jorge said:

Strawberrylova123 said:

laytonian said:

I agree with those of you who are saying release it.I wanna see this!

luv2tha99s said:

Why is there a link to a paywall and not an article?

Valid question. Well Bort?

Strawberrylova123 said:

I believe we will see this documentary in 2025. Netflix has more powerful lawyers than the estate. People are already talking to the press, maybe this is a way of warning the estate for future litigations if they don’t get their acts together.

Well said. It is like the Streisand effect.

PennyPurple said:

luv2tha99s said:

Why is there a link to a paywall and not an article?

https://archive.ph/wXmy6

Wow,I just finished the entire article It would be a shame if we never get to see this documentary.

SoulAlive said:

a woman everyday should be thanked not disrespected,not raped or spanked and if a woman ever said I did she’s a motherfucking liar and I’m a set-up kid ... [Edited 9/8/24 16:10pm]

Did I miss the part in the article where someone said Prince was a rapist? Or that he spanked anyone? (Consensually or ortherwise?)

We all knew he could be disrepectful so that's not a new revelation.

Maybe that line is based on something from his life, but if you're going to take everything he wrote literally, then he worked at a 5 & Dime, knew a waitress named Dorothy Parker, and married someone who gave him head on the way to her wedding.

Despite what Prince told us, maybe not everything you think is true.

ItsOnlyMountains said:

SoulAlive said:

a woman everyday should be thanked not disrespected,not raped or spanked and if a woman ever said I did she’s a motherfucking liar and I’m a set-up kid ...

Did I miss the part in the article where someone said Prince was a rapist? Or that he spanked anyone? (Consensually or ortherwise?)

We all knew he could be disrepectful so that's not a new revelation.

Maybe that line is based on something from his life, but if you're going to take everything he wrote literally, then he worked at a 5 & Dime, knew a waitress named Dorothy Parker, and married someone who gave him head on the way to her wedding.

Despite what Prince told us, maybe not everything you think is true.

I've always wondered if that line was directed at the Sinead O' Connor accusations.

Strawberrylova123 said:

RODSERLING said:

Sure. But after Leaving Neverland, MJ streaming numbers exploded It was like after Living With MJ. One could think this was to destroyed his image, but it made him popular again, and he sold more discs during that year than in the year following the release of Invincible.

Exactly my point, cancel culture doesn’t exist. MJ was accused of the worst thing ever imaginable but his music still lives on. Prince will be fine.

I agree.The whole "cancel culture" thing is overblown.There is no reason for the estate to cancel this documentary.

SoulAlive said:

Read the article. Not shocked by any of the stuff in the article, mostly rehashed info with maybe a bit more detail of some things that are mostly known to us hardcore fans. I'm sure we all have an idea of what we think of Prince the person, but unless any of us actually knew him personally, it's all based on what either he has divulged, or what others have said so there's that. Highly doubtful these interviews would change much for me but it's always interesting to hear what they say, again, to me.

With that, the Piano and a Microphone footage alone would be fantastic to have.

laytonian said:

muleFunk said:

Bullshit to you as well. This falls into to camps. One is Prince needs to be exposed. The other is give us the music side to the story. And it's absolutely the truth that Netflix ordered a hit piece based on Cat Glover's post from a few years back.

What about the side that simply just wants the entire truth of who Prince was, faults and all? I think that is the camp most people fall under here including the maker of the documentary

bozojones said:

christobole said:

One gets the impression, that both the NY Times & the film's director (and perhaps certain Prince associates, as well as some former Netflix brass) are/were trying to exploit Prince, by tying him to their ideologies - framing Prince as some kind of pioneer of "gender fluidity", on top of the label "black man". While it should be obvious, that Prince himself would've refused such labels & identities, branding Prince's persona that way, although seemingly appropriate these days, would not be profitable in the long-term. Think what you will of McMillan - he is likely too shrewd a businessman, to allow his asset to be tarnished by the ideology du jour - thank god for that. Btw, contrary to this NY Times writer's claims, Netflix documentaries of the past, rather than being deep, have merely been too long & too repetitive - 6 hours is more than enough for a public prone to watching garbage.

Prince was a black man, and while he wasn't "genderfluid", he very obviously flirted with adrogynous fashion and imagery through most of his career. Not sure why those verifiable truths are so offensive to you.

Exactly! 100% even.

RenaRF said:

bizzie said:

Read the article. Edelman shows Prince as a human. Prince had plenty of flaws, and pretending that wasn't the case is a lie.

