Do you have rock solid proof it's isn't Michael?
Unless you have that, you can't assume what appears to be Michael doesn't know how to dance.
do you have proof it is him? there are mulitple pictures of him with different facials structures and yet the only "reason" for this is lighting <!-- s --><!-- s -->
but you cant say that definitively that the whole of the TII movie were doubles - you cant know that for sure
you cant say mike never showed up and never was in any of the footage
you cant say he was editted out
and only doubles and stunts remain
your just the same as us - you have one view - just like us
and i do agree with some of what you say that there were stunt doubles on site
but you know no more than the rest of us.
OK, I have never said that I know more than anyone else, I am just asking how on earth he changed that much in just 3 months of time.
I never said I was sure he is not in the movie, I said the low quality footage can be him.
I also never said he didn't show up, I think he was at the other side of the camera.
I think the doubles are in the movie for a reason, not because Mike didn't want to do the shows, because IMHO he is the one who set it all up.
Then there is the movie where there are no cuts in the audio, yet the visuals are cut and we see different outfits all the time. Means that the audio is not live from what we have seen. Why is that?
Maybe because the doubles can't sing?
Don't tell me I claim to know more, I am simply discussing and I am asking how he could have changed that much in 3 months, after just having aged in 20 years before. To that question I still don't have an answer.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Do you have rock solid proof it's isn't Michael?
Unless you have that, you can't assume what appears to be Michael doesn't know how to dance.
do you have proof it is him? there are mulitple pictures of him with different facials structures and yet the only "reason" for this is lighting <!-- s --><!-- s -->
None of us knows for certain, that is why we are discussing. No-one can have concrete proof unless they were at the filming - all we can do is speculate - and we are never all going to agree.
New page, but still no answer as to how he transformed that much in 3 months, so I will throw in the pics again:
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Posting the 1989-2005-2009 (1) and 1989-2005-2009 (2) again:
Please someone explain to me how he looked the same during the past 20 years but looked way different in TII...
I've just wanted to post this photo about Mike in 2009 March but u've done it before me. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
That's him just one day after the O2 press conference. THAT'S MIKE. That photo proves that the O2 guy is no Mike never ever, and also proves that that guy in the TII on the other photo (3rd)was a double. (well most of the guys were)
If anyone still can't see the differences well i really don't have any idea what the heck would help them. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
. It is not about a different looking cleft or nose or whatever at some picture, it is the overall image.
.
so are you saying that as long as the person has the "overall" image then its mike?? as long as they have a cleft, reguardless of size, light skin, and a curly wig its mike???
Thats not the make-up that's the PhotoShop...But still that's obviously Mike's face.
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
. It is not about a different looking cleft or nose or whatever at some picture, it is the overall image.
.
so are you saying that as long as the person has the "overall" image then its mike?? as long as they have a cleft, reguardless of size, light skin, and a curly wig its mike???
No, many more things.
You're not making sense. What are you saying here, that it would be OK to base an identification on just one thing like nose or ear or cleft but not on the overall picture?
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
Yep.. And it's strange we havn't seen these doubles after June 25th.. Four doubles that looks like Michael can't go outside their house, because they look like Michael.
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
This thread is not meant to "proof" who died on June 25th, it's to discuss if doubles were used.
It's important to discuss it, because the use of doubles raises the question as to WHY doubles were used, especially in This It It.
Thats not the make-up that's the PhotoShop...But still that's obviously Mike's face.
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
But he is still look like Michael Jackson because he IS Mike do ya know what i mean? U can change your make up u can use photoshop it doesn't matter cause your face 's gonna be still YOUR face. (and it's gonna look like your face. ) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
Well if I believed for one second that he died himself the 25th of June, I wouldn't be here. You don't get the point here, the use of doubles IS important, why would he need them? Protection IMO. Why in the movie? No clue, maybe to make a statement afterwards, as to make people see that they only see what they want to see, that they take everything for granted, that they think it is him because the media tells you it's him.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Thats not the make-up that's the PhotoShop...But still that's obviously Mike's face.
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
But he is still look like Michael Jackson because he IS Mike do ya know what i mean? U can change your make up u can use photoshop it doesn't matter cause your face 's gonna be still YOUR face. (and it's gonna look like your face. ) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Thats not the make-up that's the PhotoShop...But still that's obviously Mike's face.
