I'm a big fan of Michael Jackson and I wasn't in the US at the time of the scandals so I missed all the media coverage and seeing this documentary was an eye opening experience. Understanding MJ's life, however, was not as important as my realization and understanding of sexual abuse and the life long lasting physiological effect it has on people. I feel a little ashamed for defending MJ for so many years as I was convinced these gentlemen were speaking the truth. You can't make this up with so much detail that matches the documented parts of his life. The entire family feels shaken up when they portray their experience and I just can't imagine that all members of two families would be such good actors to make this all up. I am certain there will be much more talk about this documentary but I hope these gents and many other victims who watch this piece will benefit from it on their journey of healing. I wouldn't have watched it, had it not involved MJ and now I am educated about sexual abuse. So some good came out of it. I hope more people watch it.
750 Reviews
Heartbreaking
beaglelynn4 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This film affected me deeply. These seduction and grooming of the boys (and the families too) was so skillful that the boys considered themselves MJ's friends and lovers. It wasn't until they each became fathers themselves that they fully realized what had been done to them.
It hurts to watch them tell their stories but I respect them for having the courage to come forward.
All I have to say is wow.
cindycrna4 March 2019
The frankness of the interviews with the main characters, James and Wade, was stunningly raw. Before this documentary , I had doubts as to the validity of their stories but listening to the interviews, I have little doubt this is how it went down. This isn't for kids to watch.
Watch both parts before you write your opion
jaredosburn6 March 2019
I feel like this documentary was very well done. I came into this thinking this would be some more BS and it was just a way to tarnish MJ life without him being able to defend himself. Well after watching both parts I 100 percent believe this happened to them. For everyone saying there is no evidence and no proof. Did you actually watch it? How many boys need to come forward with the same exact story? Why would maids and people who work on the property and drivers need to lie on their behalf? What did they need to gain? The workers weren't trying to get any money. Think about this. How do you feel like it is ok for a grown man to have a 7 year old boy sleep in his hotel room alone or all the other younger boys sleep in his room alone? In what shape or form is that ok? Is that not proof or evidence in itself? The maid even said she saw them naked taking showers together. So was it one big conspiracy to just tarnish his name? When everyone keeps saying that they testified on his behalf so they must be lying now. Think about this. Wade Robson was 22 at the time with a gf and had a good career in the music industry. MJ had a relationship with him since he was 7 and had groomed him on what to say and he felt love toawards MJ. He even lied to his family and his gf about everything. He didn't even want to testify but he was subpoenaed. He knew MJ his whole life and even knew his kids. He didn't want to see MJ go to jail. He felt like is was a relationship and friendship and didn't feel like he was abused. This is what abusers do to their victims and their families. They become really close and manipulate the parents into trusting them as well. Both of these men are now in their 30s and finally have the courage to speak up. Some victims never speak up because of the shame and embarrassment they feel. You can feel however you want about MJ or this documentary but when you look at the facts and even court documents and everyone with the same story that's not just a coincidence or a conspiracy. The fact that he had young boys sleeping with him alone is enough for me to believe them. Watch both parts all the way through before you just automatically assume they are lying. Honestly I hope more people have the courage to speak up about this now. Some will take it to their graves and that happens to victims. I commend these two brave men for finally having the courage to speak up and tell their story. I don't feel like they are doing it to hurt MJ I feel like they are doing it to help others who go through or have gone through this type of abuse and are never able to speak out about it.
How can anyone deny the possibility of this happening?
brandonhyl6 March 2019
I wouldn't consider myself a diehard MJ fan but as a child growing up in the 80's I understood the super star power that MJ had. I get why these families were awestruck by MJ wanting them to be a part of his family. Ultimately it blinded them from the sick realities of MJ's own struggles with pedophilia. This film did a great job at laying out the facts and focusing on the two men and their experiences. Anyone that actually watches this movie will have a tough time denying the stories from these two men.
A difficult-to-watch examination of grooming and the psychological scars engendered by abuse
Bertaut28 October 2019
Broadcast in early March 2019, Leaving Neverland is not about Michael Jackson. It's not about Wade Robson. It's not about Jimmy Safechuck. It's about how paedophiles groom not just their victims, but their victims' families. It's about the complicated relationship that victims can form with their abusers. It's about the myriad of reasons that can conspire to prevent victims from coming forward. It's about how the effects of childhood sexual abuse linger into adulthood. Certainly, fans will argue that Jackson didn't have a childhood, that he himself was a victim of non-sexual abuse at the hands of his father, that he was an innocent who simply liked to make children happy. However, even his most fervent admirers have always found it difficult to rationalise the fact that this grown man chose to surround himself with prepubescent boys, with whom he would hold hands in public and share his bed in private. That's not normal, and no amount of blinkered rhetoric can render it so.
Undoubtedly, the documentary is unbalanced - no attempt was made to contact the Jackson estate, any of his family, or anyone who knew or worked for him, limiting itself instead to interviews with Robson, Safechuck, and their families. It also omits information concerning the ongoing lawsuits each has filed against the estate. Furthermore, it's aesthetically bland, with the majority of the runtime taken up with visually flat talking-head interviews filmed in standard mid-shots and close-ups. However, this is very much by design; director Dan Reed isn't concerned with bells and whistles or smoke and mirrors. This isn't a tabloid depiction of a salacious celebrity scandal - rather it has a troubling story to tell, an important point to make, a relevant theme to explore, and it wants to do so as unencumbered by the trappings of form as it can. It doesn't need to be as long as it is, and the lack of balance unquestionably leaves it open to criticism, but nevertheless, this is an exceptional examination of grooming and the psychological effects of abuse.
The film tells the similar but separate stories of Wade Robson and James Safechuck, each of whom met Jackson in 1987, when Wade was five and James was ten. Over the next few years, each boy became a frequent companion of Jackson, and, as they tell it, a victim of regular molestation. When Jackson was accused of molesting 13-year-old Jordan Chandler in 1993, Wade and James gave statements denying that Jackson had done anything inappropriate with them, whilst Wade, his sister Chantal, and his mother Joy all publicly defended Jackson. In 2005, Jackson was charged with seven counts of child molestation relating to 12-year-old Gavin Arvizo, and reached out to both Wade and James. However, whilst Wade and Chantal both agreed to act as witnesses for the defence, James refused, telling his mother Stephanie that Jackson had molested him. Wade would not reveal to his family that he had been molested until 2013.
