Michael Jackson Biopic ‘Michael’ Sparks Critical Debate Over Depth and Honesty

Antoine Fuqua’s Michael, released in April 2026, has ignited widespread discussion among critics and audiences for its portrayal of the King of Pop. Starring Jaafar Jackson in the titular role, the film chronicles Michael Jackson’s journey from his early days with the Jackson Five to the height of his solo fame, culminating in the 1988 Wembley Stadium concert. Despite strong performances and meticulous attention to period detail, the biopic has drawn sharp criticism for what reviewers describe as a significant omission of the controversies that defined Jackson’s later life and legacy.

The film’s narrative deliberately concludes before the allegations of child abuse that surfaced in the 1990s, a choice that has led many to characterize it as an incomplete or sanitized account. The Guardian’s review condemned the movie as “bland, bowdlerised … and bad,” arguing that it assembles every music-movie cliché while failing to confront the “elephant in the living room” of Jackson’s complex persona. Similarly, the BBC described Michael as “a bland and barely competent daytime TV movie” that removes “everything that might be deemed dramatic” or contentious, leaving behind a reverential but emotionally flat portrait.

RTÉ’s review acknowledged the strength of the performances, particularly highlighting Jaafar Jackson’s portrayal of his uncle from the making of Off the Wall through Bad and Juliano Valdi’s compelling turn as the young Michael. However, it concluded that the film ultimately tells “only half the story,” noting that its cooperation with the Michael Jackson estate may have influenced its reluctance to engage with more challenging aspects of the star’s life.

This selective storytelling has sparked broader conversations about the responsibilities of biopics, especially those involving controversial figures produced with family or estate involvement. While Michael succeeds as a nostalgic jukebox biopic for fans of Jackson’s music and early career, its avoidance of the darker chapters of his life has left many questioning whether it offers a genuine portrait or a carefully curated tribute. As discussions continue about a potential sequel—referred to in the film’s closing surtitle as “The story continues”—the debate over how to balance artistic honesty with institutional cooperation remains unresolved.