Michael is facing a fierce critical backlash after several reviewers described the new Michael Jackson film as a whitewash and a heavily sanitised retelling of his life and career. The biopic, which stars Jaafar Jackson as his uncle, is being judged for what it leaves out as much as for what it shows. Critics say the film sidesteps the abuse allegations linked to Jackson and instead leans almost entirely on the music.
Michael puts the music front and centre
The film follows Jackson from his rise with the Jackson 5 through to his solo success, with musical performances dominating the running time. The production is financially backed by the late superstar’s estate, and it uses his original vocals for the musical numbers. Several reviewers praised Jaafar Jackson’s performance, but argued that the surrounding film reduces the subject to a polished showcase rather than a full portrait.
That omission is at the core of the criticism. The movie does not address the sexual abuse allegations against Jackson, after a historic non-disclosure agreement prompted some footage referencing them to be removed. In one review, Peter Bradshaw of said the film is “rammed with every music-movie cliche” and plays “like a 127-minute trailer montage. ”
Critics call the film sanitized and ghoulish
Clarisse Loughrey of the Independent gave the film one star and called it a “ghoulish, soulless cash grab, ” arguing that it mechanically recreates the most famous images of Jackson’s career. Kevin Maher of the Times also gave it one star, saying it would be remembered as a “watershed moment” for the music biopic genre, and not for the right reasons.
Maher wrote that the film becomes detached from reality and delivers “two hours of pure and unadulterated [rubbish], ” while still conceding that the music scenes are “quite brilliant and thrilling. ” The Telegraph, meanwhile, said the film “refuses to address the elephant in the room. ” The Hollywood Reporter said it delivers for lifelong fans who cherish the music.
The response centers on what Michael leaves out
The critical response has also focused on the wider shape of the film. Reviewers say it includes the expected rise-to-fame milestones, but avoids the harder questions around Jackson’s private life and legacy. In one account, the film is described as a stylized sequence of music-movie clichés, while the supporting cast is said to be largely muted around Jaafar Jackson’s central performance.
That framing has made Michael a lightning rod for a familiar debate in music biopics: whether celebration can stand in for scrutiny. Peter Bradshaw said the film cannot quite bring itself to show Jackson as an abuse victim, while other reviewers argue that the result is a slick but emotionally empty portrait.
What comes next for Michael
For now, the debate around Michael is likely to remain centered on its omissions, its reliance on familiar showbiz imagery, and the question of who the film is meant to satisfy. The reviews suggest the music may carry the production, but the broader story remains unresolved on screen. If the film becomes a box-office success, the conversation around Michael will only grow louder.
