Michael: a great musical tribute. An overly gentle biopic

Michael is the biographical film about Michael Jackson directed by Antoine Fuqua, a fine action-film director responsible for Training Day and the The Equalizer.

It is also produced by Graham King, who was previously behind Bohemian Rhapsody, so the ingredients look promising from the outset.

It also has the direct involvement of the singer's estate: John Branca and John McClain -not to be confused with John McClane, the lead in Die Hard– are among the producers.

That has two sides: a positive one, because it gives the film access to his music and inner circle, but it also helps explain why it treats Michael with such—too much—care.

The lead is Jaafar Jackson, Michael's nephew and a newcomer to a film role of this scale. He is joined by Colman Domingo as Joe Jackson (Michael's father) and Nia Long as Katherine (his mother), as well as Miles Teller (an actor I love) as John Branca.

The truth is that, with these resources, I expected the film to grab me from the first minute. It did not.

Bohemian Rhapsody, for example, had already hooked you within its first ten minutes. Michael takes time to get going and begins on a rather cold note. That said, things improve considerably once the music starts, Jaafar begins to dance and the film becomes the spectacle we were expecting

Michael plot

The film covers the first part of Michael Jackson's life: his childhood in the Jackson 5, the group's success, his growth as an artist and his transformation into a star capable of eclipsing his entire family.

But the underlying story that truly holds the film together is much simpler: Michael tries to escape his father's control.

Joe Jackson runs his children's careers with brutal discipline. He leads them to success, but that same control eventually suffocates Michael, who needs to make his own decisions, work with other people and build an identity that does not depend on his family.

In that respect, it reminded me quite a lot of King Richard, although the father there, played by Will Smith, was more honest and considerably more likeable.

As for the story itself, there are not many twists likely to surprise anyone. We all know, at least in broad terms, what eventually happened to Michael Jackson. The interest lies in seeing how the film reconstructs that path.

Jaafar Jackson is the best thing in the film

Jaafar Jackson looks remarkably like his uncle. And not only physically.

The movements, poses, gestures and the way he looks at the audience are impressive. When he starts dancing, it feels as though you are watching the real Michael Jackson.

Yes, he works better on stage than in the dramatic scenes, but he is not bad in those either. He had an extremely difficult job and comes through it very well. He is, without any doubt, the best thing in the film.

Perhaps the standout is the performance of “Billie Jean” in the Motown 25 , special, but every musical number works. Whenever a song begins, the film becomes (much) more interesting and pulls you in.

The problem may be that these are long sequences. Although they are the best part of the film, they make its more than two-hour running time feel a little noticeable.

Colman Domingo is the perfect counterpoint

Colman Domingo is excellent as Joe Jackson.

You completely believe him as a demanding, controlling father capable of justifying any method because he is convinced that he knows what is best for his children.

He is not simply the villain of the story. The film acknowledges that he was essential in taking the family as far as it went, while also making clear the damage he caused.

Nia Long has less room as Katherine Jackson, but when she speaks, people listen. She conveys well the position of a woman and mother overshadowed for years by her husband's authority, until she decides not to be any longer.

A portrait with too few shades of grey

The main problem with Michael is that it is far too gentle for the life of someone with so many shades of light and darkness. Quite literally.

The physical transformation is shown very subtly. His insecurities, surgeries and vitiligo are mentioned, but the film does not explore deeply enough how they affected his personality or the way the public began to see him.

Also striking is the absence of Janet Jackson. As the film progressed, I expected her to appear or carry some weight within the family, but she never does. Janet, Randy and Rebbie were left out of this version; according to La Toya Jackson, Janet declined to take part.

And then there is the most obvious issue: the allegations involving minors.

It is true that the first public allegations (in 1993) came after the point where the film ends (in 1988, with the Victory Tour). But it has also emerged that an earlier version of the screenplay did include that period and that the production was altered to remove it.

That leaves me with a very clear feeling at the end: they owe us a more uncomfortable and controversial sequel. Precisely the film that would have to explain the most complicated part of his life.

I do not have much hope that it will ever be made.

Verdict: is Michael worth watching?

Michael works very well as a musical tribute and considerably less well as a complete biography.

Jaafar Jackson is fantastic, Colman Domingo is the perfect antagonist and all the musical numbers are entertaining. If you like Michael Jackson, pop or big-budget music videos, it is hard to imagine leaving disappointed.

Otherwise, it feels a little long and takes time to get going. It also offers an overly kind version of a complex figure and ends just when the hardest part of the story should begin.

In short: entertaining and spectacular when the music is playing, incomplete when it stops.

Technical details

Item	Information
Title	Michael
Year	2026
Running time	2 hours and 9 minutes
Director	Antoine Fuqua
Main cast	Jaafar Jackson, Colman Domingo, Nia Long, Miles Teller and Laura Harrier
Genre	Biographical and musical drama
Country	United States
Spoilers in the review	No