[speeddemon]

hi,

i have just seen the us this is it dvd.

after watching it, it feels totally different than the cinema version. in the cinema i was sure there were impersonators.

watching the dvd i can categorically dismiss this. it was all michael, even orange pants.

the movie is a masterpiece, it feels like a top notch production, not the two guys filmed random stuff garbage that we are supposed to believe.

still no mention of michael being dead.

what i found suspicious was that end credits mention that aeg would like to thank people that have helped them during the production of this is it. i'm not sure why they would have had any input at all.

the credits also mention a uk publicity team. what where they supposed to do? recruit people for the o2 announcement?

the credits also heavily mention a full live production team. what is that all about? i understand stage design and execution... but live production?

another thing that is very obvious. the amount of money that went into the creation of this is it, by this i mean the stage show is phenomenal.

i'm really staggered by this and really fail to see how they could have returned a decent profit from the tour even with 50 dates. the stage is so mega complicated, the quality of the 3d effects mind-blowing and so many different costumes, even for the dancers, much on the scale of a mega production.

after watching this is it on dvd i just get the impression that mj is back on top of his game. not for one second did i think, boy mj looks ill or has lost it.

i'm joining the hoax believer team.

boy what a first post :-)

greets to all

[AnnieIsNotOK]

A warm welcome to you speeddemon and what a great opening post this is :D

[DancingTheDream]

How did you get a DVD? Bootleg or real deal?

Im looking forward to getting mine... although i know its going to break my heart all over again.  I only saw TII in the cinema once so its hard to get a feel for how MJ really was but i remember he did look very thin in some scenes.

I agree with you...  i also think it was all MJ and no impersonators.

In answer to the UK publicity team... the O2 concerts in London were very well promoted over here in the UK with UK advertisements on TV and things like that...  probably what that refers to.

[speeddemon]

i'm in the uk too.

the credits stated publicity not promotion team. for me they are different. i saw some posters in london and some ads on itv (thats a uk tv network), but this tour practically sold itself. the o2 announcement was the big promo item.

when looking for hoax clues i think we should just go with the obvious really.

at the end mj says i'll be back in my own time, which is captain obvious.

further to this, during thriller there is a resurrection scene similar to the one in the ghosts movie and immediately after this we hear the song threatened.

resurrection & threatened , hmmm how could they be connected, the spider is also just before the resurrection scene.

[DancingTheDream]

@speed-deomon.  I am curious how you got DVD.   :lol:   Ive pre-ordered the two disc special TII for Feb 22nd.

Is yours real deal or boot leg?

Reason i ask is because there are a few DVDs knocking about that are actually the film recorded from the cinema if you know what i mean...  people go into the cinema and record the film there and then transfer it to DVD.

[speeddemon]

some us dvds got sent out early. someone i know showed me the dvd version. it's definitely the cinema version. i'm getting the uk version when it's out, but i have seen the us dvd version and just wanted to give some impressions.

[speeddemon]

A warm welcome to you speeddemon and what a great opening post this is :D

thanks, annie, I'm a long time lurker, lol

[Kirsche]

How did you get a DVD? Bootleg or real deal?

Im looking forward to getting mine... although i know its going to break my heart all over again.  I only saw TII in the cinema once so its hard to get a feel for how MJ really was but i remember he did look very thin in some scenes.

I agree with you...  i also think it was all MJ and no impersonators.

In answer to the UK publicity team... the O2 concerts in London were very well promoted over here in the UK with UK advertisements on TV and things like that...  probably what that refers to.

I will watch it on Blu Ray and I'm more excited then before to watch it:)

[jonnysgirldangerous]

Heyyy speeddemon, welcome to the family. Just wanted to comment something you mentioned about the quality of the recording. I saw TII three times in the cinema and not for a moment I believed that was something amateur that was only for MJ personal purpouses, it was a professional recording without a doubt. So very likely all of that was meant for being a movie to begin with and not a concert IMO. In YT you can see the rehersals of the dangerous tour and it's a camera taking the hole thing from one angle, that's how you do it if you just want a personal archive.

