Sections

Michael Jackson estate forces PopCap to re-design dancing zombie in PvZ

Wednesday, 28th July 2010 05:52 GMT By Nathan Grayson

mj_dancingzombie

Michael Jackson zombie wanted to be bad. He really, really did.

But instead, he just beat it.

“The Estate of Michael Jackson objected to our use of the ‘dancing zombie’ in PLANTS vs. ZOMBIES based on its view that the zombie too closely resembled Michael Jackson. After receiving this objection, PopCap made a business decision to retire the original ‘dancing zombie’ and replace it with a different ‘dancing zombie’ character for future builds of PLANTS vs.ZOMBIES on all platforms. The phase-out and replacement process is underway,” a PopCap rep told MTV Multiplayer.

The casual games colossus has – so far – stripped dancing zombie of his stylish Jacksonian garb in the iPhone version of PvZ, with plans to “update” all versions of the game accordingly. Gone is the King of PopCap, replaced by a zombie whose style – disco – may actually be deader than he is.

More through the link.

Latest

51 Comments

  1. freedoms_stain

    *sniff* it’s the end if an era :(

    #1 4 years ago
  2. Lloytron

    “the creepy old guy”? Surely there are better ways to describe Vincent Price?!

    #2 4 years ago
  3. Dean

    Also, Vincent Price is dead!

    #3 4 years ago
  4. Blerk

    Well, the miserable bastards. Haven’t they got anything better to do?

    #4 4 years ago
  5. mington

    “the zombie too closely resembled Michael Jackson”

    Easy, just make the zombie black

    FANFARE!!!!!

    *whats going on?*

    Congratulations mington, you are the one millionth person to use the ‘Micheal Jackson isn’t black anymore ‘joke!!

    *poses for pictures with a sequined glove and a chimpanzee*

    #5 4 years ago
  6. Yoshi

    “The Estate of Michael Jackson objected to our use of the ‘dancing zombie’ in PLANTS vs. ZOMBIES based on its view that the zombie too closely resembled Michael Jackson.”

    Why now? I didn’t see them complain when it was first released. I REFUSE TO UPDATE!!! This was a great little tribute there is nothing wrong with it.

    #6 4 years ago
  7. Blerk

    They probably couldn’t sue before because he wasn’t actually dead. Now that he really is a zombie they’ve got a stronger case.

    #7 4 years ago
  8. Craymen Edge

    When he was alive they weren’t making any money from his likeness. Now he’s dead and therefore popular again, they’re trying to protect their “brand”.

    #8 4 years ago
  9. Kerplunk

    I suppose the imagery closely resembles him now that, you know, MJ is dead and all. Like a zombie would be.

    Also, this.

    #9 4 years ago
  10. Moonwalker1982

    Any jokes about him not being black anymore are based on nothing but stupidity and ignorance anyway. I’ve known this for years but for some reason many people didn’t want to believe it. As if the dude actually choose to get that skin disorder, sigh.

    #10 4 years ago
  11. mington

    @10 But, if you’re thinkin’ about my baby it don’t matter if you’re black or white

    #11 4 years ago
  12. Blerk

    Sadly, Craymen’s mostly likely hit it right on the head. Chances are Jackson himself wouldn’t have cared, he was known to like games so he might even have been flattered. But now… the money men are in charge.

    #12 4 years ago
  13. _LarZen_

    Who cares if that pedofile is in a game, the man i dead and all the children in the world smiles :)

    #13 4 years ago
  14. Moonwalker1982

    @ 13, idiot.

    Ain’t it funny how a person can get 100% aquitted and still stupid ass people out there call him a pedophile. There was never any evidence of wrongdoing and actually plenty of wrongdoing from the prosecution. But nevermind, some people just never learn. Some people don’t know what the hell they are talking about, thats for damn sure.

    But i’m not gonna start with this here, its not the place. If you actually DO want to learn some new things, see how wrong you are, i can hit you up with cold hard facts that are quite mindblowing but the mainstream media just doesn’t show you. I highly doubt you want that though.

    #14 4 years ago
  15. freedoms_stain

    @14, yeah MJ has never made out of court settlements to children he allegedly abused.

    Never.

    If by Never you mean deffinately.

    #15 4 years ago
  16. mington

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbc1K_IqTVs&feature=related

    #16 4 years ago
  17. Moonwalker1982

    @ 15

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0k08tiQF-8

    #17 4 years ago
  18. The Hindle

    To honour MJS life Mcdonalds have announced the special MJ burger, fifty year old meat between 10 year old buns.

