Re: Bohemian Rhapsody
Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2018 8:15 am
I was very dubious going into this given the very mixed press and accusations of 'straight washing', but I figured at least the music was going to be good.
Surprisingly the film is very watchable but its also very superficial (well it is directed by Bryan Singer) and it really needed a more intimate approach. Everything is told in large brush strokes and is easy to digest but left me rather unfulfilled.
Needles to say the music is the best aspect of the film and every well known Queen song (of which there are quite a few) are included to some degree. Rami Malek does as good as can be done with this sort of undeveloped material but anything briefly approaching intimacy involving Mercury feels faked and never rings true. I did like that his love of cats was covered in the film though and they offer up some amusing moments. As a matter of fact most of it pretty factual from what I can gather but some events happened later in real life. All the other actors really have nothing to do expect to orbit around Malek and it is a credit to the remaining members of Queen that Freddie is the primary focus of the film.
Ending the film at the LiveAid concert in 1985 actually feels right to my surprise. Ending the film on a high rather than a depressing low in November 1991 isn't by any means the worst idea, now that I have seen the film for myself. However, I must acknowledge that by stopping in 1985 and not continuing the further is in some ways a disservice not only to Freddie Mercury but to the many people around the would who succumbed to AIDS.
Mercury's homosexuality is played out in the film, though not in any sexually explicit manner and nor does the film need to that route. Drug use barely gets a mention. The problems with the film all stem from the screenplay first and foremost. Surprising because Peter Morgan who has written some wonderful screenplays over the years, but not surprising because co-writer Anthony McCarten also wrote The Darkest Hour & The Theory of Everything which were frankly terrible screenplays turned into terrible films.
This will not be figuring at the Oscars not only because it not good enough (plenty of crap makes of the nomination most years anyway) but its not daring enough. We didn't need an NC17 version of Mercurys life but something that was more probing and gave real insight into of one of the most important, talented and beloved music industry figures of the 1970s/1980s.
Surprisingly the film is very watchable but its also very superficial (well it is directed by Bryan Singer) and it really needed a more intimate approach. Everything is told in large brush strokes and is easy to digest but left me rather unfulfilled.
Needles to say the music is the best aspect of the film and every well known Queen song (of which there are quite a few) are included to some degree. Rami Malek does as good as can be done with this sort of undeveloped material but anything briefly approaching intimacy involving Mercury feels faked and never rings true. I did like that his love of cats was covered in the film though and they offer up some amusing moments. As a matter of fact most of it pretty factual from what I can gather but some events happened later in real life. All the other actors really have nothing to do expect to orbit around Malek and it is a credit to the remaining members of Queen that Freddie is the primary focus of the film.
Ending the film at the LiveAid concert in 1985 actually feels right to my surprise. Ending the film on a high rather than a depressing low in November 1991 isn't by any means the worst idea, now that I have seen the film for myself. However, I must acknowledge that by stopping in 1985 and not continuing the further is in some ways a disservice not only to Freddie Mercury but to the many people around the would who succumbed to AIDS.
Mercury's homosexuality is played out in the film, though not in any sexually explicit manner and nor does the film need to that route. Drug use barely gets a mention. The problems with the film all stem from the screenplay first and foremost. Surprising because Peter Morgan who has written some wonderful screenplays over the years, but not surprising because co-writer Anthony McCarten also wrote The Darkest Hour & The Theory of Everything which were frankly terrible screenplays turned into terrible films.
This will not be figuring at the Oscars not only because it not good enough (plenty of crap makes of the nomination most years anyway) but its not daring enough. We didn't need an NC17 version of Mercurys life but something that was more probing and gave real insight into of one of the most important, talented and beloved music industry figures of the 1970s/1980s.