innocent person. Anyone unaware of that fact is either grossly misinformed, or chooses, deliberately, to keep themselves ignorant of the facts.
Tragically, due to the media’s biased and bigoted reporting concerning Mr.Jackson, the truth of the allegations levelled against him, (namely, that they were clearly extortion attempts,) was veiled from the public. Freelance journalist Charles Thomson makes this precise point in his article “One of the most shameful periods in journalistic history,” in which he sates: “The media did a number on its audience and it did a number on Jackson. After battling his way through an exhausting and horrifying trial, riddled with hideous accusations and character assassinations, Michael Jackson should have felt vindicated when the jury delivered 14 unanimous not guilty verdicts. But the media’s irresponsible coverage of the trial made it impossible for Jackson to ever feel truly vindicated. The legal system may have declared him innocent but the public, on the whole, still thought otherwise. Allegations which were disproven in court went unchallenged in the press. Shaky testimony was presented as fact. The defence’s case was all but ignored.” To read his full article on the grossly inaccurate manner in which the media reported the 2005 trial, click here: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html
The 1993 incident was a clear case of extortion, a point made clear by the comments made by the accuser’s father in a taped phone conversation in which, when asked how certain situations will affect his son, he states, “That’s irrelevant to me…It will be a massacre if I don’t get what I want. It’s going to be bigger than all us put together…This man [Jackson] is going to be humiliated beyond belief…He will not sell one more record.” This is clearly not the heartfelt statement of a man seeking justice for his son. Several false assumptions are made about this case which are as follows:
1) It wasn’t Mr Jackson but his insurance company who paid to the Chandlers.
2) The claim was for ‘negligence’ only (no molestation charges) which was withdrawn after reaching the financial settlement. Mr Jackson always maintained his complete innocence.
3) The settlement had absolutely no limitations for Jordan Chandler to testify in court in case the family wanted justice for their son and insisted on taking the case to a criminal court. They could go on with it while still keeping the money.
4) This opportunity was open to the Chandlers up to the year 2000 but Tom Sneddon, [the Santa Barbara DA] prolonged it as he wanted Jordan to show up in the 2005 court. However each time the prosecutors demanded a testimony from Jordan he left the country.
5) Mr Jackson later regretted the Chandler case had been settled out of court, stating to several friends that he felt it made him look guilty in the public mindset.
Several sources have in fact suggested that Jordie Chandler has privately admitted to lying when he accused Mr.Jackson, (several college friends state that he told them, during Mr.Jackson’s 2005 trial that he thought Michael was innocent and that his father forced him to do something he didn’t want to do-for which reason he sought legal emancipation from both parents.) It is also telling that he refused to testify against Mr.Jackson during the 2005 trial.
In terms of the 2005 trial, that again was a clear case of extortion, a family driven by avarice, and a corrupt judicial system willing to support them. Mr.Jackson invited the Arvizo’s to Neverland because he was told that one of the young boys, Gavin, was dying of cancer. In his kind, loving way, Mr.Jackson offered them free rein in his house, amusement park, cinema, in a bid to offer this child a chance for a normal and happy childhood given the daunting prospects he faced. However, when Gavin recovered the Arvizo’s started to exploit Mr.Jackson’s generous and kind nature, routinely using his credit cards, his cars and vandalising his property. When Mr.Jackson attempted to distance himself from the family, they, anxious perhaps that they would lose moneyed privileges, invented their accusations. (All of this evidence is available in Larry Nimmer’s “The untold story of Neverland”, which was used as evidence in the 2005 court case.) The family’s accusations were used by DA Tom Sneddon, who, it is clear, had a vendetta against Mr.Jackson for many years. Mr.Sneddon, throughout the course of the case, exhibited all the signs of malicious prosecution, abusing his power, and, engaging in illegal acts such as evidence tampering, (eg. putting fingerprints on evidence, fabricating phone evidence,) in order to try and convict Mr.Jackson for a crime he did not commit. His motives for these actions I can only put down to jealousy and deep seated prejudice.
