My encounters with Michael’s world
Although a 1980s kid, I never got to listen to Michael Jackson’s music. Because I was raised as a francophone; never understanding English until I learned the language in 1995. Nevertheless, I had five wonderful moments to connect with his artistic culture.
One, the anime series Alfred J Quack which had an episode dedicated to Michael; through a character and adventure called Michael Duckson. Nice tribute that I adored for it displayed Michael‘s skills in wowing fans with his music and dance.
Two, the short film Thriller, which a classmate brought to our music lesson in third grade. A clip that impressed me with the werewolf transformation, though we didn’t see the whole video as the school bell told us our lesson was over. However, I saw a portion of Thriller at the Pointe-Claire swimming pool and the audience adored it. But it would be years later when I would watch the whole film; which I loved for its musical creativity and visual direction.
Three, a classmate did an expose on the singer for a school lesson and his presentation of Michael’s life was accurate and excellent. Non-tabloid, it focused on the music, the singer’s career, and his origins in a respectful way.
Four, the film Free Willy, whose credits had the song Will You Be There. Tune about Earth, Love, and Respect that amazed me because it was unusual that a Pop Rock singer dealt with humanitarian issues. For most Rock/Pop stars would do the opposite. Commercial tunes or narcissistic songs about selfish and demeaning values. So this composition made me see Michael as a humanitarian; who cares for others like he did with We Are The World.
Five, my favourite moment was The Simpsons Season Premiere where, in 1991, Michael Jackson had an uncredited guest appearance as an asylum figure who claims to be Michael. Though I originally saw the episode in French Canadian, dub viewers worldwide love for its respect of the jokes and its great performances, it made me realise the incredible appeal people had for the singer and how he brought out the best from everyone. An episode I shall deal further here considering that story’s latest updates.
But through the years, I also noticed the most tragic side to this genius.
The Tabloid Medias; their constant slanders of Michael. Press, TV News, and talk shows. Calling him Wacko Jacko, plastic surgery junkie, paedophile, bad parent, and other horrors. Relentless, aggressive, and mean attacks. Stuff that I did not believe for one second. Because I NEVER TRUST THE PRESS AND MEDIAS. For as a hypersensitive and analytical person, I have always had, ever since a small kid, a powerful sense of observation. A sixth sense that has helped me detect honest/kind/evil/nasty/deceptive individuals and surroundings. Especially while living in a suburb similar to those in Tim Burton’s movies and in Desperate Housewives; a close-minded community with a clique/mob/witch hunt culture that also creeped out an actress who worked with the filmmaker Xavier Dolan. An actress who used to live in my community, had frequented my elementary school, and described my town as unpleasant. Which I also agree.
So through my years in that Muggle community, I became perceptive of nasty and malevolent individuals, detecting them fast nowadays. And I can tell you that every time I, for various reasons, ignored my Douchebag-Detector (ex: a questionable University teacher whose relative got ridiculed in a South Park episode, a prima donna former friend I will write about later on), I got stabbed in the back. Which further reinforces my belief to only trust my instincts when I meet someone.
At two years old, I became a massive fan of Osamu Tezuka’s anime and mangas. And in series like the 1980s Tetsuwan Atom (Astroboy), he displayed a sharp critique of our world’s injustices; revealing himself as a powerful humanist. Denouncing, for instance, the daily racism minorities endure. Indeed, through the robot society in Tetsuwan Atom, Tezuka denounced the discrimination that the Africans, Asians, and South American communities endure in modern societies. Including racial profiling, work racism, and demonisation culture. Furthermore, Tezuka was one of the few, in series like The 3-Eyed Child, Black Jack, and MW, to denounce the corruption of American politics, the witch hunts of our modern medias, the hypocrisy of showbiz culture, but also the dangers of thoughtless and extreme radical activists. Subtle social criticism that, among all the Tetsuwan Atom North American fans I met, I was the only one to notice as many proponents just watch his shows as entertainment pieces, while his detractors saw anime and manga as stupid violence. So when I presented Tezuka’s humanism through a High School Research that everybody applauded, I was proud to shed more positive light on the manga/anime medium that was always demeaned back then. And thanks to Tezuka’s work, I had learned, from the age of five years old, stuff that Michael Jackson and many adult people would only learn later on.
