Critical response On
Rotten Tomatoes,
Leaving Neverland holds an approval rating of 98% based on 96 reviews, with an average score of 8/10. Its consensus states: "Crucial and careful,
Leaving Neverland gives empathetic breadth and depth to the complicated afterlife of child sexual abuse as experienced by adult survivors." In
Vanity Fair,
Owen Gleiberman described Safechuck and Robson's stories as "overwhelmingly powerful and convincing".
Hank Stuever of
The Washington Post thought the documentary was "riveting" and "devastating", ending his review with a plea: "Turn off the music and listen to these men." Melanie McFarland of
Salon believed the "intent isn't to merely grant these men and their families a platform to air their stories in all their painful fullness, but to place the viewer inside the perspectives of everyone who was taken in by the dream... it does leave the viewer in the thorny clarity of what we know now." Matthew Gilbert of
The Boston Globe wrote that
Leaving Neverland was not "particularly imaginative", but admired how it chronicled Robson's and Safechuck's emotional narrative: "It accounts for every stage of their respective recoveries, which are still in progress, including their darkest feelings of fear, denial, and shame." In
Entertainment Weekly, Kristen Baldwin gave
Leaving Neverland a B grade. She criticized it as "woefully one-sided" and concluded: "As a documentary,
Leaving Neverland is a failure. As a reckoning, though, it is unforgettable." In
The Hollywood Reporter, Daniel Fienberg wrote that
Leaving Neverland is "about the 20+ years... Robson and Safechuck [held secrets, lied, covered up] — and the damage that can do — as it is about the alleged crimes." He concluded: "It's doubtful you'll feel exactly the same after watching."
The Daily Telegraph awarded it five out of five, describing it as "a horrifying picture of child abuse". David Fear wrote in
Rolling Stone: "By offering these men a forum, this doc has clearly chosen a side. Yet the thoroughness with which it details this history of allegations, and the way it personalizes them to a startling degree, is hard to shake off."
IndieWire's David Ehrlich wrote that
Leaving Neverland was "dry" and "hardly great cinema", but a "crucial document for a culture that still can't see itself clearly in Michael Jackson's shadow". Alissa Wilkinson described it as "a devastating case" that "may forever" change Jackson's legacy. In the
Chicago Sun-Times,
Richard Roeper described it as a "devastating and undeniably persuasive film".
Leaving Neverland earned the
Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Documentary or Nonfiction Special and the
TCA Award for Outstanding Achievement in News and Information.
Backlash against Jackson Leaving Neverland led to a media backlash against Jackson. Reed said he was not interested in this debate, and said: "I'm not about
cancelling Jackson. But I think people should know that he was, at times, a monster to children." but later re-added it.
NH Radio in the Netherlands and
MediaWorks New Zealand,
New Zealand Media and Entertainment and
Radio New Zealand also pulled Jackson's music, but some New Zealand radio stations eventually re-added it, citing "positive listener survey results". A 1991 episode of
The Simpsons guest-starring Jackson, "
Stark Raving Dad", was pulled from circulation; the co-writer,
Al Jean, said he believed Jackson had used the episode to groom boys for sexual abuse. A London concert produced by Jackson's collaborator
Quincy Jones removed Jackson's name and album titles from its advertisements; the organizers said the modified artwork reflected the show's inclusion of Jones's repertoire unrelated to his work with Jackson.
"Weird Al" Yankovic dropped his parodies of Jackson's music from his
Strings Attached Tour. The film producer Jodi Gomes said she and the Jackson family had been working on a new documentary about
the Jackson 5 for their 50th anniversary, but that it was canceled after the broadcast of
Leaving Neverland. However, Gomes believed Jackson's legacy would continue "from this generation to the next". Items of Jackson's clothing and a Jackson poster were removed from the
Children's Museum of Indianapolis, but Jackson's photographs from the museum's
Ryan White exhibit were kept. The fashion house
Louis Vuitton canceled Jackson-inspired products planned for its 2019 collections. The American gymnast
Katelyn Ohashi removed Jackson's music and Jackson-inspired dance moves from her
floor routine at the 2019
PAC-12 Championships. The city council of
Brussels cancelled plans to dress the
Manneken Pis sculpture in Jackson's signature clothing.
Aftermath Despite the negative publicity, Jackson's honors were not rescinded, as had happened following sexual assault allegations made against
Bill Cosby and
Harvey Weinstein, and there were no mass calls to stop playing his music, as had happened following allegations against
Gary Glitter and
R. Kelly. His videos were viewed 22.1 million times, an increase of roughly 1.2 million from the week prior, and three of his albums re-entered the UK
iTunes chart. In June 2019, around the time of the tenth anniversary of
Jackson's death, various industry executives said that his legacy would endure. Darren Julien, president of
Julien's Auctions, which has sold millions of dollars' worth of Jackson memorabilia, said Jackson "still commands prices compared to most any other celebrity". The senior
Billboard editor Gail Mitchell said she interviewed about 30 music executives who believed Jackson's legacy could withstand the controversy. Reed said he had received abuse and death threats from Jackson fans. In January 2019, he said: "There must be dozens of men out there who have been sexually abused by [Jackson] ... others will see this film and come out." A follow-up documentary,
Leaving Neverland 2: Surviving Michael Jackson, premiered on Channel 4 on March 18, 2025. It followed Robson and Safechuck as they took their allegations against Jackson to trial.
