BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY | Nov 2 2018 | Fox | Rami Malek | Queen biopic | Bryan Singer fired | Kindly avoid libeling anyone in this thread

[TombRaider]

3 hours ago, The Futurist said:

People loooove mediocrity and mediocre films and filmmaking.

 

 

 

Mediocrity is championned, as it always is.

 

 

you would know:

Edited January 9, 2019 by TombRaider

[dashrendar44]

19 hours ago, Goffe said:

the film doesn’t do that, at all. you mentioned the band breaking up as example. the band broke up in the movie because fame and success went over freddie’s head, a typical trope in musical biopics.

 

The underlying thread of that imaginary break-up that never happened IRL is Paul Prenter alleged bad influence on Mercury, the moustache twirling's "evil gay" manager who has boasted up Mercury's ego to go solo against his partners. (Even though IRL, May & Taylor had already released solo albums outside Queen with Mercury's support without breaking that so-called "family" dynamics). It really seems that the movie's script (and caricatural interpretation), under Brian May and Roger Taylor's biases, blames that guy for turning Freddie Mercury on "the dark side"....Like that Mercury would be still alive (and straight) fronting Queen up to this day if it was not for that evil Lothario that corrupted Mercury and led him on that path rather than a self-discovery.

 

In that case of twisting and inventing fake facts, I can see why people think his homosexuality seems to be portrayed as a curse or an ordeal getting in the way of the band for the sake of artificial drama.

 

All this kerfuffle for a Lifetime special when this music video has more Queen-ess in a second than a two hour movie:

 

 

Edited January 9, 2019 by dashrendar44

[efialtes76]

38 minutes ago, TombRaider said:

you would know:

Jennifer Lawrence isn't mediocre. 

[Goffe]

2 hours ago, dashrendar44 said:

 

The underlying thread of that imaginary break-up that never happened IRL is Paul Prentiss alleged bad influence on Mercury, the moustache twirling's "evil gay" manager who has boasted up Mercury's ego to go solo against his partners. (Even though IRL, May & Taylor had already released solo albums outside Queen with Mercury's support without breaking that so-called "family" dynamics). It really seems that the movie's script (and caricatural interpretation), under Brian May and Roger Taylor's biases, blames that guy for turning Freddie Mercury on "the dark side"....Like that Mercury would be still alive (and straight) fronting Queen up to this day if it was not for that evil Lothario that corrupted Mercury and led him on that path rather than a self-discovery.

 

In that case of twisting and inventing fake facts, I can see why people think his homosexuality seems to be portrayed as a curse or an ordeal getting in the way of the band for the sake of artificial drama.

 

All this kerfuffle for a Lifetime special when this music video has more Queen-ess in a second than a two hour movie:

 

 

Fair enough. The writting is not this movie strongest suit, and any criticism about it being superficial, manipulating is valid, but to say it treats freddie’s homosexuality as a problem to overcome I can’t see that.

Edited January 9, 2019 by Goffe

[TombRaider]

1 hour ago, efialtes76 said:

Jennifer Lawrence isn't mediocre. 

BR isn't mediocre.

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

10 hours ago, Lordmandeep said:

 

 

That is not a critique I think that can be focused on this film alone really though. 

 

I think most people wanted to watch the film for his music then it being a thinkpiece about his sexuality though?

Well, yeah, certainly knives are out because of Singer's involvement but many biopics rearrange/make up events for drama, some get slammed and some don't. Queen/Freddie are very well known, plus it's been reported for years, the prospect of a "harder" version, it set this movie up to disappoint with critics no matter what. But the way this portrayed his relationships didn't help. I wouldn't say it shows homosexuality as something to overcome, you do see him with a good guy BF in the end, but it seems to be portrayed a lot more reluctantly than his hetero relationship.

 

9 hours ago, Goffe said:

the film doesn’t do that, at all. you mentioned the band breaking up as example. the band broke up in the movie because fame and success went over freddie’s head, a typical trope in musical biopics.

It seems like like some see playing around with the timeline of his AIDS diagnosis as trivializing the disease.  And onscreen Freddie's "wild" partying/trusting the wrong person aren't just because a biopic is gonna biopic (embellish reality and invent drama where there wasn't any)...but because the movie is clearly saying that all the band's problems were because gay Freddie just had to be so darn gay and lured in by a gay predator. (Fans don't look at the movie this way at all obviously). The singer who overdoes it casual sex and/or substances, the stars clashing over egos and jealousy, the sleazy music industry type in the lead's ear: these are all staples of musician dramas. Does a biopic have to avoid these themes with LGBT characters even if they are typical for the genre? Gay or straight, movies about singers can be very cliched so maybe they should try to do something different regardless.

[JB33]

17 minutes ago, BoxOfficeChica said:

Well, yeah, certainly knives are out because of Singer's involvement but many biopics rearrange/make up events for drama, some get slammed and some don't. Queen/Freddie are very well known, plus it's been reported for years, the prospect of a "harder" version, it set this movie up to disappoint with critics no matter what. But the way this portrayed his relationships didn't help. I wouldn't say it shows homosexuality as something to overcome, you do see him with a good guy BF in the end, but it seems to be portrayed a lot more reluctantly than his hetero relationship.

 

It seems like like some see playing around with the timeline of his AIDS diagnosis as trivializing the disease.  And onscreen Freddie's "wild" partying/trusting the wrong person aren't just because a biopic is gonna biopic (embellish reality and invent drama where there wasn't any)...but because the movie is clearly saying that all the band's problems were because gay Freddie just had to be so darn gay and lured in by a gay predator. (Fans don't look at the movie this way at all obviously). The singer who overdoes it casual sex and/or substances, the stars clashing over egos and jealousy, the sleazy music industry type in the lead's ear: these are all staples of musician dramas. Does a biopic have to avoid these themes with LGBT characters even if they are typical for the genre? Gay or straight, movies about singers can be very cliched so maybe they should try to do something different regardless.