- That the Press and the Medias are not your friends and that they care about your words only if it fits their agenda. That if they can twist quotes to suit their needs, they will always do so.
- That the Press and the Medias do not give a damn about the truth. That they can distort reality to their suiting and to their bosses’s ideas.
- That the Press and the Medias can lie, slander, and demonise innocent people for money and that they couldn’t care less about their witch hunts’ consequences.
- That the Press and the Medias can be sexist, misogynist, misandrist, racist, and evil if the circumstances are appropriate to make cash.
- That social minorities suffer and endure constant injustices. Whether it is through racial profiling, shady accusations, witch hunt mob culture, and prejudiced prosecutors/police.
- That although some activists can come in with good intentions, others can be so caught up with their demons and ignorance/prejudices that their activism can become as extreme, thoughtless, and dangerous as the people they despise. Causing therefore more harm to their causes than productive help.
- That the showbiz planet is not the haven it proclaims. That it is not because actors work/live/meet together that they are friends and truly care about their colleagues, nor that they honour their humanitarian/political causes, and nor are they Saints because of certain roles they did. In some cases, some of these celebrities participate in humanitarian activities only for opportunism/publicity, or even be the world’s biggest jerks.
The Press and I
In sum, Tezuka’s masterpieces made me beware the Press and the Medias, critical of our modern culture, and more intellectually thoughtful about employing the most reliable sources regarding a serious topic. Such as the 2005 trial Michael Jackson went through as the Press was portraying inaccurately the court room proceedings and treated fans supporting the singer as blind weirdos. In sum, two alarm signals that the press had a vile agenda against Michael. While of the singer — before, during, and after the trial — I always saw him as the most loneliest, saddest, and bullied person in the world.
To be blunt, the way the Press treated Michael Jackson in the 1990s is one of the main reasons why I never felt that close with the North American society; preferring the perspectives of European and Asian cultures. Including the UK one, though regarding their Press, I always smelt its vile vomit when they attacked artists I love like J K Rowling and Lars von Trier; spewing out horrible lies. Especially as I saw the events as they happened and knew that these Rita Skeeters’s recounts were bullshit.
So every time I looked at the Medias, I always noticed their liar culture and unreliability in depicting reality. Certainly more when I saw them demonise artists that I love (ex: Lars von Trier, Woody Allen, Jean Cocteau, etc.), cultures that I like (ex: manga, horror, comic books), and innocent people for shady reasons (ex: the Lavigueur family, etc.). And regarding the Montreal press, its attitude toward Michael Jackson is mediocre.
Indeed, a Canadian reporter, whom I will call Steve, had a habit of attacking Michael’s plastic surgery, even accusing him of being a paedophile by using facts that the 2005 trials debunked. Which pained me as this reporter’s one of the few who presented reliable researches in his cases. So I think that had he been presented more accurate sources, he would have a different stance. And considering that a few months after he accused Michael of being a sexual predator on a talk show, Steve was also accused of being a predatorial creep by two former friends/colleagues (one of them I shall cal Dick), I guess Steve sort of realised what it feels like to be accused of something horrible he could never do.
And I do insist that Steve is innocent not only because a major investigation confirmed his innocence and those Judases’ accusations as untrue, but because I had the chance to work with Dick a few months before he and his bitchy colleague did their witch hunt on Steve.
Indeed, I was an extra on one of Dick’s culture shows and the man was nasty, unpleasant, and a pure diva toward his co-host, crew, and extras. A situation that happened on other shows he hosted and which my friends/relatives also witnessed. Worse, this accuser had a history of spewing out sexually vulgar remarks/concepts on his shows, even getting a lawsuit warning from one person he slandered. Looking back, I remember Steve obtaining more popularity in his career and other projects. Including on that show he worked with his Judases co-stars; gaining more popularity than them during the last two years before that scandal. And regarding the second accuser, disturbing rumours circulated on the web about that person and Dick. Strange behaviours as Steve also explained in interviews.
