So you didn’t like “Michael”? Shocking. Truly groundbreaking stuff.
Don’t worry, I’ve put together a helpful little guide so you can make sure you never enjoy it (or any biopic, really) ever again. You’re welcome.
- Buy a ticket for a biopic… and expect a documentary
Yes, absolutely. Go in expecting a frame-by-frame factual archive with footnotes, timestamps, and a narrator correcting every line. Then act outraged when the film dares to feel like cinema.
- Ignore the timeline completely
The movie clearly covers 1965 to 1988? Perfect! Now loudly complain about things that happened years later. Bonus points if you say “they avoided the real issues.” Extra bonus if you say it confidently.
- Do zero research beforehand
Press notes? Background reading? Knowing who’s in or out of the film? No no, walk in blind, then complain that certain people aren’t there. Even better, ask “Where is Janet?” like you’ve just uncovered a global conspiracy.
- Get outrageously confused about casting, absences, and basic filmmaking choices all at once
Be furious that certain real-life figures declined to be in the film, then immediately blame the filmmakers for respecting that reality. At the same time, loudly complain about missing characters while conveniently ignoring the ones who are actually important to the narrative. And to really top it off, refuse to understand that biopics often merge multiple real people into one character for storytelling purposes. In short: demand total historical completeness, zero legal boundaries, and absolute 1:1 realism… in a two-hour film. Because clearly, that’s how cinema works.
- Be selectively outraged about a missing accuser while ignoring basic legal reality
Take a moment to be deeply angry at the Estate and filmmakers for not including the first accuser in the film, despite the fact there is a legal agreement specifically preventing that person from being dramatised, a restriction that exists regardless of what the filmmakers may or may not have wanted. But don’t let facts get in the way of a good rage. Much easier to frame it as creative censorship than to acknowledge, you know… contracts and law exist in real life.
- Be utterly offended by other human beings enjoying the film
Sit there in a permanent state of disbelief that anyone else is having a good time. Watch people laugh, feel emotional, tap their feet, or get genuinely moved by what they’re seeing and let that alone become your biggest grievance. Forget the story, forget the performances, forget the intention of cinema itself. The real issue is clearly that other people are experiencing joy in your vicinity, and that simply cannot be tolerated.
- Watch the film while doing literally anything else
Scroll your phone, go grab snacks during key scenes, miss emotional moments entirely, then complain the movie “lacks depth.” Perfect strategy.
- Expect to learn something new… despite 40+ years of content
If you’ve consumed every book, documentary, interview, and conspiracy thread, yes, demand brand new revelations in a two-hour film. If not delivered, declare the film pointless.
- Ignore the emotional scenes, then say it’s “sanitised”
Miss the abuse, the loneliness, the trauma, the humanity, then confidently say the film avoids all difficult topics. Truly elite critical thinking.
- Decide your opinion before you even sit down
This is the golden rule. Walk in with your review already written in your head. That way, no scene, performance, or emotion can get in the way of your masterpiece take.
And there you have it, your go-to guide to not enjoying “Michael.”
Follow these steps carefully, and you too can write a completely disconnected, painfully predictable review that makes actual viewers wonder if you even watched the same film.
For the rest of us?
We’ll be over here, laughing, crying, dancing, and actually experiencing the movie.
But hey… what do we know, right?
 ever again. You’re welcome.){kind=link}