Lawsuit against HBO and public arbitration On February 7, 2019, shortly before broadcast,
Howard Weitzman, attorney for the Jackson estate, wrote a letter to HBO chief executive
Richard Plepler criticizing
Leaving Neverland as journalistically unethical. The letter asserted that HBO is "being used as part of Robson's and Safechuck's legal strategy [both of which are currently seeking appeals]", and that Reed intentionally did not interview anyone who detracted from the story. The letter said that the two accusers had been caught lying in testimony, and the documentary would only bolster their credibility. "We know that this will go down as the most shameful episode in HBO's history," the letter said. On February 21, the Jackson estate sued HBO for violating a non-disparagement clause in a 1992 contract by agreeing to run the documentary. The suit sought to compel HBO to litigate the issue in a public
arbitration process and claimed that the estate could be awarded $100 million or more in damages. The suit accused HBO of fabricating lies with a financial motive. HBO did not stop the airing of the documentary. The suit sought to compel HBO to participate in a non-confidential
arbitration that could result in US$100 million or more in
damages being awarded to the estate. HBO denied claims of a breach of contract and filed an anti-
SLAPP motion against the estate. Judge
George Wu denied HBO's motion to dismiss the case, allowing the Jackson estate to compel arbitration, but granted HBO's motion to stay the arbitration proceedings with the Jackson estate pending HBO's appeal to the
US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On December 14, 2020, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court ruling favoring the Jackson estate. The sex abuse lawsuits Robson and Safechuck filed which were based on the allegations they later described in
Leaving Neverland would eventually be dismissed as well. On February 28, Plepler resigned from HBO. He was rumored to have chafed under the leadership of
John Stankey,
WarnerMedia's new chief. The Jackson estate said Plepler "must have known" about the 1992 contract, since he had been senior vice president of communications then. It was reported in September 2019 that Plepler resigned three days after an unnamed shareholder wrote a letter criticizing, among other things, Plepler's greenlighting of
Leaving Neverland, arguing that it opened the company to lawsuits. On May 2, HBO lawyers Daniel Petrocelli and Theodore Boutrous filed an opposing motion arguing that the contract had expired once both parties had fulfilled their obligations. HBO contended that the estate's interpretation of the clause as conferring perpetual immunity from disparagement, even in death, was excessively broad. They argued that such interpretation would "run afoul of the public policy embodies in numerous California statutes to protect children from sexual abuse" and "legitimize the creation of a category of wealthy, powerful or famous individual who could... preserve for themselves via contract posthumous control over how they are portrayed and described in a way that ordinary citizens cannot." Bryan Freedman, an attorney for Jackson estate, responded, "If HBO thinks the contract does not apply or is expired then why are they opposing adjudicating it? The reason why is because they know they were complicit in this one-sided farce of a money grab that clearly violates the agreement... Let this be a warning to all talent that HBO will disregard the truth and distribute fictitious one-sided content in violation of the artists' rights it promised to protect." The Jackson estate aimed to have a
Los Angeles Superior Court judge compel arbitration proceedings before the
American Arbitration Association. HBO said there was no enforceable agreement that pertained to
Leaving Neverland. It argued that an over-reading of the 1992 contract would violate both its due process rights and the First Amendment; under the
Federal Arbitration Act, the federal judge had to decide the "gateway issues of validity and arbitrability". The Jackson estate called this argument "classic tautology" and that it "assumes the very conclusion that HBO wants an adjudicator to reach in this dispute, i.e., that there are no remaining obligations under the Agreement". On the recommendation of
Judge George Wu, HBO filed a
SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motion against the estate on August 29. It pointed to the "extraordinary" origins of the case. The estate argued that its petition is a federal issue, under the Federal Arbitration Act, hence the California SLAPP law should not take precedence. They said, "Breaching an agreement by refusing to arbitrate is not constitutionally protected activity. And even if it were, the Jackson Estate has shown a probability of success on that claim." The SLAPP law provides an automatic right to an immediate appeal, which may bring the case to the
Ninth Circuit. On September 19, Judge Wu tentatively denied HBO's motion to dismiss the estate's lawsuit.
John Branca, co-executor of the estate, said HBO had been trying to suppress the other side of the story. "I've never seen a media organization fight so hard to keep a secret," Branca said. The following day, Judge Wu gave a final ruling to deny HBO's motion to dismiss the case, granting the Jackson estate's motion to compel arbitration. On October 21, 2019, HBO filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, seeking appellate review of the District Court's order granting the Jackson estate's motion to compel arbitration. Shortly after, HBO applied for a stay of the arbitration proceedings. On November 7, HBO was granted its motion to stay the arbitration proceedings with the Jackson estate pending HBO's appeal to the Ninth Circuit. In October 2024, the case was dismissed by both parties resulting in
Max removing the film and never to return to the platform. ==Criticisms of allegations==