Again, a lengthy investigation cleared Steve as he was declared innocent. Which pleased him; but since then he became less trustful of artists as he broke his friendship from many of them. Even ridiculing that showbiz culture and those who had promoted his attackers’ slanders with shark-biting skits that shocked many. And as for the other accusers, their careers did not improve. For Dick, some of his shows and future projects got abruptly cancelled. While for the second accuser, my dad later read in the press that this person had received bullying complaints from other colleagues. So considering how Steve endured the same things Michael went through — an accusation that could have destroyed his career and hurt his reputation/family — I do hope he has changed his stance on Michael Jackson and realised what it feels like to be wrongfully accused as a creep.
Michael in the 2000s
When Martin “Human Garbage” Bashir presented his slander piece on Michael Jackson, I knew that what he said was untrustworthy even though I was not a massive fan of Michael back then. So of that documentary, I refuse to watch it. But I did see during my March 2019 researches the singer’s reply as his team filmed the other angle of his interviews; exposing Bashir’s evil agenda. A counter reply you can consult here.
So alongside my eternal respect for Michael, I was sad and angry at how the medias demeaned him. And when he died in 2009, that rage boiled up inside.
For here were many Canadian/worldwide figures exclaiming their love for the singer; lamenting his mistreatment. But where the hell were they when it was time to defend him? Where the hell were they when it was trendy to ridicule him? Weren’t some of them accomplices as many shows and movies had embarked in that cruelty.
To me, the most revolting was Scary Movie 3, treating him like a predator in a skit so horrible that when the film passed in Cinemas, nobody laughed. Instead, spectators were shocked. Angry. Even Duckman, a show I like, made a pass at Michael Jackson through their episode Forbidden Fruit where the detective and his sister-in-law Bernice, after putting a newspaper ad for a personal tutor that would help his kids, refuse at their door characters they consider creeps. Among them a psychopath clown, a satanist, and Michael Jackson. A horrible joke that always wounded me as I felt the show’s attack was based on unreliable press reporting and not on the truth. Within an episode that is ironic since Duckman and Bernice have not been great role models for their kids whereas Michael Jackson, through the researches I made, was a much better parent to his kids than those fools. Moreover, the Forbidden Fruit episode presented a critique of radical movements that accuse everyone of sexual harassment, including people wrongfully accused (does that ring a bell, anyone?). So seeing them tackling this serious topic while attacking an innocent man was hypocritical. And I do hope the Duckman showrunners have changed their view over their view of the singer.
Although I know that South Park made parodies of Michael Jackson in some episodes, I feel they were the only ones who tried to better portray him. Especially during their episode The Jeffersons, as they were the only show that denounced the 2003-2004 accusations as a conspiracy from racist police officers and the prosecutor Tom Sneddon. And unlike other shows that rejoice in demonising ONE person, South Park is the only show that satirises ALL celebrities. Including people the authors adore; and even themselves when they ridiculed their shit movie Baseketball. Making their program a satire on celebrity cult and the prejudices people have over certain artists, alongside those that stars have over the public rather than a complacent celebration of pop culture like The Simpsons became. And knowing that the show follows Michael Jackson on Twitter and that they took time to display a hologram Michael punishing a music executive who mistreated him, I feel the show is one rare jewel who attempted to portray the singer with more kindness. With some inaccuracies, but nevertheless more respect than other programs.
Here is down below a South Park fan writing on Reddit about Matt Stone and Trey Parker’s take on the singer.
Among all the testimonials CNN passed the night Michael died, Larry King’s moved me. His recount at when he heard lawyers talking about how the Arvizos were attempting to blackmail Michael, and he flew straight to Santa Barbara to defend the singer was a bold move from him. An interest to defend the man at all costs. A gesture that touched Michael, and which Larry King recounted down below.
