MovieChat Forums > Twilight Zone: The Movie (1983) Discussion > Why did Michael Jackson still want to wo...

Why did Michael Jackson still want to work with John Landis?


Yeah I know the "obvious reason", Jackson saw a movie that Landis directed called American Werewolf in London and thought that he would be perfect to direct his Thriller video. But still, given Jackson's public stance on how much he loved kids and how he'd never hurt them, for him to openly STILL work with Landis AFTER the incident that killed TWO children, just speaks volumes to me. I mean, how can you say you care about children, genuinely, and yet, you openly hire someone who intentionally killed two kids on the set out of drug-induced negligence?

reply

Are you serious?? Landis may have made a mistake with that scene with the helicopter, but Jackson made a bigger mistake by admitting to sleeping with children IN THE SAME ROOM... and all that that implies.

reply

I'm talking about in the context of the year 1983 not many years down the road! And I'm not going to get into which action is worse or more morally reprehensible because then, we would go down a long rabbit hole

reply

Are you being anti-Landis? If so, f--- you.

American Werewolf is a classic movie.
Twilight Zone: The Movie is a classic movie.
Trading Places is a classic movie.

And what do you mean, "intentionally", and "drug-induced negligence"? Are you saying Landis was high when filming that scene?

As far as I'm concerned, it was a tragic accident.

reply

Yes, I'm being anti-Landis and why shouldn't I? Maybe I went a tad bit too far in suggesting that he got Vic Morrow and those two kids killed intentionally and Landis was more than likely high when filming that scene. But that doesn't mean that Landis wasn't at all remotely capable of what happened on the Twilight Zone set.

In the scene, a helicopter is hovering over Morrow and the kids; Landis was screaming into a bullhorn "Lower, lower, lower! Fire, fire, fire!" The helicopter dipped lower, more explosions were set off and one of the chopper's wings was crippled. The aircraft came crashing down on Morrow, decapitating him. The kids were crushed and dismembered.

The bottom-line is that Landis unnecessarily put Morrow and the kids' lives in danger. He practically had no concern for the safety of the actor or the children. All he cared about was making his segment of the movie as spectacularly violent as possible. The helicopter was flying at an altitude of only 25 feet (8 meters), too low to avoid the explosions of the pyrotechnics used on set.

reply

You backed off the basis of your accusation pretty quick...

reply

Why should I give a shit if John Landis made classic movies if the man is more than likely the primary reason why three people (two of them being small children) died in such a horrific manner? That would be like saying that I shouldn't dare question the moral character of somebody like say Woody Allen or Roman Polanski because they may have made some movies that people have really liked in the past.

reply

Even if it was on the surface a tragic accident, it's still mostly John Landis' fault. He refused to listen to anyone when they told him it was too dangerous while they were planning the scene and setting it up. Even while they were filming it he was again warned. But he insisted - on illegally hiring the children who were killed, on working them at night, at demanding more dangerous explosions, at demanding the chopper get closer and closer to the actors.

reply

You are sick for supporting this guy.

reply

ive been saying for sometime now but foebane you are one of the biggest pricks on these boards, everything that come out of that fat mouth of yours is utter shite , go suck a f**k u a hole

reply

While I agree with you. You are nothing but a blind Star Wars fanboy. When I pointed out how LOTR beat Star Wars on imdb, metacritic and Rottentomatoes you drank the denial juice.

reply

Star wars is better than lotr

reply

Not according to the data. Lotr won more Oscars, got higher rated on IMDb, metacritic and rotten tomatoes. Lotr completely owns star wars. You lost today kid, it doesn't mean you have to like it.

reply

Star Wars is better than LOTR, you can’t handle the truth

reply

Only in your head. Look at the data and cry. IMDb which is the biggest user based website has both return of the King and fellowship above any Star Wars film.

reply

Im afraid for you this argument is futile , star wars is better than Lord of the rings, this is fact, does any one care for LOTR any more? not really , is star wars still discussed and going strong? absolutely.

Fear is the path to the dark side…fear leads to anger… anger leads to hate… hate leads to suffering, i sense much fear in you

reply

It still sits firmly above star wars on IMDb. So apparently the mass majority still thinks quite highly of it. Not to mention a huge budget tv show is coming next year. Only in your deluded head have people forgotten about lotr. One does not simply forget about lotr.

reply

There many films that are rated highly on imdb that shouldn't be , LOTR should be rated highly as its a beautiful trilogy , However star wars is better , these are simple facts that you must accept.

reply

So what's your point? Lotr is rated higher than star wars. These are objective facts. You can't ignore them. Choke on it. See all you can do is say star wars is better I can provide data which showcases lotr is better received. You lost today kid, that doesn't mean you have to like it.

reply

I win as the whole world know star wars is better

reply

Which is why lotr is ranked higher on IMDb... You know the biggest user based rating movie website in the world. Try again.

reply

It's Hollyweird and the music industry do you think they really care about us?

reply

Information wasn't as easily available in the early 80s as it is now. He likely barely knew anything about the tragic details of the deaths of the children in this film or John Landis' culpability. Hollyweird seemed to downplay the whole thing as Landis' careeer never seem to suffer consequences.

reply