IS
THE FILM 'MICHAEL' REALLY GOOD?
I
finally watched MICHAEL... and I understand why people are debating it.
This
isn't a biopic.
It's
public relations on a budget.
Jaafar
Jackson did a great job, no doubt.
The
voice, the movement, the aura... he STUDIED Michael Jackson properly.
But
acting alone doesn't save a story that's afraid of itself.
The
biggest problem?
The
film avoids the most difficult conversations.
You
can't tell the story of one of the most controversial figures in pop culture
and then... tiptoe around the controversy.
That's
not storytelling. That's image management.
It
feels like the film is constantly protecting him instead of exploring him.
Every
rough edge is smoothed over.
Every
uncomfortable moment is rushed.
Every
question... calmly avoided.
A
great biopic doesn't idolize.
It
reveals.
Think
of films that showcase both brilliance and flaws. That's what makes legends
human.
This
one just wants you to applaud.
The
crazy part? Actually, there's a GREAT film hidden within this.
The
musical sequences? Fire.
The
performance scenes? Electric.
The
emotional depth? Barely scratched.
You
leave the theater entertained... but not enlightened.
And
for a figure as complex as Michael Jackson, this seems like a missed
opportunity.
Final
verdict:
If
you're a fan, you'll like it.
If
you're looking for truth, depth, or balance... you might be disappointed.
And
that's where the real debate begins.
What
do you think? Did the film tell the truth... or just protect a legacy?
[FOWOBI
OF LAGOS Profile | Twitter X]
