MICHAEL

In 1988, Michael Jackson released a film called ‘Moonwalker’. The film is a series of short films, mainly music videos, that have no connective tissue. It seems the creative team behind ‘Michael’ where big fans of this film and decided to reuse this formula for the biopic on The King of Pop. The film is four segments of montages of different points of Michael’s life, and nothing more. This isn’t revealing, nor does it question any factors of his story; it’s here to serve as a reminder of different points of his legacy. The film is simply uninterested in attempting to have a narrative structure - it wants to show the highlights, and that’s it. Michael Jackson is not a character here, just a man who’s singing. He doesn’t grow as a character, nor is he challenged.

‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ is the clear blueprint here, both trying to copy its formula as well as listen to the complaints that the movie had in relation to music. Songs in ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ were rushed outside of the Live Aid sequence, while ‘Michael’ shows all songs (with the exception of ‘Thriller’) in full. Here, the full performances are used to avoid having to add any story, and while they are successful recreations, they lack narrative weight. The film does nothing to form emotional connections to its characters; it’s relying entirety on your existing personal connection to Michael and the Jackson family.

A prime example of the lack of narrative substance is the ‘Thriller’ segment. We get a montage of the album being worked on and them struggling to work out the title. Michael watched B-grade horror movies, he moves the post it note that says ‘Thriller’ to the title mark on a cork board, we see the dance break in the ‘Thriller’ music video being filmed. Michael and his lawyer meet with the head of the record label, asking to get his music videos on MTV. Cut to the MTV logo, then Michael is shown performing ‘Billie Jean’ at a Motown 25th anniversary TV special. ‘Thriller’ arguably should have been given a lot more thought and screen time, but the film just does not care to add any backstory to these historical moments. In fact, a Michael Jackson film may have focused entirely on the ‘Thriller’ album.

'Michael' also suffers from the same problems all these biopics do, and that’s trying to fit an entire legacy into a neat two and a half hour run time. Jackson's career has so many historic moments that you can’t physically fit into a neat film (personally attacked over the lack of a ‘The Wiz’ montage; I mean, if we are just doing montages, it wouldn’t hurt to add one more). It appears they are hinting that this is just the beginning of Michael’s cinematic story, but based on how this film turned out, anything that follows isn’t going to dive beneath the surface and give substance to this story.

The film attempts to have a throughline and parallel between Jackson and Peter Pan. As a kid, we see him seek refuge in the story when his Dad is abusive to him, and as an adult, he sees himself in Peter, the boy who never grew up and has an interest in Neverland. This is an interesting idea, but again is showcased on a surface level. The film simply showing us Michael holding a book is not a deep enough dive into this thought. Coupled with the ‘Peter Pan’ concept, the film features numerous scenes with Michael visiting children’s hospitals and spending time with sick kids. With both rooted in facts, it’s clear the intentions of showcasing these moments relate more to demonstrating Michael’s acts of humanity while avoiding allegations put forward of child sexual abuse.

A weird complaint I have about ‘Michael’ is the CGI. Large crowd shots look really rubbery and unnatural. On the crowds, I don’t think the costume design for these extras existed; they all look like they are wearing modern clothes. The fire during the Pepsi commercial and Michael’s pet monkey, Bubbles, also stand out as poor CGI.

Michael Jackson’s nephew Jaafar Jackson portrays the King of Pop, and while the script doesn’t allow him to showcase his acting, his movement and mannerisms when performing his discography are phenomenal. Jaafar does really capture the stage presence of his uncle, and I hope that if there is to be another chapter to this story, he gets to showcase his acting chops more. The other positive I have is the sound design. The music sequences sound beautiful, and it’s clear a lot of effort has gone into this aspect of the film.

‘Michael’ is just another biopic about a musician that only scratches the surface of the artist’s career. The film is so desperate to steer clear of providing any backstory to Jackson’s story - be it positive or negative - that the film turns into a clip show, letting fans relive iconic moments on the big screen if their internet is out at home and they just can’t pull up the real things on YouTube.