Leaving Neverland is less concerned with the actual abuse (although time is certainly given over to that) than with the process of grooming and the psychological aftereffects. Culled from over 50 hours of interviews, the film runs just under 240 minutes, but, despite the runtime, the only interviewees are Wade, Joy, Chantal, Wade's brother Shane, his grandmother Lorraine Jean Cullen, and his wife Amanda, and James, Stephanie, and James's wife Laura. Reed did interview investigators from 1993 and 2005, but as he explains, "I realised that the families' telling of the story was so complete already. You feel like you are inside the family, and I felt that interviews from the public sphere would break that spell and place us back on the outside."
Aesthetically, the film is as plain as possible. Whereas Wade and James's accounts are graphic and difficult to hear, they're never sensationalised, with Reed allowing their words to speak for themselves - there's no cutaways to experts telling us what to think, no graphics or voice-overs, no montages to suture us into the timeframe. Indeed, at times, Reed's camera sits patiently as an interviewee formulates their thoughts - a kind of "dead air" that one doesn't find in most documentaries.
This tendency to leave the stories unadorned ties into the usage of such a small pool of interviewees - this is Wade and James's story, and anything or anyone which can't speak to that very specific rubric isn't featured. Something else Reed omits is any attempt to tie Jackson's behaviour back to his own abusive upbringing - the film makes no attempt to portray him as somehow less culpable because he didn't have a childhood. In fact, it makes no attempt to portray him at all. Again, this is Wade and James's story, and for better or worse, Reed concerns himself with nothing but that story and how the abuse rippled out through the two families.
Within that, it's as much about the complex, often contradictory relationships that victims can develop with their abusers as it is with the abuse itself. This speaks to why both Wade and James lied for so long - they weren't just lying to other people, they were lying to themselves. And ultimately, the film suggests that rather than being indicative of fabrication, such falsehoods are an understandable reaction to sustained abuse - the compulsion to keep the secret is an intrinsic element of that which is being kept secret, with Wade stating, "I want to be able to speak the truth as loud as I had to speak the lie for so long."
Of course, a major theme is the manipulative nature inherent to grooming. As Oprah Winfrey says in Oprah Winfrey Presents: After Neverland (2019), "this wasn't just sexual abuse, it was also sexual seduction." However, it was also non-sexual seduction of the families. This is especially important in relation to Joy and Stephanie, who allowed themselves to be talked into granting permission for a man they didn't really know to take their child into his bed, and who today are working as much to forgive themselves as they are to atone to their children.
However, as much as the film indicts the parents, so too does it indict society at large. Reed continuously cuts from the talking-head interviews to archival footage of young boys in Jackson's presence (as well as Wade and James, we see Macaulay Culkin and Brett Barnes). This allows Reed to wordlessly comment on the collective societal obliviousness and blind hero worship that allowed Jackson to publicly surround himself with children without anyone saying, "this is kinda weird". And just as people such as R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes, and Bill O'Reilly got away with predatory behaviour, Jackson's celebrity was simply too big, dwarfing any sense of criminality; his star power was such that we dismissed what, in hindsight, was textbook grooming, as we put his fondness for prepubescent boys down to nothing more than his young-at-heart idiosyncrasy. Celebrity Trumps criminality (pun very much intended - after all, when Donald Trump literally admitted on tape he could sexually assault women with impunity and get away with it because he's famous, he was subsequently elected president).
Of course, there are problems, several of which I've already touched on. The imbalance for example. I understand why Reed confined his interviews to just Wade, James, and their families, but by doing so, he has opened himself and the film up to a not illegitimate form of attack. And because this makes the film easier to critique, it makes it easier to dismiss, and thus easier to ignore, which is pretty much the opposite of what you want to happen as a documentarian.
Another problem is that it doesn't need to be four-hours long. There are several lengthy narrative digressions that, although they help to flesh out the home lives of Wade and James, do very little to inform the allegations against Jackson. Reed also tends to overuse drone shots of LA, which act like paragraph breaks. It's an interesting idea, but there are far too many, becoming repetitive and, eventually, irritating. And then, of course, there are the omissions, which have proven to be a red flag to a bull for Jackson fans. For example, that Wade is suing the Jackson estate is mentioned once, very briefly, and never alluded to again. That James is also suing the estate is never mentioned.
In the end, the lack of balance is a significant problem, but not to the extent that it undermines the way Reed presents the accusations, the way he teases out the process of grooming, the way he unflinchingly presents the abuse itself, the way he comes to focus on the years after the abuse ended - the film's cumulative effect is startlingly raw and generally persuasive. It looks at the process by which Jackson manoeuvred himself into a position to abuse the boys as much as at the abuse itself and at the psychological effects of telling the lie for so long as much as at the lie itself. In this sense, this is a hugely valuable document, not necessarily in terms of the specifics of Wade and James's stories, but in relation to the broader issues of child sexual abuse, and the misconceptions that permeate the zeitgeist.
Undoubtedly, the documentary is unbalanced - no attempt was made to contact the Jackson estate, any of his family, or anyone who knew or worked for him, limiting itself instead to interviews with Robson, Safechuck, and their families. It also omits information concerning the ongoing lawsuits each has filed against the estate. Furthermore, it's aesthetically bland, with the majority of the runtime taken up with visually flat talking-head interviews filmed in standard mid-shots and close-ups. However, this is very much by design; director Dan Reed isn't concerned with bells and whistles or smoke and mirrors. This isn't a tabloid depiction of a salacious celebrity scandal - rather it has a troubling story to tell, an important point to make, a relevant theme to explore, and it wants to do so as unencumbered by the trappings of form as it can. It doesn't need to be as long as it is, and the lack of balance unquestionably leaves it open to criticism, but nevertheless, this is an exceptional examination of grooming and the psychological effects of abuse.
The film tells the similar but separate stories of Wade Robson and James Safechuck, each of whom met Jackson in 1987, when Wade was five and James was ten. Over the next few years, each boy became a frequent companion of Jackson, and, as they tell it, a victim of regular molestation. When Jackson was accused of molesting 13-year-old Jordan Chandler in 1993, Wade and James gave statements denying that Jackson had done anything inappropriate with them, whilst Wade, his sister Chantal, and his mother Joy all publicly defended Jackson. In 2005, Jackson was charged with seven counts of child molestation relating to 12-year-old Gavin Arvizo, and reached out to both Wade and James. However, whilst Wade and Chantal both agreed to act as witnesses for the defence, James refused, telling his mother Stephanie that Jackson had molested him. Wade would not reveal to his family that he had been molested until 2013.