[darkchild]

Welcome to the boards! Glad to have you here! :D

I bought the TII DVD and the Blue ray version today.  I can tell you one thing that the DVD is so high quality. In the cinema, it was very hard for me to see MJ clearly.  I could see MJ clear as day on the DVD.  I am still looking for any clues.  I will post any clues that I see.  Thank you! :D

[Another_Part_of_Me]

I think the most interesting part in credits was when they wrote:
Michael Jackson would like to thank (insert some names here, I dont remember)
 :?

[mehere]

Welcome!

My guess is they never had any plans to take the ginormous stage anywhere.  It was all for the movie including the pyrotechnics.

[JACKSONGIRL]

hi,

i have just seen the us this is it dvd.

after watching it, it feels totally different than the cinema version. in the cinema i was sure there were impersonators.

watching the dvd i can categorically dismiss this. it was all michael, even orange pants.

the movie is a masterpiece, it feels like a top notch production, not the two guys filmed random stuff garbage that we are supposed to believe.

still no mention of michael being dead.

what i found suspicious was that end credits mention that aeg would like to thank people that have helped them during the production of this is it. i'm not sure why they would have had any input at all.

the credits also mention a uk publicity team. what where they supposed to do? recruit people for the o2 announcement?

the credits also heavily mention a full live production team. what is that all about? i understand stage design and execution... but live production?

another thing that is very obvious. the amount of money that went into the creation of this is it, by this i mean the stage show is phenomenal.

i'm really staggered by this and really fail to see how they could have returned a decent profit from the tour even with 50 dates. the stage is so mega complicated, the quality of the 3d effects mind-blowing and so many different costumes, even for the dancers, much on the scale of a mega production.

after watching this is it on dvd i just get the impression that mj is back on top of his game. not for one second did i think, boy mj looks ill or has lost it.

i'm joining the hoax believer team.

boy what a first post :-)

greets to all

OMG I NOTICED THAT TOO , the dvd seemed to all be mj :D

[*Mo*]

hi,

i have just seen the us this is it dvd.

after watching it, it feels totally different than the cinema version. in the cinema i was sure there were impersonators.

watching the dvd i can categorically dismiss this. it was all michael, even orange pants.

Sorry but I have to disagree.  I have the US DVD and blue ray and it's the same version as the movie we saw in the cinema.  Definitely NOT all Mike!

[michaelsupporter]

Just finished viewing the blu-ray version of "This Is It". I had my dad over because he was interested in seeing it too and I was interesting in hearing his perspective. I had also seen it at the theater on it's opening night. At any rate, it is phenomenal and am glad I invested the $$ to own it. It is incredible to see just how incredible that concert would have been and I am pained to think that I may never have that opportunity in my lifetime.  My dad-who is a hug Elvis fan -mentioned that some of Michael's techniques on stage (like stretching the ending of songs and jumping up and  down on stage-----per the scene where he states he's gonna let the coat burn) are very much like Elvis'. Could this indicate anything more than that????  My dad also asked why MJ failed to include any of his latest "Invincible" music in this concert. I have always wondered this because the man has incredible music from every album. Why not mix it up more???? My dad said it was very odd for an artist to not include his latest music in a tour. Why totally disregard it????  It is still confusing to me.  Otherwise, my Dad was shocked at how thin MJ was and that he couldn't recall him ever being that thin and he was very concerned about that. Overall, he very much enjoyed it and just reiterated how talented the man is.

To me, it looked like Michael throughout the concert (musical) part. I still question the 02 MJ though.  I cannot wait to hear what everyone else has to add.  The bonus footage is well worth it and insightful. I feel as if I got to learn a bit more about Michael through it. He is fabulous, just fabulous!
Love you Michael!!!!

