It’s not a great movie, and no one cares.

Michael Jackson fans turned out in force around the world this weekend. They drove receipts for “Michael,” directed Antoine Fuqua, to around $217.4 million counting every country. In the US, $97 million.

So Lions Gate says.

The result is the biggest opening ever for a musical biopic.

Damn the critics, which gave it a 40% on Rotten Tomatoes, including yours truly.

The movie is fact free, riddled with narrative issues. But no one blinked an eye. They just wanted to see Michael Jackson sing and dance, moonwalk, twirl around, and perform the most popular music since the Beatles.

Indeed, Jackson’s three main albums — “Thriller,” “Bad,” and “Off the Wall” — are in the Amazon top 10.

The huge amount of money is partially because the film opened in 1,700 IMAX theaters, almost half its venues in the US. The prices are high — up to $30 in some locations. That’s twice the price of a regular movie ticket in the most expensive theater.

Fuqua’s movie and its success says nothing about truthfulness, which is no longer an issue in the Trump-verse. It’s about entertainment. It’s 17 years since Michael Jackson died, but his music has never gone away despite lingering accusations of child molestation. The audience was thirsty to see the King of Pop again, and that’s what Fuqua gave them. No third act? No problem.

Kudos to the producers also for casting Michael’s real life nephew, Jaafar Jackson, to play his uncle. That was value added for fans, who couldn’t get enough of the story. And to be the son of the man who sang “Word to the Badd,” and wrote a book about resenting his brother — well, that’s PR lightning in a bottle.

The last time I heard Anne Hathaway sing was in 2012 when I saw her give the performance of a lifetime in “Les Misérables” as Fantine. I was eight years old.

Therefore, when I saw that Hathaway would be starring in a new musical drama — an A24 film, at that — with original music written by Jack Antonoff, Charli XCX and FKA Twigs, my 21-year-old self was intrigued.

In retrospect, I should have just re-watched “Les Mis.”

The film opens with mega-famous pop star Mother Mary, played by Hathaway, as she enters the stage of a packed stadium and performs to her adoring fans. Her wardrobe, sound, energy and overall aesthetic are reminiscent of Lady Gaga, and were, to me, obviously inspired by the well-known singer.

Viewers are then introduced to Sam Anselm — played by Michaela Coel — a clearly successful and respected British designer in her studio that also doubles as her home. Sam enters her bedroom from her studio and lies down. During the scene, viewers can hear Sam’s inner dialogue.

“I haven’t seen her in over 10 years, but I could tell she was coming from a thousand miles away,” Sam’s voice says as she falls in a fetal position on her bed.

Mother Mary, who is not referred to in any other way for the entirety of the film, then shows up to Sam’s studio as rain pours down in London, looking disgruntled, pale and generally unhappy — opposite of the Mother Mary we saw on stage a few scenes ago.

Mother Mary storms through Sam’s studio up to her bedroom as many of Sam’s assistants try to stop her, while also looking in shock as they realize they are in the presence of the iconic pop star.

After breaking through the assistants and storming into Sam’s room, the two have a conversation as Sam tries to get to the bottom of why Mother Mary is really there. In this scene, it is implied that Sam was once Mother Mary’s designer and the two shared a close bond, but that Mother Mary did something to destroy their relationship.

With tensions high in the room, Mother Mary reveals she needs a dress for a performance that is happening in three days. This isn’t just any performance, though — this is her first performance since “the incident.”

“The incident” is different from whatever occurred between Sam and Mother Mary. “The incident” happened after Sam and Mother Mary’s relationship ended, but Sam knows all about it, as it was all over social media. Whatever happened traumatized Mother Mary, and she has not performed since — until now.

After Mother Mary begs and pleads with Sam to make her a dress that “feels like her,” Sam begrudgingly agrees. Then the two get to work.

As Sam takes Mother Mary’s measurements, holds up different fabrics to the singer and tries to get a feel for what Mother Mary is looking for in a comeback dress, the layers start to peel back on what happened between the two of them, and what happened to Mother Mary in “the incident.” The film gives most of the context through flashbacks that appear in the design warehouse they are working in, in a very A24 fashion.

Through the two working together on the dress and also hashing out their issues from years past, it is finally revealed to viewers what happened between Sam and Mother Mary and also what happened to Mother Mary more recently in “the incident.”

The reasoning behind their relationship ending was anticlimactic, while the story of “the incident” was just ridiculous. When this information is revealed to viewers around three-quarters of the way through the film, it turns into a horror-style drama. As a fan of horror, this plot was just too silly to get on board with.

There was a lot of symbolism that felt on-the-nose, which was nice when you’re trying to catch on to deeper meanings, but the whole film felt very “fake deep” in that way. Similarly, Sam and Mother Mary pretty much only speak to each other in metaphors, which they even directly address at one point, but the dialog translates pretty cringe-worthy.

