These are all legitimate gripes though? None of them come off as biased to me outside of maybe the first one

Yeah a bunch of reviews that don't actually cover the film just whining about peddling media narratives is totally legit

When you're sold a biopic you expect the story of his life. If they didn't want to address that and didn't want people talking about it they should've made and marketed a concert film instead

sounding like a classic

I really can't in good conscience fault people for being upset that they aren't getting what was sold to them

Reviewers reviewing the human more than the movie

Seems more to me like they're reviewing the movie they got vs. what they expected, which are obviously two very different things

Right, so the Elvis film was equally reviewed given he was f***ing 14 year olds

I'm sure the Beatles biopics will receive the same response too right

Elvis was similarly panned and I don't know a single person irl or online that's excited for the Beatles movies

The panned Elvis film sitting at a 77% on RT yeah

Why is RT your only source? Michael has a higher rating on Letterboxd (and will likely go higher this weekend) and will very likely end up with a similar or higher user score on Metacritic as well

Elvis was not similarly panned lmaoooo

Because we're discussing the "critic" response to the movie and RT is an aggregator of critic response.

The same movie's synopsis which reads:

So they knew they weren't involved, they knew there's a second part coming, they knew this first film covers his early solo rise

Yet want to play all "huh?!?" it's just so unbelievably obvious in how disingenuous it is.

It got the exact same complaints this film is getting about being sanitized and safe while not having the stellar lead performance to fall back on

general audiences haven’t even seen this yet so how are you going to compare audience scores

Exactly.. My point is simply that these very obviously disingenuous reviews aren't actually reviews of the movie. And that the same standard is not held to other subject matters even in the same genre.

The roaring success + audience reaction will only upset them further, I'm sure.

crine

A "concert movie" of a dead artist?

Nice words from Magic Johnson

Better Man was good. A Complete Unknown was your basic music biopic that probably should be closer to low 70s

A MJ movie deserved better than mid-ass fuqua and the producer of bohemian raspberry making it.

what’s Magic’s letterboxd like

Would be very interesting I'm sure lol

Elvis was nominated for best picture at the Oscars

So was Bob Dylan movie. Neither deserving imo