>I’d like to begin this article by saying that any conversation about the life of Michael Jackson that fails to acknowledge the allegations against him would fail to be productive. If you are unable to support Michael Jackson because you think that he did it or are too uncomfortable with the mere possibility that he did it, then that remains valid and you have every right to express disdain for this film. Nevertheless, whether you think that the allegations are true or false, it’s impossible to discuss his character without mentioning them.
I’ll follow this up by saying that this is exactly what makes “Michael” so difficult to praise. However, with a little look behind the curtain, the decision to omit this crucial part of Jackson’s life begins to make sense.
Originally, the film began with boldly addressing Jackson’s 1993 child sexual abuse allegations, featuring an opening shot of the star grimly staring into his reflection as police officers investigate his home, Neverland Ranch. In fact, the third and final act of the movie was supposed to be entirely focused on the allegations against Jackson and the impact that it had on his life. However, this part of the film was cut after attorneys found a clause barring the depiction of one of Jackson’s accusers in any movie. This led to the entire third act being redone, delaying the release date from April 18, 2025 to the recent release of April 24, 2026.
And with this new third act ending at Jackson’s record-breaking ‘Bad’ tour, that left zero seconds of screentime addressing absolutely any of Jackson’s many controversies in the latter half of his life. It’s the main reason why “Michael” ultimately fails as a proper Michael Jackson biopic, and why critics have been tearing it apart. How can one enjoy a movie that promises a deep, artistic look into one’s character, while being completely left hanging on the last 21 (and very, very eventful) years of this character?
Even if the movie is supposed to serve as a celebration of Jackson’s life, I struggle to consider excluding his later struggles as a proper way to do that. To remove from history is to act like it never happened, and that’s just an offense to the many years of life that he lived, whether happily or sorrowfully.
But there remains an argument that keeps this movie alive: a biopic… doesn’t actually have to be about one’s entire life. As Jackson’s life, from start to finish, is one of the most storied in modern history, it’s fair to say that a movie just about his rise to superstardom should be enough to satisfy viewers.
In fact, if you’re looking to watch it, I highly recommend going into it with the knowledge that it’s about Michael Jackson being a superstar, and not about Michael Jackson being a human. Because if you go into this asking for a movie about Jackson’s humanity, it truly falls flat. Not because they don’t go into his personality, but because they give him so much personality that it feels manufactured.
Throughout the 127 minutes of runtime, Jackson is portrayed about as wonderfully as possible. When he’s a child, he’s lovable, innocent and garners a lot of empathy. When he’s a teenager, he’s still filled with childlike wonder and ferocious ambition. When he’s an adult, he fights against racism and gang violence. When he’s in the studio, he’s meticulous and extremely gifted. And throughout all of it, he’s just the nicest guy: he’s a mama’s boy who visits hospitals and does philanthropy.
I wish I was exaggerating, but it truly feels that these are the only takeaways that the movie would like you to come out with (also that he had a terrible father, but even then, Jackson’s comments later in life would imply that he wouldn’t want to deliver that message); nothing about his artistic evolution or the nuances of what made him such a personality, but the idea that he was the nicest and most talented guy of all time. And I’m not saying that none of these things are true or ever happened, but it comes off more like propaganda than it does a biopic.
Really, we don’t see any in-depth look into the development of Jackson as an artist or human at all. Of course, he was gifted since childhood, but it would’ve been nice to see a deeper look into the evolution of the mind that created some of the greatest albums of all time. The most we get are montages of him thinking, moving and singing. Meanwhile, since Jackson is portrayed as the nicest person from childhood, he’s just the same guy throughout the entire plot. Perhaps that’s the point, hence the constant allusion to “Peter Pan,” but it creates a rather dry character without any depth.
And even when they did try to cover some intricacies in Jackson’s character, it all fell flat by the end of the movie. There were only short scenes and lines touching on his religious side, insecurities, perfectionism, vitiligo, addictions and more. Each one was interesting on its own, but with so many different sides of Jackson to touch on, none of them could really develop into something truly satisfying. Honestly, that’s the challenge of properly portraying the life of Michael Jackson; he simply had so much character, life and influence that it’s impossible to fit into one film.
