Have you noticed how some biopics try to tell you everything about a person’s life and it ends up watering down the experience? Well, the new Michael Jackson biopic Michael doesn’t do that. Instead, it focuses on a specific part of his life, giving us a clear view into that moment and that theme.

This is a directorial choice by Antoine Fuqua to avoid unpacking every controversy, every headline, and every chapter of this story. It’s a bold choice, but it’s one that makes sense because we’ve seen those versions of Michael’s story before. What this film does instead is something much more focused, and I think that choice actually makes it far more interesting to talk about.

Michael explores two very specific ideas. First, it recreates the remembered feelings of audiences who lived through Michael Jackson’s rise to fame in a way no other biopic has achieved. Second, it gives us a focused look at what it was like for Michael himself to break away from a controlling father who refused to let his son grow into an independent creative adult.

Those are two strong themes, but they come from very different perspectives. On paper, a film that tries to do both well is a hard sell. However, because of how the film is constructed, those two ideas create a third layer—allowing us, as a modern audience already familiar with Michael’s legacy, to explore the gap between those two experiences.

That’s a risky decision, especially because Michael Jackson’s life is now shaped by accusations and controversy that will forever shadow his legacy. So how do you approach a film like this honestly? That’s the mindset I brought into Michael, because at the end of the day, my goal is to give you an honest sense of whether this is a movie you might enjoy.

Read the review below or watch it on YouTube:

Biopics often turn into either hype machines or information dumps. Most follow a familiar structure that starts at the beginning, hits the major milestones, moves through the rise, the fall, the redemption (if there is one), and leaves the audience feeling like they’ve seen the “whole story.” It’s logical and the formula works for a reason, but we’ve seen that Michael Jackson story before.

Instead, Michael focuses on the rise of a global pop icon as he struggles to carve out his own creative future as an adult while being controlled and manipulated by his father, Joe Jackson. That choice centers the story on something much more specific, giving us a look at creative genius trying to break free from a system that depends on keeping him small and controllable.

The film does a good job showing the friction between father and son. We see Michael trying to escape into his imagination, where his father can’t reach him. As he ages, we also see him using his connections to stand up to Joe indirectly, because he’s learned what happens if he pushes back himself. All of that family drama and abuse builds toward the moment when, as an adult, Michael finally has nothing left to lose and publicly rejects his father and the emotional control that has tortured him for most of his life.

That emotional through line that brings triumph over loving brutality is incredibly effective in highlighting this part of Michael’s experience. It positions him as a performer and as someone who had to become something bigger to survive, and it makes me think of how the heroes in the childhood stories that Michael read had to become as powerful or more powerful than the villains to win. Given how significant Michael was when he cast off his father, that tells us just how powerful Joe Jackson was in controlling his son’s life.

At the same time, this narrative choice creates a significant story hole in the film because it leaves out the accusations that came later in his life that create the shadow that follows his legacy. This omission will frustrate some viewers. However, the way they keep it in the shadows and just out of reach creates story friction that is so much more interesting than simply avoiding the issue or glossing over the controversy. If they wanted to do that, they could have added in a few scenes and then buried them, but instead the film alludes to the coming storm with scenes like the moment in the toy store.

The Missing Context

This decision to leave out the controversy mirrors the audience’s experience of the time. As fans, we didn’t know what was happening behind the scenes, which allowed us to just enjoy his music without worry or discomfort, and Michael really captures that experience. We still don’t have definitive clarity because there is no resolution to the allegations, no discussion of the terms and facts associated with the settlements, and no end to the lingering discomfort associated with the one criminal trial that was tossed out of court. In this way, the film reflects that ambiguity by keeping those things just out of frame and that’s part of the film’s experience.

Michael forces us to sit with the tension between who we remember Michael Jackson to be and the uncertainty that now surrounds his legacy with only the court of public opinion to try his case. Instead of resolving that tension, the film hands it back to us as if to say, “You decide.”

From Performer to Visionary Artist

One thing that comes through is the expression of Michael Jackson’s genius is tied directly to his desperation for independence (or escape?) from his father’s relentless control. He wants to escape so badly that he throws himself into his work—not just to succeed, but to transform himself into someone powerful enough to stand up to his father. At times we see fear and at other times we see desperation, but we always see his desire to grow into something “more.”

We see Michael studying the greats, watching them, and being inspired by who they are as performers. The scene referencing Fred Astaire’s commentary about the importance of seeing the dancer’s feet shows how that one idea clearly shapes how Michael dresses and how he performs. That insight connects directly to his iconic footwork and how his choice of socks, his shoes, his pants are used to elevate his performance.

