0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:17:19 PM
I've seen the movie a few times too and I believe doubles were used. My husband who isn't even an MJ fan but grew up with him and the Jackson 5 picked out the times he thought weren't Michael either (this was without my prompting or even mentioning I believe there were doubles). His exact words were "Is that Michael? cause he dances diferently...."

I think doubles were used, mainly based on some of their appearances BUT more so their movements. If you have grown up with Michael many would notice that his dance moves were very sharp and distinct. His movements flowed but always with an edge of sharpness to them. At other times (and this was the times I think doubles were used) they were more flimsy and floppy. They weren't as controlled. There bodies didn't move the way Michaels did.  If you ever see the movie again, check for this.

Michaels presence, whether singing and dancing on the stage is very unique and distinct to him alone. That wasn't the case in all the people on stage presented as Michael during the TII. I know others believe they were all Michael and hey I respect that opinion. I'm just sharing my point of view here like you.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:22:00 PM
:shock: i do not think it is him either he does not look quite right,any way why would mj wanna wear dr arnies clothes :?: he is not exactly a fashion icon and he is quite fat is that why mj looked so thin at times ,not being rude really
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:25:34 PM
Ok, but if this one is not MJ, which is the intention on use doubles. I do not understand, I never dealt, what are the gains for the hoax death theory with this conclusion.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:34:19 PM
Even tho I don't believe Michael in the double/twin/whatever theory that has been going on since his "death, it's not him in the photo...

BTW, did you guys notice those pointy ears?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:40:17 PM
Quote from: "wandulka"
Even tho I don't believe Michael in the double/twin/whatever theory that has been going on since his "death, it's not him in the photo...

BTW, did you guys notice those pointy ears?

I don't believe the twin theory either.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:42:22 PM
That is the guy that I was talking about yesterday on the Doubles post.  The performance of Black & White.  When Michael is in the black jacket and singing it is definitely him BUT when they show him in the white shirt and black pants something looks funny.  This is the same guy that looks funny to me in that segment!!!!!!!!!
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions


I close my eyes just to try and see you smile one more time
Its been so long now all I do is cry
Cant we find some love to take this away
Cause the pain gets stronger every day
Cant you see I dont wanna walk away

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:46:34 PM
Quote from: "lucrecia"
Ok, but if this one is not MJ, which is the intention on use doubles. I do not understand, I never dealt, what are the gains for the hoax death theory with this conclusion.

Everyone has a difference of opinions when it comes to the gains of the death hoax theory. Some believe it was for the making of a 'never done before movie', others spiritual enlightenment, saving the planet, trying to get out of debt, unable to fulfil the concert. There is not  a black and white answer that any of us can give you, just our opinion and speculation. I personally believe Michael hoaxed his death for serious reason. Always have. However I respect the fact others think differently because I don't have the answer for that so who am to say I am right and they are wrong. I'm just going with what I believe.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:56:12 PM
Not trying to put words in Lucrecia's mouth but I understood her question to be how does using doubles at some points in TII contribute to the hoax theory?
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 03:59:00 PM
100 % NOT MICHAEL, Maybe a stand in double or as i mentioned in the other thread...

Michael also used a double on stage for the werewolf part of the Thriller song. He'd be back stage stage changing during that time. Usually on stage, when you saw Michael run off stage and the pyrotechnics suddenly come on with Michael standing there again, that was usually a double. Mike would be backstage getting oxgen and changing.

He used them in real life to as decoys to fool fans after concerts and when he needed to leave hotels etc...

For This Is It, Michael was going to do a lot of illusion and had several doubles lined up.

It's really not uncommon.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Everyday creates your HIStory.........
Everypath you take your leaving your legacy.......

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:09:13 PM
Quote from: "Freeze Frame"
Not trying to put words in Lucrecia's mouth but I understood her question to be how does using doubles at some points in TII contribute to the hoax theory?

Oh, ok. Sorry :)
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:12:54 PM
Quote
How does using doubles at some points in TII contribute to the hoax theory?

I don't know either... I don't see what would be the point of this . I believed there were no doubles but I do agree that it's not Michael in those pictures :shock: Maybe it's because of the quality of the pic? I don't know. As I'm seeing the pic, it's not him, what strikes me the most is the mouth...
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
dd64300@hotmail.com


[size=110]"Lie run sprints, but the truth runs marathons"[/size]

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:13:28 PM
Too bad quality for me to distinguish, til then he is Michael.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
All he wanted was the mountain high
Beyond these boundaries,he wanted to fly
In nature\'s scheme,never to die
– MJ



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:15:46 PM
From the pic that I saw, I personally don't think that was Mike @ all. The double is way different for sure.
That's just my opinion though.
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
"You\'ll never make me stay, so take your weight off of me, I know your every move, so won\'t you just let me be, I\'ve been here times before but I was too blind to see, that you seduce every man, this time you won\'t seduce me.."
[size=150]I Love You So Very Much MJ, You Are My Life <3[/size]


Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:17:42 PM
Quote from: "Happy Feet"
I've seen the movie a few times too and I believe doubles were used. My husband who isn't even an MJ fan but grew up with him and the Jackson 5 picked out the times he thought weren't Michael either (this was without my prompting or even mentioning I believe there were doubles). His exact words were "Is that Michael? cause he dances diferently...."

I think doubles were used, mainly based on some of their appearances BUT more so their movements. If you have grown up with Michael many would notice that his dance moves were very sharp and distinct. His movements flowed but always with an edge of sharpness to them. At other times (and this was the times I think doubles were used) they were more flimsy and floppy. They weren't as controlled. There bodies didn't move the way Michaels did.  If you ever see the movie again, check for this.

Michaels presence, whether singing and dancing on the stage is very unique and distinct to him alone. That wasn't the case in all the people on stage presented as Michael during the TII. I know others believe they were all Michael and hey I respect that opinion. I'm just sharing my point of view here like you.

Thankyou you took the words out of my mouth... For 30 yrs i have watched this man and i know some of the "MJS" in TII were not him... And i dont want to sound like a "know it all" but for me to see which ones are not him was  very easy even when they switched up with quick editing between the fake and real Michael...Actually the first time i watched TII i was really angry and couldnt enjoy it because the first 15 minutes were crawling with doubles in an out of shots...
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
Everyday creates your HIStory.........
Everypath you take your leaving your legacy.......

Re: This is DEFINITELY not Mike.
December 15, 2009, 04:20:53 PM
Quote from: "larab"
Klein was reconstructing Michael's face..sometimes he even wore band aids on his nose. I still think it is him.


You cant change a face in 3 weeks and let your patient jumping and dancing around just a few days after a surgery ;)

BTW is it the light or is his jaw smaller? and well let me gi with the rest(eyebrows etc)
Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Guest
friendly
0
funny
0
informative
0
agree
0
disagree
0
pwnt
0
like
0
dislike
0
late
0
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions
No reactions

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
7 Replies
1891 Views
Last post February 07, 2010, 03:17:56 AM
by gracesong
115 Replies
10167 Views
Last post February 06, 2010, 03:13:39 PM
by paula-c
67 Replies
5966 Views
Last post February 22, 2010, 03:08:57 PM
by Eva R
28 Replies
2721 Views
Last post March 11, 2010, 11:13:53 AM
by Kirsche
mike's shameful employees

Started by the arabian nights Others

8 Replies
1911 Views
Last post April 10, 2010, 03:57:34 PM
by the arabian nights

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal