Leaving Neverland

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Leaving Neverland
File:Film Poster for Leaving Neverland.jpg
Television release poster
Directed by Dan Reed
Produced by Dan Reed
Starring <templatestyles src="Plainlist/styles.css"/>
Music by Chad Hobson
Cinematography Dan Reed
Edited by Jules Cornell
Production
company
Amos Pictures
Distributed by <templatestyles src="Plainlist/styles.css"/>
Release dates
 <templatestyles src="Plainlist/styles.css"/>
  • January 25, 2019 (2019-01-25) (Sundance)
  • March 3, 2019 (2019-03-03) (United States)
  • March 6, 2019 (2019-03-06) (United Kingdom)
Running time
 236 minutes[1]
182 minutes (UK version)[2]
Country United States
United Kingdom
Language English

Leaving Neverland is a 2019 documentary directed and produced by the British filmmaker Dan Reed. It focuses on two men, Wade Robson and James Safechuck, who allege they were sexually abused as children by the singer Michael Jackson. It also examines the effects on their families.

The film is a co-production between the UK broadcaster Channel 4 and the US broadcaster HBO. It premiered at the 2019 Sundance Film Festival on January 25, 2019 and was broadcast on HBO in two parts in March 2019.[3] It received positive reviews from critics and generally mixed reviews from viewers.[4][5] The documentary resulted in a backlash against Jackson and a reassessment of his legacy in some quarters, while critics dismissed the film as one-sided and unconvincing under the evidence of Jackson's previous allegations in 1993 and 2005. The Jackson estate condemned the film as a "tabloid character assassination Michael Jackson endured in life, and now in death."[6]

Synopsis

File:Michaeljackson1.jpg
Jackson with James Safechuck (right) in Hawaii, January 1988

In 1993, Michael Jackson was accused of sexually molesting 13-year-old Jordan Chandler. Jackson denied the claims and settled the case out of court for a $15 million payment. The settlement included a nondisclosure agreement and no criminal charges were filed.[7][8] In 1994, Jason Francia accused Jackson of molesting him from when he was 7 to 10 years old. Jackson made an out-of-court settlement with Francia's family for more than $2 million and a NDA.[9][10] In 2005, Jackson was criminally tried for child abuse charges, following concerns raised in the 2003 documentary Living with Michael Jackson. In the film, Jackson was holding hands with a boy named Gavin Arvizo and talked about his sleepovers with children. Jackson was acquitted of the child sexual abuse charges.[8]

Eight years later, choreographer Wade Robson filed a lawsuit alleging that Jackson had sexually abused him for seven years, beginning when he was seven years old.[11] James Safechuck subsequently filed a case in 2014, who alleged he was sexually abused over a four-year period from the age of ten.[12][13] Both had previously testified in Jackson's defense — Safechuck as a child during the 1993 investigation, Robson both as a child in 1993 and as a young adult in 2005.[14][15] In 2015, Robson's case against Jackson's estate was dismissed on the grounds of being filed too late. In 2017, it was ruled that the corporations formerly owned by Jackson could not be held accountable for Jackson's alleged past actions.[16][17]

In the film, Robson, Safechuck, and their respective families describe their relationships with Jackson. It includes graphic descriptions by both men of Jackson's sex acts during their boyhood. The descriptions include masturbation, rimming, oral sex, and in the case of Wade Robson, anal sex when he was 14 years old. Safechuck and Robson allege that Jackson committed these acts and sexually abused them at his home, Neverland Ranch, and at his other residences across California.[18]

Director Dan Reed described his film as a "study of the psychology of child sexual abuse, told through two ordinary families...groomed for 20 years by a paedophile masquerading as a trusted friend."[19]

Production

The documentary was conceived by Channel 4's editors. After Reed produced enough material to make a four-hour film, the HBO network joined the production.[20] He felt the four-hour length was necessary to present the story "in a way that makes it fully understandable in all its complexity." Reed said he did not use the film to comment on Jackson's actions or motivations.[21]

In February 2017, Reed and assistant producer Marguerite Gaudin flew to Hawaii to interview Robson.[22] Robson agreed to tell his story chronologically and omit no details.[22] A camera failed shortly after shooting began, but a solution was found; shooting continued until nighttime and continued throughout the second day. Reed travelled to Los Angeles later that week to shoot Safechuck's story in two days.[22] Reed said that Robson, Safechuck, and their families received no financial compensation for the film.[23]

After filming, Reed returned to London and began corroborating the stories.[22] Wondering how Robson and Safechuck's mothers could have allowed their sons to be abused, he returned to Los Angeles in November 2017 and interviewed their families.[22] The wedding ring scene with James Safechuck was filmed in July 2018.[24] Reed decided that footage he had shot of former detectives and prosecutors from the 1993 case and the 2005 trial was unnecessary.[21]

Reed was unable to contact Jordan Chandler for the documentary and assumed he would prefer to remain private.[25] Reed also said the Chandler and Arvizo stories could form the basis for a second documentary.[25]

Release

Leaving Neverland premiered at the 2019 Sundance Film Festival on January 25, 2019. For television, it was split into two parts broadcast on March 3 and 4 on HBO in the US and March 6 and 7 on Channel 4 in the UK.[3] It broke Channel 4 streaming records and became the most downloaded Channel 4 show ever, and took a 45% share of young television audiences.[20] In the US, the first episode was watched by 1.29 million viewers and scored 0.41 in the key 18–49 demographic.[26][27] The second episode was watched by 0.927 million viewers and scored 0.26 in the 18–49 demographic.[28][29]

Kew Media Group sold the documentary to channels in 130 territories.[3] In New Zealand, the first episode was watched by 716,000, making it one of the most watched non-sporting non-news broadcasts in the country's history.[30] Netherlands broadcaster VPRO referred viewers to the Mind Korrelatie foundation for victims of sexual abuse, and attracted callers in large numbers.[31]

The US broadcast was followed by Oprah Winfrey Presents: After Neverland (recorded March 2, 2019), in which Robson, Safechuck, and Reed were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey before an audience of victims and their families.[32] The special was watched by 0.78 million viewers and scored a 0.23 in the 18–49 demographic in its initial broadcast and was later made available on HBO On Demand, HBO Go, and HBO Now.[28] Winfrey later spoke of the "hateration" she received from people who negatively criticized the film and Jackson's supporters, yet said her support of the accusers has not wavered.[33]

Channel One Russia originally planned to release the film on nighttime television on March 15 but later relegated it to their website, available until March 20, due to "mixed reception, speculation, and aggression from both supporters and opponents of the film."[34]

Reception

Critical response

On Rotten Tomatoes, Leaving Neverland holds an approval rating of 98% based on 92 reviews, with an average score of 7.97/10. Its consensus states: "Crucial and careful, Leaving Neverland gives empathetic breadth and depth to the complicated afterlife of child sexual abuse as experienced by adult survivors."[35] On Metacritic, it holds a weighted average of 85 out of 100, indicating "universal acclaim", based on 21 reviews.[36]

In Vanity Fair, Owen Gleiberman described the two men's stories as "overwhelmingly powerful and convincing."[37] Hank Stuever of The Washington Post thought the documentary was "riveting" and "devastating", ending his review with a plea: "Turn off the music and listen to these men."[38] Melanie McFarland of Salon believed the film's "intent isn’t to merely grant these men and their families a platform to air their stories in all their painful fullness, but to place the viewer inside the perspectives of everyone who was taken in by the dream...it does leave the viewer in the thorny clarity of what we know now."[39] Matthew Gilbert of The Boston Globe wrote that the film was not "particularly imaginative", yet he admired how it chronicled Robson's and Safechuck's emotional narrative: "it accounts for every stage of their respective recoveries, which are still in progress, including their darkest feelings of fear, denial, and shame."[40] In Entertainment Weekly, Kristen Baldwin gave the film a B grade. She criticized it as "woefully one-sided" and concluded: "As a documentary, Leaving Neverland is a failure. As a reckoning, though, it is unforgettable."[41] In The Hollywood Reporter, Daniel Fienberg wrote: Leaving Neverland is "about the 20+ years...Robson and Safechuck [held secrets, lied, covered up] — and the damage that can do — as it is about the alleged crimes." He concluded, "it's doubtful you'll feel exactly the same after watching."[42] The Daily Telegraph awarded it five out of five, describing it as "a horrifying picture of child abuse."[43]

David Fear wrote in Rolling Stone: "By offering these men a forum, this doc has clearly chosen a side. Yet the thoroughness with which it details this history of allegations, and the way it personalizes them to a startling degree, is hard to shake off."[44] IndieWire's David Ehrlich wrote that the film was "dry" and "hardly great cinema," but that it was "a crucial document for a culture that still can't see itself clearly in Michael Jackson's shadow."[45] Alissa Wilkinson described the documentary as "a devastating case" that "may forever" change Jackson's legacy.[46] In the Chicago Sun-Times, Richard Roeper described it as a "devastating and undeniably persuasive film."[47]

Issues regarding credibility and supporters of Jackson

In January 2019, the Jackson estate issued a press release condemning the film: "The two accusers testified under oath that these events never occurred. They have provided no independent evidence and absolutely no proof in support of their accusations."[48] In February 2019, the estate filed a $100 million lawsuit against HBO, petitioning a court to compel their arbitrate cooperation regarding the film's broadcast.[49] As Jackson has died, HBO cannot be sued for defamation. Instead, the estate claimed HBO violated a 1992 agreement never to disparage Jackson's public image, one of the terms in broadcasting his concert film Live in Bucharest: The Dangerous Tour.[50] On the day of the HBO premiere of Leaving Neverland: Part One, the estate posted Live in Bucharest on YouTube. The next day, to coincide with the broadcast of Part Two, the estate posted another concert film, Live at Wembley July 16, 1988.[51]

Fans of Jackson demanded the Sundance Film Festival to cancel the screening.[52] At the Sundance premiere, Robson and Safechuck said they had received death threats from some fans.[53] There were protests outside Channel 4's office, an internet campaign against the film calling it a "mockumentary," and a crowdfunded advertising campaign publicising Jackson's alleged innocence with the slogan "Facts don't lie. People do" on buses and bus stops.[20][54] On March 13, Transport for London announced it would remove the adverts after the charity Survivors Trust complained that they could discourage victims of sexual abuse from coming forward.[55][56] Several critiques of the film's credibility have appeared online.

American actor Corey Feldman, a friend of Jackson since a child, called the documentary "one-sided" and said Jackson never approached him inappropriately.[57] He later clarified that his comments "wasn't meant in any way to question the validity of the victims."[58] Singer Aaron Carter, who was also a friend of Jackson since young, stated that he remembered his friend as "an amazing guy" and reiterated his support for Jackson when the media speculated on the suggestiveness behind some of his previous comments.[59] Brett Barnes and American actor Macaulay Culkin also denied any inappropriate behavior coming from Jackson, when they were close to him as children.[60]

American singer Barbra Streisand spoke in Jackson's defense, saying, "his sexual needs were his sexual needs," and that the accusers were "thrilled to be there." She added that the accusers were "both married and they both have children, so it didn't kill them."[61] Streisand later apologized and expressed sympathy for the accusers.[62] English singer Boy George expressed skepticism about the documentary's claims: "It's just taken almost for granted that this is what happened and therefore we all should accept it."[63] American singer Madonna, who was a friend of Jackson, spoke to British Vogue in defense of him: "I don't have a lynch-mob mentality, so in my mind, people are innocent until proven guilty."[64] She further questioned the filmmakers' intentions and credibility, saying, "What's the agenda? What do people want out of this? Are there people asking for money, is there some kind of extortion thing happening?"[65] Joey Fatone of NSYNC, who knew Robson and worked with him during the 2001 MTV Video Music Awards also expressed skepticism: "[At the time] it seemed like nothing was going on, that's the whole thing. To come out later on and have these repercussions, it's kind of weird and interesting because you never know what's true."[66]

Brandi Jackson, Michael Jackson's niece, told John Ziegler of Mediaite in a podcast that the singer introduced her to Robson, and the two began dating around the time Robson claimed to have been molested. She stated that her experience with Robson contradicted his story of abuse in the documentary.[67] In an interview with Billboard, Brandi Jackson further expounded on her experience with Robson, saying Robson never mentioned any abuse occurring at the time, and that "the only thing he said was how blessed he was to have Michael as a business partner and a friend."[68]

A former bodyguard of Jackson dismissed claims of child sexual abuse, saying that Jackson was heterosexual. A second bodyguard condemned the film for omitting Robson and Safechuck's lawsuits against the Jackson estate.[69] Mark Geragos, former attorney for Jackson during his 2005 trial, noted that the film contains a speech spoken by him but was edited to fit the film's narrative. The film portrayed Geragos threatening anyone, particularly victims of child abuse, who were willing to besmirch Jackson's image, but omitted the part showing Geragos addressing two men who were found guilty for wiretapping Jackson, contrary to the film's presentation.[70][71]

Journalist Charles Thomson, who has written about the media's atrocious coverage of Jackson,[72] said in a radio podcast, "[Robson and Safechuck] are two men who have maintained for decades that Michael Jackson was innocent, including under oath defending him in legal proceedings. And then both of whom hit hard times a couple of years after [Jackson] died and changed their stories and started suing his estate for hundreds of millions of dollars. Their case has been thrown out of court twice, and in one of them, the judge reprimanded them and threw their entire witness statement out of court, because he had found that they have provably and deliberately lied under oath. In the film they tell stories which directly contradict the stories they told under oath in their lawsuit." He described the film as "edited with zero supporting evidence" and "completely covers up and omits all of the public record information [and] the court documents which have been accrued over the last five years." He said, "Whether you believe them now or you believe them then, either way they're perjurers.... This director has taken two perjurers at their word, which is so unethical anyway."[73] In an interview with BBC Essex, he described the media's failure to provide any balance of information as a "universal, catastrophic failure" and said the only reason why the film is allowed to air is because Jackson is dead, so it's free from libel laws.[74]

