Michael Jackson’s new biopic is pulling in attention for Jaafar Jackson’s performance and the family support behind it. It is also drawing sharp criticism for what the film leaves out.
At the Hollywood premiere, the Jackson family turned out in force. La Toya, Marlon, Jermaine and Jackie Jackson all praised Jaafar’s work, with La Toya telling The Hollywood Reporter, “I was flabbergasted. I have to tell you that you think it’s Mike. You forget it’s Jaafar, you think it’s Michael.” But as the film opens, the conversation is not just about the performance. It is about the parts of Michael Jackson’s life the movie chooses not to confront.
Family Support Meets Family Division
Producer Graham King said the family stayed closely involved during production. He said Prince Jackson “was on set every day,” and Bigi Jackson also publicly backed the film. That level of involvement has only increased questions about how the final story was shaped.
Paris Jackson stayed away. Her earlier criticism is now getting fresh attention because it cuts straight to the heart of the debate. She said, “I read one of the first drafts of the script and gave my notes about what was dishonest/didn’t sit right with me and when they didn’t address it I moved on with my life.” She later added that the film “panders to a very specific section of my dad’s fandom that still lives in the fantasy.”
That split inside the family has become one of the clearest signs that not everyone agrees on how Michael Jackson’s life should be told.
What the Film Chose to Leave Behind
Writer John Logan openly said the team made a choice. “We chose to tell the uplifting story of his triumph in the movie, and that’s what we did,” he said. That decision is exactly why the film is now taking hits.
Critics have called the movie a “whitewash” and a “sanitised” version of Jackson’s life. The Telegraph said it “refuses to address the elephant in the room.” The Guardian called it “frustratingly shallow,” while the Independent went further, branding it a “ghoulish” cash grab.
The strongest criticism centers on the absence of the child abuse allegations that shaped so much of Jackson’s later public life. Several reviewers argued that a film claiming to tell his story cannot avoid that part and still expect to be seen as honest.
The Investigation and Why the Film Changed
Reports say earlier versions of the film did include material tied to the allegations. Variety reported that much of the third act originally focused on Jordan Chandler, who accused Jackson of abuse in 1993 when he was 13 years old. That material was later removed after lawyers for the Jackson estate found a clause in a prior nondisclosure agreement that barred Chandler from being depicted or mentioned in a film.
The result was major restructuring. New material was shot, reshoots followed, and the ending was rewritten so the story now stops in the late 1980s, before the first public allegations emerged. Jackson was later acquitted in 2005 in a separate criminal case involving a different 13-year-old boy.
So the real controversy is no longer subtle. ‘Michael’ may impress fans who want the music, the moves, and the mythology. But for many critics, the film’s biggest statement is what it refuses to say.