Thanks to this clip, I was delighted that I was right all along. That Michael Jackson was a victim of a vengeful and greedy family’s slanderous blackmail. And I was glad that Elizabeth Taylor and Macaulay Culkin, Michael’s closest friends, took time to denounce his sufferings. How he never had a childhood. How this lack of interaction with the outside world made him a poor communicator at explaining himself, which caused people to misunderstand him and created confusion over his remarks.
my entry into Michael’s Neverland
So after all the turmoils in Michael’s life, I was happy more positive infos came out over the singer. And though from 2009 till 2018, I didn’t follow his music and art the same way I did with Lars von Trier, Ken Russell, Jean Cocteau and Osamu Tezuka, I did listen to a few tracks. Mostly Billie Jean and Thriller. Though as for the rest of his songs, I wanted to discover them when I was ready to follow his music. Which soon happened thanks firstly to the incredible Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure anime/manga series which honoured musicians like Prince, Yes, Oingo Boingo, Crimson King, The Beatles, Suzie Q, and other musical pioneers I love.
And secondly after what happened last March.
The Leaving Neverland documentary. Which I uncovered through the reporting of Mira Sorvino’s latest tweet. A MeToo activist/actress who betrayed a director I like (Woody Allen) and owes her entire notability through her work with him. An attack which alarmed me as I thought this witch hunt over Michael had stopped. And knowing that activist’s hypocrisy, it was suspicious for she, like many others in her business such as Quentin Tarantino, Oprah, and Ava DuVernay, knew about Harvey Weinstein’s behaviours and did nothing for many years. Just like Mira has refused to recognise the Farrow family’s controversies, and the abuses the matriarch figure pulled; which Moses Farrow, Soon-Yi Previn, Woody Allen fans, and the director Robert Weide recapitulated on their website posts. Posts that convinced some of the biggest Wood Allen detractors that the director was innocent.
Now let’s make it clear once and for all regarding the MeToo/TimesUp movements.
As someone who studied in the movie business, who met on several occasions industry professionals, who worked with future artists on school projects, who worked as an extra for a TV show, who lives in a family that had a hotel/bar complex which hosted spectacles for artists such as Edith Piaf and Maurice Chevalier, who has a father who dealt with nice artists for his work — such as that reporter Steve whom he found very nice — but also nasty actors, a smarmy TV/radio host who got arrested for his abusiveness, and who reprimanded a famous writer whom my dad, a Canadian Art Funds Grant representative and a Book Publishing official all described as a humongous asshole, I can attest there is a strong culture of nastiness in show business.
Indeed, I had a scriptwriting teacher I shall call Cruella who constantly demeaned/ insulted her students, creating a horrible atmosphere she fed to the greediest students. All of them believing her doctrine that being rude and mean is how you succeed in the business. I also remember dealing with a student who behaved like a nasty Harvey Weinstein and I got so angry with him everyone fell silent, all shocked that someone confronted him. In sum, I met personalities that are part of the problem in show business. And so did my former boss who used to work at an important Canadian station and he witnessed there a culture of cruelty; for instance a female TV host displaying a Jekyll and Hyde personality.
So as you can see, much of this nastiness culture exists behind cameras, from people who exhibit charming personalities before cameras, but are bastards away from them. Producers/actors/musicians/hosts who display abuse of power, power struggles, cat fights, and bullying in their studios and movie/TV sets. Toward extras, actors, assistants, technicians, crew members, runners, etc. Which is a shame because those productions — meant to enrich viewers’ lives — exist in toxic work climate that affect employees and this business culture many dream to work in.
Therefore, it is imperative that bullies and assholes (of both genders and all professional sides in the movie/music business) are confronted over their behaviour and be reprimanded accordingly. So that productions are done in perfect harmony and people can enjoy their work experiences.
However, do I agree with the way the MeToo/TimesUp movements have behaved?
And for various reasons I spoke with people of all professions and origins. With People who live in the real world instead of a movie/TV set culture as navel-centered as Hollywood.
