Michael (2026): 10 Behind-the-Scenes Controversies, Explained

#10: Nepotism Accusations

Who could play an icon like Michael Jackson? The filmmakers decided to keep it in the family, casting his nephew, Jaafar Jackson. Based on the trailers, Jaafar undeniably looks and sounds just like his uncle at the peak of his superstardom. While this will likely be a breakout role for Jaafar Jackson, accusations of nepotism were inevitable. Jaafar has proven through his music career that he can sing and dance, but this is his first major acting role. One could argue that there were casting alternatives with more experience, such as Myles Frost, who won a Tony for playing MJ on Broadway. Of course, if Jaafar’s acting chops are on par with his musical talents, this so-called “nepo baby” should prove the haters wrong.

#9: From the Producer of “Bohemian Rhapsody”

“Michael” is from producer Graham King, who previously brought us “Bohemian Rhapsody.” On paper, that 2018 music biopic was an irrefutable success, grossing almost $1 billion and winning four Oscars. Even its Rotten Tomatoes score is technically fresh, just crossing the 60% positive threshold. That score also speaks to the film’s divisive nature, however. Its harshest critics argued that “Bohemian Rhapsody” watered down Freddie Mercury’s R-rated life with a PG-13 rating and ignored historical accuracy to an irresponsible degree. At least “Michael’s” director, Antoine Fuqua, doesn’t bring the same baggage as someone like Bryan Singer. Still, King’s involvement leads many to believe “Michael” will be “Bohemian Rhapsody 2.0,” which is either a good thing or a bad thing depending on who you ask.

#8: Limited Press Leading Up to Release

Based on advance ticket sales, “Michael” is inclined to have one of the biggest opening weekends ever for a music biopic, potentially exceeding $60 million. While Lionsgate seems confident that they have a box office hit on their hands, the critical response may be another story. The review embargo doesn’t lift until April 21 at 6:00 AM PT, about three days before its general release. While not always indicative of a movie’s quality, studios typically lift an embargo sooner rather than later if they’re expecting glowing reviews. Cast interviews have also been kept tight heading into the film’s premiere. That’s not to say there have been no interviews, but it’s not like Jimmy Fallon is going to ask very tricky questions surrounding the film.

#7: Miles Teller as John Branca

Michael’s daughter, Paris Jackson, has voiced her concerns about this biopic, saying that she read an early draft and gave notes on what she felt was “dishonest.” According to Paris, her issues weren’t addressed. Beyond the script, Paris Jackson spoke out against the casting of Miles Teller as entertainment attorney John Branca, who now serves as the co-executor of Michael Jackson’s estate. Paris argued that by casting an “A-list” actor like Teller, Branca was attempting to “enrich and aggrandize himself.” Branca is also co-producing, leading Paris to believe that he’s using his position to portray himself as “central to the Michael Jackson story.” While Paris believes many will enjoy “Michael,” that acknowledgement was not without a caveat.

#6: Janet Jackson’s Reaction

If Michael is the most famous member of the Jackson family, his sister Janet isn’t far behind. Surprisingly, Janet Jackson isn’t in the biopic, according to an insider who spoke with Variety. Then again, Janet’s absence makes sense considering her response to the project. When the film was screened for over 60 members of the Jackson family, Janet “had something negative about almost every scene,” via one insider. While the others in attendance responded more favorably, Janet reportedly took issue with “the acting, the makeup, how the actors spoke, even how they walked.” One source claimed that “Janet’s always been insanely jealous of Michael.” Whether or not that factored into her opinion, Janet most notably clashed with Jermaine Jackson, her brother and Jaafar’s father.

#5: Controlled by the Jackson Estate

As mentioned before, John Branca is co-producing the film with accountant John McClain, who’s also an executor of Michael Jackson’s estate. The estate has been a driving force behind the biopic, reportedly providing $10-15 million in reshoots. With the estate having so much say in the final product, there are concerns that “Michael” will play more like a commercial for Jackson’s music. This is a recurring issue for most music biopics. If you want a film about a famous singer to be commercially successful, you need the rights to incorporate their songs. With estates serving as gatekeepers to the music, you’ll likely require their approval on most creative decisions, which usually entails cutting less glamorous aspects of the subject’s life.

#4: Ongoing Jackson Lawsuits

Even in death, Michael Jackson’s name remains tied to multiple ongoing lawsuits, which this biopic has only brought more press to. In the 2019 documentary “Leaving Neverland,” Wade Robson and James Safechuck accused Jackson of abusing them during his youth. Although Robson’s lawsuit against Jackson’s estate was dismissed multiple times, it found a new path forward in 2023. As of writing, Safechuck v. MJJ Productions is expected to go to trial in November 2026. Paris Jackson has also been engaged in a legal scuffle with her father’s estate, citing “irregular payments” while accusing John Branca and John McClain of mishandling funds. These allegations have cast a shadow over the release of “Michael,” which has an estimated budget of $155–200 million.

#3: What Graham King Means by “Unbiased”

Graham King is well aware that Jackson was “complicated.” With this biopic, King says that he sought “to humanize but not sanitize and present the most compelling, unbiased story.” Based on what’s been shown in the advertising, though, King’s definition of “unbiased” won’t necessarily align with everyone else’s. The film is being sold as a tribute to Jackson, tiptoeing around the less flattering aspects of his life. Even if those scandals are touched upon, the film (or at least its marketing) seems more interested in Jackson’s music and often misunderstood genius. Maybe the trailers haven’t reflected the film as a whole, but if Jackson’s contributions to the zeitgeist completely overshadow his controversies, “unbiased” might not be the right word to describe this approach.

#2: Reasons Behind the Costly Reshoots

We already brought up the reshoots that potentially raised the film’s budget to $200 million. Supposedly, much of the third act had to be reworked due to its depiction of Jordan Chandler, who clashed with Jackson over abuse claims in 1993. A settlement was reached with Chandler’s family in 1994. As it turns out, Jackson’s estate wasn’t legally permitted to depict Chandler or his family in a dramatization, requiring the filmmakers to rethink the whole ending. On one hand, you could argue that the movie at least tried to address one of the most controversial chapters in Jackson’s life. According to “Leaving Neverland” director Dan Reed, though, the script would’ve taken Jackson’s side.

#1: Response From “Leaving Neverland” Director

Speaking of Dan Reed, the director of “Leaving Neverland” and its 2025 sequel has perhaps been the most vocal critic of this biopic. Reading a draft of “Michael,” Reed called the screenplay “startlingly disingenuous.” According to Reed, Jackson’s only interactions with children in the version he read portrayed him as more of a caregiver. As Reed put it, “It feels like the creators of the movie have been stuck in a room with John Branca and just told what to write.” While that script likely went through some changes on its way to the screen, Chandler’s omission further suggests that the accusations against Jackson won’t be the focus. Although Jackson maintained his innocence and was acquitted, Reed strongly believes the whole story isn’t being told.

Do these controversies give you pause about “Michael,” or will you still be there opening night? Let us know in the comments.