Leaving Neverland is less concerned with the actual abuse (although time is certainly given over to that) than with the process of grooming and the psychological aftereffects. Culled from over 50 hours of interviews, the film runs just under 240 minutes, but, despite the runtime, the only interviewees are Wade, Joy, Chantal, Wade's brother Shane, his grandmother Lorraine Jean Cullen, and his wife Amanda, and James, Stephanie, and James's wife Laura. Reed did interview investigators from 1993 and 2005, but as he explains, "I realised that the families' telling of the story was so complete already. You feel like you are inside the family, and I felt that interviews from the public sphere would break that spell and place us back on the outside."
Aesthetically, the film is as plain as possible. Whereas Wade and James's accounts are graphic and difficult to hear, they're never sensationalised, with Reed allowing their words to speak for themselves - there's no cutaways to experts telling us what to think, no graphics or voice-overs, no montages to suture us into the timeframe. Indeed, at times, Reed's camera sits patiently as an interviewee formulates their thoughts - a kind of "dead air" that one doesn't find in most documentaries.
This tendency to leave the stories unadorned ties into the usage of such a small pool of interviewees - this is Wade and James's story, and anything or anyone which can't speak to that very specific rubric isn't featured. Something else Reed omits is any attempt to tie Jackson's behaviour back to his own abusive upbringing - the film makes no attempt to portray him as somehow less culpable because he didn't have a childhood. In fact, it makes no attempt to portray him at all. Again, this is Wade and James's story, and for better or worse, Reed concerns himself with nothing but that story and how the abuse rippled out through the two families.
Within that, it's as much about the complex, often contradictory relationships that victims can develop with their abusers as it is with the abuse itself. This speaks to why both Wade and James lied for so long - they weren't just lying to other people, they were lying to themselves. And ultimately, the film suggests that rather than being indicative of fabrication, such falsehoods are an understandable reaction to sustained abuse - the compulsion to keep the secret is an intrinsic element of that which is being kept secret, with Wade stating, "I want to be able to speak the truth as loud as I had to speak the lie for so long."
Of course, a major theme is the manipulative nature inherent to grooming. As Oprah Winfrey says in Oprah Winfrey Presents: After Neverland (2019), "this wasn't just sexual abuse, it was also sexual seduction." However, it was also non-sexual seduction of the families. This is especially important in relation to Joy and Stephanie, who allowed themselves to be talked into granting permission for a man they didn't really know to take their child into his bed, and who today are working as much to forgive themselves as they are to atone to their children.
However, as much as the film indicts the parents, so too does it indict society at large. Reed continuously cuts from the talking-head interviews to archival footage of young boys in Jackson's presence (as well as Wade and James, we see Macaulay Culkin and Brett Barnes). This allows Reed to wordlessly comment on the collective societal obliviousness and blind hero worship that allowed Jackson to publicly surround himself with children without anyone saying, "this is kinda weird". And just as people such as R. Kelly, Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Roger Ailes, and Bill O'Reilly got away with predatory behaviour, Jackson's celebrity was simply too big, dwarfing any sense of criminality; his star power was such that we dismissed what, in hindsight, was textbook grooming, as we put his fondness for prepubescent boys down to nothing more than his young-at-heart idiosyncrasy. Celebrity Trumps criminality (pun very much intended - after all, when Donald Trump literally admitted on tape he could sexually assault women with impunity and get away with it because he's famous, he was subsequently elected president).
Of course, there are problems, several of which I've already touched on. The imbalance for example. I understand why Reed confined his interviews to just Wade, James, and their families, but by doing so, he has opened himself and the film up to a not illegitimate form of attack. And because this makes the film easier to critique, it makes it easier to dismiss, and thus easier to ignore, which is pretty much the opposite of what you want to happen as a documentarian.
Another problem is that it doesn't need to be four-hours long. There are several lengthy narrative digressions that, although they help to flesh out the home lives of Wade and James, do very little to inform the allegations against Jackson. Reed also tends to overuse drone shots of LA, which act like paragraph breaks. It's an interesting idea, but there are far too many, becoming repetitive and, eventually, irritating. And then, of course, there are the omissions, which have proven to be a red flag to a bull for Jackson fans. For example, that Wade is suing the Jackson estate is mentioned once, very briefly, and never alluded to again. That James is also suing the estate is never mentioned.
In the end, the lack of balance is a significant problem, but not to the extent that it undermines the way Reed presents the accusations, the way he teases out the process of grooming, the way he unflinchingly presents the abuse itself, the way he comes to focus on the years after the abuse ended - the film's cumulative effect is startlingly raw and generally persuasive. It looks at the process by which Jackson manoeuvred himself into a position to abuse the boys as much as at the abuse itself and at the psychological effects of telling the lie for so long as much as at the lie itself. In this sense, this is a hugely valuable document, not necessarily in terms of the specifics of Wade and James's stories, but in relation to the broader issues of child sexual abuse, and the misconceptions that permeate the zeitgeist.
If your neighbour was doing that you wouldn't be so defensive.
torkovervictoria16 March 2019
It's interesting how people are trying so hard to find an excuse for MJ. They just don't want to beleive anything bad. Imagine if your next door neigbour was walking around holding hands with boys (every time with a different one), and you know that these boys spend nights in his apartment. You know that their parents are not there all the time. Wouldn't you be calling police? And if that neigbour was telling you that what he does that because he loves children and he didn't have a childhood, wouldn't you recommend him to see a psychiatrist?
But in case of MJ it all makes sence. All that is pefectly normal. I don't get it! Wake up, people!!!
I had a doubt at that time, but this documentary is really disturbing !
laurentdelvigne-446-5869735 March 2019
Michael Jackson was in my favorite music playlist in the 80's but I was not a hardcore fan. I was wondering at that time why he was with only with kids.
This documentary shed new light on the mega pop-star and his 'dark' side. Interviews of 2 victims and relatives.
Really disturbing. Like the 'dark' side of the Catholic Church around the world.
This documentary shed new light on the mega pop-star and his 'dark' side. Interviews of 2 victims and relatives.
Really disturbing. Like the 'dark' side of the Catholic Church around the world.
Watch before forming an opinion
kat131322 January 2023
This documentary is being review bombed by fans and based on the reviews, it seems like they haven't even watched it. I've seen so much misinformation online about the MJ case and this documentary that is being spread as fact by the people who make money off MJ and fans who don't want to accept that it's highly probable that man that has being accused by half a dozen young boys and caught by a couple staff being inappropriate with children was not completely innocent.
Now about the documentary. It's hard to watch. It's mostly two men and their family giving their account of their time with MJ and talking very candidly about sexual abuse and grooming. The document doesn't present you with hard evidence of what happened. I still urge you to watch it before forming an opinion. In my opinion, it's very hard to believe they're lying or faking their emotions. Both of them still seem to carry love for MJ and their "friendship" and it has affected their life and their relationship with their family.
