There have been few celebrities to cause the kind of reactions that Michael Jackson managed to cause throughout various stages of his career. Then there's the scandal that overshadowed the last decade or so of his life. It's a very odd and complicated situation (even those who believe him entirely innocent would have to admit that nobody would be asking for more evidence if it was Old Jimmy from round the corner building a park in his garden and inviting kids over for sleepovers). I always try to separate the art from the artist, I know that some seem unable to do that (for specific examples anyway), and Michael Jackson was quite a big part of my youth. I made multiple trips to the video rental store to rent the tape that had the full Thriller video, as well as The Making Of Thriller. I, like so many others, have tried to moonwalk. And, also like many others, I have failed spectacularly. I was about twelve or thirteen when Bad was released, and I spent some of my birthday money on a special set that had the album on cassette, and a branded pencil and notepaper.
Michael Jackson ruled the world for a number of years. I'm still not sure his fame wasn't the absolute pinnacle of that kind of thing for a solo artist. Maybe I was just more aware of it because of my own fan status. He was a genius, but he also had a best friend chimpanzee. He worked with top-tier directors to deliver astonishing music videos. But he also gave us Moonwalker. He was a big kid, but he should have been able to at least accept how his lifestyle and choices would look to a constantly watching public.
This movie gives a glimpse at the star that was Michael Jackson, but it's no more than the very smallest and superficial look at his life. Legal rulings meant that the film had to be reworked, at no small expense, and writer John Logan seems to think that viewers will be happy with a number of song-creating scenes that wouldn't feel out of place in Weird: The Al Yankovic Story. I don't envy Logan his position, but he must have known what he was getting into when he took the job.
Jaafar Jackson takes on the main role (with Juliano Valdi playing the younger Michael in the earlier scenes), and he does what is asked of him. It's not a great acting performance, but it's a very good impression of Michael Jackson. It's a tribute act, which you could also say about the whole film. Colman Domingo is very good as the tyrannical Joseph Jackson, Nia Long is enjoyable as Michael's mother, Katherine, and the others worth mentioning as KeiLynn Durrel Jones (playing the main security guard assigned to Michael), Miles Teller (a strong-willed agent), and Mike Myers (playing a powerful exec who proves pivotal in getting MTV to change their policy on how much airtime was allotted to black music artists).
There's not much more to say. I'm surprised that Antoine Fuqua decided to direct this. I'm surprised that it runs for 127 minutes and feels like it gives you nothing of actual interest. Michael didn't have a great childhood, as the family were trained and exploited to make as much money as possible, but that's not a revelation. There's nothing here showing Michael leaning into his own imagination, perhaps because it was belatedly decided to end things just as Bad became a huge success. So we don't get any idea about the creation of Moonwalker. What's worse is that we don't get any look at the purchase of the property and development work that would become Neverland (that's a whole movie in itself, surely). Sadly, we also have to miss out on learning anything about the development of We Are The World, the hit charity song that Jackson wrote with Lionel Richie in response to the British Band Aid hit. There's also no mention of any women in his life. Okay, his marriages happened later, but I assume that neither Tatum O'Neal nor Brooke Shields wanted to be part of the story. Despite being part of the story. But, hey, at least there's screentime for "Bubbles".
If you LOVE Michael Jackson and want to spend a couple of hours remembering some of his hits then this might be for you. I don't understand how even fans will be satisfied though, unless they specifically wanted something that was split evenly between depicting his victimhood and saintliness. With some time devoted to reminding us all about that Pepsi incident, that I admit I didn't realise was as serious and damaging as it seems to have been.
Maybe the life of Michael Jackson is best explored through books and documentaries, almost all of them with their own bias. Maybe it takes a lot more effort to weigh up his entire life, to consider everything he did for fans over the years and everything that then started to overshadow his public persona. I recommend a lot of other sources for those wanting to learn more. All you will learn here is how spineless and lacking vision the film-makers are. Although I'm sure they're figuring out how to prep a sequel already.
3/10
If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do
consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A
subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
notwithstanding guilt or innocence, Jackson’s art is bound to stand the test of time, much like the work of other controversial icons, such as Walt Disney (racial insensitivity) and Alfred Hitchcock (accused of abuse).