This information is all supported by official government documents-both the FBI files and the DCFS ongoing investigation found one thing against Mr.Jackson-nothing-both documents declared him innocent. Here is a link to a discussion of the DCFS article which stated there was never any evidence against Mr.Jackson:https://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/05/08/the-dcfs-says-there-was-never-any-evidence-against-michael-jackson-give-this-truth-a-chance/
So many, including the writer of this piece, seem to refer implicitly to the “Living with Michael Jackson” documentary as a basis for judging a man they never knew, which was twisted beyond all bounds of truth. -The way Mr Bashir approached and edited the Living with Michael Jackson documentary was not simply bias but also loaded with serious accusations concerning the conduct of an innocent man. Evidence suggets that it was Mr Bashir’s sole aim to destroy Mr Jackson’s reputation from the outset. For example, Mr Bashir asked Mr Jackson to invite a group of underprivileged children to Neverland, explaining to Mr Jackson that his crew would film the event and thus make known the full extent of his humanitarian work. However, when the documentary aired, the home Mr Bashir praised in front of Mr Jackson as a spiritually beautiful enterprise was dubbed a dangerous place for children. For full evidence of the extent to which Mr Bashir manipulated and misrepresented Mr Jackson’s words and actions, the unedited version of the documentary, entitled, ‘Living with Michael Jackson, Take Two’, can be viewed on You Tube. Contrary to popular belief, Mr.Bashir asked Gavin to hold Michael’s hand and put his head on Michaels shoulder as he wished to suggest that something untoward was taking place when it was not. Furthermore, during Mr Jackson’s 2005 trial, Mr Bashir was also accused of some extremely serious misdemeanours including the forging of signatures on key documents. More information about who Mr.Jackson was, as highlighted by the people that knew him intimately, rather than the tabloids that printed stories based on rumour and hearsay, can be found at any number of websites, including MJJ-777.com, Vindicating Michael, AllForLoveBlog, and Reflections on the dance. This final site contains an extraordinary interview with Mr. Jackson’s personal portrait artist-who knew Michael intimately for 20 years. Among the many wonderful, poignant and moving anecdotes Mr.Nordhal shares, he says that Michael was “just such a normal guy. So intellectual and so bright and so normal.” He also says that he was “so genuine and so warm and so caring.” In the 20 years he knew Michael he never “heard him raise his voice.” I implore people to Google “Reflections on the dance-interview with David Nordhal” and take the time to learn about the real character of Michael Jackson-the character the biased and bigoted mainstream media spent 20 years stifling, in what became one of the most appalling character assassinations of a kindly, gentle person, in modern history.
Contrary to popular belief, Mr.Bashir asked Gavin to hold Michael’s hand and put his head on Michaels shoulder as he wished to suggest that something untoward was taking place when it was not. Furthermore, during Mr Jackson’s 2005 trial, Mr Bashir was also accused of some extremely serious misdemeanours including the forging of signatures on key documents. More information about who Mr.Jackson was, as highlighted by the people that knew him intimately, rather than the tabloids that printed stories based on rumour and hearsay, can be found at any number of websites, including MJJ-777.com, Vindicating Michael, AllForLoveBlog, and Reflections on the Dance. This final site contains an extraordinary interview with Mr. Jackson’s personal portrait artist-who knew Michael intimately for 20 years. Among the many wonderful, poignant and moving anecdotes Mr.Nordhal shares, he states that Michael was “just such a normal guy. So intellectual and so bright and so normal,” that he was “so genuine and so warm and so caring,” that in “20 years, [he] never ever heard him raise his voice at anybody. Never happened. He was just such a good person. Just a really deep-down good person,” that he “had incredible empathy, especially (for) children that were injured or sick or neglected. There were people that were hungry and homeless and that was always in the front of his mind his whole life, and then to be accused of something so horrific, it just stopped him in his tracks and then when it happened again 10 years later, the man was devastated, absolutely devastated,” that “[The press] treated him without any respect for the fact that he’s a human being and his whole life has been based on doing good deeds.” I implore people to Google “Reflections on the Dance-interview with David Nordhal” and take the time to learn about the real character of Michael Jackson-the character the biased and bigoted mainstream media spent 20 years stifling, in what became one of the most appalling character assassinations of a kindly, gentle person, in modern history.
I implore the writer of this piece to study carefully the words of those who cherished Mr.Jackson as a close friend, rather than the empty speculations of those seeking to profit of of his name, before they deign to formulate conclusions concerning his character. I must thank the author of this piece though for suggesting that Mr.Jackson’s “music held up well” during the show. One wonders how one of the planet’s greatest musical geniuses endured without such educated approval.
Regarding the Chandlers Case in 1993:
Evan Chandler wanted Michael to help negotiate script-writing deals for him, to which Michael would not agree to. (Evan even admits this in his brother’s book.)
Evan Chandler did not contact the police when he says he suspected his son had been abused. First he hired a lawyer, and set up a meeting with Michael to exact the terms of his extortion attempt for $20 million dollars, and to which Michael would not comply (if he had paid then nobody would ever have known about any of this). Only after that failed extortion attempt did Chandler take custody of his son and only because of that court order did he then take his son to a psychiatrist who contacted the police.
