What do we want from biopics about pop stars?
Are we looking for a thorough and thoughtful retelling of the life of an important historical figure? A psychological examination of a creative force? Or do we just crave a celebration of music that we love and an opportunity to revel in songs that may have changed our lives?
For more than seventy years (back to at least 1954’s The Glenn Miller Story) and throughout the recent explosion in the genre’s popularity, there are plenty of examples of all of these approaches. Increasingly, though, it’s clear what the top priority is for the parties involved in approving and assembling these stories, especially since the record-breaking billion-dollar box office attained by 2018’s Bohemian Rhapsody—a successful biopic is a perfect mechanism for promoting an artist’s catalog and helping lock down their legacy, especially with newer, younger fans.
Streaming has made all music available all the time, and almost all pop superstars (at least those of a certain age) have sold some combination of their music publishing, recordings, and rights to companies who specialize in exploiting that material for future profit. These entities need to keep breathing new life and continued interest into the work of musicians nearing the end of their careers, or even gone for many years. And the estates of the subjects need to be kept happy with how their famous family member is presented, or they’ll yank the rights to the music or image.
Which brings us to the curious case of Michael, the long-awaited Michael Jackson biopic opening this week—a project which represents the apotheosis of biopic-as-marketing device. Jackson was, of course, not just one of the greatest performers of all time, he was also one of the most complicated figures in American culture. He was driven and disciplined, obsessed by fame and success, a child star who never had a childhood, a Rorschach test for issues around race and sexuality, a talent beyond compare. He was also repeatedly accused of sexually abusing children and committing unforgivable crimes.
Michael the film does not mention that final point. The allegations and trials that defined the final decades of Jackson’s life, and for many remain an inextricable piece of his legacy, are nowhere to be found. And how you feel about the movie—and about the purpose of biopics in general—is likely to come down to that absence.
|
Jafaar Jackson, Michael's Jackson's nephew, in Michael / photo by: Lionsgate
|
As the story goes, a version of the film was shot that was much longer and more comprehensive and did delve into the abuse scandals. But then the Jackson estate realized that Michael’s settlement with Jordan Chandler, his first accuser, required that neither side ever speak about the situation, and so that footage was deemed unusable. They decided that instead Michael would (conveniently) conclude with the world-conquering triumph of Thriller, and that the remaining material could potentially be used in a sequel that addressed MJ’s later career.
Not that this solved everything, even internally: a look at the Executive Producer credits reveals that some of Michael’s children and siblings chose to approve and participate while others did not (sons Prince and Bigi and sister LaToya yes, daughter Paris and other sister Janet no, and those who opted out have been outspoken about their concerns).
What remains, then, is a total and unabashed tribute to the rise and rise of Michael Jackson, a singer who had four straight Number One singles as a pre-teen fronting the Jackson 5 and then somehow only got bigger. The closing scene is a lengthy restaging of Jackson singing “Bad” at Wembley Stadium while fainting and screaming fans are hoisted over the barricades. This particular choice is actually a bit of a letdown as a finale (at least Bohemian Rhapsody ended with Queen’s miraculous Live Aid performance and everyone walked away on a high), but if by some chance you don’t know what the future holds, you would think the rest of his career must have been great.
Does Michael have a responsibility to at least hint at what subsequently happened to Michael Jackson’s life and career? Of course not—it’s not a documentary, and its only obligation is to be the best movie it can be. Nor does a biopic need to be a comprehensive life story, as we’ve seen in the recent Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen films focusing on one period in their careers.
Any good movie, though, does require a sense of honesty, and while Michael Jackson was certainly a victim who channeled his pain into glorious work, ignoring the tougher, destructive results of that pain is ultimately deceitful.
By Alan Light
|
|
|
|
Michael producers claims that Jackson's darker history may be addressed in a potential sequel. / photo by: Lionsgate
|
How do you separate an artist’s troubled life from their celebrated work? It’s a loaded question without an easy answer, and Michael feels like one of the most polarizing cases yet. But I want to know what you think. Did you enjoy the Michael biopic, or is the film dishonest about Michael Jackson’s legacy?
Let me know by writing to me at josh.rosenberg@hearst.com.
Did someone forward you this email? Sign up here.
|
The Continuing Adventures of the Esquire Entertainment Desk
|
Lee Sung Jin, the writer and creator of Beef, told Brady Langmann about how he came up with the idea for the Netflix drama’s excellent second season. The series follows two couples who fight over money, love, children, and how far they’re willing to bend the system to get what they want. “At this point, with where the world's at, I don't even think you can point fingers at the individual anymore,” Lee said. “ You do have to take a look at what we've created." Read the full interview here.
Jorma Taccone, the comedy director and former Lonely Island member, talked to Eric Francisco about the inspiration behind his new action comedy film, Over Your Dead Body. "These guys being novices, they get beat to shit in this movie,” Taccone said. “[I was] pushing the comedy as best I could with what might happen in a real situation of violence." Read the interview with Taccone here.
|
|
|
|
Lee Sung Jin, the writer and creator of Beef / photo by: Sela Shiloni, Netflix
|
|
|
|
The Cliff-Hanger's Winners and Losers of the Week
|
Winner: White Linen Suits
Will ‘80s fashion make a comeback when the Miami Vice reboot hits theaters? Top Gun: Maverick director Joseph Kosinski will reportedly direct the new film starring Michael B. Jordan and Austin Butler. It’s a pairing that will make a billion dollars—even if I have to see the movie thousands of times myself.
Loser: Marvel
Avengers: Endgame is returning to theaters ahead of Doomsday… with a secret new scene added to the original cut of the movie. “It’s critically important,” director Joe Russo told the audience when Disney announced the rerelease. “It’s an opportunity to create a bridge from Endgame to Doomsday in a very unique way.” Ah yes, the “unique way” of forcing fans to pay to watch the movie again.
Winner: Wile E. Coyote
The cartoon predator might never catch the Road Runner, but he’s getting his revenge on Warner Bros. The network shelved Looney Tunes’s Coyote vs. Acme movie for a tax write-off at the end of 2023, then fan backlash gave the film a second life.. Now, the newly independent film will finally see release in theaters this August, costarring Will Forte, John Cena, and of course, Bugs Bunny.
Loser: Love
Rapper Megan Thee Stallion dropped a bomb on social media this weekend when she revealed that she was splitting up with basketball pro Klay Thompson over claims of infidelity. Cheating? On Megan Thee Stallion? Hold my beer.
Winner: Video Game Movies
Last week was a boon to the video-game-to-movie pipeline. Audiences not only heard about a Battlefield movie produced by (and maybe even starring) Michael B. Jordan, but also updates for the film adaptations of Elden Ring and Gears of War. Has Hollywood found a gold mine of stories here, or will some video games just prove impossible to adapt? We’re excited to find out.
|
|
|
|
|
