Review: Michael (2026)

There's a moment in Michael when a 25-year-old Michael Jackson is confronted in his bedroom at the Jackson family home by his overbearing, abusive father, Joseph. Recognizing that Michael has outgrown the family band, the patriarch and architect of the Jackson 5 wants the newly-crowned "King of Pop" to tour with the Jacksons one more time so he can capitalize on his son's success and keep the gravy train going. When Michael hesitates, Joseph says (I'm paraphrasing) "what do you want to do, surround yourself with people who will only say yes to you?" The scene then holds for a few moments without anyone speaking. The implication is clear: that's exactly what Michael wants. This is the only moment in the entire film that features any sort of objectivity about Michael Jackson and hints that he may have been complicit in the eventual decline of his career amid controversy and medical issues that were caused, in part, by heavy prescription drug use given to him by doctors who did, in fact, only say yes to him. 

For the length of the film, Michael Jackson is portrayed as an angelic genius with no flaws other than failing to believe in himself--but even that's not his fault, because Joseph beat his kids whenever they showed independence. Biopics are often works of hagiography, knighting and sainting their subjects with the fervor of the religious devout, but Michael takes this to a level we've rarely seen before; first of all, it's produced by every member of the Jackson 5 (Tito, Jackie, Jermaine, and Marlon, not to mention sister La Toya. Michael's son Prince is also an executive producer.) But Michael himself is played by Jermaine's son (and Michael's nephew) Jaafar Jackson, making this the official product of the Jackson family as told by the Jackson family. Because of this, the MJ in this film never loses his temper, never swears, never drinks, never says anything unkind about anyone else, and most certainly never does anything to raise eyebrows as being inappropriate. All those crotch grabs that Michael Jackson was both famous and infamous for? We see it only once. 

Jaafar, in his movie debut, does a great job living in the skin of his famous uncle. He often looks like Michael, certainly dances like Michael, and he even sounds like Michael--though in the age of AI, I can never be sure that I'm not being duped by technology. I'd like to think that I'm hearing an actor who has captured the essence of a real person, but given how much CGI must have been used to recreate Michael's multiple plastic surgeries, one can never tell. 

The story frequently sticks close to the formula, regaling audiences with a walk down memory lane of the "greatest hits" of Michael's early life. We're there for the first Motown recording session, Michael's debut solo album, the birth of the moonwalk, the creation of the "Thriller" music video, and so much more. The goal of the movie clearly seems to be to salvage Michael Jackson's reputation from the controversy that plagued the artist throughout the 1990s and 2000s. It's a look back through rose-colored glasses, removing literally anything remotely unsavory and focusing on the highs of an incredible career by recreating moments that most of us know by heart.

Because of this, the movie is quite a bit of fun to watch. So fun, in fact, that it's easy to forget that this is basically a commercial for the Michael Jackson and Jackson 5 music catalog. It shows remarkable restraint on the part of the filmmakers that the movie doesn't end with a QR code before the credits roll so that audiences can buy or stream the songs on the way home from the theater. I'm mostly joking, but I don't think we're too far away from that happening in a similar movie within the next few years. In an increasingly bold, soulless biopic market, Michael might be the most overtly commercial to date.

I'm writing this review on opening weekend, but I'm already hearing reports that this isn't quite the story that Antoine Fuqua, the filmmaker behind The Replacement Killers, Training Day, and The Equalizer, set out to make, and that the production was plagued by reshoots dictated by the Jackson family. It's easy to believe this is true, since there's an awful lot that isn't in Michael, with the story ending in 1988 after the incredible success of Bad. As a result, Michael makes for a fun-but-shallow movie that may accurately reflect the emancipation of Michael Jackson from his father, but fails to capture the nuance of the man himself.