So much of this kind of stuff doesn't even make it into the audience's collective consciousness, at least most people. Others just go and think for everyone and over-think, period.

[The Futurist]

22 minutes ago, BoxOfficeChica said:

Well, yeah, certainly knives are out because of Singer's involvement but many biopics rearrange/make up events for drama, some get slammed and some don't. Queen/Freddie are very well known, plus it's been reported for years, the prospect of a "harder" version, it set this movie up to disappoint with critics no matter what. But the way this portrayed his relationships didn't help. I wouldn't say it shows homosexuality as something to overcome, you do see him with a good guy BF in the end, but it seems to be portrayed a lot more reluctantly than his hetero relationship.

 

It seems like like some see playing around with the timeline of his AIDS diagnosis as trivializing the disease.  And onscreen Freddie's "wild" partying/trusting the wrong person aren't just because a biopic is gonna biopic (embellish reality and invent drama where there wasn't any)...but because the movie is clearly saying that all the band's problems were because gay Freddie just had to be so darn gay and lured in by a gay predator. (Fans don't look at the movie this way at all obviously). The singer who overdoes it casual sex and/or substances, the stars clashing over egos and jealousy, the sleazy music industry type in the lead's ear: these are all staples of musician dramas. Does a biopic have to avoid these themes with LGBT characters even if they are typical for the genre? Gay or straight, movies about singers can be very cliched so maybe they should try to do something different regardless.

Drugs, they don't work.

[That One Girl]

3 hours ago, JB33 said:

So much of this kind of stuff doesn't even make it into the audience's collective consciousness, at least most people. Others just go and think for everyone and over-think, period.

 

...that doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to discuss it?

[TombRaider]

2 hours ago, That One Guy said:

 

...that doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to discuss it?

People LOVED the movie. 90% audience score on RT. It's a smash hit. Biggest musical ever.

 

Stay mad and unhappy.

Edited January 9, 2019 by TombRaider

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

6 hours ago, JB33 said:

So much of this kind of stuff doesn't even make it into the audience's collective consciousness, at least most people. Others just go and think for everyone and over-think, period.

 

2 hours ago, That One Guy said:

 

...that doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to discuss it?

"Bohemian Rhapsody was a great time at the movies, people love it so much, what are these critics going on about?"

 

*presents some things the critics are going on about [while clearly not even personally agreeing with all these points]*

 

"It's a global smash, suck it, haters!" 

 

 

A real scintillating conversation this is turning out to be... 

 

A movie can be popular and a minority of people can still have issues with it. It doesn't mean they're wrong, it doesn't mean they're right. A lot of things that were huge in one time, make everyone cringe 10-20 years later. Or sometimes stuff gets slammed in the present and years later, we wonder what was so controversial about it. Remember how La La Land was fascist and racist in the heat of the Oscar race? 

Edited January 9, 2019 by BoxOfficeChica

[TombRaider]

1 hour ago, BoxOfficeChica said:

 

 Remember how La La Land was fascist and racist in the heat of the Oscar race?  

I've literally never heard this. Was it said by those #oscarssowhite who expect 33% of nominees to be black when only 12% of us americans are?

[Lordmandeep]

^ Hollywood Awards are so swept up in Identity Politics that they have shot themselves in the foot.

 

They have turned off most audiences who just want to be entertained and they cannot ever satisfy the crazies who see every aspect of their lives through their identity and nothing else. 

[That One Girl]

3 hours ago, TombRaider said:

People LOVED the movie. 90% audience score on RT. It's a smash hit. Biggest musical ever.

 

Stay mad and unhappy.

 

People loving the movie doesn’t mean others can’t have issues with it.

 

It’s also not a musical.  And even if it were, The Sound of Music adjusts to 1.2B+.

[Goffe]

9 hours ago, BoxOfficeChica said:

because the movie is clearly saying that all the band's problems were because gay Freddie just had to be so darn gay and lured in by a gay predator. 

I think what the film is saying is that Freddie, and that is very explicit, wants to belong and be part of people’s lives, but can’t get that. Freddie grows apart from the other band players because they, unlike Freddie, move on with their lives, getting families of their own. He is on a different page where once their bandmates also were. Prenter sees that and takes advantage of said vulnerability.

 

BR never reaches the conclusion  that Freddie has to let go of his homosexuality to get a meaningful relationship.

Edited January 9, 2019 by Goffe

[sfran43]

 

[JB33]

14 hours ago, That One Guy said:

 

...that doesn’t mean we’re not allowed to discuss it?

Of course you can discuss it. I just don't like that sometimes these think pieces are passed off as fact when it really represents how that particular individual feels. The person I quoted was lecturing about something that doesn't even cross most people's minds, which is fine. I'm just sayin'.....

[JB33]

9 hours ago, Lordmandeep said:

^ Hollywood Awards are so swept up in Identity Politics that they have shot themselves in the foot.

 

They have turned off most audiences who just want to be entertained and they cannot ever satisfy the crazies who see every aspect of their lives through their identity and nothing else. 

BINGO!

[Viktor Vilotijevic]

I guess they will expand it a bit more this weekend so it will be able to make another 2+ million $.

[Cmasterclay]

The movie literally has a "downfall" montage where he gives lingering stares to gay sexual partners in leather bars and it smash cuts to a news report on AIDS. Even if it's not homophobic it definitely plays into some pretty dumb 5th grade stereotypes there.