Mike Smallcombe, a biographer of Jackson, wrote that Safechuck's claims of sexual abuse at Neverland’s train station from 1988 to 1992 are false because the train station was not built until 1994.[75][76][77] Reed responded, "The two still photos of the station shown in [the film] were in fact taken by James," inferring that Safechuck experienced sexual abuse at Neverland before and after the train station was constructed.[78] Smallcombe called Reed's response "embarrassing." He accused Reed of changing Safechuck's timeline to post-1994, claiming that would damage the accusers' lawsuits.[79][80]

Other public response

The documentary led to a backlash against Jackson in the media and provoked negative responses from notable individuals and organizations.[81] But it also prompted a significant increase in his music's sales, in apparent disregard of the film's portrayal of Jackson.[82] According to Billboard, Jackson's combined music sales, including his work with the Jackson 5, increased 10%. Michael Jackson audio and video streams increased 6%, rising to 19.7 million between March 3–5, from 18.7 million between February 24–26.[83] His videos were viewed 22.1 million times, an increase of roughly 1.2 million from the week prior. Three of his albums re-entered the UK iTunes chart.[82]

Some radio stations banned Jackson's music after the release of the film. All Cogeco-owned stations in Canada pulled his music from their playlists temporarily.[84] NH Radio in the Netherlands boycotted for a few weeks due to fears of its listeners being unable to listen to his music "in a neutral way."[85] MediaWorks New Zealand removed them from their playlists explaining, "[Our playlists are] a reflection of our audiences and their preferences." Their rivals at New Zealand Media and Entertainment also removed Jackson's music indefinitely.[86][87][88]

Executive producer James L. Brooks of The Simpsons stated the episode guest starring Jackson, "Stark Raving Dad," will be removed from syndication, FXX's "Simpson's World" on-demand service, and future DVD sets of the show.[89][90]

Items of Jackson's clothing and a Jackson poster were removed from The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, saying, "Obviously, we want to put stories in front of our visitors (showing) people of high character."[91] However, Jackson's photographs from the Ryan White exhibit were kept.[92]

Fashion house Louis Vuitton announced they no longer will produce Jackson-inspired products that were originally planned for its fall and winter 2019 men’s collection.[93]

American artistic gymnast Katelyn Ohashi removed Jackson's music and Jackson-inspired dance moves from her floor routine at the 2019 PAC-12 Championships.[94]

A concert of music in London produced by Jackson collaborator Quincy Jones removed Jackson's name and album titles from its advertisements.[95] Some concertgoers demanded refunds.[96]

The city council of Brussels cancelled plans to dress the Manneken Pis sculpture in Jackson's signature clothing.[97]

Margo Jefferson, Jackson's biographer, wrote an essay reassessing her views on his legacy. She expressed her support for Jackson's accusers: "I am rooting for these men to win any legal and financial recompense they possibly can." Jefferson also explored the issue of separating Jackson's life from his art: "The task is to read the art and the life fully as they wind and unwind around each other, changing shape and direction."[98]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  2. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  4. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  5. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  6. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  7. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  9. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  10. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  11. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  12. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  13. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  14. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  15. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  16. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  17. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  18. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  19. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 20.2 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 22.4 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  23. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  24. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  26. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  27. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  29. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  30. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  31. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  32. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  33. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  34. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  35. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  36. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  37. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  38. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  39. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  40. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  41. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  42. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  43. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  44. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  45. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  46. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  47. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  48. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  49. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  50. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  51. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  52. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  53. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  54. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  55. ↑ Michael Jackson 'innocent' adverts to be removed from London buses, CNN
  56. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  57. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  58. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  59. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  60. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  61. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  62. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  63. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  64. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  65. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  66. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  67. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  68. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  69. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  70. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  71. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  72. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  73. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  74. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  75. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  76. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  77. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  78. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  79. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  80. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  81. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  82. ↑ 82.0 82.1 Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  83. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  84. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  85. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  86. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  87. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  88. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  89. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  90. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  91. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  92. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  93. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  94. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  95. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  96. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  97. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.
  98. ↑ Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'strict' not found.

External links

Retrieved from "https://infogalactic.com/w/index.php?title=Leaving_Neverland&oldid=725968186"