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
But he is still look like Michael Jackson because he IS Mike do ya know what i mean? U can change your make up u can use photoshop it doesn't matter cause your face 's gonna be still YOUR face. (and it's gonna look like your face. ) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
hmm any "real names" of the ppl who were Doubles in TII ? <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> if there were some <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
Yep.. And it's strange we havn't seen these doubles after June 25th.. Four doubles that looks like Michael can't go outside their house, because they look like Michael.
Have you ever heard of prostetic make up? And those doubles only seem to look like Mike because they want you to think it's him. I bet that with other hair, no make-up you wouldn't even consider the fact it's him. We see all different mouths, eyes, ears and noses in that movie. Some can dance, some can't, some have almost no shoulders, some have broad shoulders, even without shoulder pads.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
hmm any "real names" of the ppl who were Doubles in TII ? <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> if there were some <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
NAVI ?
BEN JACKSON xD ?
ECASANOVA ?
Johnny Depp? Why the obvious doubles?
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Well I would have thought the whole point of being a paid MJ double would be to look as much like him as possible in order to fool the public. I am sure, when these people go back to their normal lives, they don't look exactly like MJ and can carry on being themselves, its just a job to them.
hmm any "real names" of the ppl who were Doubles in TII ? <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> if there were some <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
NAVI ?
BEN JACKSON xD ?
ECASANOVA ?
Navi? Nah.
Ben Jackson <!-- s --><!-- s --> Nah..
E'Cassanova? No..
Michael Joseph Jackson? Maybe.. His 'twin that died'
Thats not the make-up that's the PhotoShop...But still that's obviously Mike's face.
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
But he is still look like Michael Jackson because he IS Mike do ya know what i mean? U can change your make up u can use photoshop it doesn't matter cause your face 's gonna be still YOUR face. (and it's gonna look like your face. ) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
EXACTLY.
Surgeries is a serious thing.
So r u saying he had surgeries on ALL OVER his face in the last three months to make a totally different look? ( and height? and moves? even teeth? <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) --> )
hmm any "real names" of the ppl who were Doubles in TII ? <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> <!-- s:D -->:D<!-- s:D --> if there were some <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
NAVI ?
BEN JACKSON xD ?
ECASANOVA ?
Johnny Depp? Why the obvious doubles?
because Ecasanova can sing / act like michael. and also LOOKs like Mike.. Navi can act/same body movement and dance like michael.. but Ben jackson can just dance like Michael IMO, havent heard him sing <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) --> what do you think guys ? just waana know <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
Well I would have thought the whole poing of being a paid MJ double would be to look as much like him as possible in order to fool the public. I am sure, when these people go back to their normal lives, they don't look exactly like MJ and can carry on being themselves, its just a job to them.
You know you need EXTREMELY PROFESSIONAL surgeries to look like Michael, and it cost A LOT of money!
Changing yourself back is not an easy job.
If there were 4 doubles, as some people in here claim.. How you think their life is? They are not that rich for bodyguards, and get their foods brought to the house. You see my point. They can't go out as theirselves cause they look like Michael Jackson, 90%
Interesting you say that, since we have no problem with the fact he had doubles. What I just can't believe is that people say it's all Mike in TII, since mostly it doesn't even look like him. TII has mostly, or even maybe only doubles. The only footage that could be him IMO is the small low Q footage, but that's impossible to analyze since the quality is crap. This IS important because he hoaxed his death after that, why do we see doubles in the movie? Because we do...
Q - Why is the fact that he used a double at some time important to the hoax
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
Well if I believed for one second that he died himself the 25th of June, I wouldn't be here. You don't get the point here, the use of doubles IS important, why would he need them? Protection IMO. Why in the movie? No clue, maybe to make a statement afterwards, as to make people see that they only see what they want to see, that they take everything for granted, that they think it is him because the media tells you it's him.
There's no point using protection -on stage- for his own rehearsal. It would be when leaving the building for instance, but it makes no sense on stage. So for security reasons, no. There's no point having a double rehearsing in his place.
Comments
OK, I have never said that I know more than anyone else, I am just asking how on earth he changed that much in just 3 months of time.
I never said I was sure he is not in the movie, I said the low quality footage can be him.
I also never said he didn't show up, I think he was at the other side of the camera.
I think the doubles are in the movie for a reason, not because Mike didn't want to do the shows, because IMHO he is the one who set it all up.
