The release of Michael in April 2026 feels like the inevitable culmination of Hollywood’s biopic wave. After Bohemian Rhapsody (2018) turned Freddie Mercury’s story into a billion-dollar box office phenomenon, the studios adjusted their lights and focused the spotlight on musical legends.
Elton John’s Rocketman followed, then Elvis, Whitney Houston: I Wanna Dance With Somebody, Bob Marley: One Love, and even Amy Winehouse’s Back to Black. Some were a success, others flopped, but the trajectory was clear: eventually, the industry would circle back to one of the greatest to do, the king, Michael Jackson.
With a budget of $155 million, Michael opened to a staggering $217 million in its first weekend. That figure alone almost eclipsed the lifetime grosses of several earlier biopics like Elvis. Nostalgia or perhaps the influence, I mean, there was a reason he was crowned the King of Pop. That legacy guarantees audience interest, regardless of critical reception.
And indeed, critics have been harsh on this movie, Rotten Tomatoes critics’ score as of April 26 sits at 37 percent, while audiences have embraced it with a 97 percent score. IMDb lands somewhere in between at 7.7, showing the divide between professional reviewers and fans.
Basics
Michael is directed by Antoine Fuqua, who’s best known for movies like Training Day and The Equalizer. It’s produced by Lionsgate along with GK Films and Optimum Productions, and written by John Logan.
The cast is stacked with Jaafar Jackson (Michael’s own nephew, in his acting debut) playing adult Michael, Juliano Krue Valdi as young Michael, Colman Domingo as strict father Joseph Jackson, and Nia Long as supportive mother Katherine. You also get solid turns from Miles Teller as attorney John Branca, KeiLyn Durrel Jones as longtime bodyguard Bill Bray, and others like Kendrick Sampson as Quincy Jones.
From a technical standpoint, the movie is much more detailed than I expected. The attention to detail in the production design makes the world feel incredibly believable. You can see a clear distinction between the 60s, 70s, and 80s just by looking at the cars and the interior design of the houses.
The wardrobe and outfits evolve perfectly with the timeline. Even the stage setups for the performances look accurate to their specific eras, the 80s stages look appropriately clunky and grand, with the right lighting and prop sizes. When the movie takes you into the recording studios, you see period-accurate microphones and gear that really make you feel like you are there during the creation of these hits.
Cast and the father-son story
Jaafar Jackson is amazing as Michael, and Colman Domingo is incredible as his father, Joe Jackson. The casting nails it, not just for the performances but for the sheer resemblance to the real-life figures. If you look up photos of the people who were around Michael at the time, you can see how much effort went into finding actors who looked the part.
Despite the title, I wouldn’t call this a straightforward Michael Jackson story. It’s really more of a story about Michael and his father, Joe. It follows the family dynamics of the Jackson 5 and shows how Michael eventually leaves the group to become the star we recognise today.
However, this focus means some famous faces are missing. For instance, Diana Ross isn’t in the movie at all. You also don’t see much of young Janet Jackson, which feels like a missed opportunity given how close they were.
I thought the movie tried to touch on the human side of Michael, particularly with the Peter Pan references. But in general, it portrays him in a very positive, almost sanitised light. While it explores the conflict with his father, it doesn’t really challenge Michael’s character or delve into the deeper controversies of his life.
One interesting part of the story is how much time is given to Michael’s bodyguard and his lawyer as you move past the second act. They are surprisingly prominent figures in this version of the story, which might surprise people who assumed Quincy Jones was the most influential person in his professional life.
While Quincy is there, the movie doesn’t dive as deep into their collaboration as some might expect, especially regarding the development and selection of songs for Thriller. Especially for a person who has seen Quincy Jones documentary Quincy.
If I had one major frustration, it’s the editing. The movie tries to cram a massive amount of material into a two-hour experience. It covers the 60s, 70s, and early 80s, but it feels like it’s constantly rushing to hit the next milestone.
The editing is very snappy and blends events with the music quite well, but it can feel a bit much. For a viewer like me who wants to sit with a scene and let the emotion breathe, the constant movement can be frustrating.
Conclusion
Despite the pacing issues, there are some very satisfying moments, especially for fans of his music videos. The recreations of the making of Thriller and Beat It are incredibly effective.
Seeing the iconic red jacket and the lead-up to the classic choreography is a bit more insightful than most would expect and really takes you back to that time.
Awesome experience
Overall, this is a movie built on nostalgia. If you love his music and want a general, positive look at his upbringing and early career, this is the movie for you. It captures how great he was as a performer, even if it stays on the positive surface of his personality. If you grew up in the 80s and 90s, the music on the big screen is an awesome experience.
If you are a younger fan, I’d suggest watching This is It, the Michael Jackson documentary from Spike Lee and the Quincy documentary first to get the full context of his musical genius, then watch this for the visual spectacle.
It isn’t a perfect film, and it definitely feels rushed, but it’s an interesting exploration of a father-son relationship vs fame and money. I also think it’s a heartwarming look at a career that defined an era. For the fans, it’s exactly what they wanted to see.