Michael Review

Is it really human nature

Michael Jackson, the King of Pop, dominated the late 20th century. His career began with the Jackson 5 and continued with albums like Off the Wall, Thriller and Bad. He had a painful, complicated relationship with his father Joe and was a performer so extraordinary he transcended the traditional stage, rewriting its very essence.

So here’s my question: if we already know all of that, why does this film spend two hours telling us exactly that and nothing more?

I’ve been a Michael Jackson fan since childhood. Growing up through the 1980s and 1990s, I experienced all the albums, videos and documentaries. But being a fan doesn’t mean switching your brain off. If anything, it means the opposite. If you genuinely love something, you owe it honesty. You ask the uncomfortable questions. You point out what went wrong.

So let me do that.

What I liked

Jaafar Jackson as Michael is genuinely uncanny. His movement, voice and presence are all unique. He doesn’t imitate his uncle in the concert sequences. He inhabits him. The direction and cinematography in those moments are exceptional.

My absolute highlight? The Motown 25 scene. I watched that performance on cassette tape as a kid until the tape wore thin. Seeing it recreated with that level of care and precision stopped me cold.

What I didn’t like (spoilers ahead)

The best way I can describe this film is a video game speedrun, and not in a good way.

Three time jumps in the first 30 minutes. I understand they need to reach older Michael, but the rush is disorienting. Some scenes needed to breathe. Others needed to go entirely.

Janet declined to participate, and I respect her decision. But Janet and Michael are inseparable parts of each other’s story. Their paths shaped each other professionally and personally. Leaving her almost entirely absent doesn’t just create a gap. It distorts the story.

Here’s what really raised an eyebrow. There’s a scene where Michael tells his mother, Katherine, he has no friends. And I immediately thought: what about Donny Osmond? Two young boys are navigating impossible fame at exactly the same time. Michael reportedly told Donny: “You’re the only person on this planet who knows what my childhood was like.” That’s a scene. That’s a genuine human moment. It’s nowhere in this film.

And that’s the deeper problem. The film had so many chances to show us a Michael we didn’t already know. Did you know he didn’t want strings in the opening of Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough? Quincy Jones refused to remove them. Michael was wrong. Quincy saved that song. The creative tension between two giants, one backing down and the other refusing, ultimately leading to an immortal result, reveals something profound about both men that no biography could ever capture.

The film walks straight past all of it.

The bigger issue

This film retells the Peter Pan story for adults familiar, comforting and reluctant to grow up.

Better Man takes genuine creative risks and earns its emotion. Ray is uncomfortable and honest in ways that make you love Ray Charles more, not less. Even 8 Mile, only loosely biographical, understands that messy truth is always more interesting than polished myth.

Michael isn’t convinced. It was crafted for fans seeking a celebration, and I’d argue that’s not enough. As fans, we should be demanding the full picture rather than simply applauding a shrine. What unsettles me most isn’t the film itself. It’s watching people accept it as the definitive Michael Jackson story without questioning a single frame.

Michael Jackson was brilliant, flawed, complicated, and endlessly fascinating. This film gave us a glossy and safe viewing experience.

What’s your favourite biopic movie? Put it in the comments.