    #18 4 years ago
  19. Moonwalker1982

    I can’t seem to edit…

    @15, also if you want more info, a completely different side to the story i can give you lots more. It’s not as simple as…MJ settled and thats it, there’s so much more to it. This totally ain’t the case.

    #19 4 years ago
  20. DeSpiritusBellum

    What a dick move.

    My 4 year old nephew is gonna be pissed about that. He only knows Michael Jackson because we slay him in zombie form.

    It shouldn’t be legal to bully people out of making jokes on famous people. If you ask me, that falls well within the freedom of expression.

    Hopefully there’ll be some sort of counter move where people make an unofficial patch or something.

    #20 4 years ago
  21. mington

    So, searching for MJ jokes i came across this…

    Q: What’s brown and often found in a baby’s diaper?
    A: Michael Jackson’s hand.

    so bad :P

    #21 4 years ago
  22. DeSpiritusBellum

    I like the one with the sinking cruise liner. The captain is like “Save the women and children!” and some guy yells “Fuck the children!” and Michael Jackson is like “Do we have time for that?”

    I’m sure that guy is gonna be made a saint of the catholic church.

    #22 4 years ago
  23. Moonwalker1982

    MJ jokes are as pathetic as it gets and old as hell. On top of that, based on bullshit, so i don’t see how any of that is funny. Something that has destroyed a person’s life and people make fun of it, yes great. In the end these ridiculous charges and the trial have destroyed him and his life and eventually caused his death, how nice.

    #23 4 years ago
  24. theevilaires

    Cool site Kerplunk – BOOKMARKED :D

    #24 4 years ago
  25. Moonwalker1982

    Either way, i posted that youtube link. You all should watch it, it’s sure to enlighten you alot. If you are openminded and actually want to actually consider believing in the man. If people still believe all the nonsense, even after watching that video…then its pretty clear you only want to believe he’s guilty, it’s that simple.

    So again

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0k08tiQF-8&feature=player_embedded

    The funny thing with this is, always when i have showed people this video and more, they are quiet, i don’t hear anything from them anymore.

    #25 4 years ago
  26. Hunam

    I find it hard to take an objective view from you considering your username.

    #26 4 years ago
  27. Moonwalker1982

    I knew someone was gonna say that. Whether i am a fan or not, i actually did do my research, and know what i’m talking about. That has nothing to do with being a fan, cause i sure as hell would never support a real child molester. Watch the video, one nice piece of evidence in there…an audiotape recording. And so much more, but people don’t want to take the time and research shit themselves.

    #27 4 years ago
  28. freedoms_stain

    @25, don’t get me wrong, I haven’t watched it yet, silence from me is in no way admission of being wrong.

    After all I’m at work and I don’t want to get the sack for watching kiddie porn ;)

    #28 4 years ago
  29. Moonwalker1982

    And that last part in your text just shows that you rather keep believing the man was guilty, that much is obvious. Sad really. And really, you can believe what you want, but even after seeing such things and one still believes someone is guilty, something is wrong with that persons thinking then, it sure is.

    Just a small thing about the ‘settlement’

    [b]

    If you took a few seconds to educate yourself on the subject, instead of spreading rumors, you’d see that nobody bought anyone’s silence.
    In the documents (that are public now, but nobody cares to read them) it plainly says that the Chandlers are free to prosecute this case. Nothing stopped Evan Chandler from getting the money and walking right into a police station. Oh, yeah, one thing did stop him. He was lying.

    It works this way: MJ was suing Chandler for extortion, and Chandler was asking for a settlement to “solve” the case and walk away. Chandler team made a legal move to STOP A TRIAL, and make MJ’s Insurance Carrier to pay a settlement, this way it wasn’t money from MJ’s pocket. And MJ could not control nor interfere with his insurance carrier’s demand to settle the dispute. [/b]

    And there’s so much more, also about the trial. MJ’s defense wanted to get the accuser from 93 there, but they refused, all the family members refused, there’s just so much people in general don’t know.

    #29 4 years ago
  30. freedoms_stain

    Dude missed the ;) and it’s implication.

    Too bad.

    #30 4 years ago
  31. theevilaires

    Good link Moonwalker. I always knew he was innocent. The cops checked his house from top to fucking bottom 100xs over and found nothing. Sick ass holes with that kind of sick fetish have to keep some record of it hidden so when the urge comes back and they can’t have the real thing they get off on pics or vid recordings.