Besides the abuse, it also shows MJ's pattern of befriending boys with a certain age and physical appearance (clearly had a preference for white boys) and showbiz parents who wanted their kids to get famous. He got close to their families, gave them gifts and earned their trust and then spent a lot of time with the kids and specifically the boys alone and invited them to his neverland ranch for "sleepovers". They show all the letters that he kept sending these boys and he comes off as bit obsessive and like a love sick teenger. He got very close to them and constantly demanded their time and attention. But when they grew out of being a child which seemed to be his age preference, he seemed to disappear from their lives and moved on to his next best buddy which was another white 10 year old boy.
Even after being accused of sexual abuse, he still invited kids over and spent time alone with them in his bedroom. It's very strange behaviour for a grown man and fits the definition of grooming to a t. Even if you want to believe no sexual abuse happened, these "friendships" couldn't have been healthy for the kids. Their parents were selling them to MJ hoping to get money in return for the relationship, whatever that was.
The other guilty party in this documentary are the parents. They let their child sleep in the same hotel room as a stranger and let them stay in neverland alone or unsupervised. They describe MJ as lonely and sweet which seems to be his fans defence for his alarming behavior but also ignore all the red flags like the creepy letters and the fact that he wanted to be alone with the kids. Obviously they were hoping their kids would be famous by association with MJ and were seduced by the generous gifts and promise of earning money from their kids and ignored their child well being. Even after the first allegations came out, they didn't seem to be that alarmed. People wonder why these kids defended MJ in court and they explain their side well in the documentary. They considered him a friend and like many child survivors of sexual abuse, they didn't think they were abused.
For people who are curious about the MJ case, this is a must watch. If you want to do more research, you can look into the accounts of theo other children who accused MJ (there are a lot of them outside of the tow in this doc) and the staff who said they caught him being inappropriate with children. You can look into the police reports. Even though they didn't find enough evidence to convict him, there's a lot of damning things in there like artistic nude of literal children and the measures he took to have alone time with these kids and not be seen or heard.
Now about the documentary. It's hard to watch. It's mostly two men and their family giving their account of their time with MJ and talking very candidly about sexual abuse and grooming. The document doesn't present you with hard evidence of what happened. I still urge you to watch it before forming an opinion. In my opinion, it's very hard to believe they're lying or faking their emotions. Both of them still seem to carry love for MJ and their "friendship" and it has affected their life and their relationship with their family.
Besides the abuse, it also shows MJ's pattern of befriending boys with a certain age and physical appearance (clearly had a preference for white boys) and showbiz parents who wanted their kids to get famous. He got close to their families, gave them gifts and earned their trust and then spent a lot of time with the kids and specifically the boys alone and invited them to his neverland ranch for "sleepovers". They show all the letters that he kept sending these boys and he comes off as bit obsessive and like a love sick teenger. He got very close to them and constantly demanded their time and attention. But when they grew out of being a child which seemed to be his age preference, he seemed to disappear from their lives and moved on to his next best buddy which was another white 10 year old boy.
Even after being accused of sexual abuse, he still invited kids over and spent time alone with them in his bedroom. It's very strange behaviour for a grown man and fits the definition of grooming to a t. Even if you want to believe no sexual abuse happened, these "friendships" couldn't have been healthy for the kids. Their parents were selling them to MJ hoping to get money in return for the relationship, whatever that was.
The other guilty party in this documentary are the parents. They let their child sleep in the same hotel room as a stranger and let them stay in neverland alone or unsupervised. They describe MJ as lonely and sweet which seems to be his fans defence for his alarming behavior but also ignore all the red flags like the creepy letters and the fact that he wanted to be alone with the kids. Obviously they were hoping their kids would be famous by association with MJ and were seduced by the generous gifts and promise of earning money from their kids and ignored their child well being. Even after the first allegations came out, they didn't seem to be that alarmed. People wonder why these kids defended MJ in court and they explain their side well in the documentary. They considered him a friend and like many child survivors of sexual abuse, they didn't think they were abused.
For people who are curious about the MJ case, this is a must watch. If you want to do more research, you can look into the accounts of theo other children who accused MJ (there are a lot of them outside of the tow in this doc) and the staff who said they caught him being inappropriate with children. You can look into the police reports. Even though they didn't find enough evidence to convict him, there's a lot of damning things in there like artistic nude of literal children and the measures he took to have alone time with these kids and not be seen or heard.
Interesting, though I am still peckish for information
TheVictoriousV13 March 2019
HBO's Leaving Neverland is one of those disgusting but necessary films. I hadn't heard much about it prior to its Sundance premiere, nor its subsequent two-part broadcast. However, my social media feeds told me that something, somehow, has proven to be the final drop for those who still defended pop icon Michael Jackson - not defenders of his music, mind, but of him as a person, the particular habits he had, and the children who stayed with him. There have been documentaries and reports before, but now, years later, we get to hear the children speak.
Specifically we hear from Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck, who, after growing up and starting families of their own, could stay silent no longer. This isn't squarely a documentary on the late Michael Jackson. The film is very much about the psychological effects of a traumatic past and it gets understandably uncomfortable.
The men and their families explain how it began when they were both kids, idolizing Michael like any youngster in the "Thriller" era would, eventually getting to meet and work with him, which supposedly evolved into a 7-year story of abuse. Some interpret Michael's behavior as childishly oblivious rather than nefarious or predatory. And yes, when your Peter Pan complex is so on-the-nose (no pun intended) that you name your domicile Neverland Ranch, we can all surmise you're not all there.
The pain visible on these people is unmistakable, but you know exactly what kind of tale this is and how some folk react to stories of terrible fates befalling children. I don't doubt a few Sandy Hook conspiracy types will scrutinize the authenticity of this footage when they see shots of the men smiling. "Bad thing happen to them but in this image they glad, whaaa? Why they say things now but not back when they were in a state of denial, whaaa?"
I can agree that the movie could have used more concrete data. At almost 4 hours, Leaving Neverland is a doozy (I recommend watching it in the televised 2-part format) and I still felt hungry for information after watching it. But then, I was already too familiar with the renowned Moonwalker megastar to need convincing that he had a weird relationship with kids.