And here are my reasons.
- One, I strongly disagree with the way the MeToo activists and leaders constantly scream aloud their “Always Believe the Accusers” and “Always Believe Women” slogans during their crusades; as if the idea that an accuser/woman could lie doesn’t exist. As if the accused could not be victim of lies or even abuse himself. As if anything an accused might say in his defence should be always considered as lies. That we cannot trust the word of an accused even if he has proofs confirming his innocence. Even if those proofs are court documents and criminal/psychological investigations from real experts and court officials who live in the real world; not according to the whims of a popularity-gossip-media-whore-cult like Hollywood.
- Two, I instantly noticed in those MeToo dialogues a toxic misandry mentality in their debates, especially as they focused on male predators and not on female ones. As if women are pure figures who cannot be predators or mean/vicious. Even more disturbing is how in those MeToo ranks are people with shocking and despicable attitudes/declarations/actions in their work/private life; including some who worked on TV shows they co-produced that cultivated and promoted sexism such as misandry; became platforms to feed their narcissistic egos, creating in their productions difficult work climates (ex: Charmed).
- Three, those MeToo activists’ attacks over those in the public/business who have reservations and criticisms over their radical activism have shocked many. Indeed, these activists won’t gain much support if they insult those who ask for “Due Process”, “Innocence Until Proven Guilty”, and “trial in a court of justice” instead of a “trial by social media/newspapers” as “Deniers”, “accomplices to violence, or as “apologists for rapists”. Instead, many of us find those MeToo reactions as offensive, patronising, and unconstructive dialogues for their cause. Make us consider those insults and those “trials by medias” as other proofs of problems within this movement that should be civil instead of hysterical. Indeed, the attacks Catherine Deneuve has had for her criticism of that movement are unacceptable and her words should be considered more wisely. Just like what the director Michael Haneke, a sharp critic of the American culture, shared as well. That some malevolent people can use that movement as War platforms to settle scores against others who stood up to their Diva antics. (https://www.liberation.fr/debats/2018/01/14/catherine-deneuve-rien-dans-le-texte-ne-pretend-que-le-harcelement-a-du-bon-sans-quoi-je-ne-l-aurais_1622399) ( kurier.at/kultur/michael-haneke-hexenjagd-im-mittelalter-belassen/310.169.980.)
- Four, I have been, like many, shocked when some individuals were accused left and right by others through a collective hysteria. Among the accused were people who proved their innocence (ex: George Takei, Chris Hardwick, etc.), but also others who either passed away and can’t defend themselves against their accusers (ex: Alfred Hitchcock) or couldn’t harm others because of their physical disabilities during the so-called events (ex: Stan Lee). Even more shocking was how some accusers with a strong history of lying about those who pissed them off (ex: Björk and her attacks on Lars von Trier) appeared in the MeToo scenario. By the way, regarding Lars von Trier, I wrote a pretty documented and informative page about the relationship between these two individuals where I tackle their production conflicts and also Björk’s social media accusations which I DO NOT BELIEVE for one second, mostly due to her history of lying to feed off another image of herself to the medias and fans. For those interested, here is the link to my editorial.
- Fifthly, another aspect of the MeToo activists that infuriates me is their sanctimonious/condescending sermons to the public. About how, as members of that movement, they know better than anybody else how to tackle bullying and inculcate respect in work locations such as movie sets. Which is pure bullshit when so many of these activists involved in that movement have had a notorious prima donna history at work and in public. Behaviours reported on social medias, in forums, on YouTube, in the press, on DVD/Blu-Ray Special Features, and in Fan Conventions. Diva history that intoxicated their film/TV sets, created power struggles between the main stars, instigated monarchy ranks at work that heightened those divas’ antics and narcissism, caused unnecessary stress for the crew and the cast because of those divas demands, costing some crew members their jobs because they stood up to those bullies. Even worse is when some of these stars employ the celebrity card to get things their way, which got them in trouble in the law. Though the worse is when some of these divas behave horribly toward fans who just wish to meet their favourite artists and get treated like crap in traumatic ways. Whether it is at movie premieres, in conventions, in public, or in personal meets and greets.
