Bohemian Rhapsody

[ReRushed]

if you're going to a rock mainstream bio for total accuracy.....sorry you're an idiot.

 

it was not accurate sure but i do feel enough of the spirit was captured.

 

Mick

Total accuracy? Nah, just a portrayal based on what actually happened. I don't like being manipulated. I guess Freddie Mercury's actual love wasn't that interesting sans the narcissism.

[Rutlefan]

"if you're going to a rock mainstream bio for total accuracy.....sorry you're an idiot.

 

it was not accurate sure but i do feel enough of the spirit was captured."

 

It's not a question of being totally accurate, it's making stuff up completely throughout, and not just small stuff.

 

"Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know."

 

It's throughout, from how F. Mercury and the band met, their relationship with management, the non-existent dust up with EMI over the Bohemian Rhapsody single (never happened in any form, EMI was completely behind them; ANATO was the most expensive album recorded at that time), and so on. My biggest gripe was what I mentioned earlier, Queen playing 1978's Fat Bottomed Girls on their Queen II tour, their first tour of America. That's like having The Beatles play their first Ed Sullivan show with Sgt. Pepper's, or Led Zeppelin supporting LZ I with Achille's Last Stand. I see this and realize I can't trust -- for any kind of accuracy -- anything else I'm going to see, so then it becomes, "Is this entertaining? Is this good art?" because it's not in any sense history. Most think it was entertaining at least as it was very successful, and it seems it was good art to most as it was critically well-received, but it didn't interest me as a fan of Queen's music.

 

Again, what if a movie about LZ had them play Achille's Last Stand on their first U.S. tour. Would you really be interested in the movie?

 

p.s., I'm not a huge Queen fan (more of a May and Taylor fan) but I did think, at the time, that Queen ca. Sheer Heart Attack and A Night at the Opera was up there with Zeppelin (still love those albums). I would have liked to see music of that magnitude treated with more respect, as I'm sure music of The Beatles and Zeppelin would be. That's all.

 

 

p.s. " *Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention."

Edited August 21, 2019 by Rutlefan

[Rick N. Backer]

Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know.

 

And please no, "In episode 55, when you placed documents in your safe, what was the combination?"* inaccuracies.

 

 

 

*Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention.

Queen never broke up.

 

Freddie Mercury was not diagnosed with AIDS before Live Aid.

 

Queen was not a last minute addition to Live Aid.

 

Freddie Mercury was not the first member to release a solo album.

 

Mike Myers' record producer character never existed.

 

Overall, the movie was very manipulative and dishonest. Would have a more accurate portrayal ruined Freddie Mercury's legacy?

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree that those are material misrepresentations in the context of the movie.

[ReRushed]

Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know.

 

And please no, "In episode 55, when you placed documents in your safe, what was the combination?"* inaccuracies.

 

 

 

*Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention.

Queen never broke up.

 

Freddie Mercury was not diagnosed with AIDS before Live Aid.

 

Queen was not a last minute addition to Live Aid.

 

Freddie Mercury was not the first member to release a solo album.

 

Mike Myers' record producer character never existed.

 

Overall, the movie was very manipulative and dishonest. Would have a more accurate portrayal ruined Freddie Mercury's legacy?

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree that those are material misrepresentations in the context of the movie.

Really? None of it happened. We are not talking about a composite of events or people that happened. They made it all up to make the movie emotionally relevant. It's called manipulation.

 

If the movie was branded a fictionalized story inspired by Freddie Mercury and Queen, fine, but that's not the case. Maybe they should have made a Velvet Goldmine type movie?

[Rick N. Backer]

"if you're going to a rock mainstream bio for total accuracy.....sorry you're an idiot.

 

it was not accurate sure but i do feel enough of the spirit was captured."

 

It's not a question of being totally accurate, it's making stuff up completely throughout, and not just small stuff.

 

"Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know."

 

It's throughout, from how F. Mercury and the band met, their relationship with management, the non-existent dust up with EMI over the Bohemian Rhapsody single (never happened in any form, EMI was completely behind them; ANATO was the most expensive album recorded at that time), and so on. My biggest gripe was what I mentioned earlier, Queen playing 1978's Fat Bottomed Girls on their Queen II tour, their first tour of America. That's like having The Beatles play their first Ed Sullivan show with Sgt. Pepper's, or Led Zeppelin supporting LZ I with Achille's Last Stand. I see this and realize I can't trust -- for any kind of accuracy -- anything else I'm going to see, so then it becomes, "Is this entertaining? Is this good art?" because it's not in any sense history. Most think it was entertaining at least as it was very successful, and it seems it was good art to most as it was critically well-received, but it didn't interest me as a fan of Queen's music.

