The new biopic Michael has arrived in cinemas with high expectations, particularly for its lead actor Jaafar Jackson, who steps into the role of his famous uncle with impressive dedication. However, despite the young performer’s convincing portrayal, the film’s script ultimately fails to deliver a compelling or insightful story, leaving audiences with a polished but shallow experience that does little justice to one of music’s most complex figures.

Directed by Antoine Fuqua and released by Lionsgate, Michael focuses on the early chapters of Michael Jackson’s life, tracing his journey from the Jackson 5 through to the end of the 1980s. The movie highlights his rise to global superstardom, iconic performances, and personal struggles, particularly his complicated relationship with his father Joseph. Jaafar Jackson captures many of the King of Pop’s signature mannerisms, dance moves, and vocal style with remarkable accuracy, earning praise for his commitment and natural screen presence.

Yet the screenplay, written by John Logan, rarely ventures beyond surface-level storytelling. It presents Jackson primarily as a talented, driven artist overcoming obstacles on his path to greatness. While this approach makes for an entertaining celebration of his music, it avoids any meaningful exploration of the deeper, more controversial aspects of his life and personality. The result is a film that feels safe and predictable rather than bold or revelatory.

One of the most noticeable limitations is the decision to end the story in 1988, deliberately steering clear of the serious allegations that emerged in later years. This choice has drawn criticism from some viewers who hoped for a more balanced portrait. The film instead concentrates on uplifting moments, family dynamics, and musical achievements, painting Jackson in a largely positive light without delving into the complexities or controversies that defined much of his public image.

Even within its chosen timeframe, the narrative lacks depth. Jackson’s arc revolves around gaining confidence to stand up to his domineering father while pursuing his creative ambitions. This storyline follows a familiar, somewhat formulaic pattern that many biopics have used before. It offers little fresh perspective or emotional nuance, relying instead on well-known facts and a string of hit songs to carry the momentum.

The supporting cast, including Colman Domingo as Joseph Jackson and Nia Long as Katherine Jackson, delivers solid performances, but they too are constrained by material that rarely challenges them to explore greater emotional layers. The film’s strong production values, impressive visuals, and faithful recreations of classic performances help maintain audience engagement. However, these elements ultimately serve as a glossy package for a story that feels more like a tribute than a genuine dramatic examination.

For dedicated fans of Michael Jackson’s music, the movie provides genuine enjoyment. It features several of his biggest hits played in full, allowing audiences to relive the energy and creativity that made him a cultural phenomenon. The concert sequences are particularly well executed, showcasing both the scale of his live shows and Jaafar’s ability to embody the performer’s charisma.

Yet for those seeking a more substantial cinematic experience, the lack of ambition in the writing becomes increasingly apparent. The script avoids asking difficult questions or offering new insights into Jackson’s character. It presents him as a gifted artist with a troubled but ultimately triumphant journey, without probing the contradictions, vulnerabilities, or darker elements that made him such a fascinating and divisive figure.

This cautious approach may stem from various factors, including legal considerations or a desire to celebrate rather than scrutinise. Whatever the reason, it leaves Jaafar Jackson carrying much of the film’s emotional weight with limited support from the screenplay. His performance shines through in moments of musical brilliance, but even he cannot fully compensate for the lack of dramatic depth.

The movie’s reception highlights a broader challenge in modern biopics: balancing respect for a subject’s legacy with honest storytelling. Michael succeeds as a visual and musical spectacle but falls short as a character study. It entertains without truly enlightening, resulting in a film that feels more like a highlight reel than a complete portrait.

As audiences continue to watch Michael in theatres, discussions will likely centre on what the film chose to include and, more importantly, what it left out. Jaafar Jackson’s strong work deserves recognition, yet the project as a whole serves as a reminder that great performances can only elevate a movie so far when the script remains content with familiar territory.

In the end, Michael stands as a respectful but limited tribute. It celebrates the music and the myth while sidestepping the man in all his complexity. For those hoping for a deeper cinematic exploration of one of the 20th century’s most influential artists, the film’s biggest shortcoming remains its unwillingness to move beyond the surface