Antoine Fuqua’s long-awaited biopic Michael finally answers the question fans have asked for years: who could possibly play the King of Pop on screen? The answer, fittingly, is his own nephew — Jaafar Jackson, making his film debut in a performance that’s been called eerily convincing. From the moment he steps into frame, the resemblance is uncanny enough to make you forget, for long stretches, that you’re watching an actor at all rather than archival footage of the man himself.
From Gary, Indiana to Global Icon
Directed by Fuqua and written by John Logan, Michael follows the singer’s early life, starting with his discovery as the lead of the Jackson Five in Gary, Indiana, and tracking his rise into one of the most ambitious entertainers of his era. The film doesn’t rush through this origin story — it lingers on the grueling rehearsal schedules, the pressure imposed by a demanding father, and the slow transformation of a shy, gifted child into a global phenomenon. By the time the story reaches Michael’s solo career, the audience has a real sense of the cost behind the shine.
The film covers a lot of ground from there: the Motown years, the meteoric rise of pop music superstardom, and the creative explosion that produced Thriller, Bad, and Beat It. Fuqua clearly understands that these songs aren’t just needle-drops — they’re the emotional architecture of the film, marking each major turning point in Jackson’s life. The sequence built around Thriller in particular is staged with real ambition, treating the song’s cultural impact as a genuine narrative climax rather than a nostalgic checkbox.
The Choreography Is the Point
Wisely, the film leans into recreating some of Jackson’s most iconic music videos and live performances rather than simply narrating his biography through dialogue and voiceover. This is where Michael is at its strongest. Jaafar Jackson’s dance moves have drawn particular praise from critics and fans alike, who describe his physicality as remarkably close to the real thing — channeling the same restless, electric energy that made routines like Smooth Criminal‘s gravity-defying lean so iconic in the first place. Watching him hit those familiar poses feels less like impersonation and more like resurrection.
It’s clear an enormous amount of training and choreographic research went into these sequences, and it pays off. The concert scenes have a kinetic, almost documentary-like immediacy, and the film trusts its lead’s physical performance to carry entire stretches without dialogue. For a movie about one of the greatest performers of all time, that’s exactly the right instinct.
What’s In, and What’s Left Out
Because the story runs from Jackson’s childhood with the Jackson 5 through the tour supporting his Bad album in 1988, the film stops short of later-career touchstones. Don’t expect Black or White, Remember the Time, or the concert documentary This Is It — those all belong to a chapter of Jackson’s life this movie doesn’t reach. It’s a deliberate choice that keeps the narrative focused and tightly scoped, though it also means the film sidesteps the more complicated, allegation-laden decades that many fans and critics expected it to address head-on. Ending the story in 1988 lets Fuqua tell a relatively clean coming-of-age-into-superstardom arc, but it’s also a convenient stopping point that avoids the murkier chapters of Jackson’s life entirely.
There’s no dedicated detour into Jackson’s earlier film work either — no Captain EO, no callback to The Wiz — though the specter of his cinematic ambitions, later realized in full with 1988’s Moonwalker, hovers in the background of every stage sequence. You get the sense the filmmakers were aware of these gaps and made peace with them in service of a tighter, more focused film. Whether that’s a satisfying trade-off will depend on how much you wanted this movie to be a comprehensive account of Jackson’s whole life versus a snapshot of his ascent.
Michael Reception: Box Office and Critical Response
Commercially, Michael has been a phenomenon, going on to become one of the highest-grossing musical biographical films ever released, eventually outpacing box-office giants in the biography genre altogether. That kind of box office performance for an original biopic, in an era dominated by franchises and sequels, says something about how much appetite remains for Jackson’s story and legacy. Audiences have embraced the film enthusiastically, giving it a very high approval score even as professional critics have been considerably more skeptical.
