If you were around in 2004, you probably remember the absolute media circus surrounding the King of Pop. It was a weird, heavy time. Right in the thick of it, VH1 decided to drop a biopic called Man in the Mirror: The Michael Jackson Story. Most people don't remember the title, though. They just remember the Michael Jackson movie Flex Alexander starred in. It became an instant legend for all the wrong reasons. Honestly, it’s one of those cultural artifacts that feels like a fever dream when you watch it back today.
The movie attempted to cover the high-stakes period of Jackson's life leading up to the 2005 trial. But instead of being a prestige drama, it became a masterclass in how not to do a biopic. Flex Alexander, who was riding high on the success of his sitcom One on One, took on the role of a lifetime. Or so he thought. What followed was a performance so physically jarring that it basically birthed the modern era of "hate-watching" before that was even a thing.
The Makeup That Launched a Thousand Memes
We have to talk about the look. Biopics usually live or die by the transformation of the lead actor. Think Austin Butler in Elvis or Jamie Foxx in Ray. But the Michael Jackson movie Flex Alexander did something else entirely. Flex is a tall, athletic guy—nearly 6'4"—which already made him a tough fit for the 5'9" Jackson. To compensate, the production used prosthetic makeup that, quite frankly, looked like it was melting under the studio lights.
It wasn't just that he didn't look like Michael. It was that he looked like a caricature of Michael’s most difficult physical era. The skin tone was inconsistent, the nose prosthetics were distracting, and the wigs felt like they were bought at a last-minute Halloween clearance sale. You've got to wonder what the producers were thinking during the dailies. Did no one stop and say, "Hey, this looks a bit off"? Apparently not.
The height difference was the most unintentional comedy gold. In scenes where Flex is supposed to be fragile or childlike, he’s towering over everyone else in the room. It breaks the immersion immediately. You aren't watching Michael Jackson; you're watching a very tall actor in heavy greasepaint trying to hide his natural athleticism.
👉 See also: Questions From Black Card Revoked: The Culture Test That Might Just Get You Roasted
Why Flex Alexander Took the Role Anyway
It’s easy to dunk on the performance now, but you have to look at the context of 2004. Flex Alexander was a massive star in the UPN era. He was a talented dancer—he actually started his career as a backup dancer for Salt-N-Pepa. He had the moves. He had the rhythm. On paper, a guy who can actually dance like Michael is a better choice than a "serious" actor who has to be doubled in every wide shot.
Flex has spoken about this over the years. He grew up idolizing Jackson. For a Black performer in the early 2000s, being asked to play the biggest icon in music history wasn't something you just turned down. It was a "swing for the fences" moment. If he had nailed it, he’d be in a different category of stardom right now. Instead, the limitations of a TV-movie budget and some truly questionable creative choices by director Allan Moyle turned it into a punchline.
There's a specific kind of bravery in taking a role like that. You're playing someone who is still alive, still in the news every single day, and whose face is the most recognizable on the planet. There is zero margin for error. The Michael Jackson movie Flex Alexander starred in had a script that leaned into the sensationalism of the tabloids, which didn't help. It felt exploitative rather than celebratory.
The Script and the Controversy
The movie didn't just fail on a visual level. The narrative was a mess. It tried to bridge the gap between the Thriller era and the 2003 Bashir interview, but it lacked any real psychological depth. It portrayed Michael as a misunderstood man-child, but it did so through a series of clunky, melodramatic vignettes.
✨ Don't miss: The Reality of Sex Movies From Africa: Censorship, Nollywood, and the Digital Underground
One of the most criticized aspects was how it handled the family dynamics. The portrayals of Joe Jackson and the siblings felt like they belonged in a parody. Because VH1 was aiming for high ratings during a period of peak Jackson controversy, the film felt rushed. It was "ripped from the headlines" in the worst way possible. It didn't have the benefit of hindsight. It was being filmed while the real-life drama was still unfolding in Santa Maria.
The Legacy of the "Bad" Biopic
Interestingly, the Michael Jackson movie Flex Alexander headlined has seen a resurgence in the age of TikTok and Twitter. Gen Z discovered the clips, and they are obsessed. The sheer audacity of the performance has given it a second life as a camp classic. It sits in that "so bad it's good" category alongside movies like The Room or the Lifetime Aaliyah biopic.
But there’s a lesson here for the industry. Biopics are dangerous territory. When the 2025 Michael Jackson biopic (starring his nephew Jaafar Jackson) was announced, the first thing everyone did was post photos of Flex Alexander. He became the baseline for what happens when you get it wrong. The pressure on the new film is immense because the Flex version exists as a permanent warning.
Flex himself has been a good sport about it. He knows the internet drags him for it every year on the anniversary of the movie's release. He's continued to have a solid career, but he'll always be linked to that white glove and that heavy makeup. It's a reminder that even a "fail" can become a permanent part of the cultural conversation if it’s spectacular enough.
🔗 Read more: Alfonso Cuarón: Why the Harry Potter 3 Director Changed the Wizarding World Forever
How to Watch (If You Dare)
If you actually want to see this thing, it pops up on YouTube or obscure streaming services from time to time. It’s not on Netflix or Max for obvious reasons—nobody is exactly proud of the licensing rights here. But if you do find it, watch it for the dancing. Flex actually holds his own when he’s moving. It’s only when he stops moving and the camera zooms in on the prosthetics that things go south.
What We Can Learn From the Man in the Mirror Fiasco
- Casting is more than just talent. You can be a great actor and a great dancer and still be the wrong "fit" for a historical figure. Physicality matters, especially when the subject has such a specific, iconic silhouette.
- Budget dictates quality in biopics. If you can't afford the top-tier prosthetic artists who worked on films like The Whale or Maestro, don't try to drastically alter an actor's face. It will look like a mask every single time.
- Wait for the story to end. Making a biopic about someone while they are in the middle of a legal crisis usually results in a movie that ages like milk.
The Michael Jackson movie Flex Alexander gave us isn't a definitive biography. It’s a time capsule. It represents the chaotic, celebrity-obsessed energy of the mid-2000s. It’s a reminder of a time when TV movies were the Wild West, and anyone with a wig and a dream could try to play a legend.
Next time you see a biopic and think the lead actor looks a little "off," just remember Flex. It could always be much, much weirder. The best way to engage with this piece of history is to view it as a campy alternative history rather than a factual record. If you’re a film student or a makeup artist, it’s actually a great study in what happens when production design and casting are completely misaligned with the source material.
To understand why the public reacted the way it did, you should look up the original VH1 promos from 2004. The hype was real, and the letdown was seismic. It remains a fascinating footnote in the history of music films and a cautionary tale for any actor brave enough to put on the sequins.
For those interested in the technical side of why the makeup failed, researching the "Uncanny Valley" effect provides a lot of answers. When a human face is altered to look almost—but not quite—like another real person, it triggers a revulsion response in the human brain. That's exactly what happened here. Flex didn't look like a human; he looked like a doll that wasn't quite finished.
If you’re doing a deep dive into Jackson’s filmography or portrayals, compare this to the 1992 miniseries The Jacksons: An American Dream. That project had the family’s backing and a much better grasp of the "vibe" of the era. The contrast between that and the Flex Alexander movie explains why one is a classic and the other is a meme. In the end, Flex Alexander did what he was hired to do—he gave a performance that people are still talking about twenty years later. That’s more than most TV movie actors can say.