Alaska Mulders Definitely not as good as most of his stuff, but some people on here need to chill... Louis is a journalist, and not a fool or buffoon. (What the hell even brings you to that conclusion?) But although I think very highly of Louis, I have to agree that this 'documentary' is slightly pointless. It would have been very interesting to see Louis interview Michael, and I'll forever regret the fact it didn't happen. But this wasn't really a good alternative. Although it was sort of interesting to see how hard it was to reach Michael, and all the strange people that were part of his world, like Uri Geller and Joe Jackson, it wasn't enough to carry the whole documentary. Too bad, Louis interviewing Michael could have been epic.

Gram I'm really into Lous Theroux interviews and this must be the 10th-15th that I've watched this week. Saying that, this is the worst I've seen. He just gets nothing that hasn't been seen before. He gets Joe Jackson at 2am saying 'Yes' to a few closed questions. You know what, at 2am, after a long day, if a few questions stood between me and going to bed, I would agree that aliens were my parents and that I poop ice cream every time I see clowns. He seems to spend a lot of time going at Uri Geller because Uri wouldn't give him an interview with Michael, his reason was that Louis has a negative and manipulative interview style - that statement should have been the end of the episode. He continued to rip into everyone he met from then on, getting almost nothing in comparison to the Bashir interview. This is still a mildly amusing show, the sweet fantastic irony that Bashir was chosen over Louis because Bashir was offering a positive interview, its fantastic to watch. Maybe at the time there was something unique about Joe Jackson being a jackass but he's gone on to do dozens of interviews where he seems quite normal, if cold.

fedor8 Watching a nerdy, nepotist BBC journalist have a tete-a-tete with one of the world's biggest liars and charlatans, Uri Geller, was quite fun. It was one of those "I know that he knows that I know that he knows" quasi-duels, with on-the-surface cordiality from both parties, but with an underlying tension that was almost palpable. Talk about insults being hurled with understatement... Then again, the feeling of uneasiness follows Theroux in nearly all his programs/interviews; he carefully tests the boundaries, probing his victim - "killing him softly", as it were (or trying to go in for the kill at least) - until the latter (usually) finally realizes Louis went too far and then gets upset like a little child. (That's the gist of Theroux's "journalistic method".) That Uri is highly intelligent (as all world-class crooks are) is not in question, but I am rather mystified by this Theroux. Is he a semi-buffoon, a total buffoon, or a bright guy pretending to be a buffoon? I have personally used the "idiocy card" to my own advantage on many an occasion, hence know of its golden value, but it's hard to place Theroux in this field. Perhaps he is a semi-fool who thinks he's a bright guy who is pretending to be a total fool? Nevertheless, at whatever level Theroux's IQ and abilities lie, he does score points for his second interview with Joe Jackson. After all, what he got out of the senile old boat was the memorable un-PC statement: "we hate gays, we do not approve of them at all". How interesting, this little slip-up... Not that I'm at all surprised, for this kind of predictable hypocrisy lurks behind every celebrity-"humanitarian's" carefully constructed public exterior; I was merely semi-shocked that these two experienced media wolves (who cash in 5000 bucks for practically nothing) would actually admit to something like that on camera - in the process damaging Michael Jackson's already ridiculously shoddy reputation even further. Besides, their reaction to the "gilfriend or boyfriend" comment only solidifies what even the most mentally-challenged frogs in lower reaches of the Amazon know: that MJ luuurves children.Terry George expresses his desire to renew the "friendship" he once had with MJ. So naive and optimistic is Terry, that he forgets the essential component missing in his CV: he is an adult. Hence of no interest to the world's biggest nose-contortionist.Speaking of that, I don't know if Louis Theroux is a genuine fool or whether he was just being "the polite, moderate journalist" by basically describing MJ as a "talented, troubled individual". (I'd call him many things, but that wouldn't be one of them. Sounds like the military referring to a battlefield as a "theater of operations".) As the credits roll, Theroux expresses his wish to meet MJ, but as a "curious bystander and fan". I would have preferred a more brutal, sarcastic comment for the epilogue. But that's the BBC for you... They lack the edge (mildly put) to make truly ground-breaking, hilarious, honest stuff.As for MJ's fans, they are the ones who are "deeply disturbed and need help". On the other hand, I don't really want them to be helped, because, after all, who else is going to entertain us if all of the world's pitiful, lonely worshipers of hyped-up pop stars suddenly all woke up from their horror/fairy-tale slumbers? Who would we have to laugh at as they foam at the mouth camping in tents in front of concert halls and 5-star hotels? I, for one, would love to see a documentary made solely about MJ's fans. But with someone who is a little less preoccupied with remaining PC, as Theroux (and just about every modern TV journalist) happens to be...Btw, Theroux has nepotism to thank for his TV career. Somehow it makes sense...

Maarten F. Although generally I find Louis Theroux' documentaries entertaining, refreshing, open-hearted and revealing, I wouldn't call him a journalist. Well, at least not for this film.Like his master Michael Moore, who learned him the trade in the epic series TV Nation, Theroux is biased and partial. And he has a very mean but subtle way to weave that bias into his documentaries.In this film Theroux is unmasked by Uri Geller (one of the gatekeepers to Michael Jackson) in a scene where he presents a picture of MJ and suggestively comments that 'this picture was officially endorsed' and 'seriously, I'm not pulling your leg here'. At that point Geller responds and starts revealing the true intentions of Theroux.From then on its a downward spiral. He arranges an interview with father Joe Jackson through a Vegas agent called Majestik Macnificent, pays up a total of US$ 5.500 for which he gets a few hours of Jackson promoting his new talent acts and only five minutes of interview on the curb, five minutes where Theroux totally locks up.At the end of the film, Theroux has another opportunity to speak with MJ's dad, but he manages to spoil that opportunity as well. Big time.I think in this film Theroux' biggest mistake is that he shows no interest whatsoever in the people that he does get to interview (be it Uri Geller, Majestik Magnificent or Joe Jackson) and tries much, much to hard to get an interview with Michael. He's just too eager, too hung up, too personally involved.Which will undoubtedly have made it much harder to swallow that ITV's Martin Bashir got the MJ-scoop of the century.