ReplyDeleteI liked the film but in terms of script and pacing, it felt somewhat rushed and the lack of Jackson brothers is notable. Whether there is an extended cut remains to be seen but it probably be debated whether the opportunity for a “definitive” biopic has been missed. Pity as Jaafar pulled off a phenomenal performance as his uncle
Regardless, it seems that some scenes were left on the cutting room floor that would have had more scenes; i wish we had more human bits of vulnerability (as they among the most human bits of the film) whether it be when he returns from his nose job or “show, don’t tell” moments like him conversing with a fellow burn victim in hospital
I understand they couldn’t use a real chimp but CGI Bubbles looked like he came out of a Disney film.
Joseph’s treatment of young Michael is meant to be shocking but I agree Joe came across as one dimensional (a more complex portrayal was in the 92 miniseries)
In regards to the closing text, some people joke it more like an avengers or James Bond return tag
While I like the film as it was, I actually wonder whether a better opportunity was missed; the biggest issue with Michael is that it does not just show HOW people deified Michael Jackson… it actively deifies him itself.
ReplyDeleteThere is a huge difference between portraying a cultural phenomenon and endorsing it.
A more thoughtful biopic would show how millions of fans came to see him as larger than life. Instead, the film seems to adopt that perspective wholesale.
Michael is not presented as a complicated artist with strengths, flaws, contradictions, collaborators, influences and limitations. He is presented as a near perfect figure who excels at everything.
The best singer.
The best dancer.
The best songwriter.
The best producer.
The creative force behind virtually every aspect of his success.
By the end you would think he single handedly created every song, every performance, every innovation and every career milestone entirely on his own.
The reality is that Michael was extraordinarily talented, but he was also part of a massive creative ecosystem. Producers, engineers, musicians, arrangers, choreographers, managers, executives and countless collaborators helped shape the work.
A great biopic would have explored those relationships and shown how all those moving parts came together to create something special.
Instead, everyone around him feels like they are just there to tell us how amazing Michael is.
That is another major problem. Everything is incredibly surface level. Almost every character feels like a one dimensional Cliff Notes version of a real person. They show up, fulfill a narrative function, and disappear. Nobody has much interiority, complexity or agency outside of how they relate to Michael. They are not portrayed as people. They are props in the story of Michael Jacksons greatness.
What makes a great biopic is not convincing me someone was a genius. We already know Michael Jackson was a genius. What makes a great biopic is showing me the human being behind the legend and the world around them.
Instead Michael often feels less like a biography and more like a canonization. I walked away entertained, but I did not walk away feeling like I understood Michael Jackson, his family, his collaborators, or his life any better than I did before.
Honestly I think the Rotten Tomatoes split perfectly sums up the movie. Critics and audiences were judging it by different standards.
Critics were asking “Does this work as a film? Does it work as a biopic? Is it well written, insightful, and dramatically compelling?”
Audiences were asking “Did I have fun watching Michael Jackson perform? Did I enjoy the music? Was I entertained for a few hours?”
Those are not the same question and they are not mutually exclusive. A movie can be entertaining and still be mediocre as a piece of storytelling. Likewise a movie can be artistically excellent and not be everyones idea of a good time.
For me Michael falls squarely into the first category. I had fun. I was entertained. But as a biopic it felt shallow, sanitized and far less interesting than the real story it was supposedly telling.
Agreed. It's like the old Spielberg trick. Don't just show something and tell viewers that it is awesome. Show reactions to that thing and allow them to see others being awe-struck by it.
ReplyDeleteDo you think you be able to watch "The Jacksons: An American Dream", the 1992 miniseries? It is available to watch on YouTube. I’m not saying it doesn’t have its own problems; you’ll know of what I speak if you have seen it. Just that it makes an interesting comparison to this one, given the miniseres focus on the Jackson family as a whole, while this film understandly gives MJ major focus.
DeleteIt's . . . out there in a number of places, from Vimeo to certain Tubi territories. I have no idea when I would make time for it though. I do this blog daily (currently about to get Dante's Peak written up for tomorrow), watch between 2 and 4 extra movies for the weekly podcast, and then try to fit in some of the many movies I own but haven't made time to watch yet. Which would all be well and good if this was my job, but I also have my actual job to do . . . which pays for all the discs and streaming services lol
DeleteAnd I do like my partner to be able to spend some time with me each day.