 

Again, what if a movie about LZ had them play Achille's Last Stand on their first U.S. tour. Would you really be interested in the movie?

 

p.s., I'm not a huge Queen fan (more of a May and Taylor fan) but I did think, at the time, that Queen ca. Sheer Heart Attack and A Night at the Opera was up there with Zeppelin (still love those albums). I would have liked to see music of that magnitude treated with more respect, as I'm sure music of The Beatles and Zeppelin would be. That's all.

 

 

p.s. " *Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention."

 

I guess it’s subjective. I look at it this way: the movie itself was enjoyable enough. I would say that even if Instead of Queen it was about Stillwater or Steel Dragon.

[JARG]

Like I said, I'm not a huge Queen fan. I like many of the songs I've heard, and think May is waaaay underappreciated. Here's what I took away from the movie:

 

Freddie was a child of immigrants and came of age in England in the late 60s/early 70s. He had a huge overbite. He was the last member to join Queen and his addition to the band seems to have been the catalyst for the band to expand its presence beyond the local bar scene. Freddie was bisexual and lived in a time when the risks of promiscuity were less significant than they would become. Queen got a record deal and eventually faced pressure from their record company to write "hit" songs. Their response to that pressure was to do an album that they wanted to do (ala 2112). The success of that album paved the way for a series of additional successful albums and they were near the top of their game when in-fighting in the band resulted in fairly lengthy hiatus. Freddie tried his hand at writing a solo album but discovered he didn't have the belly for it. Freddie was diagnosed with AIDS which caused him to reevaluate his relationships and they ended their hiatus by playing Live Aid. Freddie died.

 

Again, that's my take from the movie. How far off is my take from their real story?

[ReRushed]

I mean, for crying out loud, it's just a movie! We've turned an enjoyable little move, that was made to make some money, into a COLOSSAL WASTE OF TIME!

[Rick N. Backer]

Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know.

 

And please no, "In episode 55, when you placed documents in your safe, what was the combination?"* inaccuracies.

 

 

 

*Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention.

Queen never broke up.

 

Freddie Mercury was not diagnosed with AIDS before Live Aid.

 

Queen was not a last minute addition to Live Aid.

 

Freddie Mercury was not the first member to release a solo album.

 

Mike Myers' record producer character never existed.

 

Overall, the movie was very manipulative and dishonest. Would have a more accurate portrayal ruined Freddie Mercury's legacy?

 

We’ll have to agree to disagree that those are material misrepresentations in the context of the movie.

Really? None of it happened. We are not talking about a composite of events or people that happened. They made it all up to make the movie emotionally relevant. It's called manipulation.

 

If the movie was branded a fictionalized story inspired by Freddie Mercury and Queen, fine, but that's not the case. Maybe they should have made a Velvet Goldmine type movie?

 

Mercury did contract AIDS though. Why does the timing matter in the context of the movie? Or who released the first solo album? Just because they aren’t factually accurate? The Spike Lee character didn’t exist in X. Doesn’t affect my enjoyment of that movie either

[Rutlefan]

Can someone maybe explain to me what some of the more glaring inaccuracies of the movie were? I honestly don't know.

 

And please no, "In episode 55, when you placed documents in your safe, what was the combination?"* inaccuracies.

 

 

 

*Inspired by the excellent SNL skit with William Shatner at a Star Trek convention.

Queen never broke up.

 

Freddie Mercury was not diagnosed with AIDS before Live Aid.

 

Queen was not a last minute addition to Live Aid.

 

Freddie Mercury was not the first member to release a solo album.

 

Mike Myers' record producer character never existed.

 

Overall, the movie was very manipulative and dishonest. Would have a more accurate portrayal ruined Freddie Mercury's legacy?

 

I will add:

 

How the band formed in the movie had little to nothing to do with reality (the band Smile was real, that's about it for accuracy)

 

Live Aid was not a reunion (as RR mentioned, they never broke up), it came only one year after the hugely-successful The Works LP!

 

As I mentioned, Fat Bottomed Girls didn't exist when they first toured U.S. Also, the movie has them writing We Will Rock You in 1980 (News of the World was released 1977; big deal? I remember listening to News of the World as a 7th grader in '77; cognitive dissonance for me)

 

Apparently (I didn't know this before), Mercury's solo aspirations didn't cause any trouble. IIRC, Roger Taylor's Fun in Space was the first Queen solo effort.