Critics have been far less kind than audiences. The general take is that Jaafar Jackson’s performance is the film’s saving grace, but that the movie itself plays more like a highlight reel than a genuine character study — long on spectacle, short on insight into the man behind the legend. Several reviewers went further, arguing the film sanitizes its subject rather than confronting his contradictions head-on, presenting a polished, authorized version of events rather than a warts-and-all portrait. That criticism isn’t unfounded: for a film covering a figure as complicated and scrutinized as Michael Jackson, Michael often seems more interested in celebration than examination.
Still, it’s worth noting that biopics about beloved musicians have faced similar criticism before, and audiences have historically responded to spectacle and nostalgia over unflinching honesty. Michael fits comfortably into that lineage — imperfect as history, but effective as entertainment.
Verdict
Michael is a spectacular, meticulously choreographed tribute — a film that understands the sound and movement of its subject better than almost any music biopic before it. Where it falters is depth: it would rather replay the highlight reel than sit in the discomfort of the man behind Man in the Mirror. As a celebration of a career, it soars, propelled by a genuinely remarkable central performance. As a warts-and-all portrait of a complicated icon, it plays it safe, leaving the harder questions about Jackson’s legacy for another film — possibly a sequel — to tackle.
If you go in wanting spectacle, nostalgia, and a career-spanning victory lap set to some of the greatest pop music ever recorded, Michael delivers in full. If you’re hoping for a searching, critical examination of who Michael Jackson really was, you’ll likely leave wanting more.
Rating: 3/5 — A crowd-pleasing spectacle that trades insight for spectacle, but Jaafar Jackson’s performance alone makes it worth the ticket.Antoine Fuqua’s long-awaited biopic “Michael” finally answers the question fans have asked for years: who could possibly play the King of Pop on screen? The answer, fittingly, is his own nephew — Jaafar Jackson, making his film debut in a performance that’s been called eerily convincing. Directed by Fuqua and written by John Logan, “Michael” follows the singer’s early life, starting with his discovery as the lead of the Jackson Five and tracking his rise into one of the most ambitious entertainers of his era. The film covers a lot of ground: the Motown years, the meteoric rise of pop music superstardom, and the creative explosion that produced “Thriller,” “Bad,” and “Beat It.” Wisely, the film leans into recreating some of Jackson’s most iconic music videos and live performances rather than simply narrating his biography. Jaafar Jackson’s dance moves have drawn particular praise from critics and fans alike, who describe his physicality as remarkably close to the real thing — channeling the same energy that made routines like “Smooth Criminal”‘s gravity-defying lean so iconic in the first place. Because the story runs from Jackson’s childhood with the Jackson 5 through the tour supporting his Bad album in 1988, the film stops short of later-career touchstones. There’s no dedicated detour into Jackson’s earlier film work either — no “Captain EO,” no callback to “The Wiz” — though the specter of his cinematic ambitions (later realized in 1988’s Moonwalker) hovers in the background of every stage sequence. Commercially, “Michael” has been a phenomenon, going on to become one of the highest-grossing musical biographical films ever released, eventually outpacing box-office giants in the biography genre altogether. Audiences have embraced it enthusiastically, giving it a very high approval score even as professional critics have been considerably more skeptical. Critics have been far less kind than audiences. The general take is that Jaafar Jackson’s performance is the film’s saving grace, but that the movie itself plays more like a highlight reel than a genuine character study — long on spectacle, short on insight into the man behind the legend. Several reviewers went further, arguing the film sanitizes its subject rather than confronting his contradictions head-on. “Michael” is a spectacular, meticulously choreographed tribute — a film that understands the sound and movement of its subject better than almost any music biopic before it. Where it falters is depth: it would rather replay the highlight reel than sit in the discomfort of the man behind “Man in the Mirror.” As a celebration of a career, it soars. As a warts-and-all portrait of a complicated icon, it plays it safe. Rating: 3/5 — A crowd-pleasing spectacle that trades insight for spectacle, but Jaafar Jackson’s performance alone makes it worth the ticket.
Leave a Reply