The internet has officially weighed in on Michael, the Antoine Fuqua directed biopic of the King of Pop, and the reactions are nothing short of a digital battlefield. While the film was one of the most anticipated releases of 2026, the early reviews popping up on Rotten Tomatoes and social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) reveal a stark contrast between critical scrutiny and fan adoration.

As of late April 2026, the film sits at a polarizing 31% to 35% on Rotten Tomatoes, a score that has sent shockwaves through the entertainment world. Here is a breakdown of what the internet is saying about the film that everyone is talking about.

Critics Call Out the Sanitized Script

For professional film critics, the primary bone of contention is the narrative’s refusal to engage with the more difficult chapters of Michael Jackson’s life. Major outlets like The Guardian and The BBC have been particularly blunt, with some reviewers calling the film “really, really bad” and “a frustratingly shallow, inert picture.”

The consensus among skeptics is that the movie feels more like a corporate hagiography than a true biography. Critics argue that because the project was heavily influenced by the Jackson estate, it functions as a “sanitized” highlight reel that stops in 1988, conveniently avoiding the legal battles and controversies that defined Jackson’s later years. The Times went as far as giving it a one star rating, labeling it an “aimless Wiki plod” through his career milestones.

Unanimous Praise for Jaafar Jackson

If there is a silver lining that nearly every review mentions, it is the performance of Jaafar Jackson. Critics and fans alike are stunned by his ability to inhabit his uncle’s persona. Even the most scathing reviews concede that the musical sequences are “brilliant” and “thrilling.”

Reviews frequently mention:

• The Look: Many noted that the prosthetic work combined with Jaafar’s natural resemblance is uncanny.
• The Moves: His “electrostatic” dance moves are cited as the film’s most authentic element.
• The Voice: Jaafar successfully captures the soft, childlike speaking voice that Jackson was known for, making the portrayal feel deeply personal.

The Audience vs. Critic Disconnect

While critics are “clutching their pearls” over the film’s lack of depth, the audience reaction tells a completely different story. On social media, fans are hailing the movie as a masterpiece of nostalgia. Many users on X have pushed back against the low Rotten Tomatoes score, calling the film “awesome” and praising it for focusing on the music that made Jackson a global icon.

The “audience score” is expected to be significantly higher than the “critic score,” as many viewers are going to the theater specifically for the spectacle and the hits rather than a gritty exposé. This divide highlights a recurring theme in modern cinema: critics look for narrative complexity, while fans often seek a celebration of their favorite artist.

Baffling Choices and Sequel Rumors

One of the most discussed “internet moments” from the reviews involves a bizarre sequence where Michael appears to halt gang violence between the Bloods and the Crips. Critics have labeled this scene as one of the most “baffling” of the year, questioning its historical accuracy and tone.

Furthermore, the film ends with a cryptic title card stating, “The story continues,” which has fueled massive speculation online about a potential “Michael 2.” Reviews suggest that this first installment covers the rise to superstardom, potentially leaving the darker, more complex “second act” of his life for a future project.