And among these notorious divas involved in the MeToo movement, here is the actor Armin Shimerman reporting about some activists and their behaviours as he worked with them as a guest star on one of their shows. A program which he called one of his worst experience ever and those divas the worst he ever met. And which every fan in the room and in the YouTube comments confirmed as well.
- Finally as a sixth criticism of the MeToo movement and its hypocritical activists, here is a little story I want to recount to you.
Once upon a time, in 2001, I found in a movie magazine a short article about an interesting European film directed by a director whom I am going to call Caligula. A man whose personality I never liked nor trusted from the moment I first set eyes on his face. For even before I saw his films and learnt about his life, he oozed in his photos malevolent vibes that discouraged me from watching his works as I sensed they were a museum of his toxicity. So it took me a decade before I decided to see Caligula’s movies. Since then, and alongside a couple of researches, I got confirmation (through interviews, Blu-ray/DVD special features with testimonials from colleagues, and a biography written by a collaborator and close friend who worked on some of his movies) that this director has indeed an infamous history. Of despotism, of littering his toxic family life within his movies, but also of crooking up/neglecting his colleagues’ talents. For instance, he once wrote a script by doing an unaccredited loose adaptation of a foreign author’s novel, which got him in trouble with that novelist and that country’s showbiz industry. Other times, he neglected the merits of his co-writers, claiming theirs as his and hogging over the spotlight. Furthermore, his communication skills with his actors, actresses, and crew were so terrible that some collaborators came out with bad movie-making memories, even stopped working with him since then; especially as he was rough on many people, even physically violent with some. In one instance, he got into a fistfight with his producer — a powerful movie executive who was also his dad — which forced everyone to stop the film and separate them. And when one of his co-writers confronted Caligula over his antics, he replied that he was the director and that therefore he had every right to behave like this. Worse, he also had a habit of putting his actors into dangerous stunts; on movie sets whose security standards were questionable as reported by his close friend in his book, to a point that one performer got seriously wounded, which explains why that person never did any promotions for that film’s DVDs and Blu-Rays’s special bonuses. Furthermore, I read recapitulations of fans’ encounters with Caligula. One doing an interview with him, others meeting him at a convention, and finding before them an unpleasant and scary individual.
And as for Caligula’s private life, he had dated an actress whom I am going to call “Joan Crawford” for indeed, she had a controversial history in her private life. Mean, nasty, violent, manipulative, toxic, and sorting out her dirty dish into public while they were dating, she and her boyfriend were examples of spoiled rotten brats who owed their success, comfort zone mentality, and vile attributes to their rich parents who neglected them. Though what’s sadder is how they transmitted their worst qualities onto their kid; whom I shall call Bellatrix Lestrange. A girl who, through her Mommie Dearest movies and her interviews, revealed scandals in her childhood. Drug issues, family fights, even running away from home.
So right there, I knew that the director was not a gentleman, so I kept clear from him. But regarding his ex-girlfriend, I had learned that although her past had controversies (including a creepy incident that shocked her country, Caligula’s biographer who was also her friend, and some people around me), fans and Caligula’s biographer explained that she was kind with fans who met her. So when I found out she had a Twitter account where she was talking about culture (art, painting, sculpture, movies, etc.), I decided to follow her. And let’s make it clear, had I seen her exhibiting cat fights with users/actors or other silly superficiality like some Hollywood folks do, I would not have followed her. Not for one second. I wanted to visit a proper platform where she’d behave with professionalism, civility, and I have no tolerance for idiots. So I followed her, wanting to know more about her take on cultural topics which she shared in DVDs’ special features; giving her the chance and Christian forgiveness/belief that she had become a better person as her life’s scandals were serious and that her daughter’s movies had exposed her in a light that would force anyone in her place to behave herself.
