Discussion in 'Film and TV' started by Mesa, Oct 28, 2018.
going this weekend, spoiler tags appreciated
spoiler: freddie has AIDs and dies
saw it yesterday night and its fucking amazing
Worth going to see it?
definitely, go see it as soon as you can
It really doesn't portray itself any differently than any other biopic. The thing that is really driving people to say they enjoyed it is the fact that it's Queen. The whole thing feels really superficial, Rami Malek did really well in portraying Freddie Mercury, but the film itself lacked a lot of the important narrative from the time period, they could have gone a lot more in-depth with how it was to be a gay man in the 70s. Pretty big oversight in not going deeper into his sexuality if you ask me, even if it's a PG-13 film.
Because that wasn't what the film was about
It was titled Bohemian Rhapsody because it is about the band's story, not Freddie's alone
When there's so much stuff to fit in about the band itself, I doubt they felt as if they had time nor space to fit in a whole subplot about sexuality in the 70's.
probably because being gay was hardly the highlight of his life after all he'd achieved, the film definitely made the audience aware that he was constantly heckled for it by the media and that it interfered with his life, which obviously resulted in
him getting AIDS
selling out the rest of the band for paul
being gay wasnt the highlight of his career, as i said, it was his rise to fame and talent along with the band
His sexuality was just one element that was left mostly untouched, the entire story is a watered down version of Queen's legacy. His sexuality was actually a really important part of Queen, queerness was his style and he used that to shape Queen artistically. It actually played a much larger role in how Queen came to define itself. Everything is just watered down to keep the rating PG-13, but an accurate depiction would have been much more gritty.
yeah sure, it was titled bohemian rhapsody but in the trailers they were saying "more interesting than the band music... is his story" or something on those lines, as in freddie mercury
I just felt that the movie didn’t really know what it wanted to be, it kept changing focuses which in some areas was used poorly
what do you want from a film lasting around 2 hours
biopics almost always fail this is nothing new
I've been a massive fan of Queen since watching parts of their Live Aid performance on TV (I think he had a recorded version somehow, or maybe it was just on regular TV) when I was around 5-6. I thought the movie was pretty good, I went to see it on november 24th with my parents and sister. But now I can't listen to certain Queen songs without getting a tear in my eye.
mary austins eyes welling up in tears as she watched freddie flawlessly sing we are the champions was unarguably one of the best parts of the movie
Oh god don't remind me... But I do fully agree.
don't stop me now being stretched out and edited to cover queen leaving the stage also got me emotional
You really want me to tear up again, don't you?
the morose of the edited music followed by the "freddie mercury died due to complications of aids in 1991, two days after announcing his illness" gets me