The media has done a good job of talking about what’s not in “ Michael .” I refer, of course, to the accusations of child sexual abuse that dogged Michael Jackson from 1993 until the day he died (and, of course, they didn’t stop then ). The media has done a far less good job of talking about what’s actually in “Michael.” If you scan the coverage, you’d think that the movie was the most scrubbed and innocuous of jukebox musicals. You might think the reason it’s going to make a jillion dollars is that a lot of people are only too happy to revel in a Michael Jackson biopic that’s all greatest-hits cues and nostalgic high points: a two-hour hologram of Michael mania. If that’s all “Michael” was, it’s certainly possible that the film might still be breaking box-office records . Yet I think one reason for “Michael’s” extraordinary success is that it’s actually a more interesting movie than many have given it credit for.…