Nia Long

Michael (2026): A Middle of the Road Michael Jackson Greatest Hits Album

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Michael” is directed by Antoine Fuqua (The Equalizer, Training Day) and stars Jaafar Jackson, Nia Long (Missing, Boyz in the Hood), Juliano Valdi (Arco, The Loud House), KeiLyn Durrel Jones (Better Call Saul, Succession) Laura Harrier (Spider-Man: Homecoming, BlacKkKlansman), Jessica Sula (Recovery Road, Skins), Mike Myers (Shrek, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery), Miles Teller (Whiplash, Top Gun: Maverick), and Colman Domingo (Sing Sing, Wicked: For Good). This film is about Michael Jackson’s rise to stardom, chronicling his growing up, family life, and the rising conflict he faces as an artist.

The last movie I reviewed on the blog is “Lorne,” and now I am doing “Michael…” 

Ladies and gentlemen… We missed a grand opportunity to make the next “Barbenheimer” happen. LORNE MICHAEL? The name writes itself!

Anyway, “Michael” has been on my radar for some time, not necessarily because I was looking forward to it. Not that I thought the movie would be the worst I have ever seen, but Michael Jackson is not my goto artist. Sure, I like hearing “Thriller” every now and then, especially around Halloween. But keep in mind, this guy is called “the king of pop.” I am generally not a pop guy. I am more rock and roll, classical, jazz, heavy metal… Those genres speak to me more.

To be frank, the real reason why I am reviewing this movie is not because it heavily interests me, but rather because it seems to be of interest to so many other people. Some are projecting that this could end up becoming the highest-grossing musical biopic in box office history. I have family members and relatives who grew up with Michael Jackson who wanted to see this ASAP. I do not despise Michael Jackson. I think as a musician he knows his stuff, but he is not the first person I would pick to listen to in my spare time.

Also, some people have nicknamed me “Jackson 5…” So that’s a bonus.

Here is some seemingly shocking news… I have never seen an Antoine Fuqua movie. I have always been meaning to check his work out. My dad has expressed his approval for “The Equalizer” and “Shooter” for example. I just have not had the time or motivation. But given how popular I projected “Michael” to be from the getgo, I felt the need to check this movie out for myself.

Having seen “Michael,” it is better than I figured it would be in some ways, but the movie is not without its faults.

I am not a Michael Jackson fanatic. Again, I recognize his talent, but he is not my jam. That said, I have a feeling that in some way that a lot of Michael Jackson fans are going to see this film as a personal love letter, showcasing some of his greatest hits and career highlights. In that sense, the film feels overstuffed, which is really weird to say given how the film itself plays out.

Do not get me wrong. “Michael” has a story. In fact, when it comes to executing its story, or, based on several factors, as much of the story as it is willing to unveil, I thought it did a better job than the recently released “Super Mario Galaxy Movie.” Interesting enough, I find both movies to be quite similar. Both are based on cultural behemoths, they are aiming towards family demographics to a certain degree, and there seems to be a divide between the critics and audiences as to whether or not the movie is good.

Another thing that puts these two in the same boat is that they seem to rely on nostalgia. If you grew up in the 80s, you may have been playing “Mario” or listening to Michael Jackson. Perhaps both. When I was watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie,” I found myself needing more than nostalgia to keep me entertained. That is also the case when it comes to “Michael,” and the case arguably has more merit this time around, as, again, he is not my artist of choice. Of course, I have heard several of the songs in this movie… “Thriller,” “Beat It,” “Billie Jean,” but when they played, I do not think they hit me in the way the crew would have hoped.

What I liked about “Michael” is not so much the music, but rather the journey as to how we got some of the music. “Michael” reminds me a bit of “A Complete Unknown,” because that film seems to explore an artist who wants to play music based on what he is passionate about, and there are obstacles standing in his way of doing that. For Bob Dylan, the protagonist of “A Complete Unknown,” the obstacle was the audience, who put the artist in a box. For Michael Jackson, the biggest obstacle is his family. In some ways, the film highlights the importance of Jackson’s family, but it also sets up his father as an antagonist. We see Michael begin as a member of the Jackson 5 with his siblings, but the more the movie progresses, the more we see Michael feel the need to tread his own path. The only problem, his father wants him to keep making music under his supervision and with his siblings.

I am not going to pretend that “Michael” is the best movie of the year, but there is a decent movie in here somewhere. Is it familiar? Sure. But it is sometimes engaging. When I am watching “Michael,” I do not see myself watching a film about an aspiring performer who became a huge success, even though that idea does play a part in the story. If anything, I found myself mostly invested in the protagonist’s personal conflict of being his ultimate creative self. Yes, the movie presents Michael Jackson’s eccentricities. For example, we see his relationship with his pets. And these are not your typical dogs and cats. These are the kind of pets that Veruca Salt would beg for after finally getting her hands on a golden goose.