One thing to appreciate about the film was the tension between the two main characters. The feeling of betrayal from Sam left you wondering what happened between them — only to be unimpressed with the answer — and if their relationship went not only beyond designer and model, but also beyond friendship. It would have been interesting if the film explored their potentially romantic relationship in more depth.

The film also is very slow, creating boredom for the first part of the movie, and was still boring even when the plot picked up, because everything occurring was so confusing and unremarkable.

The film ends with an important breakthrough for Sam and Mother Mary, which honestly left me more perplexed than anything else. I wanted to be mind-blown by all of it, but it just came across as various creative swings and misses. The acting was so dramatic and exaggerated, which was impressive and enjoyable, but met with the lackluster plot, it made the film seem kind of full of itself.

On the note of acting, the acting was not an issue with the movie. Hathaway and Coel give great performances, and other notable actors including Hunter Schaefer and FKA Twigs give enjoyable performances as well. Paired with a better plot and better execution, this small cast would be unstoppable.

The original songs written for Mother Mary were also not half-bad, and fans of Antonoff, FKA Twigs and Charli XCX will likely enjoy the musical moments.

As someone who not only truly wanted to enjoy “Mother Mary,” but also someone who tends to love movies that leave me baffled, this one missed the mark.

Rating: 2/5

Welcome to an exciting year-long project here at The Nerdy. 1986 was an exciting year for films giving us a lot of films that would go on to be beloved favorites and cult classics. It was also the start to a major shift in cultural and societal norms, and some of those still reverberate to this day.

We’re going to pick and choose which movies we hit, but right now the list stands at nearly four dozen.

Yes, we’re insane, but 1986 was that great of a year for film.

The articles will come out – in most cases – on the same day the films hit theaters in 1986 so that it is their true 40th anniversary. All films are also watched again for the purposes of these reviews and are not being done from memory. In some cases, it truly will be the first time we’ve seen them.

This time around, it’s April 11, 1986, and we’re off to see 8 Million Ways to Die, Crimewave, and Violets are Blue.

8 Million Ways to Die

The 1980s made several runs at trying to capture the essence of film noir, and this is one of the attempts that fails miserably.

Matt Scudder (Jeff Bridges) is an alcoholic Los Angeles Sheriff’s Deputy who gets thrown off the force after shooting a man attacking another cop with a bat (somehow Scudder was in the wrong for not letting the other deputy to be beat to death?). After getting himself into Alcoholics Anonymous, he is invited up to a party where he quickly gets entangled in a drug and prostitution ring that will see to the deaths of multiple people as Scudder tries to reclaim his life.

It’s not a good movie. It’s frankly a bit of a mess with some atrocious dialog thrown in as well. (There is one line that made my jaw drop that I sadly can’t run here, but it was just one of many bad lines.)

There is no doubt the film was trying to merge the feeling of a classic film noir with the rising Miami Vice style of the time, and it didn’t succeed at either of them.

A complete misfire that you can easily skip.

Crimewave

Sam Raimi directing from a script by the Coen Brothers should be amazing, but then the studio got involved.

Victor Ajax (Reed Birney) is on his way to be executed, but before that can happen he makes a last ditch effort to clear his name to the prison officials. It seems Victor was indeed framed for a murder he did not commit, and only a car full of nuns who took a vow of silence can clear his name.

Something felt horribly off in this movie, and I went and looked it up. Sure enough, the studio decided Raimi couldn’t edit the film and we ended up with a muddle mess of a story. That being said, there are some lovely shots in the film, and the Coen brother’s fingerprints are all over the story, albeit greatly mangled by the editing.

There are times you can feel a studio abusing its position, and this one felt it all the way through. Good for Raimi, Bruce Campbell, and Coen Brothers completists only, and absolutely no one else.

Violets are Blue

Oh good, another 1980s movie were we are supposed to be rooting for people who are cheating.

Gussie (Sissy Spacek) comes back to her hometown after becoming a famous photojournalist. She runs into her old flame, Henry (Kevin Kline) who is now married with a teenage son. It’s impossible for them to avoid their old feelings and almost immediately begin an affair.

I am quickly tiring of this trend in the 80s films, and this one in particular is pretty egregious. Henry tells Gussie the only reason he is married to Ruth (Bonnie Bedelia) is because her got her pregnant. Ruth clearly loves him more than he does her, and I think somehow that is supposed to excuse everyone’s behavior.

I love Kline and Spacek, but I hated every minute of this movie.

1986 Movie Reviews will continue on May 2, 2026, with Blue City, Jo Jo Dancer, Your Life Is Calling, No Retreat, No Surrender, and Saving Grace.