And surprisingly enough, even before I had written to her a single tweet, Joan Crawford followed me back; hours after I had decided to follow her. Which both impressed me as I thought she was interested in what I wanted to speak about art, but also made me suspicious. Indeed, she was not following everybody and as I knew of her history of courting people to gain something out of them (which her Caligula boyfriend shared as well), I was doubtful about her true intents.
Still, after several hours of reflection, I decided to give her a chance and I thanked her for following me, and praised one of her movies. And double surprise, she replied to me right away and she was civil. So I told myself that as long as she kept to culture and as long as she remained nice, then I would have no problem talking with her.
So for 4 months, this went on. We had friendly talks about cultural topics, which I only kept to that level as I was still on my guards with her and did not want to go into stuff that could infuriate her. And although there were times she used to badmouth her Caligula ex-boyfriend, especially since he is the only one who gave her a posterity she’d never get otherwise, that she tweeted faster than necessary and at very late hours on her side of the world, that she frequented/followed fans who all kept overpraising her, treating her like a goddess instead of a human being, my culture dialogues with Joan went well. Making me think she had changed and had become a better person.
Until one night, Joan Crawford decided to use me as punching bag for personal problems that were none of my business and which startled me as they had nothing to do with the culture tweets I had decided to send her. Fortunately, I remained calm, kind, and polite, which must have infuriated her even more because she decided to block me. Without explaining herself. Back then, I was upset and hurt because I had thought she had really changed and become a better person, because the way she had behaved was terrible and unkind, because I had wasted dialogues with someone who didn’t deserve them, and because it confirmed my first suspicions when she followed me. That Joan was never interested about my culture dialogues, she just wanted another fanatic groupie to overpraise and deify her inflated ego. Which ALL THOSE OVERPRAISING FANS SHE FOLLOWED kept doing, including one who wrote to her everyday and said once that she always thought about Joan. Which I felt was redundant and exaggerated, especially when this actress is only known in her country and not worldwide.
Nevertheless, this break-up of our friendship was a blessing because it motivated me in establishing a culture platform on my Twitter and Instagram accounts (so thank you Joan Crawford for this inspiration) and it encouraged me in speaking with artists who treat people with respect and who do not litter the toxicity of their private life on the public space. Even more hilariously, some of the tweets I sent her still get some likes and RT from other users. So if she gets those notifications like I do, I do hope Joan has realised how other people find my culture sayings interesting and that she lost a dialogue with someone who has something to say.
As for her daughter Bellatrix, this is where it gets more interesting. For after doing her Mommy Dearest movies and the troubles she had during her childhood, one would think that she would be a model of society for others. Well, ironically, she developed the same culture for scandals as her parents did. For instance, weekly catfights during a TV show she participated. And during the MeToo debates, she appeared on the spotlight again, gaining strong publicity to her name. And her presence in that movement disturbed me for as a TV host and Bellatrix revealed in a major talk show during the 2000s, Joan Crawford was responsible for her breakup with Caligula because she had countless lovers. A Don Giovanni culture which had fed into Bellatrix a hostility for men. A revelation/interview I knew even during my 4 months friendship, making me more wary of Joan as to whether or not she would treat her friends like her lovers (which I realised that is what she does).
So through that Bellatrix Lestrange’s presence as a MeToo activist, I was extremely worried that her daughter’s misandry antics (which I had seen her do on social medias) would play themselves into the MeToo debates and I was right for right away, she displayed an alarming nastiness toward men, even kind gentlemen which infuriated me and alienated many from her. More angering was how she attacked artists I adore such as Lars von Trier; who is much kinder and professional/respectful/humbler than her father ever was. So right from the moment Bellatrix participated in those activists’ crusades, I knew her presence would be no good for that movement and would become terrible, and I was wondering as to whether or not she wouldn’t get caught into a scandal that would expose her.