    HE NEVER HAD ANY OF THAT STUFF “ANYWHERE” The FBI searched dude and they will find something when they go looking.

    Don’t ever get the name Michael Jackson confused with Michael Bowden or O’Connor. That’s all I’m saying ;)

    #31 4 years ago
  32. Moonwalker1982

    @31

    Exactly man, there’s just so much of these things that people in general don’t know. Even people who i know that believe in his innocence didn’t know about these things. At the end of the day i guess you can’t even blame these people cause the mainstream media never told them about this.

    During the trial it was especially pathetic, how the media would always comment and critisize his clothing style while walking into the courthouse or his general look. How they would ignore any positive news for Michael, the defense. And how they would always report stuff from the prosecution and making it sound bigger than it really was. In the end there wasn’t shit to be found….nothing to convict the dude on.

    There’s a book from a lady who used to be anti-MJ, until after the trial. In the book she writes about how she noticed how ridiculously biased the media was. She was there, inside the courtroom each time and the media would never ever say anything good when it came to the defense.

    Dude’s goal was to make the world a bit of a better place, and in that way started with children. That was the sole reason of Neverland. To give sick children who didn’t had long to live a few final nice days, taking these kids out of the ghetto and give them a nice time at Neverland, where they don’t have to watch out for bullets flying around them, so to speak. Dude gave ridiculous amounts of money to charity, he’s on top there in the guiness book of records, sound like someone who would destroy a kid’s life?

    Nah.

    And freedoms_stain, nope i didn’t miss the smiley, i just thought it was rather lame. It’s also not fair of people to say someone is not really credible because he/she appears to be a fan of the person. Maybe this simply means MJ fans like to do their own research and not believe everything the mainstream media tells you. And maybe they just use logic?

    #32 4 years ago
  33. DeSpiritusBellum

    @Moon Being a fan doesn’t give you access to the inner workings of a person. You may believe he’s innocent, but you have no idea who the guy was, or what turned him on. To most other people he seemed like a very unstable person.

    Your idea that the insurance carrier somehow chose to make him seem guilty ultimately raises more questions than it answers. If he was truly determined to prove his innocence, he could fight that. I’m pretty sure there are laws preventing corporations from taking over your life, even if you’re stupid enough to sign papers saying they can. He just didn’t seem too interested in doing that.

    Either way, continuing to surround yourself with other peoples kids unsupervised, and choosing to sleep with them, seems very suspicious. That’s not something a balanced person would do.

    #33 4 years ago
  34. Moonwalker1982

    @ 33

    I can put up a whole wall of text again, but thats not nessecary, these two links explain it perfectly.

    Both are good reads but especially the first one. Cause its exactly what happened. MJ choose to have all those horrible investigations done to him, photographs of his privates and being humiliated and what not. While all in the begining he could have settled the case and avoided any media frenzy and everything.

    http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/why-didnt-michael-pay-in-august-1993-to-avoid-all-that/

    http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2010/03/15/why-else-would-an-innocent-man-settle-lisa-maria-presley/

    #34 4 years ago
  35. theevilaires

    In his head and heart Michael Jackson was more kid than grown up. You have to look at all the events of his past up to his death. He came from a poor family where most of the time he had to share a bed with his other brothers.

    We see it wrong because we never lived that life style. kid went from being poor to rich over night and never emotionally and mentally became an adult at heart.

    But yea sleeping in bed with children is crossing that line though. Even if your attentions are innocent and nothing happens.

    #35 4 years ago
  36. Moonwalker1982

    I think that is something we can all agree on, even he did himself. It certainly wasn’t wise to share his bedroom with children that weren’t his. But then again, the parents of these kids didn’t see anything wrong with this. At the end of the day, it’s reall todays world that says it’s criminal and insane to do such a thing. People come up with the most sick and twisted things, when in reality its just innocent. In that sense, i guess in alot of senses, Michael was way too naive.

    #36 4 years ago
  37. The Hindle

    @36 If it was your son or daughter at the heart of all this would you still say oh its MJ hes so naive?

    Also if you were ever accused of something and someone said ill pay them off for you would you accept or would go to court to clear your name once and for all? An innocent man doesnt pay people off its as simple as that.

    #37 4 years ago
  38. DeSpiritusBellum

    @34 The stuff you’re posting is all fanatics laying out the very same side of the case, with more than a little conjecture. They don’t seem very interested in considering anything that isn’t their own cultish belief, and as such you can’t really take them seriously.

