Movie Bohemian Rhapsody

sorted

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Posts
4,348
Likes
5,699
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter #1
I know people have commented on it in What's the last movie you saw? but I reckon it's good enough to deserve its own thread. All involved with this movie have produced something very, very good.

Firstly, the subject matter is easy to like. Queen are one of the best and most accessible bands of the last 40 years. And Freddie Mercury one of the most charismatic and interesting characters.

The film makers bring all that to life and more. They have enriched the great songs with the backstory of Freddie and the band, from startup, then success, breakup, Freddie's illness and the Live Aid concert.

The casting was top notch.The actors looked spookily like the band members and were convincing in their personas. But Rami Malek absolutely nailed it as Freddie. The mannerisms and stage movements were spot on.

Whoever did the cinematography and the sound should be nominated for the highest awards.

 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

TigerCraig

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Posts
3,176
Likes
576
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Manly
#2
I know people have commented on it in What's the last movie you saw? but I reckon it's good enough to deserve its own thread. All involved with this movie have produced something very, very good.

Firstly, the subject matter is easy to like. Queen are one of the best and most accessible bands of the last 40 years. And Freddie Mercury one of the most charismatic and interesting characters.

The film makers bring all that to life and more. They have enriched the great songs with the backstory of Freddie and the band, from startup, then success, breakup, Freddie's illness and the Live Aid concert.

The casting was top notch.The actors looked spookily like the band members and were convincing in their personas. But Rami Malek absolutely nailed it as Freddie. The mannerisms and stage movements were spot on.

Whoever did the cinematography and the sound should be nominated for the highest awards.
It was a good movie - music was great, performances were very good as were likenesses

The only thing that kept grating on me was how much liberty they took with reality, like:

How band was formed
How Deacon joined
How Freddie met Brian & Roger
How Freddie met Mary
How Freddie met Jim
That Roger was the first to go solo
That the South African tours weren't shown
When Freddie found out he had AIDS
How the band hadn't been on a break before Live Aid
That the million pound fundraising wasn't hit while Queen were on stage

It shits me when "biopics" mess with timelines. I know sometimes things need to be compressed and minor characters merged, but still

(Also watched Outlaw King on Netflix last night - again timelines and whole slabs of history changed
 
Last edited:

TigerCraig

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Posts
3,176
Likes
576
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Manly
#4
Over looking all the obvious ^, the concert scenes were amazingly well done and Rami Malek could have been Freddie Mercury.
Thought Gwilym Lee was great as Brian May too.

I said to me missus (who loves Midsomer Murders, Morse, Lewis etc) "You know who that is don't you" and she wouldn't believe me it was the same bloke as the detective sergeant in Midsomer.
 

manureid

Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 24, 2003
Posts
32,825
Likes
43,255
Location
Deleted Threads
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Man United,Raiders
#5
Thought Gwilym Lee was great as Brian May too.

I said to me missus (who loves Midsomer Murders, Morse, Lewis etc) "You know who that is don't you" and she wouldn't believe me it was the same bloke as the detective sergeant in Midsomer.
Good point. He was very believable.
 

sorted

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Posts
4,348
Likes
5,699
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter #7
It was a good movie - music was great, performances were very good as were likenesses

The only thing that kept grating on me was how much liberty they took with reality, like:

How band was formed
How Deacon joined
How Freddie met Brian & Roger
How Freddie met Mary
How Freddie met Jim
That Roger was the first to go solo
That the South African tours weren't shown
When Freddie found out he had AIDS
How the band hadn't been on a break before Live Aid
That the million pound fundraising wasn't hit while Queen were on stage

It shits me when "biopics" mess with timelines. I know sometimes things need to be compressed and minor characters merged, but still

(Also watched Outlaw King on Netflix last night - again timelines and whole slabs of history changed
I didn't know the history of the band in so much detail so it didn't bother me. I guess that's the difference between a movie and a documentary.
 

Bomberboyokay

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Posts
23,331
Likes
20,358
Location
The Temple, Boyle Heights
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
West Ham, New York Rangers
#8
It was a good movie - music was great, performances were very good as were likenesses

The only thing that kept grating on me was how much liberty they took with reality, like:

How band was formed
How Deacon joined
How Freddie met Brian & Roger
How Freddie met Mary
How Freddie met Jim
That Roger was the first to go solo
That the South African tours weren't shown
When Freddie found out he had AIDS
How the band hadn't been on a break before Live Aid
That the million pound fundraising wasn't hit while Queen were on stage

It shits me when "biopics" mess with timelines. I know sometimes things need to be compressed and minor characters merged, but still

(Also watched Outlaw King on Netflix last night - again timelines and whole slabs of history changed
I believe the (non-dead) members of Queen had production credits. So nothing that made them look too shitty was going to be in it. And the studio decided on PG-13 which watered the content down further.
 

TigerCraig

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 12, 2002
Posts
3,176
Likes
576
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Manly
#9
I believe the (non-dead) members of Queen had production credits. So nothing that made them look too shitty was going to be in it. And the studio decided on PG-13 which watered the content down further.
True. May and Taylor and also Jim Beach were producers. Still the timelines were all over the place.

I know they wanted the Live Aid performance to be the big finale, but it wasnt until 2 years later that Freddie was diagnosed.
 

jabba5114

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Posts
1,104
Likes
566
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
#10
Thought this movie was awesome. Aware it's not fully accurate like every biopic. Remi malek slowly becoming one of my favourite actors.

