Michael Jackson Movie Controversy Explained

Añadido: 2026-05-05

[00:00:00]The brand new biopic based on Michael Jackson's life, Michael 2026, has just hit theaters, but it's already causing quite the controversy. As the title suggests, Michael centers on the life and legacy of the King of Pop, who remains one of the most famous and influential singer songwriters of all time. The movie begins with Jackson's early years when he was performing with his siblings as part of the Jackson 5.

[00:00:23]The movie then depicts decades of his career, although the end of Michael cuts off after the Jackson 5's final tour and early in Jackson Solo Bad Tour in 1988.

[00:00:32]Michael was initially met with overwhelmingly negative reception from critics. Even now, Michael's Rotten Tomatoes critic score is sitting at a meager 40%. However, as viewers have flocked to theaters, it's become clear that critics and audiences are divided on the movie to say the least. By comparison, the audience score for Michael on Rotten Tomatoes is currently an impressive 96%. Likewise, Michael has shattered box office records for movies about Michael Jackson. That wave of positivity from audiences isn't without its complications, though. While audiences are frequently highlighting Jaffer Jackson's depiction of his uncle Michael, the concert-like experiences of the musical scenes and the energetic, believable performances by the cast members of Michael across the board as being among the movies's greatest strengths. There is one pervasive controversy in particular that has continued to circulate online since the movie's debut. That push back is likely to remain. Although the studio has provided some context for this polarizing decision, audiences noted one glaring absence in Michael credit Kevin Maser/Copyright Lionsgate/Courtesy Everett collection. By far the biggest complaint about Michael thus far has been the fact that the movie didn't include any of the allegations made against Michael Jackson. Beginning in 1993, Jackson was accused of molestation, sexual abuse, lewd and lascivious acts with a child under the age of 14, rape, and multiple other allegations along similar lines, with some cases against his estate still ongoing. The cases began with accusations brought forth by Evan Chandler, the father of Jordan Chandler, a child who had spent considerable time with Jackson at his Neverland estate, along with his mother and his sister. An investigation was initiated that same year with the police executing search warrants for Jackson's multiple estates, although the results of the search did not reveal evidence supporting a criminal filing. Later that same year, Jason Francia, the son of Jackson's former maid, Blanca Francia, came forward with similar allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct by Jackson.

[00:02:29]By early to mid 1994, Jackson had settled out of court with the Chandlers, and grand juries in both Santa Barbara and Los Angeles declined to indict him, citing the investigation's failure to produce incriminating evidence. In 2003, Martin Basher's documentary, Living with Michael Jackson, aired, renewing backlash and speculation about Jackson's conduct. This reopened investigations into Jackson by the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department and District Attorney's Office, which uncovered new allegations from Gavin Arvo and his parents, including claims of false imprisonment. Jackson was then arrested in 2003, and in 2005, he had a 3-monthlong criminal trial. Ultimately, the jury found Jackson not guilty on all charges. Just a few years later, in 2009, Jackson died. Since Jackson's death, additional lawsuits have been filed against his estate, with some updates occurring as recently as this year. Despite the decades of cases, none of the aforementioned accusations or legal matters were addressed in Michael.

[00:03:28]Lionsgate was legally barred from depicting certain details. Viewers and even those who haven't seen the movie have understandably expressed outrage that Michael made no mention of the accusations made against Michael Jackson. However, according to the Washington Post, the studio Lionsgate did initially try to include those scenes, although the movie was reportedly going to position this storyline as one that was an intentional form of blackmailing. Per that source, there has been discourse suggesting that Lionsgate intentionally avoided addressing this history, instead opting for a sanitized version of Jackson's life story, although allegedly that is not the case. According to this reporting, Lionsgate had included at least the allegations made by the Chandler family, but they were legally barred from including those scenes in the movie and therefore had to have significant re-shoots. While audiences will likely never know what exactly those scenes entailed, that does mean Chandler's story can presumably never appear on screen. However, that may not mean the allegations can't be explored at all. Could a potential Michael sequel address the allegations? At the end of Michael, just before the credits begin rolling, the screen cuts to black and the words, "His story will continue appear." That isn't a direct confirmation that a sequel is coming, but the suggestion is clear. At the very least, this opens the door for a sequel movie, which makes sense given when Michael ends just before Jackson's bad tour. There is therefore much more of Jackson's life left to be depicted, from his many more hits to the births of his three children. Additionally, particularly given the timeline, the allegations could be explored in that movie. Given that Michael ends in 1988 and the first allegations against Jackson came in 1993, it would make sense for a sequel story to be the movie that depicts these accusations without Chandler being mentioned. Presumably, while Lionsgate had to cut scenes before, it's clear that the studio wanted to address this history in some way. With their current knowledge of what they are legally permitted to include, they may make another attempt at this aspect of Jackson's life that doesn't violate any previous settlements or legal agreements. Whether the studio will actually do so remains to be seen.

[00:05:30]Clearly, there is significant backlash against the studio for not including these allegations in Michael, which might mean more pressure on Lionsgate to focus on these stories in a sequel. On the other hand, in light of the current success of the movie, the studio may decide to proceed without addressing the accusations, banking on the possibility that audiences might accept another movie without them being depicted. Of course, the sequel isn't yet confirmed, so there may not be another opportunity to shed light on this history.