Jordan Chandler maintained for quite some time that Michael never touched him in an inappropriate way, it was only when his father got custody of him that this changed. In fact, there’s a taped phonecall of Evan Chandler threatening to take Michael for everything he owned, that was taped on July 8th, Evan Chandler claims himself that Jordan only confessed after he drugged him on July 16th. That phonecall was taped by Jordan’s step father David Schwartz, when Evan realized he’d been taped he beat David Schwartz up and David sued him, in his lawsuit David said he never believed Jordan had been molested. This physical altercation is interesting because on the occasion where he met Michael in the lawyer’s office after the supposed abuse; he reached in to give Michael a big hug. As someone with a history of violent outbursts, I’m sure this is a normal reaction to your son’s abuser.
Jordan Chandler only admitted alleged abuse by Michael after being drugged by his father with a drug known to elicit responses based simply on suggestion, and to cause false memory syndrome, which is why testimony under that drug is inadmissible in a court of law. It’s a coincidence in his brother’s book that Evan admits that he never wanted them to go to a criminal court, and that under this drug Jordan was able to speak of Michael the same way his father Evan had spoken of him a few months earlier in a taped conversation where he says he has no knowledge of abuse but that he wanted to destroy Michael. Maybe the drug gave him psychic powers.
An arrest warrant was issued for a full body search of Michael in order to match it up with a description given by Jordan Chandler. In it Jordan, who was Jewish, alleged Michael was circumcised, Michael was not circumcised. On the basis that there was no match, Michael was not arrested, and then it was the Chandler’s own lawyers who wanted those photographs barred from the civil trial.
2 separate grand juries in 1994 went through all the evidence, interviewed 300 people, including 30 children, and failed to bring any charges against him.
DCFS investigated and could find nothing against him.
From the beginning this had only been a civil lawsuit against Michael, the Chandler’s fired their first lawyer when she said they wanted to take Michael to criminal court. Michael asked for the criminal trial (i.e he wanted to face prison) be allowed before the civil one, but the judge refused.
Michael Jackson was never arrested in this case and never charged with a crime. And yet the settlement between both parties did not preclude the Chandlers’ from testifying at a criminal trial. They had every opportunity to do that, had they so desired.
Michael did not want to settle with the Chandlers. Quite the contrary; he wanted to go to court. But against his protests and the advice of his attorneys, his insurance carrier negotiated and paid a settlement with the Chandlers after they retracted their claims of molestation—a fact that is documented in trial transcripts from the 2005 case.
Jordan Chandler then emancipated himself from his parents after this ordeal and because this meant Evan would have no access to that money, he again tried suing Michael Jackson for $60 million dollars, the case was thrown out of court after 4 years. In that same time period he refused to take Michael to court for molesting his son, but he was willing to go to court to get more money out of him. He also wanted Michael to give him a record deal so he could release an album he’d composed of songs about Michael that he’d named after himself, EVANstory. I know that’s where my mind would be at, if my son had been molested and then he’d divorced himself from me. He claimed in this lawsuit the allegations had invaded his private life, I’m sure the natural reaction to that is to want to sing and dance about it (at this point he had also sought out a book deal).
In 2004 Jordan Chandler told FBI investigators that he would refuse to testify “against” Michael Jackson and threatened the prosecution with legal action should they attempt to force him to do so. They did not, neither did the prosecution subpoena his father or his uncle, both of whom claimed intimate knowledge of his molestation.
On the other hand, Michael did in fact subpoena his uncle who claimed knowledge of the molestation in a book he’d written in time for the trial. It was Michael who demanded Ray turn up to court with any of the proof he claimed he had. Ray refused and one of his responses was that he did not in fact have any knowledge of any molestation, so his book was essentially fiction. Think about the audacity of that: it was the supposed abuser demanding the relative who claimed proof to show up in court, think about how fearless you have to be do that.
Less than one month after MJ was acquitted in the trial, Evan Chandler tried to kill his son, and his son did take out a restraining order against him and took him to court. It seems Jordan was willing to testify against a real abuser when it mattered. At this point Evan Chandler showed his real intentions yet again: he took his son to court to get access to Michael’s insurance money, which Evan had no access to once his son had emancipated himself from him years back. That failed.
After MJ died word got out that Jordie had recanted (there are witnesses who’ve heard him say this); his father then shot himself in the head. Nobody attended his funeral, not any family, nor any friends. He was not a well liked man, was manic depressive, with a history of physical abuse, not just against his son, but his wives and his wives husbands.