Then there is the movie where there are no cuts in the audio, yet the visuals are cut and we see different outfits all the time. Means that the audio is not live from what we have seen. Why is that?
Maybe because the doubles can't sing?
Don't tell me I claim to know more, I am simply discussing and I am asking how he could have changed that much in 3 months, after just having aged in 20 years before. To that question I still don't have an answer.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."None of us knows for certain, that is why we are discussing. No-one can have concrete proof unless they were at the filming - all we can do is speculate - and we are never all going to agree.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."I've just wanted to post this photo about Mike in 2009 March but u've done it before me. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
That's him just one day after the O2 press conference. THAT'S MIKE. That photo proves that the O2 guy is no Mike never ever, and also proves that that guy in the TII on the other photo (3rd)was a double. (well most of the guys were)
If anyone still can't see the differences well i really don't have any idea what the heck would help them. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
so are you saying that as long as the person has the "overall" image then its mike?? as long as they have a cleft, reguardless of size, light skin, and a curly wig its mike???
I am not saying the Ebony photos weren't airbrushed; however, makeup WAS definitely a factor in why the Ebony photoshoot pics of Mike look a bit different. The photographer, Matthew Rolston, talks about the photoshoot, as well as the makeup used, on p. 243 in the Michael Jackson Opus.
He said he wanted to use a neutral lip color and warm-toned face powder to create a "golden glow" in the photos which he thought were more complimentary to Michael than the makeup he was wearing at the time. (He is the same photographer who took Mike's photo for the 1983 Human Nature single cover and publicity picture, the one where he's wearing the yellow vest.) Makeup does make a huge difference.
I thought this was interesting and thought I'd share.
A - because he hoaxed his death after that
That's not a good argument. Even if every public appearance of him was a double, and ALL in TII were doubles, it still does not proof he used one at 25th. He could have used thousands of doubles, millions even and still die himself at 25th june.
You're not making sense. What are you saying here, that it would be OK to base an identification on just one thing like nose or ear or cleft but not on the overall picture?
Yep.. And it's strange we havn't seen these doubles after June 25th.. Four doubles that looks like Michael can't go outside their house, because they look like Michael.
This thread is not meant to "proof" who died on June 25th, it's to discuss if doubles were used.
It's important to discuss it, because the use of doubles raises the question as to WHY doubles were used, especially in This It It.
But he is still look like Michael Jackson because he IS Mike do ya know what i mean? U can change your make up u can use photoshop it doesn't matter cause your face 's gonna be still YOUR face. (and it's gonna look like your face. ) <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
Well if I believed for one second that he died himself the 25th of June, I wouldn't be here. You don't get the point here, the use of doubles IS important, why would he need them? Protection IMO. Why in the movie? No clue, maybe to make a statement afterwards, as to make people see that they only see what they want to see, that they take everything for granted, that they think it is him because the media tells you it's him.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."EXACTLY.
Surgeries is a serious thing.
NAVI ?
BEN JACKSON xD ?
ECASANOVA ?
Have you ever heard of prostetic make up? And those doubles only seem to look like Mike because they want you to think it's him. I bet that with other hair, no make-up you wouldn't even consider the fact it's him. We see all different mouths, eyes, ears and noses in that movie. Some can dance, some can't, some have almost no shoulders, some have broad shoulders, even without shoulder pads.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Johnny Depp? Why the obvious doubles?
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."Navi? Nah.
Ben Jackson <!-- s
E'Cassanova? No..
Michael Joseph Jackson? Maybe.. His 'twin that died'
Michael Joe Jackson, yes!
So r u saying he had surgeries on ALL OVER his face in the last three months to make a totally different look? ( and height? and moves? even teeth? <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) --> )
because Ecasanova can sing / act like michael. and also LOOKs like Mike.. Navi can act/same body movement and dance like michael.. but Ben jackson can just dance like Michael IMO, havent heard him sing <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) --> what do you think guys ? just waana know <!-- s:) -->:)<!-- s:) -->
You know you need EXTREMELY PROFESSIONAL surgeries to look like Michael, and it cost A LOT of money!
Changing yourself back is not an easy job.
If there were 4 doubles, as some people in here claim.. How you think their life is? They are not that rich for bodyguards, and get their foods brought to the house. You see my point. They can't go out as theirselves cause they look like Michael Jackson, 90%