Despite a few minor filmmaking flaws (a few photographs and still frames last for a bit too long, editing-wise, and drone cameras are comically overused), I do think this qualifies as an "important" movie and I don't necessarily mean in terms of giving a voice to victims of grooming. Instead, I'm referring to how the buzz around the film lets us analyze fanboy behavior; how a person might approach reality when not wanting their sacred musical idol to be the bad guy. The celebrity worship that let this (or something like it) happen once is still quite alive.
The few surviving Michael Jackson apologists have called the film one-sided, saying it provides little evidence outside of anecdotes from Jackson's purported victims. They also note that previous charges against Michael have been dropped, neglecting to also mention that he was able to afford some mighty gifted lawyers.
No matter the case, thinking that "set free = innocent" (automatically) can be a pretty dangerous mindset. How do you suppose these fanboys and fangirls would have reacted if Michael invited THEIR children into his whimsical wonderland?
Dear fans: If you're having trouble, I can provide interview clips, previously used in Living with Michael, that are quite tricky to interpret in a multitude of ways. But since they're already out there and you've no doubt seen them, let me instead share a quote from Bojack Horseman worth considering (although I've obviously altered the context): "When you look at someone through rose-colored glasses, all the red flags just look like flags".
Specifically we hear from Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck, who, after growing up and starting families of their own, could stay silent no longer. This isn't squarely a documentary on the late Michael Jackson. The film is very much about the psychological effects of a traumatic past and it gets understandably uncomfortable.
The men and their families explain how it began when they were both kids, idolizing Michael like any youngster in the "Thriller" era would, eventually getting to meet and work with him, which supposedly evolved into a 7-year story of abuse. Some interpret Michael's behavior as childishly oblivious rather than nefarious or predatory. And yes, when your Peter Pan complex is so on-the-nose (no pun intended) that you name your domicile Neverland Ranch, we can all surmise you're not all there.
The pain visible on these people is unmistakable, but you know exactly what kind of tale this is and how some folk react to stories of terrible fates befalling children. I don't doubt a few Sandy Hook conspiracy types will scrutinize the authenticity of this footage when they see shots of the men smiling. "Bad thing happen to them but in this image they glad, whaaa? Why they say things now but not back when they were in a state of denial, whaaa?"
I can agree that the movie could have used more concrete data. At almost 4 hours, Leaving Neverland is a doozy (I recommend watching it in the televised 2-part format) and I still felt hungry for information after watching it. But then, I was already too familiar with the renowned Moonwalker megastar to need convincing that he had a weird relationship with kids.
Despite a few minor filmmaking flaws (a few photographs and still frames last for a bit too long, editing-wise, and drone cameras are comically overused), I do think this qualifies as an "important" movie and I don't necessarily mean in terms of giving a voice to victims of grooming. Instead, I'm referring to how the buzz around the film lets us analyze fanboy behavior; how a person might approach reality when not wanting their sacred musical idol to be the bad guy. The celebrity worship that let this (or something like it) happen once is still quite alive.
The few surviving Michael Jackson apologists have called the film one-sided, saying it provides little evidence outside of anecdotes from Jackson's purported victims. They also note that previous charges against Michael have been dropped, neglecting to also mention that he was able to afford some mighty gifted lawyers.
No matter the case, thinking that "set free = innocent" (automatically) can be a pretty dangerous mindset. How do you suppose these fanboys and fangirls would have reacted if Michael invited THEIR children into his whimsical wonderland?
Dear fans: If you're having trouble, I can provide interview clips, previously used in Living with Michael, that are quite tricky to interpret in a multitude of ways. But since they're already out there and you've no doubt seen them, let me instead share a quote from Bojack Horseman worth considering (although I've obviously altered the context): "When you look at someone through rose-colored glasses, all the red flags just look like flags".
A Story of our times: how fame can make you get away with almost anything
TheFilmographer6 March 2019
The Jacksonphiles are screaming like banshees in denial...well they are just that: peripheral extras buying into the illusion for years and now seeing it crumble whilst refusing point blank to accept the evidence, any evidence. I am very concerned about the "reviewers" here saying the testimonies of the two protagonists are not credible: they are amongst the most believable and moving things I have ever seen, The Jackson cultists have crossed the (perhaps thin to start with) threshold away from human empathy and nothing will shake them from their untenable position. Let us hope they will never be called to serve on jury dities. This documentary is a MUST. Let us hope that this and the #metoo movement will signal the turning of the tide and that we will be able to recognise more easily and we will adopt the belief in the victims as our default stance.
I wish the families of this doc peace and healing.
sinnerofcinema21 March 2019
Just saw all of "Leaving Neverland". I grew up watching the Jackson 5 in the 70's and it wasn't a secret how the father raised the kids to perform like circus animals practically depriving them from a normal childhood in the name of fame and fortune.
The reports about their abusive father and how hard he pushed them was a black cloud for the Jacksons.
Maybe the doc should have started there. That, however, is certainly no excuse for any hurt MJ caused these families.
With that said, Michael's music was, is and will always be the work of genius.
After watching "Leaving Neverland", I wish peace for all of the families involved. There's a lot of pain and raw hurt on display in the doc. The kind of pain you often see when ppl come to Hollywood & things don't work out. Many people end up homeless, on drugs, prostitution, jail etc. People you will never get to meet because they are not famous enough to have a documentary made about their plight.
Lots of issues going on in the doc.
It was heartbreaking to see the results of what happens when good intentions go wrong when the moral compass is compromised.
The reports about their abusive father and how hard he pushed them was a black cloud for the Jacksons.
Maybe the doc should have started there. That, however, is certainly no excuse for any hurt MJ caused these families.
With that said, Michael's music was, is and will always be the work of genius.
After watching "Leaving Neverland", I wish peace for all of the families involved. There's a lot of pain and raw hurt on display in the doc. The kind of pain you often see when ppl come to Hollywood & things don't work out. Many people end up homeless, on drugs, prostitution, jail etc. People you will never get to meet because they are not famous enough to have a documentary made about their plight.
Lots of issues going on in the doc.
It was heartbreaking to see the results of what happens when good intentions go wrong when the moral compass is compromised.
Proven as lies
freyavioletlocke2 February 2020
Whether you are an MJ fan or not, is irrelevant, when you are capable of research.
There have been so many parts of this film shown to be false that it is unbelievable it is still being shown anywhere.
True - the story of it is shocking. It plays on the viewer's natural and right revulsion when they are presented with abuse. But it is precisely that - a shocking story. Proven to be nothing but.
I suggest watching Danny Wu's "Square One", or "Chase the Truth", or "LeavingNeverland: The Aftermath" amongst others, where ACTUAL EVIDENCE of these men's lies is given.
These men have done so much damage to real victims of abuse it is crazy - they should not be given the time of day, let alone a platform.
