gianmarco
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't imagine how search option missed that.
Mike Meyers is in this movie. He plays EMI music exec Ray Foster. I would have never recognized him. 6.5 on the Mammymeter.God, Wayne's World ruined Bohemian Rhapsody for me. My high school friends and I loved that song through the late 80's/early 90's. . We would literally jam to it just like they do in the movie - people singing different parts, head-banging at the end. It was beautiful.
Then this movie came and stole our shtick. I've hated Mike Meyers ever since. F you Wayne, I liked that song long before you defiled it!
I agree, but would like to see the story of Queen. That's just me, though.Zero interest here. I'm a Queen fan and I enjoy the "behind the music" documentaries, but I have no interest in seeing it turned into a movie.
The truth is, the story of "Queen" (the band) is pretty boring. There was little conflict or drama between the members, and the band itself wasn't very controversial.
Freddie Mercury was a compelling personality, but if you focus too much on him, then A) the gay stuff is going to turn off a lot of casual fans, and B) it wouldn't really be a movie about Queen, would it?
There's a reason why this movie was stuck in development hell for years and went through several cast changes, director changes, and rewrites. They could never figure out how to tell the story, how to find a proper balance between "backstage drama", "redemption", and "Freddie's lifestyle".
Also, it doesn't help that Brian May and Roger Taylor were creative consultants on the film. They're going to whitewash anything that makes Freddie or the band look too awful, but when you whitewash things then it reduces the impact of the climactic finale. So we're going to get a sanitized "feel good" movie that leaves you feeling empty and unsatisfied 10 minutes after you leave the theater.
Me too. Don't care about all that stuff. Freddy Mercury is larger than life and I want to see his story told on the big screen.I agree, but would like to see the story of Queen. That's just me, though.
This documentary tells it pretty well.I agree, but would like to see the story of Queen. That's just me, though.
Thanks, man. Well done.
I agree with everything you wrote. I had goosebumps when the Live Aid concert played.Saw it and liked it a lot.
It's a flawed movie in its use of rock bio tropes, its sanitization, and the general shallowness in glossing over of lots of history and phenomenal music. It feels more like it's made for those who weren't alive when Queen was a going concern, like a Queen 101 survey course. BUT, if you can get over that, it's a thing of joy. Besides, to really capture the Queen/Mercury story, you'd need a season or two of television.
The casting is top notch, Rami Malek's performance is spectacular, and the Live Aid finale alone is worth the price of admission.
Not a perfect film, but a beautiful snapshot--of the band, their approach, their music, the times, and of Freddie's loneliness.
If you can, see it in IMAX.
Thanks
You don't have to show every aspect of Freddie's lifestyle to get the point across.how do you make a doc about Freddie Mercury pg-13?
I need to see some anal hamster play dammit!!You don't have to show every aspect of Freddie's lifestyle to get the point across.
Who cares what critics say?Critics don't seem to be crazy about it.
“Unfortunately,” TIME opined, “Queen’s lyrics are not the stuff of sonnets.” The New York Times, reviewing a 1978 appearance at Madison Square Garden came down equally hard: “Lyrically, Queen’s songs manage to be pretentious and irrelevant. Musically, for all the virtuosity—though it was cheating a bit to turn over the complex middle portion of their ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ to a taped version, with empty stage and flashing lights—the songs still sound mostly pretty empty, all flash and calculation.”
Seems like a fair review.“Unfortunately,” TIME opined, “Queen’s lyrics are not the stuff of sonnets.” The New York Times, reviewing a 1978 appearance at Madison Square Garden came down equally hard: “Lyrically, Queen’s songs manage to be pretentious and irrelevant. Musically, for all the virtuosity—though it was cheating a bit to turn over the complex middle portion of their ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ to a taped version, with empty stage and flashing lights—the songs still sound mostly pretty empty, all flash and calculation.”
Rolling Stone didn’t mention the song in its review of the album A Night at the Opera (“The Prophet’s Song” got top billing as the best track) but later referred to the song as a “brazen hodgepodge.”
Yep I agree but not a queen fan here. The band was incredible boring from a drama and backstage stuff standpoint for the exception of the Freddie stuff. Also May and Taylor admitted to whitewashing this film in a blabbermouth piece that was done as a preview to this film. They basically said they wanted a movie to show their grandkids (AKA Interp: We wanted a movie that we could show our grandkids in a better light then we rally would if we put in facts). This movie seems more or less as a money grab then anything else. Besides the popular songs never quiet cared for Queen and don't find them anywhere close to the band they were without Mercury. They should've just stopped after he died. I'll possible see this on Netflix or find a free online stream to pirate. I'm honestly more pumped to see how Motley Crue The Dirt turns out over this.Zero interest here. I'm a Queen fan and I enjoy the "behind the music" documentaries, but I have no interest in seeing it turned into a movie.
The truth is, the story of "Queen" (the band) is pretty boring. There was little conflict or drama between the members, and the band itself wasn't very controversial.
Freddie Mercury was a compelling personality, but if you focus too much on him, then A) the gay stuff is going to turn off a lot of casual fans, and B) it wouldn't really be a movie about Queen, would it?
There's a reason why this movie was stuck in development hell for years and went through several cast changes, director changes, and rewrites. They could never figure out how to tell the story, how to find a proper balance between "backstage drama", "redemption", and "Freddie's lifestyle".
Also, it doesn't help that Brian May and Roger Taylor were creative consultants on the film. They're going to whitewash anything that makes Freddie or the band look too awful, but when you whitewash things then it reduces the impact of the climactic finale. So we're going to get a sanitized "feel good" movie that leaves you feeling empty and unsatisfied 10 minutes after you leave the theater.
If you regard Bohemian Rhapsody as an excuse to sit in the dark and listen to Queen songs, well, there are far less entertaining ways to spend two hours.
I've learned over the years to dismiss the opinions of people who have the word "critic" in their job title or job description.Critics don't seem to be crazy about it.
It has it's place. I'd rather trust most of the "critics" than Joe Blow public coming out of the theater complaining that there wasn't more "splosions".I've learned over the years to dismiss the opinions of people who have the word "critic" in their job title or job description.
I've already seen a trailer for an Elton John biopic - as you said I think we can expect a lot more.shader said:Really fun movie. In this day and age where creativity is lacking, expect this formula to instantly be copied by all the great bands of the 60's/70's. Lots of money grabs coming.
The movie itself was more like a documentary and they were a bit loose with the facts and the timing to build a narrative, but it was fun.