This is where he shifts from learning to creating, and it’s a stylistic innovation that is carried through key moments of the film. It’s through insights like this that the film shows us how the “Michael Jackson” experience went beyond music to visual storytelling as part of his onstage performance. That is brought home with later moments on video with the creation of Thriller, Billie Jean, and Beat It.

On a personal note, what resonated most for me is that Michael’s transformation feels like survival. When you’re a hidden victim of abuse, there’s no one coming to rescue you. So, you have to rescue yourself by building power, assets, tools, and allies. This is exactly what we see Micheal do in this film, even if he’s not always successful at it.

The Performances

All of this works on paper, but it only matters if the performances land, and for the most part, they do. The film makes a smart decision not to try to perfectly replicate Michael Jackson on screen, because that would almost certainly drift into caricature. Instead, Jaafar Jackson focuses on capturing the essence of Michael, which is a much stronger and more believable approach.

At the same time, the film understands that Michael doesn’t exist in isolation. His family, especially his father, shapes everything he’s trying to become, and we see that reflected in his interactions with his driver, his lawyer, and his producers. Coleman Domingo’s performance as Joseph Jackson anchors the story, and at times he even steals the show. His presence is so strong that it occasionally overpowers Jaafar on screen, but that actually works in the film’s favor because those moments tend to happen when Joe is asserting control.

Without that pressure from Joe, Michael’s rise would feel like a product of the industry. With it, because of how Michael pushed back, the transformation of the music industry feels much more like a direct result of Michael Jackson’s evolution.

Sound and the Music

What elevates all of this is how the film treats performance as a complete package. It’s about what you see on screen as well as what you hear and feel in the theater. Using Michael’s original recordings makes a huge difference, but it’s what they do with those recordings that really matters. The vocals, the movement, and the physical performance are so precisely aligned that you never question what you’re watching. This creates an interesting dilemma. Is this just an incredibly disciplined performance from Jaafar Jackson, or is there something happening behind the scenes to bring that level of precision together? I don’t know the answer, but I do know this is the best lip syncing I’ve ever seen in a film. It’s seamless to the point where the illusion disappears, and that lets you stay fully locked into the performance without ever being pulled out of it.

From there, the sound design and music production take over, and this is where the theatrical experience really comes alive. This isn’t just a matter of placing tracks into the film because the music feels rebuilt for the theatrical experience. The mixing, the clarity of Michael’s voice, and the way the sound fills the room, especially in IMAX or Dolby, create something that is much closer to a live concert than a traditional film soundtrack. You feel it in your chest and in your bones, and it creates an immediate, physical response that makes you want to move. When the film ended in my theater, people weren’t just getting up to leave, they were dancing their way out. I never expected to see that, and honestly, that says more about how well this film handles the music than anything else I could point to.

What Works / What Doesn’t

Not everything works perfectly. The time jumps can be jarring, especially as Michael ages. Some relationships, particularly with his mother, feel underdeveloped since you will find yourself wanting her to push back more against Joe rather than simply comfort Michael.

Jaafar Jackson’s performance is impressive, especially given that this is his first role, but there are moments where you can feel the lack of experience. Still, he succeeds in bringing his uncle to life in a way that feels authentic enough for the film to work.

Where the film really succeeds is in its focus. By narrowing in on Michael Jackson’s rise to solo stardom, it creates a strong thematic through line around control, identity, and creativity. Plus, the use of music as an emotional bridge between the story and the audience is incredibly effective.

Final Evaluation

So, is Michael ticket worthy? Yes, Michael is worth the price of the ticket and your time. Despite its flaws and omissions, the film succeeds in what it sets out to do. It brings a complicated public and private person to the screen in a way that is emotionally engaging, even when it’s uncomfortable, and that discomfort is part of the point of this film.

This isn’t a film for everyone. If you’re not a Michael Jackson fan, or if you’re looking for a complete historical biography, this probably isn’t going to work for you. Also, if the controversies surrounding his life are deeply upsetting, this may not be something you want to engage with because you won’t get the obvious acknowledgement you want from the story.

However, if you want to understand what it felt like to experience his rise, from both his perspective and from the general public’s experience, there is something here for you because you will get a sense of why this story matters.

At the end of the day, this film doesn’t try to resolve Michael Jackson as a man or a myth. It just gives you the opportunity to sit between the lines to experience both sides of his story.

So, have you seen Michael yet? Are you planning to? I really want to hear your take, because I think this is one of those films where the reaction is going to be just as interesting as the film itself.

If you enjoyed this review, please give it a like and subscribe for more. You can also visit my YouTube channel at @ErinUnderwood for more videos.