An inspiration to victims of sexual, physical or psychological abuse
SpareMeTheCrapMovies5 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
This is by far the most compelling documentary on allegations of Michael Jackson's sexual abuse. Make no mistake, it is entirely focused on exposing Jackson in what critics will claim as being a one-sided presentation without any interviews of Jackson's family members or other children who stayed at Neverland. The video's length of 4 hours, which some argue is too long, was in my opinion necessary to present enough detailed information to build the credibility of the two witnesses, Wade Robson and Jimmy Safechuck. If you've never heard of Michael Jackson and watched this video with no bias, I am convinced that you will find the testimony very believable.
While I am no fan of Michael Jackson, I did find some of his music and videos entertaining and would certainly never deny Jackson was talented. But like most people who grow up with influences by superstars like Jackson, we tend to become intoxicated with their fame and bigger than life persona - to such a degree that we cannot possibly come to grips that allegations of sexual abuse by these people is even possible, because by doing so, we essentially admit we were gullible enough to swallow the public narrative with hook, line and sinker. And yet we want to consider ourselves intelligent, reasonable and not influenced by emotional forces that we very much align with, even if we cannot admit that there is a very real possibility that we are wrong.
What makes Leaving Neverland compelling is that it touches on the side of human nature that you will almost never see in a courtroom. If you've ever wondered why these two witnesses gave a different testimony in court when Jackson was charged, this film goes into a lot of depth to explain why that happened. The details are so graphic, that it cannot be recommended for children.
What makes the testimony of Robson and Safechuck very believable is that they were willing to lose something of significant value by coming forward, and that was their relationships with their mothers. Long before this film was even made, they both went through a long and devastating psychological turmoil of coming to grips with the abuse that happened by Jackson. It was only after Jackson died were they able to find the freedom to confront their family about it. The impact this had on their relationships with their mothers was overwhelming. Robson's own sister feared that their mother would commit suicide. Both these mothers had to face the fact that they were oblivious with the abuse because they could not believe that it was possible, in spite of the fact that any normal human being would be very appalled to learn that their son was sleeping in the same bed as a strange man. If anything, this really drives the point home that we are easily blinded by someone's fame. It should be noted that even at the end of the film, there isn't a real reconciliation between the two witnesses and their mothers. These women have to now live with the fact that they failed their children. But I will give them credit for being candid and willing to go on camera for the record.
Jackson was a pedophile and went to his grave with a glorious funeral memorial broadcast to billions around the world. It's how he would have wanted to be remembered. But at the end of the film, Dobson showed us how he remembered Jackson and how we all should. Jackson told him one day as a child to take any jacket out of his closet and could keep it as a gift. Robson took the famous red jacket that Jackson wore in the Thriller video. But at the end of the film, he took it, along with all the other memorabilia and burnt it. That is how we should remember Jackson. Not as a talented superstar, but as a pedophile who caused a lifetime amount of harm to countless children. His name should be obliterated. To Robson and Safechuck, I commend them for being brave to come forward even after all these years. It's never too late. They will no doubt inspire many others to do the same. If anything, this film and the testimony of Robson and Safechuck should inspire anyone who has experienced abuse, whether that be sexual, physical or psychological.
While I am no fan of Michael Jackson, I did find some of his music and videos entertaining and would certainly never deny Jackson was talented. But like most people who grow up with influences by superstars like Jackson, we tend to become intoxicated with their fame and bigger than life persona - to such a degree that we cannot possibly come to grips that allegations of sexual abuse by these people is even possible, because by doing so, we essentially admit we were gullible enough to swallow the public narrative with hook, line and sinker. And yet we want to consider ourselves intelligent, reasonable and not influenced by emotional forces that we very much align with, even if we cannot admit that there is a very real possibility that we are wrong.
What makes Leaving Neverland compelling is that it touches on the side of human nature that you will almost never see in a courtroom. If you've ever wondered why these two witnesses gave a different testimony in court when Jackson was charged, this film goes into a lot of depth to explain why that happened. The details are so graphic, that it cannot be recommended for children.
What makes the testimony of Robson and Safechuck very believable is that they were willing to lose something of significant value by coming forward, and that was their relationships with their mothers. Long before this film was even made, they both went through a long and devastating psychological turmoil of coming to grips with the abuse that happened by Jackson. It was only after Jackson died were they able to find the freedom to confront their family about it. The impact this had on their relationships with their mothers was overwhelming. Robson's own sister feared that their mother would commit suicide. Both these mothers had to face the fact that they were oblivious with the abuse because they could not believe that it was possible, in spite of the fact that any normal human being would be very appalled to learn that their son was sleeping in the same bed as a strange man. If anything, this really drives the point home that we are easily blinded by someone's fame. It should be noted that even at the end of the film, there isn't a real reconciliation between the two witnesses and their mothers. These women have to now live with the fact that they failed their children. But I will give them credit for being candid and willing to go on camera for the record.
Jackson was a pedophile and went to his grave with a glorious funeral memorial broadcast to billions around the world. It's how he would have wanted to be remembered. But at the end of the film, Dobson showed us how he remembered Jackson and how we all should. Jackson told him one day as a child to take any jacket out of his closet and could keep it as a gift. Robson took the famous red jacket that Jackson wore in the Thriller video. But at the end of the film, he took it, along with all the other memorabilia and burnt it. That is how we should remember Jackson. Not as a talented superstar, but as a pedophile who caused a lifetime amount of harm to countless children. His name should be obliterated. To Robson and Safechuck, I commend them for being brave to come forward even after all these years. It's never too late. They will no doubt inspire many others to do the same. If anything, this film and the testimony of Robson and Safechuck should inspire anyone who has experienced abuse, whether that be sexual, physical or psychological.
An important and profound work
BellaTheCat15 March 2019
I was once an obsessive Michael Jackson fan who had long since sadly concluded he was a paedophile.
I sat down to watch Leaving Neverland expecting to believe James and Wade - what I didn't expect was to be so profoundly moved by their harrowing stories and brutal honesty. They are without a doubt telling the truth. (To those who demand absolute proof: there's unlikely to ever be a smoking gun, but that's not unusual in sexual abuse cases - however, there's a mountain of circumstantial evidence (including court documents freely available online), compelling witness testimony, and a long pattern of textbook paedophile behaviour by Jackson.)
I feel like this is a hugely important and influential work that will change not only how we think about Michael Jackson but how we think about child sexual abuse and grooming. It (and the accompanying Oprah special) is a must see for every parent who wants to be educated about child sexual predators and how they operate. I thought I was fairly knowledgeable about the subject but my eyes have been well and truly opened by Leaving Neverland.
