The story of Freddie Mercury and the band Queen, from their formation to their legendary performance at Live Aid in 1985...
While there may be disagreement on where rock band Queen sit on the list of all time greats, one thing that is generally agreed is that the lead singer, Freddie Mercury was one the best ever, hugely charismatic and had a hell of a voice.
There have been talks of making a film about him for years, but according to various stories, there was there was always issues off screen. Allegedly the members of Queen, specifically Brian May and Roger Taylor, wanted a lot of control on the film, wanting it to focus as much on the band as on Freddie himself. Sacha Baron Cohen was approached to play him, but left the project, due to creative differences, as he wanted the film to delve deeper into Freddie's private life more than the band wanted. In the end the role went to Rami Malek.
But even then, that wasn't the end of the behind the scenes drama. Director Bryan Singer was fired from the production for not showing up and for run-ins with Malek, who complained. Dexter Fletcher, director of the joyful Sunshine On Leith and the upcoming Elton John biopic, Rocketman, was brought in to finish filming and to oversee the post-production. According to those who reported on the behind the scenes drama, Fletcher shot for sixteen days of the production. Under the Directors Guild of America rules, Singer is the only credited director on the film.
In truth, watching the film I don't think that comes across, there's no distinct change of tone in the film in that regard. However, and this could be having seen the trailer for Rocketman before the film and loving Fletcher's Sunshine On Leith, coming out I felt the film is closer to a Dexter Fletcher film than a Bryan Singer one. Of course with Fletcher overseeing the edit and post-production that is perhaps understandable.
The film hints at Freddie's private life, and we get a glimpse of it. But only a glimpse. It's clear Freddie was a complex figure, and it's a shame the film doesn't really get into how complex he was. Instead the film chooses to pick on the highlights of Queen and in turn Freddie's life, up to Live Aid. It doesn't cover the years after, up until his death.
To some, this could be seen as a 'white washing,' a sanitising of his life. Certainly some critics have picked up on that. But to the fans, the film comes over perhaps more as a celebration. But there an issue with this. Because the film is only skimming the surface of Freddie's life, it actually ends up falling into a very cliched story. Forget the band Queen exists, forget Freddie's life and if you look at it as pure fiction, it becomes the story of the rise of a band, their success, their falling out and then triumphant return. There have been a number of films that follow this path, and Bohemian Rhapsody is no exception. Perhaps, in some ways you can't tell a story like this, in any other way.
The film chooses to use certain songs at certain times, I imagine to show the passing of time. However, this brings up other issues too. Late on, they use the song, 'Who Wants To Live Forever' when Freddie goes to the hospital and discovers he has AIDS, but the song hadn't been recorded then. Likewise, Freddie's diagnosis of the illness happened after Live Aid by all accounts. He also didn't reveal he had the illness until the day before his death, but in the film, he tells the band members, again, before Live Aid. Moving events round like this, does seem to back up the claims that the film is more a celebration of his life than a proper, in depth look at his life and career.
There's also the character of Paul Prenter. In the film, he is presented as someone who had a friendship with Freddie, from the time of recording the A Night At The Opera album until before just before Live Aid. As presented in the film, Paul is seen as someone Freddie comes to rely on to such a degree, that he ends up controlling Freddie's life, in effect cutting him off from the other members of the band, as well as Mary Austin a woman Freddie at one point was engaged with (at least in the film), who ended up being a lifelong friend. I don't know if he was a real person, an amalgamation of several people or a creation of fiction for the film, but he would be considered, perhaps, the 'bad guy' of the film.
But for all the faults about the story told in the film, about how it deals with the band relationships and everything else, there are two things than cannot be denied, a fantastic performance at the heart of the film and the film's hell of an ending.
Rami Malek plays Freddie Mercury and is tremendous. He truly captures Freddie's spirit and in the 'live' performances, he like the actors playing the band are tremendous. Gwilym Lee as Brian May, Ben Hardy as Roger Taylor and Joseph Mozzello as John Deacon, the other members of the band are also pretty good too. There is also a great performance from Lucy Boynton as Mary. The scenes between Mary and Freddie are very touching and bring the emotional heart to the film. Other cast members, such as Tom Hollander, Aiden Gillen, Allen Leech and Mike Myers in a small role offer good support. Despite the behind the scenes drama, it hasn't affected the cast performances.
But even if you dislike the story, even if you think the film is too lightweight to do justice to Freddie and Queen, even if you think the film wants to tie up some strands before the ending, such as Freddie reconciling with his father, who, in the film, disapproves of his life, when it comes to the recreation of Live Aid, the film just about gets everything right.
Queen's performance at Live Aid is regarded as one of the greatest live performances ever. Some consider the greatest of all time. It's generally agreed Queen stole the show on the day. And the film captures that performance brilliantly. Between Malek's commitment to the role, the actors playing the band, some great visuals, the film recreates it very well indeed. It does it so well in fact, you almost want to get up and sing along. I would not be surprised if this does end up happening at some screenings!
It gives the film a fantastic, feel-good ending, one that will leave you on a high.
Getting someone's life story right can be tricky. You can either skip through the years, focusing on the highlights of their career or try and show their more personal side, which show a more complex person instead. The latter will maybe get you a film like the Johnny Cash biopic Walk The Line, the first will get you a musical like The Greatest Showman. Bohemian Rhapsody while touching on the more complex nature of Freddie Mercury, is certainly closer in spirit to The Greatest Showman.
Comparing Bohemian Rhapsody to The Greatest Showman may seem unfair and harsh, but it is a valid one. Both films cover their subject matter in a more superficial, manner. Both have fantastic central performances at their heart and both have great music to keep you going.
Bohemian Rhapsody is maybe not the film some fans wanted. But for all the issues in the making of it and the telling of Freddie and Queen's story, it does end up being a damn entertaining one.
Rating: 3/5
No comments:
Post a Comment