    If those are really his best defenders, there really seems to be a lack of sane people argueing for this guy.

    If you’re not guilty, then a trial is the only way to prove it. Why would that stress him out? He should’ve been championing it.

    #38 4 years ago
  39. G1GAHURTZ

    An innocent man doesnt pay people off its as simple as that.

    Very well put.

    #39 4 years ago
  40. Moonwalker1982

    Have you not read any of my messages and links? It explains it all perfectly.

    if MJ didn’t settle then that would have meant a civil trial and the double jeopardy of him being tried for the same case twice if it would have also gone to criminal trial! And like I said Sneddon(DA) was gonna be allowed to get all the info the defense had in the civil case for his criminal case against MJ which is unfair! So that’s what MJ was really avoiding!

    Because the out of court settlement did not stop the criminal case from going forward! Plus Jordan was interviewed after the settlement by detectives and as a result of that interview no charges were filed! Plus the statue of limitation didn’t run out until 1999 for the 93 case! So they just wanted the money obviously!

    So Remember MJ fought that civil lawsuit so it wouldn’t interfere with the criminal case and that failed! The chandlers were the ones suing him for money! They later change that civil lawsuit to just negligence and drop any molestation allegations so they would be guaranteed money if MJ decided to settle and give it to an insurance company! Evan Chandler knew what he was doing!

    Ask yourself this as well…..even after getting that money from that person whom you believe he destroyed your son’s life…you STILL could have went on going agains that person, but instead of that they didn’t do anything. Ain’t that weird? It really is!

    And in 2003 he decided to fight against it, and he fully won in 2005. But just look at how many years it took away from his life, and not only that. Everything that comes with it.

    #40 4 years ago
  41. DeSpiritusBellum

    @40 Simple question – What did Jackson stand to lose by going to trial?

    #41 4 years ago
  42. Moonwalker1982

    I don’t understand that question really.

    What i don’t get is why is it so hard to understand his decision to settle, even just a bit? If he didn’t..the media frenzy would have even been more crazy. And ALL the reaons i mentioned above, and NO…that has nothing to do with fanatic those are facts. It would have taken away several years from his life like the 2005 trial did. And i guess he simply wanted to be rid of it all, which is very understandable too. You say a innocent man doesn’t pay somebody off, while it was even really ‘paying off’ anyone, don’t you wonder why MJ DID accept to have all those investigations done? His house trashed, his whole body photographed and being humiliated beyond belief. WHEN he could have avoided all of that all along by simply offering money to the family? But he didn’t….it’s really not all so simple as ‘a innocent man doesn’t pay someone off’ in my book. Not with all these things combined.

    #42 4 years ago
  43. DeSpiritusBellum

    @42 It’s pretty simple. You’re innocent – Someone takes you to court – Why would you choose not to face those charges?

    #43 4 years ago
  44. Moonwalker1982

    @ 43, the answer to all of that can be found in my reply above you and all my other replies. I think those are pretty good enough reasons. Also this –>

    A answer to your question directly…

    http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/civilsuit.html

    http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/settlement.html

    Just a very good and informative read.

    #44 4 years ago
  45. DeSpiritusBellum

    @44 That’s not an answer. It’s a pretty simple question.

    The media attention would’ve turned towards his glorious acquittal if he’d faced trial, which probably would’ve saved his career. Instead he chose to act like a person with everything to hide. He chose to pay rather than have the case come before a judge.

    I’m asking – Why?

    #45 4 years ago
  46. Moonwalker1982

    You can keep saying its not an answer, but IT IS!!!! Please read this. It explains it all, why do you not understand even ALITTLE bit why he chose this decision? Cause i sure as hell do. Read all of that. That’s what was going to happen, not a criminal trial. Really not so weird why he decided to settle, really not!!!!

    http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/civilsuit.html

    #46 4 years ago
  47. DeSpiritusBellum

    @46 If I’m innocent, then I have everything to win in a trial. If I’m guilty, then I have everything to lose in a trial.

    If I’m innocent and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being acquitted in a trial, I’m paying to have my only chance of justice taken away.

    If I’m guilty and I pay millions of dollars to avoid being found guilty in a trial, I’m paying to stay out of jail.

    Which is the more likely motive? You decide.

    #47 4 years ago
  48. G1GAHURTZ

    Sorry Moonwalker, I realise you’re obviously a pretty big MJ fan and all… but I think that for most people, no matter how many excuses, long winded explanations and conspiracy theories they see, the simple fact that no-one could ever prove an innocent man guilty will never change.