Thank you to James and Wade and their families for their bravery and honesty, and to Dan Reed for creating such an important work. Leaving Neverland is not an easy watch but I thoroughly recommend it.
10/10
I sat down to watch Leaving Neverland expecting to believe James and Wade - what I didn't expect was to be so profoundly moved by their harrowing stories and brutal honesty. They are without a doubt telling the truth. (To those who demand absolute proof: there's unlikely to ever be a smoking gun, but that's not unusual in sexual abuse cases - however, there's a mountain of circumstantial evidence (including court documents freely available online), compelling witness testimony, and a long pattern of textbook paedophile behaviour by Jackson.)
I feel like this is a hugely important and influential work that will change not only how we think about Michael Jackson but how we think about child sexual abuse and grooming. It (and the accompanying Oprah special) is a must see for every parent who wants to be educated about child sexual predators and how they operate. I thought I was fairly knowledgeable about the subject but my eyes have been well and truly opened by Leaving Neverland.
Thank you to James and Wade and their families for their bravery and honesty, and to Dan Reed for creating such an important work. Leaving Neverland is not an easy watch but I thoroughly recommend it.
10/10
A ONE-SIDED VICTIMIZATION
Vivkon26 March 2019
HBO is continuing to discuss the Michael Jackson allegations which had started in the 90s. News about Michael Jackson's perversions were the subject of some news and special investigations at the end of the last century. However, the public discourse on the subject of child abuse among the celebrities is ready only today. #Metoo and other online movements and related hashtags have reversed the discourse about sexual freedoms and sexual crimes. Most achievements of the 60s now have reverse consequences. If, in the childhood of Michael Jackson sexual behavior and various forms of sexuality formed some false perception of permissiveness, then today's society fix those false perceptions of sexual permissiveness. For instance, the movie Leaving Neverland exposes some false perception of result of the sexual revolution. At the same time, the movie provides a one-sided victimization view. The movie neglects that Michael Jackson is a victim here too - he has health issues, he suffered racial prejudices, he had a hard childhood. The HBO documentary is pretty one-sided and doesn't give the balance of fact and biography of victims of Michael Jackson and Michael Jackson as a victim himself of the society and family wherein he was raised. The main perception of the movie relies on posthumous judgments without any opportunity for Jackson and his family to defend and illuminate the allegations. Hopefully, the discussion about child abuse among American celebrities will not distract from other crimes and culture patterns which exist among unknown people and well known cultures in the East and Africa (child marriage and this alike practices). Anyway, the cultural heritage of Michael Jackson will still be a part of African-American history and an element of the World musical business.
Hauntingly Familiar
Shesachameleon5 March 2019
As an adult who grew up in the 80's and remembers Michael and his influence very well, I watched this documentary with my own experiences with his music in mind. When he first began being accused of various acts of pedophilia in the late 80's and early 90's, it seemed clear that he had some extremely disgusting proclivities. As a survivor of molestation myself, I watched this documentary and went right back to my own experiences and found their stories very believable. This movie was not about providing evidence, although I believe that they did with their personal testimonies, witnesses to his behavior and faxes, videos, and recordings. This movie was about their experiences with him personally and what they went through. There is no situation wherein it is appropriate for a grown man to keep a young boy in his bed unless it is a father/son. I give this movie a 10. I hope that they can someday heal.
Believable, unbalanced and excruciatingly long
whatgift11 June 2022
Being a fan of Michael Jackson's music and having just watched the Square One doco, I was ready to not believe what this was going to show. Problem was I couldn't - there is such sincerity in the story told by the two men at the focus of this doco that's it's impossible to deny it's authenticity.
The problem is the ridiculous length of this and the pointless side stories and details that are completely unnecessary. It all feels very unfocused at times and tough to sit through. The other problem is the narrow focus of this narrative, not considering the wider story and the many other perspectives that are part of it. By choosing to focus only on the two accusers it leaves the conclusion to be open to criticism.
Between this and the docos representing different sides of this story, none are able to really get to the heart of it and are ultimately disappointing for the viewer.
Don't believe the many 1-star superfan reviews - there's no way anyone who looks at what is presented here can reasonably say that this is not believable or an equally important part of the story.
The problem is the ridiculous length of this and the pointless side stories and details that are completely unnecessary. It all feels very unfocused at times and tough to sit through. The other problem is the narrow focus of this narrative, not considering the wider story and the many other perspectives that are part of it. By choosing to focus only on the two accusers it leaves the conclusion to be open to criticism.
Between this and the docos representing different sides of this story, none are able to really get to the heart of it and are ultimately disappointing for the viewer.
Don't believe the many 1-star superfan reviews - there's no way anyone who looks at what is presented here can reasonably say that this is not believable or an equally important part of the story.
Excellent, but hardcore fans may not think so
pensacolacomputer3 March 2019
This at times is very hard to watch. The supposed victims describe in detail what they went through. They did not get paid for their participation in the doc so I have a tendency to believe them.
Sad that this has a current rating of around 3 on IMDB when you know the majority of people rating it have never even seen it...it has not even had a wide release yet on HBO...all because it shines a bad light on their favorite pop singer. So to the unbiased people out there, sit back, watch, listen, and decide for yourself. I personally don't think its right for a grown man to want to have sleep overs with very young boys, no matter how rich and power they are, which Jackson admitted to doing. There is something that doesn't sit right with me with that picture, and it shouldn't sit well with you either. Peace.
Sad that this has a current rating of around 3 on IMDB when you know the majority of people rating it have never even seen it...it has not even had a wide release yet on HBO...all because it shines a bad light on their favorite pop singer. So to the unbiased people out there, sit back, watch, listen, and decide for yourself. I personally don't think its right for a grown man to want to have sleep overs with very young boys, no matter how rich and power they are, which Jackson admitted to doing. There is something that doesn't sit right with me with that picture, and it shouldn't sit well with you either. Peace.
What's wrong with these parents?
kristinpanter8 October 2019
Legitimately, there's no way to know if this is 100% true or not but can anyone explain to me what is wrong with these mothers? "I never thought anything of my seven year old spending the night with him over me." "He was like a nine year old so it seemed fine." Is it legitimately possible for people to be so star struck that your children's welfare is not even considered. I'm so disgusted in so many ways... the other reviews that I have seen only confused me. Most people say it's either fake or it's sad but no one seems to be outraged at these garbage parents. I hope this is fake because I hope no one would allow this to happen to their children just because the person is famous. If it is true, which I personally think it may be, these two boys went through a terrible childhood. I grew up a MJ fan, I'm mostly disgusted with him now, which makes me sad in a different level. Curious if the majority of these reviews are big fans that don't want to believe these things are true...? Either way, after watching this I'm truly depressed and confused.