But throughout all the failures to tell the story of Jackson, there was one saving grace: Jaafar Jackson, the man portraying Michael who just so happens to be his nephew. There were multiple shots throughout the movie that made me stop every thought and just go, “Wow, that’s Michael Jackson.” His voice was just as off-putting and cheerful as Michael’s was. He smiled and radiated the same excitement that Michael carried throughout his first hit albums. He had the little mannerisms and movements of Michael down so perfectly. And man, he danced with that same electrifying energy that Michael had coursing through his veins whenever any music came on. I will say, it was incredibly uncanny to see Jaafar’s face replacing Michael’s on an “Off the Wall” cover, but still, it all felt incredibly natural. I’m very excited to see if he can continue performances like this in the future, considering the fact that this was a role literally built for him.
Past Jaafar though, the casting was strange. Colman Domingo, as you would expect, was probably the best of the rest, but even then, Joseph Jackson is so one-dimensional that there isn’t much to see. Now that I think about it, that’s probably my takeaway for just about every character in this movie. Maybe Katherine Scruse-Jackson, Michael’s mother played by Nia Long, was an interesting character that felt personal, but that’s about it.
And also maybe it’s just because I’ve seen him in so many other films, but seeing Miles Teller in this was so goofy. Every time I see him, he’s either putting on the greatest performance of his life (“The Spectacular Now,” “Whiplash,” “Top Gun: Maverick”), or being an absolute slimeball (Divergent, Fantastic Four). This performance would unfortunately have to fall into the latter category; not because he was bad, but because he just had the most smug grin on his face the entire time.
Despite all of these things, I think the movie was a joyful watch for just one reason: Michael Jackson, the artist, was awesome. The movie has so many scenes of him just performing a song (Jaafar being absolutely incredible in doing so), and there are honestly too many for too long (the last 10 minutes is basically a music video), but at the same time, you’ll be dancing in your seat the entire time, so who really cares? Clearly, I had so many takeaways from this movie, but the one that really stuck with me by the time that I exited the theater was the fact that I wanted to throw on “Thriller” on my drive home.
I think that it’d be impossibly difficult to make a positive Michael Jackson movie without showing that his artistry is timeless, but I still credit the team for getting it done. They got his signature style perfect. They evoked visuals particularly reminiscent of the 80s. And most importantly, they created that aura of him being the most untouchable man alive.
Overall though, I think that all of these clashing thoughts takes me to my last real takeaway. Every time that I encounter Michael Jackson’s artistry, whether that be through his music, performance or persona, I am absolutely entranced by how incredible he was. However, he always feels so impossible to support because there’s just such a dark history of allegations that will never leave him. And furthermore, when you discuss his character, it’s hard to ever truly believe in the heart of his obviously good actions (philanthropy, humanitarianism, kindness) because there is just so much mystery surrounding his accusations.
So despite wanting to love Michael so much because he’s so thrilling, there’s just too much going against him to say that I can.
I think that this entire dilemma has unintentionally created a brilliant, meta commentary on Michael Jackson’s legacy as a whole. On Rotten Tomatoes, the movie has a 97% audience score and a 38% critic score. For the audience, they’re in love with the sparkle and excitement that comes with the superstardom of Michael Jackson; when you completely ignore the last 21 years of his life, he was the greatest spectacle in human history. For the critics, they’re missing the man behind Michael Jackson; for them, it’s impossible to ignore the last 21 years of his life, let alone the depth of his character that developed throughout his ascension to superstardom. History continues to take two sides when discussing Michael, and it remains the same for “Michael.”
This entire ordeal is pretty fantastic to see play out on such a big stage, especially after such deep discussions of Michael have been considered rather taboo for so long. I hope that this may restart some conversations on how to treat the star, and possibly even provide closure on the truth of who he really was.
I’m still struggling with how to feel about this movie. On one side, I’m really disappointed that we didn’t get to truly see the emotional depths of one of the craziest lives in modern history. On another side, I understand why we didn’t get to see that due to production issues and how impossible of a task that is. And then on another side, I’m just kind of fired up that we got to have such a timeless artist like Michael Jackson. Thankfully, Lionsgate will have plenty of opportunity to fix the first two faults in the upcoming sequel that was recently green-lit. If presented with the opportunity, I’d love to watch this movie again, just so I could gather some more thoughts.
Jaafar Jackson’s break out. A disappointingly rose-tinted display of Michael Jackson’s character. Visually and musically fantastic. 4/10.
