Why Many Critics Mauled “Michael” While Audiences Made It a Massive Hit

Michael chronicles Michael Jackson’s journey from the nine-year-old lead singer of the Jackson 5 in Gary, Indiana to an artist destined to become the world’s biggest pop performer. When Michael took the stage, the world stopped. He seamlessly blended rhythm and soul with raw emotion. He spread pure joy, love, and celebration to his audiences as he united the world one moonwalk at a time. This is where his story begins.

Michael is poised to be a mega-hit for fans as they practise their falsetto singing voices and Thriller dance moves. Responses have been mixed, divisive – beyond the level of differing personal tastes. Is the film Bad or is disagreement just part of Human Nature? Can you Blame It On The Boogie or should you just Beat It? Do critics just Wanna Be Startin’ Something? 

Michael: The Film Stats

1. The film covers Michael Jackson’s life from 1966 to 1988 (his childhood in the Jackson 5 through to the Bad era)
2. Critics gave it about 38 – 40% on Rotten Tomatoes, audiences gave it 96 – 97%
3. Critics say it’s sanitized, avoids controversy, lacks depth, and is a “filmed playlist”
4. Audiences love it for the entertainment value, spectacle, music, immersive experience
5. The film had to be modified due to legal issues
6. The third act was rewritten and reshot in June 2025
7. Opening weekend global box office – $217 million

Michael highlights this wide chasm between critical appeal and commercial success.

What the Film Actually Covers: A Chronological Snapshot

The film spans three main stages in his career – Michael’s childhood in 1966 when his father Joseph Jackson (Colman Domingo) assembled the Jackson 5 in Gary, Indiana, through his emergence as a solo superstar in the late 1980s.

– The Jackson 5 era (1966-1969): Young Michael’s grueling rehearsals under his father’s demanding hand and the group’s signing to Motown Records
– The transition to California (early 1970s): The family’s move from Gary to Encino after the Jackson 5 achieve massive commercial success
– Solo stardom (1978-1988): Michael’s transition to Epic Records, the release of Off the Wall, his famous Motown 25 performance of Billie Jean, the revolutionary Thriller album, and the subsequent Bad era.

The film conspicuously ends in 1988, before the 1993 child sexual abuse allegations that would define the latter half of Jackson’s career and mar his life. This decision was due to legal restrictions in a settlement agreement. References to these allegations were entirely removed from the film, and the third act had to be refilmed from scratch during reshoots in June 2025. This creative constraint would become the central flashpoint in the critical discourse surrounding the film.

Legalities aside, critics had their say about the film’s narrative which many believed glossed over other controversial aspects of Michael’s career, his love for his family while he lived his own life as a solo artist. Regardless, fans sang and danced their way to the closing credits waving their rhinestone-studded gloves.

Young Tito (Judah Edwards), Young Marlon, (Jaylen Hunter), Young Michael (Juliano Krue Valdi), Young Jackie (Nathaniel McIntyre) and Young Jermaine (Jayden Harville) Photo couttesy of Lionsgate

Why the Critics Revolted: The Case Against Michael

A “Filmed Playlist” Rather Than a Film

Critics were nearly unanimous in their harsh assessment: Michael prioritizes spectacle and music over substance. Roger Ebert’s review described it as “not a movie” but rather “a filmed playlist in search of a story,” noting that Michael Jackson’s actual music is the film’s only real asset. This criticism cuts to the heart of what troubled professional reviewers — the film feels constructed around the songs rather than the songs augmenting the narrative.

Sanitization and the Absence of Complexity

Critics argued the film is a “hagiographic nightmare” that presents a whitewashed, uncomplicated portrait of an extraordinarily complicated person. Rather than interrogating Michael as a visionary creator or a person with anxieties, traumas, and frustrations, the film “leaps from one event to the next without reflection or pause,” making hasty attempts to summarize an accepted mythology of Jackson’s rise into bite-sized nuggets.

Some critics saw this episodic format as comparable to Bohemian Rhapsody; another musical biopic criticized for glossing over its subject’s complexities and contradictions in favor of a feel-good greatest-hits experience.

Narrative Weakness

The film suffers from “choppy recreations” and flat characterizations prevent any deeper exploration of Michael’s internal life. Critics felt the 127-minute runtime simply couldn’t accommodate both the scope of Jackson’s achievements and any meaningful character examination.

Michael Jackson (Jaafar Jackson) Photo by Glen Wilson

Why Audiences Embraced It: The Entertainment Argument

An Immersive Experience Over Clinical Analysis

Audiences reported feeling transported, with some noting they “had to remind myself at times that I wasn’t actually at a live concert.” For general viewers, this immersive quality wasn’t a flaw — it was the feature – the entire point. Audiences weren’t seeking a clinical dissection of Michael Jackson’s psychological crevices; they wanted to experience the spectacle, energy, and cultural impact of one of history’s deservedly greatest entertainers.

 The Music Transcends Everything

While critics dismiss the reliance on Jackson’s music as a crutch, audiences view it as the film’s greatest strength. The songs aren’t window dressing for them—they’re the authentic heart of the musical experience. They are Michael Jackson.

Every time a Jackson classic plays, audiences reconnect with the very thing that made Michael Jackson legendary. The performances, the choreography, and the recreation of iconic moments carry an emotional romanticism that no dialogue or plot exposition could hope to match.

A Celebration Rather Than a Deconstruction

One audience reviewer perfectly captured this perspective: “I enjoyed the film despite its low rating from some ‘specialized’ critics. Not every critically praised movie stands the test of time — many fade quickly from memory. It’s better to watch and decide for yourself rather than follow the consensus. For me, it was genuinely entertaining.”

Audiences came to celebrate Michael Jackson’s artistry, not to interrogate his personal demons. That’s not a failing — it’s a fundamentally different goal from what critics expected.

So, Who’s Right?

Both. It all comes down to what you expect from a biopic and how you measure success. Should the film be a comprehensive documentary or an edited celebration? Both are factual in nature, but neither can contain the whole truth. A biopic isn’t necessarily a complete biography. Certain audiences are comfortable with the limitations of a feature films that capture the essence of an era of an artists in a curated highlights reel.

As the heated debates continue, critics argue that the historical truth should be acknowledged even if it wasn’t explored in the film. Fans argue that they prefer to recreate the sensation of seeing Michael Jackson live to preserve his memory and legacy.

Michael’s story continues.

by Staff Writer

From our in-house editorial team.