Why Lifelong Fans Believe 'Michael' Hits All the Right Notes Despite Critics

By Stacy M. Brown Senior Global Correspondent

The long-awaited Michael Jackson biopic “Michael,” set for worldwide release April 24, is arriving under a wave of sharply divided reactions, with several major outlets delivering blistering—if not unfair—reviews even as others acknowledge its appeal for devoted fans of the King of Pop.

Publications including The Wrap, The Daily Beast, UPI, and RogerEbert.com have issued some of the harshest critiques, with one reviewer describing the film as “a filmed playlist in search of a story,” while another labeled it “an unmitigated disaster.”

The criticism centers on what many reviewers describe as a narrow and incomplete portrait of Jackson’s life. The Daily Beast called the film “estate-authorized fluff,” arguing that it avoids the most controversial aspects of Jackson’s story and presents only a carefully controlled version of events. The Wrap raised similar concerns, noting that the film “remembers the time but doesn’t look at the man in the mirror" and sidesteps the allegations that defined much of the latter part of Jackson’s life.

Across multiple reviews, critics point to the same issue: a focus on the music and rise to fame while avoiding deeper examination of the artist himself. A Financial Times review described the film as “a stilted waxwork of a movie” that “does little to illuminate the man or his genius.”

The Guardian’s assessment was equally direct, calling the film “bland, bowdlerized … and bad,” arguing that it relies heavily on familiar biopic clichés and offers a “frustratingly shallow” portrayal. UPI also found fault with the storytelling, writing that the film “offers little insight” and leans on standard biopic shortcuts rather than meaningful exploration of Jackson’s life and motivations.

Even reviews that were less severe acknowledged the same limitations. Variety noted that the film avoids any reference to the allegations that surfaced in the 1990s, leaving “a hint of a void at its center” and making clear that “this is not a movie about Michael Jackson’s dark side.”

Colman Domingo channels Joseph Jackson in "Michael"/Lionsgate

Public Enemy's Chuck famously sang, "Bring the noise!" Here, we paraphrase, "Kill the noise!"

Not all reactions have been negative. Early audience responses and some critics have pointed to Jaafar Jackson’s performance as a standout, with praise for how closely he captures his uncle’s voice, movement, and stage presence. Social media reactions focused on the musical sequences as the film’s strongest moments, even as some viewers described the overall story as “generic” and “one-note.”

That divide is revealed in one of the more measured takes from The Hollywood Reporter, which framed the film as one that will depend heavily on the viewer’s perspective, writing that those who can separate the music from the man may find value in the experience, while others may not. That assessment aligns with the view expressed in this reporter’s review, which opens with a clear declaration: “This film is a thriller," a nod not only to Jackson’s iconic work but also to the way the movie leans fully into the music, the movement, and the global connection that defined his career. From its opening moments, driven by “Wanna Be Startin’ Something,” the film “doesn’t build slowly; it drops you right into it,” placing viewers inside the sound, rhythm, and energy that once powered Jackson’s tours and made him a worldwide phenomenon.

The review makes clear that the film understands its audience, pointing to its Berlin launch as a signal of where Jackson’s legacy continues to thrive, with fans across generations and continents still carrying his music and image forward. It also places the spotlight where it belongs: on the performances, noting that Jaafar Jackson settles into the role in a way that at times makes viewers “stop thinking about who’s playing the role and just see Michael,” while Colman Domingo’s portrayal of Joseph Jackson captures the pressure and control that shaped the artist’s early life.

The review acknowledges the film’s clear creative choice to stay with the rise and the music, presenting Jackson’s relentless pursuit of greatness, rather than attempting to cover every chapter of his life. “The film makes its move,” the review states, immersing audiences in the sound and spectacle that defined Jackson’s legacy and keeping its focus on the moments that made him a global icon.

For critics, omissions of scandal are too significant to ignore, leaving a story many of the complainers feel is incomplete. However, for the fans, the music, performances, and recreation of iconic moments should be enough.

“If you are unwilling to separate the art from the artist, this will not be a movie for you,” The Hollywood Reporter concluded. “But for lifelong fans who cherish the music, the movie delivers.”