[steffmaster1]

thats interesting elvis used to do those things!! a lot of people saying so far dvd seems to be mj cinema doubles gives a lot of insight i agree and thats the point sounds pretty dam awesome from wot ive heard so far!! :lol:

[lisap27]

Heyyy speeddemon, welcome to the family. Just wanted to comment something you mentioned about the quality of the recording. I saw TII three times in the cinema and not for a moment I believed that was something amateur that was only for MJ personal purpouses, it was a professional recording without a doubt. So very likely all of that was meant for being a movie to begin with and not a concert IMO. In YT you can see the rehersals of the dangerous tour and it's a camera taking the hole thing from one angle, that's how you do it if you just want a personal archive.

you took the words out of my mouth!! i read somewhere that they used normal cameras just to capture the rehersals so mike could look back an say change this etc etc..

sorry guys that does not look like crappy recorded rehersal footage to me just to look back on.. and why interview the dancers.. what difference would that make..

OH AND.. when you look back on films to show them making of them in general its crappy even shakey and the sounds rubbish, etc.. AND look at his other rehersal footage from his history tour on youtube, just him on stage no dancers, just an empty arena or whatever he was in, doing sound an lighting checks..  :shock:

just repeated some of what you said but i got excited as it all makes sence!!  :lol:  :lol:

[karralyn]

This has always been a thought of mine...........if this was really just supposed to be rehearsels, why not have done them in London to begin with?   I mean, as we have all seen, everything was over the top, so elaborate, and had to have cost millions.  So, rehearse all this here, pack up ALL THAT STUFF, and spend God knows how much money to have them shipped over on a boat?    It just ever made any sense to me.  Anyone ever think that?
karralyn

[somekindofsign]

I haven´t see the DVD version but in the theaters version there are clear things already.

I work in media, mostly making music videos, groups EPK, alive concerts for DVD... so for me it´s easy to analyze some of the things. Not everything.

EPKs (electronic press kits) normally are the result of stuff following the band during the process, recording, tour, or whatever... That would be similar to the pretended "MJ personal use" (his cameraman of course is professional so it have to be similar) or a making off shooting.

TII is more like shooting for DVD, so personal use, no way. And HD? No.
Not even him, when he have never before asked for the best available quality for that.

The whole thing seems to be recorder for the film, taking care to show as much as possible of the whole show. But taking care not to put it all, because it would be obvious that it´s not for personal use and that the show was completly ready (for the hoax).

Totally agree about stage stuff made in US to be shipped over. No sense.
But I´ve never worked in something so huge.
We can say he did it that way because wanted US stuff, but it´s cheaper paying the accommodation in UK, flights and allowances of the crew.

And one thing more. Some graphic stuff is obviously made only for the film.
I think there are some examples of that.
Check the begining of "The way you make me feel".
There is some kind of theater or city lights, in graphic motion, getting closer, so from our point of view we zoom or fly it over and there is the scaffolding, city, shadows, dancers...

How can they possibly do this motion graphics alive????

The films on screen at the back of stage, even 3D there, are completly possible, but this?

Motion graphics between the audience and the stage?

They don´t seem to imply it´s just for the lack of shots that to edit with.
They seem to imply it was happenning also alive in tour.

[Boreas]

This has always been a thought of mine...........if this was really just supposed to be rehearsels, why not have done them in London to begin with?   I mean, as we have all seen, everything was over the top, so elaborate, and had to have cost millions.  So, rehearse all this here, pack up ALL THAT STUFF, and spend God knows how much money to have them shipped over on a boat?    It just ever made any sense to me.  Anyone ever think that?
karralyn

yeah, I was thinking the same thing....Like, yeah, it would have been convenient to rehearse in L.A where MJ was living, but I'm sure he could have gotten a place to stay in England...

Well, one thing I did feel, at least for me, is that it felt weird watching it on the tv. I felt like some things have been changed?

Also... the whole thing felt staged in a way...especially the beginning with the dancers saying "omg it's so cool to work with mike!"...like how it was filmed like a documentary type of thing....like the camera angles and zooms were all perfect, like a real movie was being shot or something. I don't know. that's my 3 cents.

