Michael: A Glittering Tribute or a Sanitized History?

The legend of Michael Jackson is one of the most complex narratives in music history—a blend of unparalleled genius, global superstardom, and deep-seated controversy. When Antoine Fuqua announced a new biopic titled “Michael,” expectations were sky-high. But does the film offer a raw look at the man behind the myth, or is it simply a carefully curated image restoration project?

A Revelation in Performance: Jaafar Jackson

If the film has one undeniable triumph, it is the casting of Jaafar Jackson. Taking on the role of his uncle is no small feat, yet Jaafar is a genuine revelation. He doesn’t just mimic the movements; he captures the essence of the King of Pop with a naturalistic ease that is breathtaking.

From the seamless lip-synching of iconic hits to the flawless execution of the moonwalk, Jaafar brings a shimmer and heartache to the screen that anchors the movie. Alongside him, Juliano Valdi provides a poignant portrayal of a young Michael during the Jackson 5 era, capturing the wide-eyed ambition of a child prodigy.

The Narrative: The Man Behind the Curtain

While the performances dazzle, the screenplay by John Logan feels surprisingly banal. The film operates less like a traditional biopic and more like a carefully managed public relations exercise. By focusing heavily on the 1960s through the 1980s, the movie effectively pushes the more “inconvenient” aspects of Jackson’s later life to the periphery.

The film portrays Michael as an innocent soul battling an abusive father and a destructive drive for perfection. While this is a part of his truth, the “curtain” stays firmly shut regarding the allegations and scandals that defined his final years. For those familiar with documentaries like Leaving Neverland, the omissions in “Michael” are glaring and conspicuous.

The Family Dynamic: Tyranny and Tenderness

One of the most riveting aspects of the film is the depiction of Joe Jackson, played by the ferocious Colman Domingo. Domingo captures the tyrant within the patriarch, turning the family living room into a claustrophobic training ground where Michael is pushed to the brink of exhaustion.

n
• Joe Jackson: A brutal philosophy of “winner or loser” that fueled Michael’s success and trauma.
• Katherine Jackson: Played by Nia Long, she provides the emotional warmth, though her character remains underwritten.
• The Jackson 5: A vibrant depiction of the group that brought essential colour to the pop charts.

The Verdict: Is it Worth Watching?

“Michael” occasionally reaches heights of pure cinematic magic, particularly during the climactic 1988 performance of “Bad” at London’s Wembley Stadium. It is a showstopper that reminds us why the world fell in love with him.

However, as a piece of storytelling, it feels incomplete. By avoiding the interrogation of the mythology and opting for hagiography, the film caters more to devoted fans than to those seeking a rigorous exploration of a complicated life. If you are looking for a visual tribute to the music and dance of Michael Jackson, this film is a win. If you are looking for the full, unvarnished truth, you may find it lacking.

For more information on the legacy of the King of Pop, you can explore the Billboard archives to see his chart-topping impact on global music.