I mean, it’s cool to see the background of “Thriller.” But if I want to watch “Thriller,” I could just watch “Thriller?”
That’s a common thought during the course of “Micheal,” a biographical film about the King of Pop during roughly the first 35 years of his life. The picture begins when he was a boy, making waves in the music scene with his brothers as part of the Jackson 5. Under the guidance of their strict father Joseph (Colman Domingo), the group experiences great success.
Michael, played by the musician’s actual nephew Jaafar Jackson, later wants to go on a solo route. The film follows how this creates tension between him and his father, and how he pushed forward to make his notable hits, such as “Beat It.” The film also explores his isolation and difficulty building connections with others.
Sometimes you get a biopic of a musician that has unique artistic merit and/or a deeper, intriguing look at a singer, such as “Rocketman” or “Elvis.” In other cases, you get a middling dramatization that does little more than recap the career of an artist, like “Bohemian Rhapsody.”
Unfortunately, “Michael” leans toward the latter. Writer John Logan has a solid track record, penning 2000’s “Gladiator,” 2003’s “The Last Samurai,” 2004’s “The Aviator” and a couple good “James Bond flicks.” Director Antoine Fuqua, meanwhile, helmed the great drama “Training Day” as well as underrated flicks like 2013’s “Olympus Has Fallen” and 2015’s “Southpaw.”
With “Michael,” though, their talent feels squandered and stifled. Their combined effort is paint-by-numbers timeline of Jackson’s life from when he was a kid to the release of his song “Bad.” It’s full of cliché moments, from Berry Gordy of Motwon commenting on the singer’s potential to montages capturing the rise in popularity.
That’s not to say the film isn’t professionally well-made. Some of the scenes showing Michael during his concerts are properly big in scale, while a few moments are cleverly written to show Jackson’s musical prowess and overall personality. However, these pale in comparison to the number of generic pieces to get Jackson from Point A to B in his life.
It’s also hard to ignore the Titanic-sized elephant in the room. Reports have come out that the film needed to change course to avoid mentions of the first allegations Jackson faced in the early 1990s. Not including them makes this feel like even more of a glossy, sanitized biopic than it already is.
Now, rumors are out that this may be covered in a sequel, but the fact remains that this film avoids complexity. It’s not limited to that portion of his life, either. The movie is void of nuance. It doesn’t feel grounded and lacks grit. Many scenes come across as artificial.
One example is where Michael is inspired to make “Beat It” when he’s disturbed by gang violence. Another is where he gets surgery to adjust his nose. These pass by quick so quick, when they could have been interesting angles to explore Jackson’s views on how he relates to the Black experience, how he was influenced by hip hop and his insecurities with appearance.
It’s too bad because the cast is putting in the work here. Domingo, a two-time Oscar nominee is making the most of his antagonistic character. Miles Teller is also a very capable actor and bring some weight to the film as Jackson’s skilled entertainment attorney.
Jaafar Jackson deserves credit for bringing the energy Michael had as an artist, too. However, he also feels limited in giving the character personality in the more dramatic moments.
As a film project, “Michael” has enough talent on both sides of the camera to make something quite good, but the result is barely mediocre. The abilities of its writer, director and cast do show up to create good cinematic moments and the viewing experience isn’t poor thorughout.
However, the film is largely still a bland recreation of a portion of a superstar’s life that often feels more like an excuse to play his greatest hits than truly dig into the man in the mirror. 2.75 out of 5.
Matthew Liedke on Film 