For decades Prince fans have ignored the elephant in the room: that Prince was flawed. He had a mean streak, he loved to prank people but couldn't stand being the butt of one, he fired people for the flimsiest of reasons, he repeatedly screwed people over,... And whenever someone close to Prince told "negative" stories they were dismissed as a "disgruntled employee", ignoring that Prince seemed to have a lot of those and that perhaps the problem wasn't the employees.

THANK YOU. How can you appreciate genius in a person if you can't profile who that person is? Good and bad, cringeworthy and exultory, it's all part of understanding the genius. Genius doesn't live separate from the rest of the person - it's all interwoven and one feeds the other in a continuous cycle.

After reading the whole article, I really really hope they release it. I want to appreciate everything that shaped his genius. I don't get how others don't see that it's all related, and you can't tell one story without weaving in the other.

Exactly.

The point is, how can we convince MakeMilllions and Spicer so that they have to stop thinking and “allegedly concerned” to watch over the sanctity and honorability of His Royal Sex-soaked Highness?
(Do they perhaps do so because of his swaggering faith, which eventually ended in a watered-down, yet healthier version of his believes and Jehovah story?)

wasitgood4u2 said:

pdiddy2011 said:

Jill Jones accusing P of assault seems so odd to me given how respectfully she seems speaks of him (for a recent example see Apollonia's podcast).

Wonder if they play the lyrics from Days of Wild after her story (then again, it seems this guy researched the life but not the art so may not know the song exists…)

.

[Edited 9/9/24 5:40am]

I thought the artice was really good. I'm pretty sure we all knew he wasn't perfect, everyone has character flaws. He decided to try and keeps his private life secret and focus on the music

As a fan it would be fascinating to get this insight into the person as well as the unreleased music and footage. Keeping it from being seen in my opinion only does more harm as it prevents his music etc from being released and heard

The fans are only getting older, we need releases to keep him in the public eye. A prolonged stalemate will just make his memory and music fade into the past

So release it, let there be articles written, these will be forgotten and hopefullt the music and the legacy will outlive any perceived negativity from the documentary.

simon1969 said:

I thought the artice was really good. I'm pretty sure we all knew he wasn't perfect, everyone has character flaws. He decided to try and keeps his private life secret and focus on the music

As a fan it would be fascinating to get this insight into the person as well as the unreleased music and footage. Keeping it from being seen in my opinion only does more harm as it prevents his music etc from being released and heard.

The fans are only getting older, we need releases to keep him in the public eye. A prolonged stalemate will just make his memory and music fade into the past

So release it, let there be articles written, these will be forgotten and hopefullt the music and the legacy will outlive any perceived negativity from the documentary.

Well said.

-

Edelamn's words : “How can you tell the truth about someone who, when you’re talking to people, they all had different things to say? How can you tell the truth about someone who never told the truth about himself?”

-

I mean, that's spot on, right?

RODSERLING said:

I can't read the article, but I m amazed they would have paid 64 millions $ for special access and use of the vault, and actually not using it. That makes no fucking sense at all.

.

Why do you insist on making a massive ass of yourself? Why do you invent horseshit instead of reading the article?

.

Uptown said:

Read the article. Not shocked by any of the stuff in the article, mostly rehashed info with maybe a bit more detail of some things that are mostly known to us hardcore fans. I'm sure we all have an idea of what we think of Prince the person, but unless any of us actually knew him personally, it's all based on what either he has divulged, or what others have said so there's that. Highly doubtful these interviews would change much for me but it's always interesting to hear what they say, again, to me.

With that, the Piano and a Microphone footage alone would be fantastic to have.

Agree with this. Other than the Jill Jones incident, there was nothing in the article that I didn't already know. The "secret" was that there was no secret about Prince.

But reading the article made me very sad. It seems that the film manages to capture the pathos of the person Prince. The description of his being locked-up for 6 weeks in his bedroom (corroborated by two people from his childhood) was harrowing.

rap said:

luv2tha99s said:

Why is there a link to a paywall and not an article?

Valid question. Well Bort?

.

It's 2024. You're on the fucking internet. Google is 25+ years old. Learn to fish.

bizzie said:

rap said:

Valid question. Well Bort?

.

It's 2024. You're on the fucking internet. Google is 25+ years old. Learn to fish.

Bart you're replying to someone who can't even post clickable links. don;t bother.

-

its clearly a pro-Edelman/anti Estate propanganda article. But all it does is show Edelman is acting just as stubborn and amatuer as Mcmillan and co if not worse