Not all of the concert scenes are exactly memorable, but I will not deny that there are some that stood out to me. There is one scene in particular that is shot and edited less like a movie and more like a televised special, or an actual “concert film.” I thought it was kind of clever. The sound mixing is also quite good, and I had a feeling it would be from the getgo, where the movie opens to a crowd chanting “Michael’s” name over and over again. The auditorium was almost shaking at that point.

Perhaps the biggest standout in “Michael” is… Well, Michael himself. Or more specifically, Jaafar Jackson, who plays him. In real life, Jafaar is Michael Jackson’s nephew, so I would have been shocked to say that his performance was not good. Thankfully, he is excellent. It is too early to tell if his performance is awards-worthy, but Jackson brings a flair to his uncle that feels similar to how some would probably imagine the artist in real life. Jackson does a great job at capturing the character’s ambitions and kineticism. It is clear that Jackson did some major studying behind the scenes to capture his uncle’s essence.

“Michael” is Jaafar Jackson’s first movie acting credit. My question is, and I say this as someone who found this performance to be excellent, what is Jaafar Jackson’s future in film? Is he just going to play Michael Jackson and call it quits? I would be interested to see him in another role, as long as it is something completely different than the one he played in “Michael.” I would like to see some range should he continue acting. This is also the biggest factor as to why he may not win an Oscar next year. As great as Jaafar Jackson is, he is playing someone who has a somewhat personal attachment to him. Jackson is superb, but unlike Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury or Austin Butler as Elvis Presley, his performance feels less transformative in comparison.

This does not take anything away from Jackson’s ability to capture the character and bring him to life. I will not deny that he did exactly that. In fact, if there is one positive that I will continue to think about regarding this movie, Jaafar Jackson may be it. All due respect to everyone else involved, including the super talented Colman Domingo as Joseph Jackson, but Jaafar steals the show.

As I watched this movie though, I found parts of it to drag, especially around the middle. For a movie whose trailers promise something exciting and kinetic, I was kind of surprised to find myself bored during certain scenes. I think about 10 minutes of the runtime could have been trimmed just to provide something tighter.

In the end, “Michael” is not the worst film I have ever seen, but it is occasionally bogged down by somewhat poor pacing, feeling somewhat incomplete in the story it is trying to tell, and the concert scenes not having the oomph that I was expecting. For a movie about the King of Pop, it works in some places, but overall, it does not quite pop. This movie is likely going to go down as a success at the box office, and I partially played a factor in that. I cannot say my experience of watching it, however, was exactly the best. Did I have a decent time? Perhaps barely. But I do not see “Michael” having any replay value down the road. I am going to give “Michael” a 6/10.

“Michael” is now playing in theaters. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! If you want to see more of me, and by that I mean, literally see me, check out my latest episode of Movie Requests, featuring special guest Katee Sackhoff! She requested I should watch “High Noon,” and I was more than happy to do so! To hear my thoughts, click the video above! Give it a like if you enjoyed it! If you want to see more episodes down the line as soon as they come out, please subscribe to my YouTube channel!

My next review is going to be for “Deep Water!” Stay tuned! Also coming soon, be on the lookout for my thoughts on “Animal Farm,” “Mortal Kombat II,” “The Sheep Detectives,” and “In the Grey!” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Michael?” What did you think about it? Or, what are your thoughts on Michael Jackson as a performer? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Missing (2023): This Kinda Sorta Sequel Spinoff to Searching Cannot Compete with the Novelty of Its Counterpart

Posted on by Jack Drees

“Missing” is directed by Nicholas D. Johnson and Will Merrick, both of whom edited the 2018 film “Searching.” This film stars Storm Reid (A Wrinkle in Time, 12 Years a Slave), Joaquim de Almeida (Good Morning, Babylon, 24), Ken Leung (Old, Lost), Amy Landecker (Transparent, Project Almanac), Daniel Henney (My Lovely Sam Soon, The Wheel of Time), and Nia Long (The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Boyz in the Hood). This film centers around a young girl named June whose mom goes on a getaway. When June goes to the airport to pick her mom up at a time she was scheduled to arrive back from said getaway, she is nowhere to be seen. This leads June down a spiral of questions, searches, and wonders as to what happened to her mom and what she could be up to via the internet.

