In a private Los Angeles screening last week, janet jackson sat among more than 60 relatives as the upcoming biopic “Michael” played out on the screen—then, as the lights came up, her detailed criticism of the film helped turn what many expected to be a celebratory family moment into a confrontation with her brother Jermaine Jackson.
What happened at the Los Angeles screening?
The Jackson family gathered quietly in Los Angeles for a private showing of “Michael, ” a film scheduled to hit theaters worldwide on April 24 (ET). The screening brought together more than 60 members of the extended family to watch a story that traces Michael Jackson’s rise from child prodigy out of Gary, Indiana, to global stardom.
People present described an electric atmosphere during the film: relatives laughed, clapped, and leaned forward in their seats. The mood shifted within minutes of the film ending. In the room, janet jackson—described by attendees as dissecting the movie “with brutal precision”—criticized elements ranging from performances to makeup and even how the actors spoke and walked. One attendee described her as having “something negative about almost every scene, ” framing the moment as one person pushing against the consensus that the family should rally behind the project.
Jermaine Jackson, who has been heavily involved with the movie, confronted his sister. A family insider in the room recounted Jermaine telling her: “You are going to miss this wave… You are so jealous — just get on the wave. ” Several attendees said the blunt exchange surprised younger relatives, particularly those who had not witnessed such an open disagreement among Michael Jackson’s immediate siblings.
Why is “Michael” stirring tension inside the Jackson family?
The film “Michael” stars Jaafar Jackson—Jermaine Jackson’s 29-year-old son—as Michael Jackson. Family members supportive of Jermaine have pointed to Jaafar’s proximity to his uncle’s music and mannerisms, and some who have seen early cuts of the film have praised his ability to capture Michael Jackson’s voice, posture, and dance style.
But the conflict over the screening did not land in a vacuum. Family insiders tied the moment to longer-running divisions about how Michael Jackson’s legacy should be preserved and who gets to shape the narrative. One fault line runs through disagreements connected to Michael Jackson’s estate. Janet Jackson has been one of the most visible family members backing Paris Jackson, 27, in her ongoing legal fight against the estate—an argument that has fueled tension among siblings, cousins, and advisors over how the late singer’s empire should be run.
The biopic itself has also been described as surrounded by controversy. Dan Reed, the director of “Finding Neverland, ” criticized the film as “a complete whitewash” and told The Times of London in 2024: “It’s an out-and-out attempt to completely rewrite the allegations and dismiss them out of hand, and contains complete lies. ”
Paris Jackson has publicly criticized the script as well, calling it “dishonest” and “filled with inaccuracies, ” saying she is no longer involved. shared on Instagram, Paris said: “The thing about these biopics is, it’s Hollywood. It’s fantasyland. It’s not real. But it’s sold to you as real… The narrative is being controlled. And there’s a lot of inaccuracy and there’s a lot of just full-blown lies. At the end of the day, that doesn’t really fly with me. ”
How do legacy, money, and memory collide in this moment?
To understand why a post-screening critique could ignite so quickly, it helps to see what the film represents to different people in the room. Family insiders have described Jermaine as viewing the movie as a moment of redemption for the Jackson brand and the biggest opportunity since Michael Jackson’s 2009 death to reconnect with audiences who once followed the family with near-religious devotion.
That yearning exists alongside the weight of Michael Jackson’s tragic end—described by family insiders as an overdose on a cocktail of drugs—and the persistent allegations of child abuse that shadow his legacy, while noting he was never convicted of any such crime while alive. Those unresolved tensions have placed extraordinary pressure on projects that purport to “tell the story, ” especially when they are positioned for a global audience.
In that context, the family’s internal disagreements become more than personal. They become a negotiation over which parts of history are amplified, which are minimized, and who is allowed to speak with authority. The estate and family have pursued new licensing deals and the Broadway hit “MJ: The Musical” as part of a broader effort to preserve Michael Jackson’s musical legacy, making the biopic not only an artistic endeavor but also a high-stakes cultural and commercial symbol.
What happens next for the film—and for the family?
What happens inside a private screening room rarely matters to the wider public. But this one did, because it exposed competing expectations inside a family that remains central to the narrative the film is trying to sell: unity, triumph, and a legacy reclaimed.
On one side are relatives who see “Michael” as a vehicle for renewed public attention and a shared “wave” the family can ride together. On the other are voices emphasizing the cost of smoothing out uncomfortable chapters, especially in a story already contested in courtrooms, boardrooms, and living rooms.
For the Jackson family, the release date—April 24 (ET)—now looms not just as a premiere, but as a deadline for coexistence: to decide whether disagreements stay behind closed doors, or whether they continue to surface publicly in ways that reshape how the film itself is received.
In Los Angeles, the screening began with laughter and applause and ended with a room full of relatives absorbing a raised voice and a sharp accusation. The lights came up, and the film was over—but the argument about janet jackson, “Michael, ” and who gets to define Michael Jackson’s story appears far from settled.