 

p.s. From https://www.indiewir...ids-1202018135/

 

Fake drama:

 

The numerous factual inaccuracies in “Bohemian Rhapsody” have been broken down in fact checks published on The Wrap and ScreenCrush, but two historical errors in the film stand out most for being egregious. One is the fact that Singer’s movie makes Mercury seem like a villain for cashing in and wanting to make a solo album. Rami Malek’s Mercury is seduced by his manager Paul Prenter (Allen Leech) to go off on his own, and tension between Mercury and his bandmates instantly occurs when he breaks the news. In reality, Mercury wasn’t even the first Queen member to make a solo album.

 

Drummer Roger Taylor released solo albums “Fun in Space” and “Stranger Frontier” in 1981 and 1984, respectively, both of which came out before Mercury’s first solo effort, “Mr. Bad Guy” in 1985. The movie leads viewers to believe it was Mercury who wanted to go solo and caused friction among the band, although Taylor had already made the same move twice. Taylor is played by Ben Hardy in the film and is made to appear as Mercury’s biggest adversary in the group. When Mercury announces his solo plans, Taylor scoffs at the idea, which is ironic given what went down in real life.

 

Manipulative?:

 

“I’ve never seen a film distort its facts in such a punitive way. It’s like the movie wants to punish Freddie Mercury,” wrote UPROXX’s Mike Ryan. “Mercury’s tragic death from AIDS was a defining moment in the early ’90s fight for AIDS awareness. To now retcon his illness into his Live Aid performance seems flippant and cruel.”

 

In a piece entitled “‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ Is an Insult to Freddie Mercury,” Daily Beast writer Kevin Fallon says the film’s handling of Mercury’s HIV diagnosis is “a cruel and manipulative version of tragedy porn that is inaccurate and perpetuates the trope of AIDS as punishment for gay promiscuity.”

Edited August 21, 2019 by Rutlefan

[Rick N. Backer]

Sorry, guys. I understand your points. I would just say, for me, these kind of inaccuracies in the context of the movie don't affect my enjoyment of it as entertainment. Your mileage may vary.

[bluefox4000]

people are way more bothered than they should be about this honestly.

 

Mick

[ReRushed]

people are way more bothered than they should be about this honestly.

 

Mick

Yes, they are. Ironically! ;) :cheers:

[Rutlefan]

Like I said, I'm not a huge Queen fan. I like many of the songs I've heard, and think May is waaaay underappreciated. Here's what I took away from the movie:

 

Freddie was a child of immigrants and came of age in England in the late 60s/early 70s. He had a huge overbite. He was the last member to join Queen and his addition to the band seems to have been the catalyst for the band to expand its presence beyond the local bar scene. Freddie was bisexual and lived in a time when the risks of promiscuity were less significant than they would become. Queen got a record deal and eventually faced pressure from their record company to write "hit" songs. Their response to that pressure was to do an album that they wanted to do (ala 2112). The success of that album paved the way for a series of additional successful albums and they were near the top of their game when in-fighting in the band resulted in fairly lengthy hiatus. Freddie tried his hand at writing a solo album but discovered he didn't have the belly for it. Freddie was diagnosed with AIDS which caused him to reevaluate his relationships and they ended their hiatus by playing Live Aid. Freddie died.

 

Again, that's my take from the movie. How far off is my take from their real story?

 

"Freddie was a child of immigrants and came of age in England in the late 60s/early 70s. He had a huge overbite. He was the last member to join Queen and his addition to the band seems to have been the catalyst for the band to expand its presence beyond the local bar scene. Freddie was bisexual and lived in a time when the risks of promiscuity were less significant than they would become. Queen got a record deal .... Freddie died."

 

This is accurate.

 

"Queen .... eventually faced pressure from their record company to write "hit" songs. Their response to that pressure was to do an album that they wanted to do (ala 2112). The success of that album paved the way for a series of additional successful albums and they were near the top of their game when in-fighting in the band resulted in fairly lengthy hiatus. Freddie tried his hand at writing a solo album but discovered he didn't have the belly for it. Freddie was diagnosed with AIDS which caused him to reevaluate his relationships and they ended their hiatus by playing Live Aid."

 

This is pretty much all B.S. Record company was behind them when they recorded A Night at the Opera. There was no hiatus. Freddie did record a solo album after two Roger Taylor albums, none of which was a source of friction in a band that never split up. Again, there was no hiatus before or after Live Aid, and if I recall correctly, his AIDS diagnosis happened after LIVE AID.