This film is from the editors of “Searching,” which I missed during its original release. In fact, despite having a pass to a press screening for this film, I took it almost neglecting the fact that I still have not seen “Searching.” I felt guilty. I heard good things about it and the concept itself sounded unique. Having watched the film the week of said screening, I can confirm the execution is exactly that. A good movie with a unique concept. Naturally, this made me more excited for “Missing.” I was also glad to know that this was from people who were involved with “Searching.” Part of what made that original film so watchable is its ability to multitask. “Searching” has the ability to juggle a quick pace, a wonderfully twisty narrative, and great characterization without the use of full-fledged cameras. I thought this was shockingly well done. In my best movies of 2022 list, I said “Everything Everywhere All at Once” stood out to me because of how much of a one of a kind concept it turned out to be. “Searching,” while not as great of a movie, sits in the same boat.

One of the greatest things about “Searching” was its ability to keep me interested in the story from start to finish despite the unique, perhaps gimmicky filmmaking style. “Missing” nails the start, but as we get closer to the finish, my interest levels waned. Part of it is because this film missed (no pun intended) something that “Searching” had through its full runtime. Each moment in “Searching” felt like something that could actually happen. Each conversation, every action. All of it felt real. Despite some occasionally juicy material, everything that happened came off within the definition of verisimilitude. That said, the first half sold me before we get into some shark jumping moments that ultimately reduced my enjoyment. I did not hate this movie. To say I hated “Missing” would be a hyperbole. But it is also a movie where the flaws stand out just as much as its wins.

The wins for “Missing” would be the performances. Every actor does a good job in this movie. Storm Reid carries this film from start to finish, but it does not mean the supporting roles filled by actors like Joaquim de Almeida and Nia Long were not worthy of my praise. Giving some specification on the latter, I bought the chemistry both between Nia Long and Storm Reid, in addition to Long and Ken Leung, who plays her love interest. The love Long’s character gives to both individuals, even if there is some tension between them and the protagonist, feels genuine.

If there are any other wins, I did find the film surprisingly humorous. Although between both movies, I laughed more during “Searching.” That said, like “Searching,” there were a couple moments that showcase jokes that poke fun at some of the ways we use technology or some of the things we use technology for. There were a couple laughs from me and the rest of my audience.

I loved the use of the screen technology in “Searching.” Not only because of its uniqueness, but how it was used. While “Missing” definitely does not have as many visual effects as “Avatar: The Way of Water,” there are moments where this film has a larger than life feel to it. But this is a rare case where I am using that as a negative. This is especially true in the climax. Larger than life can have numerous meanings. In this case, the meaning applies to how far-fetched the climax felt at times. While there is a moment where my crowd erupted in applause, I on the other hand remained silent because I did not believe what was happening on screen felt like it belonged in a picture like this. I have watched movies where I was able to suspend my disbelief because while I knew what was happening is not realistic in our universe, the movie’s rules made me think it could happen there.

In fact one of my negatives regarding “Missing” is how the movie attempts to connect to “Searching.” This movie just came out, therefore I am going to be as spoiler free as I possibly can, but there is a television program in the film. Not a real program, but one that exists within this film’s universe, that starts off as something that sounds legitimate within the lore. But by the end of the film, it comes off as a cheap joke. I mean that in more ways than one. The end of this film, while it has glimmers of entertainment, feels loosely strung together like a last minute project for a high school class I deemed less important than the others. It did not have the satisfying oomph the filmmakers seemed to be going for. If anything it felt out of place, abrupt, and maybe even a bit lazy. I am not asking for every aspect of “Missing” to be just like its original counterpart, but my hope was for this movie to take what was great about “Searching” and have a story that kind of stands on its own. “Missing” does both those things, but it does not make the story interesting. Before my screening started, they had a promo suggesting that this movie is full of twists and turns. That should be a good thing, right? It could have been. But it did not help that the twists and turns ranged from out of the blue to highly illogical. What do I think about “Missing?” Well, to put it short, something was missing.

In the end, while I did not despise “Missing,” it is definitely no “Searching.” I would much rather watch “Searching” a second time than pop this movie on again. I thought Storm Reid did a great job leading this movie. Her performance and character stood out. The cast is great. The concept, while a reversal of the original, lends itself to some decent ideas. I just wish they belonged in a better narrative. I am going to give “Missing” a 5/10.

“Missing” is now playing in theaters everywhere. Tickets are available now.

Thanks for reading this review! I know I am in the minority when it comes to this movie. The reviews for this film so far have been mostly positive from both critics and audiences. For some reason it did not work for me. But that is the beauty of film. Speaking of films, next weekend I will be watching “80 for Brady.” The brand new movie about four elderly women who will do anything to see a Tom Brady-led New England Patriots play in the Super Bowl. If you want to see this and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Missing?” What did you think about it? Also, did you see “Searching?” Tell me your thoughts on that film as well! Leave your comments down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!