Can a Michael Jackson biopic ever tell the full story?
Michael (2026 film) is already one of the most talked-about films of the year, but not for the reasons you might expect.
While audiences are drawn to the music and performances, critics are far more divided.
The scores tell the story
Early reviews have been tough.
- Rotten Tomatoes: around 31 to 32 percent
- Metacritic: 38 out of 100
These numbers point to a film that is struggling to win over critics, despite its high-profile release.
ALSO READ: The Devil Wears Prada 2 Release Date SA: Cast Reunites for Premiere
Why everyone is still watching
Despite the scores, the film is generating strong interest.
- curiosity around the story
- strong fan reactions
- ongoing debate online
It is not being ignored. It is being discussed.
The performance that stands out
At the centre is Jaafar Jackson as Michael Jackson.
Critics across the board agree on one thing.
His performance works.
- described as “dazzling” and “uncanny”
- captures both movement and voice
- brings energy to every major sequence
Supporting roles add weight:
- Colman Domingo delivers a strong, intense performance as Joe Jackson
- Juliano Krue Valdi brings emotional depth to the younger years
What works on screen
The film is at its best when it leans into music.
Highlights include:
- detailed recreations of “Thriller” and “Beat It”
- large-scale performance sequences
- a soundtrack built on classic hits
Some critics describe these moments as “electrifying” and visually impressive.
ALSO READ: What to watch in South Africa right now

So, why are critics so divided?
This is where the conversation shifts.
What the film leaves out
A major concern is what the story chooses not to explore.
Critics point to:
- the absence of later-life controversies
- a timeline that ends in the late 1980s
- limited focus on personal struggles
This has led to accusations that the film feels incomplete.
The biggest criticism
Many reviews describe the film as overly safe.
Some of the strongest reactions include:
- “a filmed playlist in search of a story”
- “a surface-level retelling”
- comparisons to a carefully managed narrative
There are also concerns about the influence of the Jackson estate on the final product.
Notable critic reactions
Critics from major outlets including the BBC, The Guardian and Rolling Stone have raised concerns about the film’s storytelling.
“Michael is a cotton candy machine of a movie. At some point, we need to face the hard stuff.” — Slashfilm
“It’s a filmed playlist in search of a story.” — Robert Daniels, RogerEbert.com
“For lifelong fans who cherish the music, the movie delivers… as a celebration of Jackson’s songs and stagecraft, it’s phenomenal.” — David Rooney, The Hollywood Reporter
These mixed reactions explain the gap between audience interest and critic scores.
How it compares to other music biopics
Films like Bohemian Rhapsody and Elvis offer useful comparisons.
- Bohemian Rhapsody leaned into crowd appeal
- Elvis used a bold visual style
- Michael focuses heavily on performance and legacy
Each takes a different approach to telling a music icon’s story.
Should you watch Michael (2026)?
It depends on what you expect.
- Watch it for the performance
- Watch it for the music and visuals
- Approach with caution if you want a deeper, more complete story
FAQs
What is Michael (2026) rated by critics?
It holds around 31 to 32 percent on Rotten Tomatoes and 38 out of 100 on Metacritic.
Who plays Michael Jackson?
Jaafar Jackson stars as Michael Jackson.
Why are reviews negative?
Critics feel the film avoids major controversies and lacks depth.
What are the strengths of the film?
The performances, music sequences and visual recreations are widely praised.
Is it worth watching?
It is worth watching for fans of the music, but may not satisfy those looking for a full biography.
ALSO READ
- What to watch in South Africa right now
- What Everyone Is Watching on Netflix in April 2026
- Tropika Island 2026 Location: Is La Réunion the Next Filming Destination?


