The long-awaited Michael Jackson biopic is finally nearing its theatrical release, but early reactions suggest a rocky reception. Initial reviews for Michael on Rotten Tomatoes have been overwhelmingly negative, with the film currently sitting in the high-20% range—a score that signals broad disapproval from professional critics.
Directed by Antoine Fuqua, the film traces Jackson’s rise from his early days with the Jackson 5 to his peak during the 1988 Wembley era. It is produced by Graham King, known for overseeing the Queen biopic Bohemian Rhapsody. Stepping into the lead role is Jaafar Jackson, the son of Jermaine Jackson, portraying his uncle through much of the film.
An image from Michael – YouTube, Universal Pictures
READ: Ryan Reynolds Claims Deadpool Will be a Supporting Character Going Forward
When a production of this scale—backed by major talent and cultural significance—faces such strong critical backlash, it naturally draws attention and raises questions about what audiences can expect.
Critical Reception
A quick glance at Rotten Tomatoes paints a bleak picture for Michael. One critic describes it as “a movie terrified to explore the interiority of its protagonist,” adding that it “will work just fine for fans who just want an uncomplicated ramble that plays all the hits.” Another dismisses it more bluntly as “utterly empty.”
Writing for RogerEbert.com, Roger Daniels argues that Michael “isn’t a movie. It’s a filmed playlist in search of a story.”
Across reviews, a clear pattern begins to emerge. Critics repeatedly describe the film with terms such as superficial, safe, aimless, mechanical, and even “a snooze,” reinforcing a broader sense of disappointment with its overall execution.
An image from Michael – YouTube, Universal Pictures
READ: Refreshment Port to Reopen as La Poutinerie in EPCOT
Some reviews do offer limited praise for Michael’s technical craftsmanship and certain performances. However, even this praise is often qualified, with one recurring observation noting that the film feels “more concert than movie.” For many critics, that distinction does little to offset what they see as a fundamentally shallow narrative experience.
Ironically, a growing segment of audiences now views a low Rotten Tomatoes score as a promising sign rather than a warning.
Audience vs. Critics Trend
The most recent example of the critic–audience divide is The Super Mario Galaxy Movie.
While its initial Rotten Tomatoes critic score was not as low as some recent releases—hovering around 42%—it was still criticized by reviewers as simplistic and shallow. Despite that reception, the film went on to perform strongly at the box office and became a major hit with general audiences.
Mario, Yoshi, and Frog Luigi in the Super Mario Galaxy Movie trailer – YouTube, Nintendo of America
READ: Pedro Pascal Comment Fuels Questions About ‘The Mandalorian’s’ Future
This pattern is not evidence that Michael will follow a similar trajectory or that viewers will necessarily respond more favorably than critics. However, it does point to a broader shift in how some audiences engage with film criticism. Increasingly, Rotten Tomatoes scores and traditional critical consensus appear to carry less weight, with viewers turning to alternative sources—such as social media reactions, influencer reviews, and peer recommendations—for guidance on what to watch.
Emerging Platforms
As legacy voices like Rotten Tomatoes appear to be losing influence, newer platforms are gaining attention. One example is Criticless, which centers entirely on audience feedback. Its user base is made up of everyday film fans rather than professional critics. Instead of a simple “Rotten” or “Fresh” label, it uses more nuanced scoring systems. Users can rate films across multiple categories using sliders, including entertainment value, violence, sexual content, and political themes.
Criticless Review scores for The Super Mario Galaxy Movie – Criticless
READ: Zelda Live-action Artwork May Provide First Look at Link’s Master Sword in Live-action
It is too early to tell how Michael will score on Criticless compared to Rotten Tomatoes. In this case, audience and critic reactions may end up more closely aligned than in other recent releases. One thing is certain: an audience score will emerge, regardless of how critics attempt to shape the conversation.
Do you believe the Rotten Tomatoes’ reviews for Michael? Will you be seeing the movie this weekend? Let us know in the comments!
Is Zendaya playing Bubbles, Michael’s pet chimp?
Critics hated him back in the Eighties and Nineties and they still hate him in the Twenties. So absolutely nothing has changed. Including the fact that people love him and his music, no matter how weird he was. They did the same to Elvis and he’s considered the King of Rock and Roll.
So, no. I don’t believe a thing RT has to say about the film. Because critics are and always have been useless except as propagandists and even that’s not working anymore. It’s just more blatantly obvious now that people can easily communicate their own opinions about things to the rest of the world.
I dunno; most biopics are about fairly neutral or revered figures. Freddy Mercury – beloved. Elton John – admired for his music but terrible for his lifestyle,
Michael Jackson is one of the last figures I’d do a biopic about. Maybe a documentary, but not a biopic where parts can be glorified and others parts glossed over under the cover of “artistic license” – meaning they wanted to make shit up or memory hole other things.
But that would likely be fighting the same problems with a “documentary” like those Netflix ones. I dunno, he’s got some good songs but if they want to infect another generation, I think they are going to have a tough time of that, but the best of the AWFLs will pimp him and his music out with massive amounts of virtue signaling.