 

Odd thing is that the LIVE AID performance was in fact a rebirth of Queen's relevance and popularity, not in the U.S. but about everywhere else, so there was some real-life drama there. Despite The Works having been a big hit not long before LIVE AID, Queen had been considered to be an aging '70s act slipping into pop irrelevance (where they remained in the U.S. until Mercury's death). Then LIVE AID happened and they were the biggest band on the planet again, for a year or so, outside N. America at least. So the use of the AIDs diagnosis to play up the drama leaves one scratching one's head. It wasn't necessary, but hey, that's Hollywood.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Rutlefan

[JARG]

Sorry, guys. I understand your points. I would just say, for me, these kind of inaccuracies in the context of the movie don't affect my enjoyment of it as entertainment. Your mileage may vary.

 

Same here. I get that there are lots of nits to pick, but it does seem to me that the overall story of Queen has been presented with enough fidelity that a relatively Queen-ignorant viewer like me can come away with an appreciation for their backstory.

[Rutlefan]

^^ I get this. I actually got to meet Brian May the Thursday before the Oscars ceremony (have the picture to prove it!). He was visiting my place of work as an honorary member of the New Horizons (NASA) mission. I didn't ask him about the movie but others told me that he was very gratified by how well it was received.

 

So if Brian May is fine with the inaccuracies, then so be it. I'm not saying that no one should see the movie, or shouldn't enjoy the movie, I'm just explaining why I can't enjoy it. If it's not minimally accurate -- if it's creating an alternate reality version of the band and events -- then what's the point? Raise sympathy about Mercury's AIDS-related death? But AIDS activists say they botched that as well. So what's the point except the movie was intended to entertain and make money? Ok fine, just don't call it a biopic, it will make people think that they learned about the band Queen whereas what they "learned" was mostly wrong.

 

p.s. "...appreciation for their backstory" ... I can appreciate this :). If I didn't know the backstory pretty well already, I would have probably enjoyed the story, as it was a pretty good dramatic narrative, if not all that accurate in the finer points. But because I knew their story pretty well already, I was taken aback by almost every scene that involved the band. Hard to enjoy it that way. Funny as I watched Where Eagles Dare the other night. Was a favorite of my late dad's. I didn't notice when watching as a kid with my dad that there is a completely anachronistic German helicopter featured near the beginning of the movie (actually a post-war American Bell 47) but it stuck out like a huge "what the ...?!" this time (why?!?). I was able to shrug it off but if every other scene had similar missteps it would have totally taken me out of the "suspension of disbelief" mode necessary to enjoy these things.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Rutlefan

[Rick N. Backer]

I mean, for crying out loud, it's just a movie! We've turned an enjoyable little move, that was made to make some money, into a COLOSSAL WASTE OF TIME!

 

YOU! Have you ever even kissed a girl?

 

In the running for funniest SNL skit ever IMO.

[Rick N. Backer]

http://www.dailymoti...om/video/xmagzq

[Lorraine]

We need a crisis to happen to distract everyone from this.

 

Does anyone know where Fraroc is?

Edited August 21, 2019 by Lorraine

[bluefox4000]

We need a crisis to happen to distract everyone from this.

 

Does anyone know where Fraroc is?

 

off playing hair metal i suspect. or Harassing Neil peart about how he put Ged and Al out of jobs.

 

Mick

[Rutlefan]

http://www.dailymoti...om/video/xmagzq

 

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x115u4

[Lorraine]

We need a crisis to happen to distract everyone from this.

 

Does anyone know where Fraroc is?

 

off playing hair metal i suspect. or Harassing Neil peart about how he put Ged and Al out of jobs.

 

Mick

 

He's always good at fabricating a crisis, so I thought if he was around, he could produce one to distract from this.

[JARG]

We need a crisis to happen to distract everyone from this.

 

We got people in the Riff thread voting for more than one riff per post! Hell, we got people who were butthurt at those multi-riffs-per-posts doing it themselves! Oh the humanity!

[Lorraine]

We need a crisis to happen to distract everyone from this.

 

We got people in the Riff thread voting for more than one riff per post! Hell, we got people who were butthurt at those multi-riffs-per-posts doing it themselves! Oh the humanity!

 

Thanks for the laugh.

[Rick N. Backer]

http://www.dailymoti...om/video/xmagzq

 

https://www.dailymot...om/video/x115u4

 

That was hysterical.

[Three Eyes]

http://www.dailymoti...om/video/xmagzq

 

https://www.dailymot...om/video/x115u4

 

The funniest insult comic dog puppet that ever lived.....for me to poop on. He has another great remote segment from Conan: a Bon Jovi concert.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ajABuRj67o