And eventually, I was right. For during the MeToo debates, she got caught into a horrible twister of scandals that exposed her entire hypocrisy over that activism. A hypocrisy that has deeply scarred her reputation worldwide and made her lose the support of many fans, activists, and showbiz parasites she used to befriend/court as well. Whereas for her mother, she decided to demean her daughter on social medias in vicious posts that were reported only in her country’s press. And knowing the twisted way of thinking of that family, I think Joan did this as a way to get back at her daughter’s horrendous scandals that have stained the entire family’s reputation, including her own parents as everyone realised they badly raised their kid and that she is as troubling and unworthy to preach moral lessons as them.
Now as for Caligula, Joan Crawford, and Bellatrix’s true names, I will not reveal them because I refuse to give publicity to those snotty/outdated/opportunistic has-beens who have bottles of champagne shoved up their asses. But in private, with my family and close friends, I have no problem detailing who those three are and some of the dialogues I had with Joan Crawford for during our friendship, Twitter used to email-me notifications that contained copies of all the Likes/RTs/answers/Follow-up Confirmation and tweets Joan sent me (ex: notification of Joan Crawford’s following I posted paragraphs above). And although I cannot follow her account anymore, I did found out about her latest social media catfight against her daughter thanks to press articles that had embedded in them all of Joan’s tweets where she attacked her daughter. And every time I click on those tweets, I always get the same message. That I am forever blocked from a Twitter account that screams of narcissism and hypocrisy. From an artist of a movie clan whose three members should not be courting the spotlight or movie sets, but those of SuperNanny and Cesar Millian The Dog Whisperer instead.
Through this interaction with that disturbing diva, I witnessed full-blown the psychology of a self-inflated narcissistic fool and her little games, but also got the confirmation to always believe my first instincts if someone is trustworthy or not, which had been warning me during all this friendship where I gave a chance to a woman who will never change. Especially since, as stated earlier, I have a strong sixth sense in detecting honest/kind people from those that aren’t. For each of the few times I ignored my instincts, I got stabbed in the back like with Joan. And considering the shitty community I have lived in for years and its culture of masks and mobs, my observation skills made me detect various type of society creeps. Among them two-faced, smarmies, liars, bandits, crooks, ass-kissers, and hypocrites.
And regarding the Robson and Safechuck people interviewed in Leaving Neverland, I recognised the airs of many jerks I met. In Wade Robson, a hypocrisy and narcissism that glared at pure light. Back to Safechuck, same thing, but underneath a BS sad puppy look; which hides something weird that could ruin him one day or the other. And from Dan Reed, which many have nicknamed Egg Head/Mr. Clean, a malevolent creepiness; the kind of nastiness that would discourage me to stay alone with this man. So from Wade Robson, James Safechuck and Dan Reed — three people I didn’t know until Leaving Neverland — all displayed an aura similar to Caligula, Joan Crawford, and Bellatrix Lestrange. So powerful that I got goosebumps. Therefore, I always had to cover their faces as what they exulted was sinister. Signalling my inner guts to not trust them in the same way to not trust Harvey Weinstein. Which I detected when I first saw Harvey’s photo in 2003 and therefore disliked the man which many, like Lars von Trier and Trey Parker/Matt Stone, denounced years ago as a bully.
As for the videos of Leaving Neverland, I recognised in them this manipulative imagery, editing, and information display that reeks in American/UK medias and many trashy/slanderous talk shows and documentaries that try to brainwash you an agenda. Which the crass of Oprah, Sally Jessie Raphael, Montel Williams, Jenny Jones, Jerry Springer, and Jeremy Kyle would splatter in their scandal porn. Audiovisual tactics film schools would order you to never do as film director. Psychological manipulation Tezuka’s mangas/anime also denounced. So right away, I knew that what the program showed was BS. Therefore, instead of listening to their trash, I concentrated my viewings on the 1992 Dangerous Tour Broadcast and my researches of the singer over the last weeks and months.
So as a person who never did until now any major research about the singer’s work and life (apart from knowing he never had a childhood, the hair burning incident during a Pepsi commercial, and that he had vitiligo), here are my results and reactions.
(To Be Continued in Part 2)