Sent from my 0PJA10 using Tapatalk
 

BlakeyNoFlakey

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Posts
9,253
Likes
13,097
Location
On the Buses
AFL Club
Geelong
#11
It was a good movie - music was great, performances were very good as were likenesses

The only thing that kept grating on me was how much liberty they took with reality, like:

How band was formed
How Deacon joined
How Freddie met Brian & Roger
How Freddie met Mary
How Freddie met Jim
That Roger was the first to go solo
That the South African tours weren't shown
When Freddie found out he had AIDS
How the band hadn't been on a break before Live Aid
That the million pound fundraising wasn't hit while Queen were on stage

It shits me when "biopics" mess with timelines. I know sometimes things need to be compressed and minor characters merged, but still

(Also watched Outlaw King on Netflix last night - again timelines and whole slabs of history changed
Not to mention the outrageous parties that Queen were legendary for that often turned into huge orgies. But this is not the first bio film that has messed with the facts, for what it is, it's very good. But if you want to know the truth about Queen you probably need to read some books or watch some documentaries.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

kaiserchief13

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Posts
20,632
Likes
12,879
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Eagles, Lakers, Bayern, Trojans
#12
Enjoyed the movie especially the music scenes. Yeah some things got rushed but it's a movie not a TV series so how can they fit everything in
 

Richard Pryor

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Posts
6,405
Likes
8,065
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#13
I didn't know the history of the band in so much detail so it didn't bother me. I guess that's the difference between a movie and a documentary.
I get dramatizing events, that's fine, but the movie is outright fantastical.

Freddie Mercury was diagnosed with AIDS in 1987, Live AID was in 1985. Yeah it's not a documentary, but at a certain point what is the point of even pretending it's based in reality?
 

Shell

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Posts
80,374
Likes
45,207
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#14
Freddie Mercury was diagnosed with AIDS in 1987, Live AID was in 1985. Yeah it's not a documentary, but at a certain point what is the point of even pretending it's based in reality?
To make the whole scene more emotional I guess. Perhaps they could have done it in a more subtle way idk... the lyrics of BH are probably enough tho! Was in tears.
 

Shell

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Posts
80,374
Likes
45,207
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#15
Here's a fun fact.

My mum could have watched Live Aid Live, but it was my dumb brothers 9th birthday of July 13th. So she didnt get to watch it. (I was 5- cant remember it at all- cant even remember him dying and I was 11 when that happened)
 

sorted

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 21, 2016
Posts
4,348
Likes
5,699
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter #16
I get dramatizing events, that's fine, but the movie is outright fantastical.

Freddie Mercury was diagnosed with AIDS in 1987, Live AID was in 1985. Yeah it's not a documentary, but at a certain point what is the point of even pretending it's based in reality?
Next you'll be telling me that Leonardo DiCaprio wasn't on the Titanic!
 

Spiritof82

Club Legend
Joined
Jan 8, 2004
Posts
2,127
Likes
1,025
Location
S**tny, the cesspit of OZ
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Footscray
#17
Thought this movie was awesome. Aware it's not fully accurate like every biopic. Remi malek slowly becoming one of my favourite actors.

Sent from my 0PJA10 using Tapatalk
Noticed Malek playing the young Egyptian in the Night at the Museum movies, don't think he really needed the false teeth to play Freddie, his real set would've fitted the part
 

squashface

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Posts
6,428
Likes
13,019
Location
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
#19
I get dramatizing events, that's fine, but the movie is outright fantastical.

Freddie Mercury was diagnosed with AIDS in 1987, Live AID was in 1985. Yeah it's not a documentary, but at a certain point what is the point of even pretending it's based in reality?
At the end of the day it is a cinema released movie and has to have a solid story with themes and a beginning/middle/end, character arcs, and be accessible and watchable to a large number and different demographics of audiences.

Real life doesn’t fulfill any of that so I don’t think anyone was expecting it to mirror the exact story of Freddie and Queen.

I loved the movie and Rami Malek was exceptional. Best Actor nomination coming up for him I reckon.
 

Richard Pryor

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Posts
6,405
Likes
8,065
AFL Club
Hawthorn
#21
At the end of the day it is a cinema released movie and has to have a solid story with themes and a beginning/middle/end, character arcs, and be accessible and watchable to a large number and different demographics of audiences.

Real life doesn’t fulfill any of that so I don’t think anyone was expecting it to mirror the exact story of Freddie and Queen.

I loved the movie and Rami Malek was exceptional. Best Actor nomination coming up for him I reckon.
There's a difference between compressing timelines and amalgamating background characters for pacing/thematic value and inventing scenarios out of thin air (eg; conflict over Freddie's solo album, band breaking up, aforementioned AIDS coinciding with Live AID). Expecting it to mirror the real story is too much to ask for, expecting it to resemble the real story is another. Biopic =/= historical fiction.

If you make dramatic edits to bring the real story to life on screen that's fine ala Walk the Line, but if you're just going to say things that didn't happen did happen you might as well have had Freddie Mercury ending the Cold War or something.

I guess it is somewhat arbitrary what is an acceptable or unacceptable bending of the truth though. This movie didn't annoy me near as much as Bridge of Spies.
 
Last edited:

outabounds

Premiership Player
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Posts
4,266
Likes
3,404
Location
Lygon Street
AFL Club
Carlton
#23
Yes I loved it too. I realize that critics have attacked to for not being gritty enough but does everything have to be so graphic in film these days? For pure entertainment, its hard to beat.
 

Shell

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Posts
80,374
Likes
45,207
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
#24
Yes I loved it too. I realize that critics have attacked to for not being gritty enough but does everything have to be so graphic in film these days? For pure entertainment, its hard to beat.
I would have preferred it "grittier" I've made my feelings pretty clear on that. But whatevs, it is what it is. I still enjoyed it.

Wouldnt see it again tho, unlike my mum who said she would.
 
Top Bottom