Misinformation and manipulating
jasondrew-460006 March 2019
Most of the information in the movie is not true and has been confirmed to be false. For example Michael not wanting Wade be with girls and him hating girls, when in reality Michael set Wade up with his niece when they where kids and they dated for like 10 years during this period. The last scene in the movie where he burns memorabilia is also fake, as Wade sold all his Michael Jackson stuff in 2011-12.
Wade barbecuing with Michael and his kids is also fake as Michael Jacksons bodyguard and others who where there say that never happened. His bodyguard said that Wade did not meat Michael, as everyone who want to meet Michael has to go through him. The scene where Michael, his kids with Wade and family is said in the movie to be before the trial and they use what allegedly happened in dinner there as a reason why he testified under oath. When in reality according to people who where there say that the dinner was after the trial had ended. So you see there lots of lies and manipulation. So this movie can't be trusted at all.
Wade barbecuing with Michael and his kids is also fake as Michael Jacksons bodyguard and others who where there say that never happened. His bodyguard said that Wade did not meat Michael, as everyone who want to meet Michael has to go through him. The scene where Michael, his kids with Wade and family is said in the movie to be before the trial and they use what allegedly happened in dinner there as a reason why he testified under oath. When in reality according to people who where there say that the dinner was after the trial had ended. So you see there lots of lies and manipulation. So this movie can't be trusted at all.
For MJ Fans It's a Difficult Documentary
dal_asher5 March 2019
I sat and watched all 4 hours of this disturbing documentary today. I have always been a die-hard fan of Michael Jackson's music. I followed him from his early Jackson 5 days through his death. I knew he was deeply affected by his own upbringing and really wanted to believe that he just loved being with kids because he was emotionally stunted but I wondered if the allegations were true. This documentary handled the stories of these 2 men, Robson and Safechuck with respect and care. The fact they are coming forward knowing they will be vilified in public to tell their truths convinced me. This was very well done and I hope it raises awareness of a very sad social issue.
How do you even review this?
Jeremy_Urquhart4 July 2020
Dot point time; I have too many thoughts and no coherent way to connect them:
Typing all that has made me question my positive rating, but at the end of the day: it's a well made documentary. Whether you agree or disagree, I can't make anyone feel the same way as I do. But maybe do think about why you feel so strongly about it, if your opinion is heavily slanted one way or the other, and use it as an opportunity to maybe think about why you are as deadset in your beliefs about something you likely don't know for sure. In divided times, we may as a whole need a bit more neutrality, or at least understanding towards why a person feels a certain way, that's different from the certain way you feel.
- It's crazy to me how people believe or don't believe Michael Jackson is innocent. It's really an opinion, unless you were directly involved as a victim or someone claiming to be a victim. There is no way of knowing for sure. That's a scary thought but in a case like this, I think that's just how it has to be.
- This documentary provides a good reason to question his innocence. The interviews are compelling and emotional. If these people are making this all up then they are fantastic actors and probably should be spending their time trying to break into the film industry. But: as convincing as they are, they're not necessarily proof.
- There are documentaries that counter this one that I may check out, but similarly, I don't feel like they can prove or disprove anything. They could expose things in Leaving Neverland as questionable, but to dispute every single allegation would require evidence that just doesn't exist.
- That being said: maybe there is money to be made in exaggerating or manipulating the truth, as a filmmaker. This whole documentary has created a huge buzz and I imagine it was extremely profitable. Profitable enough to make people feel okay with telling nothing but lies? Again, I want to doubt it, but the only truth I can come to is that I do not know.
- What I can offer is my thoughts on how well made this is as a film. The argument presented is compelling, but again: I'm not going to act like it proves or disproves anything. It's very long but is well edited and kept my attention for most of it. Part of me thought it didn't need to be 4 hours, but there are many other 4 hour documentaries I'd tap out of before they were over, so the fact this one kept me until the end means something.
- The biggest missed opportunity: the fact it interviews such a limited number of people. This makes it feel somewhat repetitive in its second half, and makes the film overall slightly less interesting. If they'd gone the OJ: Made In America route of interviewing many people with differing opinions, I think it would have made it stronger overall. And with a 4-hour runtime, I think they could have afforded to add in a few more talking heads.
Typing all that has made me question my positive rating, but at the end of the day: it's a well made documentary. Whether you agree or disagree, I can't make anyone feel the same way as I do. But maybe do think about why you feel so strongly about it, if your opinion is heavily slanted one way or the other, and use it as an opportunity to maybe think about why you are as deadset in your beliefs about something you likely don't know for sure. In divided times, we may as a whole need a bit more neutrality, or at least understanding towards why a person feels a certain way, that's different from the certain way you feel.
Not a 'documentary'
sarahthiel-862615 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
What upsets me the most about this movie is that it's being called a 'documentary'. By definition a documentary is "a film or television or radio programme that provides a factual report on a particular subject."
Leaving Neverland is non of that. Not once does the movie (I'm going to call it 'movie' from now on, because that's what it is.) provide any official document from either James Safechuck's or Wade Robson's lawsuit. It doesn't provide one piece of evidence that supports their claims of being sexual abused by Michael Jackson. (James Safechuck has a box of jewelry that Michael Jackson allegedly gave to him for sexual acts. However, no proof that it was given to him as a child.)
On top of that, we're only hearing on side of the story. Over and over again.
Director Dan Reed recently admitted in an interview that he didn't want to interview others, because it would complicate the story. That's absolutely unethical considering that Leaving Neverland implies that Macaulay Culkin and Brett Barnes were Robson's and Safechuck's "replacement". Culkin and Barnes vehemently deny that they were ever abused by Jackson.
This movie is basically four hours of two families blaming every family problem they ever had on Michael Jackson and two men painting a whole different picture of Jackson as an abuser. (Safechuck describes him as a paranoid abuser that coached him how to put on his clothes as fast as he could in case someone catches them during the abuse, whereas Robson claims that he was abused everytime they were together and even when his mum was next door.)
What this film does have is drone shots of random places (mostly not related to what they are talking about) and random pictures of Michael Jackson in a red shirt. If they cut these drone shots and red-shirt-pictures the movie would have been over in two hours.
My conclusion: it's not worth anybody's time. The length is absolutely not justified and this whole movie is based on the word of two perjurers.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