    #48 4 years ago
  49. Moonwalker1982

    @ 47 You seem to ignore everything i said, you really do. Maybe i should just quit with this too. You are not a celebrity that has been in the spotlight since his 5th, he was! Like i explained it several goddamn times…his whole case would have been in a jeopardy cause the prosecution was gonna be let in on his strategy, information and what not.

    I can go on and on, but again i give you this link..cause its exactly what i was going to say.

    http://mjjr.net/content/mjcase/civilsuit.html

    Sneddon (The DA) messed with evidence during the 2005 trial, god knows what he would have done in 93 when he was let in on all the evidence the defense had?

    Here watch this

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x390rVfx3Qg&feature=player_embedded

    @ 48, i’m starting to realize that yeah. But i just hate it, and not only cause i’m a fan. I hate injustice, and thats certainly something that has been done to him. Fact remains that there has never been any evidence of any wrongdoing on MJ’s and plenty of wrongdoing and shady things about the accusing families. PLENTY! Just a shame that still alot of people will never acknlowledge this man as a huge humanitarian who did loads of good things for charities and the living in general. He just never boasted with it cause it came from his heart, its that simple.

    Also alot of people think he was insane and unstable, but i’ve seen speeches of him (oxford university speech for example) where he talks for like a hour or so and the person speaking there is not unstable or insane, not by a longshot. A highly intelligent man who is well aware of the world and its surroundings.

    #49 4 years ago
  50. DeSpiritusBellum

    @49 See the above for basic logic.

    #50 4 years ago
  51. Moonwalker1982

    Exactly what i thought, you only come up with that stuff but it has nothing to do with this. You obviously ignore everything i said. It’s clear to me now that you don’t even want to consider his innocence.

    That basic logic of yours doesn’t really count when all those other things come in to play, like the civil trial.

    MJ was really pushing for a CRIMINAL TRIAL, but Chandler lawsuit didn’t let him, instead he sued him for “NEGLIGENCE” that’s when the insurance carrier entered in the scene.

    I bet if there was even a VIDEO of CHandler where he’s blackmailing MJ for money…you’d still say ‘But he did make a settlement’ . It’s quite obvious that its no use.

    Also…if you are even interested, which i highly doubt…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-hutchinson/bury-the-never-ending-myt_b_228307.html

    Very good article, also touches on the subject about the settlement. And this time it’s not a site affiliated with MJ fans or whatever.

    Also the reason why i believe you dont even consider the chance of MJ being innocent back then,is because you only talk about MJ. Never ONCE did you mention the strange things about the chandler family, the audiorecording where the dad says he’s gonna ruin MJ’s career and that his son doesn’t matter. The fact that the asshole sued him and eventually accepted MONEY from him. WHAT parent in their right mind would do this? I ask you that!!!!!

    Reasons that lead to the settled:

    1. MJ filed charges against Chandler for EXTORTION.

    2. The L.A. District Attorney’s office decided that it would not investigate Chandler’s alleged criminal extortion attempts of Michael Jackson. (The reason for this decision is clear: it would be absurd for a District Attorney to build a case for molestation against a defendant while simultaneously bringing charges against the complainant for extortion)

    3. Evan Chandler filed charges for a Civil charge instead of a criminal charge when he included the word “negligence” in the lawsuit, avoiding the chance for a criminal trial.

    4. MJ’s Insurance Carrier enters in the scene wanting to settle the dispute for “negligence” (it’s what an Insurance Company does in all “negligence” suing)

    5. Other MJ’s advisers: People who intended to earn millions of dollars from his record and music promotions did not want negative publicity from these lawsuits interfering with their profits.

    Tell me……HOW does that basic logic come into play now? I certainly dont see it. When you wrote that message you said ‘I am innocent, i am guilty’ you spoke about yourself. But no way can you compare yourself to a celebrity who is known worldwide, constantly in the media spotlight and lots of people profitting from him. In those ways you can never compare yourself to him.

    I also just read this

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-thomson/one-of-the-most-shameful_b_610258.html

    And i know from own experience during that time, that the media coverage was pathetic…but this is downright outrageous. This is obviously pure hate , stupidity and prejudice from the media. This ain’t even funny anymore..i wasn’t aware that it was THIS bad. READ IT! If that ain’t injustice, i don’t know what is. And no wonder that so many people still believe he’s guilty.

    #51 4 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.