The new Michael Jackson biopic Michael puts Michael Jackson’s artistry front and centre, but leaves key questions about his life unanswered
by Paul Cashmere
The long-anticipated Michael Jackson biopic Michael has arrived in 2026 with a performance that commands attention and a narrative that will continue to provoke debate. Led by Jaafar Jackson, the nephew of Michael Jackson, the film traces the rise of the King Of Pop through to the end of the Bad era in 1988, delivering meticulously staged recreations of landmark performances while sidestepping some of the most contested chapters of Jackson’s life.
For audiences, the immediate takeaway is the uncanny central performance. Jaafar Jackson captures the physicality, voice and stagecraft of Michael Jackson with precision, particularly across sequences tied to Off The Wall, Thriller and Bad. The choreography is executed with technical fidelity, reflecting the evolution of Jackson’s performance language from disco-era groove to the sharper, militaristic precision that defined the late 1980s.
The film’s significance lies in how it reframes Jackson’s legacy for a new generation while reinforcing existing divides. Backed by the Michael Jackson Estate, Michael operates within tightly controlled parameters, choosing to conclude its story at the commercial peak of the Bad World Tour. That editorial decision shapes the entire narrative, positioning Jackson as an artist in ascent rather than a figure navigating the complexities that followed.
From a structural standpoint, the film adheres to a performance-driven format. Key musical milestones are recreated with high production values, including the breakthrough success of Off The Wall in 1979, which the film presents as Jackson’s solo arrival despite his earlier Motown releases Got To Be There, Ben, Music & Me and Forever, Michael. This condensation of the timeline prioritises momentum over historical completeness.
The depiction of Joe Jackson aligns broadly with documented accounts of his strict management style during the Jackson 5 era, although the film tempers some of the harsher interpretations found in biographies and previous interviews. In contrast, figures such as bodyguard Bill Bray and lawyer John Branca are elevated into stabilising influences. Bray is portrayed as a constant protector, reflecting his real-life role across decades, while Branca’s depiction as a guiding strategist aligns with his involvement in Jackson’s transition to global superstardom and his ongoing role with the Estate.
Notably absent is Janet Jackson, a key figure in both the Jackson family and the broader pop landscape of the 1980s. Her exclusion from the film follows her decision not to participate in the project, resulting in a narrative gap during a period when her own career, particularly around Control and Rhythm Nation 1814, intersected with her brother’s trajectory.
The production’s handling of controversy is where the divide between audience and critical response becomes most pronounced. By design, Michael avoids the allegations and legal battles that defined Jackson’s later years. Reports of significant reshoots and legal constraints contributed to the removal of material referencing the 1993 allegations, leaving the film focused almost entirely on Jackson’s artistic output and early career narrative.
This approach has led to criticism that the film functions as an estate-approved retrospective rather than a comprehensive biography. Some reviewers have pointed to factual inconsistencies and selective storytelling, particularly in how certain historical events are framed or omitted. The portrayal of industry dynamics, including resistance to airing Jackson’s videos on MTV, is dramatised through a cameo by Mike Myers as CBS Records executive Walter Yetnikoff, echoing familiar archetypes of industry gatekeeping.
From a catalogue perspective, the film reinforces the centrality of Thriller within Jackson’s legacy, while positioning Bad as the culmination of his initial creative peak. The absence of later works such as Dangerous or HIStory underscores the film’s deliberate endpoint and raises the possibility of a continuation should a second instalment proceed.
The broader question surrounding Michael is its place within the current wave of music biopics. Following commercially successful titles like Bohemian Rhapsody, the genre has increasingly leaned towards celebratory narratives that prioritise music and performance over critical examination. Michael sits firmly within that trend, offering a visually compelling but tightly curated account of an artist whose story remains complex and contested.
For fans, the film delivers on its promise as a large-scale tribute to Michael Jackson’s music and performance innovation. For others, it will be defined as much by what it omits as what it includes.
As it stands, Michael is both a technical achievement and a selective retelling, one that reinforces the enduring impact of Michael Jackson’s catalogue while leaving the full scope of his life open to continued scrutiny.
Treat ‘Michael’ as you did ‘Titanic’. Both are “based on a true story”.
Stay updated with your free Noise11.com daily music news email alert. Subscribe to Noise11 Music News here
Be the first to see NOISE11.com’s newest interviews and special features on YouTube. See things first—Subscribe to Noise11 on YouTube
Follow Noise11.com on social media:
Bluesky
Facebook – Comment on the news of the day
