You can recreate the moonwalk, the diamond glove, the costumes, and even the screaming crowds, but recreating the magic of Michael Jackson seems impossible. Somehow, Michael (2026) almost does it. During the performance scenes, Jaafar Jackson is so convincing that I forgot I was watching an actor. The music, choreography, lighting, and energy make Michael Jackson’s stardom feel alive again. The biggest strength of this biopic is the way it reminds you of how extraordinary Jackson’s career was. Everyone knows songs like “Billie Jean” and “Thriller,” but watching those performances come to life is different from hearing them come up on your Spotify mix. Still, capturing Michael Jackson’s magic is not the same thing as capturing Michael Jackson. Once the music stops, the movie has to tell the story of one of the most complicated celebrities to ever live, and that is where the magic fades.
For me, the recreation of the Motown 25 performance of “Billie Jean” is where the movie’s magic really shines. The stage is simple: a dark background, a spotlight, and Jaafar standing alone in Michael’s black sequined jacket and iconic glove. Then the bass line kicks in, and suddenly every tiny move feels important, from the sharp head turns to the way he freezes before exploding into the next move. When he finally glides into the moonwalk, the crowd erupts, but the camera stays focused on Michael, showing how completely he commands the room. For those few minutes, Jaafar is Michael, and it feels so right.
That excitement also makes the movie’s omissions harder to ignore. The most significant is its avoidance of the child sexual abuse allegations against Jackson. In 1993, thirteen-year-old Jordan Chandler accused Jackson of sexually abusing him. Jackson denied the allegations and reached a civil settlement with Chandler’s family in 1994. In a separate criminal case involving another boy, Jackson was acquitted of all charges in 2005. These distinctions matter: accusations should not be presented as proven facts, but an acquittal in one case does not make the broader controversy disappear from his life story. A movie does not have to decide whether Jackson was guilty to acknowledge that these allegations are essential to understanding his complicated legacy.
There were real legal obstacles to including some of this history. According to Variety, the original version of Michael included the 1993 allegations, but those scenes were removed after attorneys for Jackson’s estate discovered a settlement clause prohibiting Chandler’s depiction or mention in a film. The production then underwent extensive reshoots. That explains a specific restriction, but it does not make the finished movie feel complete. By ending its story before the allegations became public, Michael allows audiences to celebrate Jackson’s rise without confronting the accusations that would complicate that celebration. The result feels less like an examination of a difficult life and more like a carefully protected version of it.
That sense of protection also affects how I see John Branca, Jackson’s longtime attorney and adviser. The movie presents him as a supportive figure, but his involvement as a producer makes that portrayal feel convenient. The Jackson estate’s involvement in the production adds another reason to question whose perspective the movie prioritizes. This does not automatically make every scene dishonest. It does, however, make the film’s choices about what to include—and what to leave out—harder to separate from the interests of the people helping tell the story. The bigger issue with Michael is not necessarily that it lies about Jackson, but that its truths feel carefully selected.
That is what makes Michael both so impressive and so frustrating. I loved watching it, especially when Jaafar was onstage. The movie helped me understand how Jackson became such an extraordinary star, but it rarely challenged me to think about what it means to admire him. Acknowledging the allegations would not erase his talent, just as celebrating his talent should not require ignoring them. Michael succeeds at bringing the magic back to life, but magic has always depended on a little misdirection. Maybe the most important thing to notice about Michael isn’t only what it puts in the spotlight, but what it chooses to leave in the dark.