[Elsa]

I don't understand why there are different release dates for the DVD.  In Australia it keeps being put back.  Now it is 03-03-2010.  

This has always been a thought of mine...........if this was really just supposed to be rehearsels, why not have done them in London to begin with? I mean, as we have all seen, everything was over the top, so elaborate, and had to have cost millions. So, rehearse all this here, pack up ALL THAT STUFF, and spend God knows how much money to have them shipped over on a boat? It just ever made any sense to me. Anyone ever think that?
karralyn

Yes, when I see the cherry picker.   It must be a huge operation if you tour to pack everything and relocate.  So if you're in one location and you don't have to do that why not go to the O2 weeks ahead and rehearse there with everything in place.  

Or maybe they did.  Maybe they were in London.  

The second time I saw TII I noticed most of them seemed overdressed for rehearsals in spring/summer in California.  The dancers and Orianthi especially.  Was the Staples Centre temp set to subarctic!  We should see all the dancers stripped down for the rehearsals but mostly you see layers, jackets, long coats, long sleeves - on stage and off.

[simalves]

I got my DVD early too - a week ago - the special edition with two discs.

A few things I noticed are

1) The movie is five minutes shorter than the version shown in the cinemas - have to play both simultaneously to see what is missing.

2) ORANGE PANTS IS MICHAEL - you can see that especially in the featurettes. If you dont find him singing in some places it is because the audio has been taken from different rehearsals and pieced together with the best video.

3) 02 MICHAEL IS MICHAEL - I have frozen the dvd while it was playing and in no way is there any glove/skin on his right hand. I AM NOW SURE THAT THE PIC RELEASED WITH THE EXTRA SKIN IS FAKE. It is all part of the illusion and to make us believe that there was a double. You can see all his doubles on the MJ impersonation MYSPACE and no one is even 90% Michael. They just wanted us to think there were doubles, just like when he did his world concert - the media was full of - will 'real Michael' visit all the countries or not.

4) The dates for all that happened is given in the DVD. It says auditions started in April 2009, Practice started in May 2009. Yet Timor got his work visa May 11 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctaL7uiG ... re=related . So they practiced for little over a month ONLY and was supposed to start the show July 09?????

5) In the featurettes - you can see the double they used for placements - he looks healthy - like navi build - and you can clearly tell him apart. MJ also did most of his stunts in the Smooth Criminal movie.

More to come.....

[4KB]

I went out and purchased my copy the first day out!  

I am a little confused.....I have only watched the dvd once from beginning to end...and will watch it again and again but thought to ask you guys about this also.  We have seen some of the dancers do intereviews and also we saw some of the dancers say their piece in TII.....when you watch the actual movie, none of the dancers that are performing with MJ seem to be those that we have seen.  There is one dancer with very blonde spikey hair.....and a few others that I have not seen anywhere.  How many lead dancers did he have?  Also, they had done auditions for DANCERS, yet in the movie, some of the dancers are also back-up singers.  Would they not have to audition for dancers that could sing as well?  I am very confused by the dancers...and I think we should look at them a little more closely.  The blonde female dancer (sorry can't remember her name) is barely even in the movie.

[Elsa]

4) The dates for all that happened is given in the DVD. It says auditions started in April 2009, Practice started in May 2009. Yet Timor got his work visa May 11 2009 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctaL7uiG ... re=related . So they practiced for little over a month ONLY and was supposed to start the show July 09?????

Can anyone translate the part about the work visa?  

Was it a work visa for the UK or the US?  The show that didn't happen (concerts) or the show that did happen (memorial).  

Rehearsals - US
Concerts - UK
The memorial/burial/live appearances - US  

And didn't he need a work visa to audition?    :?:

[simalves]

It is a visa for the US - exactly my thought - why get a work visa for the US when you are just practising and then leaving to actually work in the UK few months later. And the video was specially made. They focus on the watch to show the date - who did they need to prove the date to. It was uploaded a day after they say the event took place but it is a very strange personal video.