“We need to capitalize on Michael’s success. ‘Cause the Jackson family is the brand. That’s our Coca-Cola, and we need to start selling! So I’m planning an international tour. This is just the beginning!”
Ever since the beginning of the sound era of film, audiences have been enthralled with portrayals of musicians. In the last 25 years or so, the musical biopic has become a genre in and of itself that many moviegoers deride as simply greatest hits albums for the fans. When it comes to musicians with the most fans, it becomes almost inevitable that the Michael Jackson biopic would at some point be made and tear up the box office, telling the story of the most successful musician of all time. I just wish that the movie could have been a bit more successful in telling his story.
The plot starts with the Jackson family in Gary, Indiana, led by patriarch Joe Jackson (played by Colman Domingo) who is trying to—physically—whip them into shape to become the Jackson 5. Early on, the youngest member, Michael (later played by Jafar Jackson, the real-life nephew of Michael and son of Jermaine), demonstrates a clear aptitude for performing and is destined for greater things. He starts a career as a solo artist, creating and releasing the albums “Off the Wall” and “Thriller,” which go on to become two of the best-selling records in music history.
Director Antoine Fuqua did a surprisingly decent job blocking his acts within the frame, although the film could have looked a bit more visually interesting. I have to give credit to him for being intentional about framing action.
My main problem with this film is that—in spite of Jafar Jackson’s great performance—the film’s narrative does not do enough to make Michael Jackson a compelling protagonist. There are only three times in the entire film when the character even gets slightly introspective: when he gets his first plastic surgery, when he is recovering in the burn ward and when he cuts off all financial ties with his father at the end of the film. The character of Michael Jackson is simply too static and reactive for a film that is supposed to be about his life. If you strip away the music and you strip away the idea of Michael Jackson that we all have in our heads, the film doesn’t give you enough reason to care about its protagonist, which is a major issue. The major legal battle that also resulted in the film’s planned third act tackling the child abuse allegations being thrown out likely contributed to this problem. The current epilogue at Wembley Stadium feels mostly unrelated and packed on at the end, and the development of the “Bad” album would have been a great start to the planned sequel, but it seems that they have thrown it out in an attempt to retool the usable footage they had from the first film.
In spite of these issues, I did enjoy the film. If you are even a passing fan of Michael Jackson, you’ll have a good time. My final rating for “Michael” is a tepid 7/10.