His insurance settled in January 1994, 7 months after Evan first threatened him for money in private. Evan was taped saying he was going to get “everything he wanted” from Michael on July 8th 1993; Jordan denied he was molested and only said he was on August 17th and only because his father had taken custody of him. The photos of Michael’s genitals did not match Jordan’s description which was why Michael was not arrested and it was the Chandler’s who wanted those photos barred from court. Two grand juries were held in separate counties in 1994 to go through all the evidence, they interviewed 300 people and 30 children and one juror left saying “no damaging evidence had been seen”; no charges were brought against him. DCFS and the FBI also conducted investigations and could find no evidence against him in either trial. Jordan then emancipated himself from his father and his father spent 4 years suing Michael for another $60 million and an album deal he wanted from Michael before it was thrown out of court. Jordan threatened the prosecution with legal action if they made him testify “against Michael” in 2005. Less than a month after Michael was acquitted Evan Chandler attempted to kill his son who took out a restraining order on him and also an order asking his father to stop threatening, phoning, stalking and harassing him. When Evan killed himself after word got out that Jordan had recanted online (there are witnesses who have heard him say this) after Michael died in 2009 not a single person showed up at his funeral; the allegations began and ended with him.
The last allegation was beyond ridiculous – the alleged victim, Gavin Arvizo, and his brother, Star Arvizo, who supposedly saw the alleged abuse, were never able to keep their stories straight. They, along with their sister, Davellin, all changed their stories several times with regard to what abuse occurred, where it occurred and how and when it occurred – they all changed their stories even while on the witness stand, it got to the point where his own lawyer tried to help Gavin out by asking him if he’d had memory problems because of his cancer, to which clueless Gavin said that he had had some problems but they were gone now. They also admitted to previously lying under oath, lying to the police and lying to their own lawyers.
But you’ll be glad to know all the evidence against MJ was entered into that trial – all prior allegations, everything. It went on for 5 months as opposed to Sadusky’s two weeks. The supposed victims were cracking jokes with the police and the juror’s laughed at their testimony, as opposed to Sadusky’s where the jury openly wept on hearing some of the real victim’s testimony.
Wow. The review isn’ t that great, but getting this upset over Michael Jackson is as insane as he was.
I fail to understand why this review doesn’t stick to what it says its reviewing. So you dont like the Cirque du Soleil “Michael Jackson Immortal.” Fine thats your perogative I’ve read plenty of reviews that love it.
However you have a major weakness in your ‘review.’ Why didn’t you stick to the show itself?
What is the link between the show Sandust and Michael Jackson? This is just another excuse to bring up the tired old tabloid preoccupations. I wont go into detail other comments have done that and I expect they would be wasted on you.
If the show was that dull you’d have plenty to review within the show itself without digressing into media fantasy land about Michael Jackson’s private life.
In future stick to reviewing what you are supposed to and I’m assuming are paid to do.
I have to agree with what Arnold says about this show… everyone on here is ranting and raving about Michael Jackson and his life and blah blah blah , but what the F^%$ does that have to do with this show. I Have never been so BORED at a cirque perfomance in my entire life until now.. Hell I have never been bored at any event as much as a was at this show…. living on a desert Island would be a party compared to this show. What a rippoff ! From the moment I sat down until I got up I was praying this tragedy would end… The last time I sat thru anything this boring was at a dental appointment..which would have been better because at least dentist gives oyu drugs to get thru it. The Sad thing is , this being so commercial it may be some peoples only chance to ever see Cirque and
they will never understand the Phenomonon of what Cirque should be !
@ mark bently, we must not have seen the same show in this touring company..it was boring boring boring and boring ..oh, did I fail too mention that it was BORING.. I love MJ and CDS and it was anything but mystical, and fabulous…. I could have gotten more from watching it on a HAND HELD MONITOR THAN TO HAVE TO SIT THRU IT AT AMERICAN AIRLINES ARENA..MAYBE THE VENUE WAS BIGGER THAN THE SHOW !
I saw the Immortal Tour in Denver and it was the most beautiful and emotional show I have ever seen. I listen to the CD from the show and it still gives me chills and brings tears to my eyes. I cannot imagine anyone who loves his music or loves the Cirque would walk away from this show with anything but pure joy.
I saw Michael Jackson the Immortal at Madison Square Garden and I totally disagree with your review! The show was wonderful, and the audience responded to it as an amazing piece of artistry. The biggest cheers and applause came each time a picture of Michael Jackson was shown!
Your review does not ring true with me, and I find your comments, particularly the mention of Sandusky in this article, to be very offensive. Mr. Jackson was never convicted of any crimes against children, unlike Mr. Sandusky. In fact he spent most of
his life trying to improve the plight of ill and underprivileged children in this world.
Are you sure that you really saw the same show that I did? I think that one of us was looking at the show through glasses colored with a personal bias of dislike. This show was a brilliant tribute to Michael Jackson, and deserves to be reviewed by someone who
is objective, unlike yourself!