aion wrote:
Mr.QueenFan wrote:
I would like Freddie bio to be focused on his musical skills. What it took for him to become the wonderful composer that he was. His relationship with the band, and the impact that his death has had on the remaining Queen members when they were recording "Made in Heaven".
How would that be an interesting movie to general audiences? What are the plot points in his musical career that are going to intrigue non-Queen fans and film critics? .
You should have quoted me on what i said next, and that way it would make more sense. But my answer to your question is:
I don´t care about general audiences or film critics. You want to know about what general audiences like? Here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4YRWT_Aldo
And who cares about film critics opinions anyway? They only going to like what they´re going to like. If they want to say bad things about the film they will, like music critics had donne in the past.
aion wrote:
Think of "Amadeus", the acclaimed movie of Mozart by Milos Forman. It shows Mozart composing, but the movie isn't really about Mozart as a composer, it's about his life and particularly his relationship with Salieri. It's a great movie, but it wouldn't be so great if it only showed Mozart making music for two hours and ended happily with the main character smiling during end credits. .
You could be right, if the story wasn´t bullshit. For me the only way to do a bio is to tell the truth. No Bullshit included to appeal to the general public. Or, tell people what it is - a romancised version of someone´s life!
aion wrote:
You can't make a Mozart movie focusing on his musical skills, you can't make a Freddie Mercury movie on his musical skills..
Of course you can! You can still adress the relationships, but with these two cats you can focus on their musical skills. Maybe not with Mick Jagger and Iggy Pop, but certainly with Mozart and Freddie Mercury.
What makes Mozart an interesting character is His music. Probably the greatest composer that ever lived - to me anyway - and that´s not interesting?
It´s their music and talent that makes Mozart and Freddie and Lennon and so forth, interesting in the first place. Nobody started to like Lennon because of his political views. It was his music! Then, many fans followed him politically, but it was his music that made him the legend that he is today.
aion wrote:
Freddie was a great musician, but there have been lots of great musicians in the world and that's not enough to build a movie around. How about a comparison to Mick Jagger or Iggy Pop, two rockers who also lived a wild life in the 60s/70s? If you made a movie about Iggy Pop, where you leave out his personal life with drugs and parties and everything, and only show Iggy Pop at his profession, do you think it would be a fascinating movie for everyone? .
Mick Jagger and Iggy Pop? Not even in the same league as Freddie. I don´t mean to offend their fans, but they are not great musicians - to me anyway - but i concede that they are great entertainers, wich is a very good thing in itself.
Basically you don´t find interesting nothing that has to do with talent. Yet, drugs and parties, and sex is what makes you and the general public go to the movies? I´m not interested in that, but i understand your point of view.
I always like to hear what comes after when people say "I loved Freddie Mercury", because i rarelly hear people talking about the great musician that he was. If he was only about being a great frontman, i wouldn´t be here. His musical talent is what i find interesting.
aion wrote:
... Freddie actually had an interesting life story, one that could be worthy of a movie, but then you really need to make it about his LIFE and not his music. (...) .
And that´s what you and others here don´t understand about Freddie. Music was his life! Mary Austin has stated in the past that when Freddie wasn´t able to sing anymore he stoped all medications to let himself go. So i understand why his bio should be about his music and his life. Because for me that is the same thing.
Having said this, of course i would love to know the impact that his sexuality has had on his personal life and choices and music. But that´s not the angle Sacha wanted for the film. Puting Freddie having sex and snurting coke on a party would be vulgar, even if true. And it would reduce Freddie to THAT!
And Sacha doesn´t give a shit about Freddie´s legacy, but i´m glad Brian does.
Of course i don´t agree with the plot of having Freddie dying in the middle of the movie, but for now i´m skeptical that Brian would refer to Freddie´s death in the middle of the movie as "Something great" or something of the same effect.
aion wrote:
All the Queen and Freddie documentaries already exist for celebrating the musical legacy and fans don't seem to understand that an actual, scripted movie aimed at general audiences and cinemas is a completely different thing .
I understand, but i don´t care! Queen members and Freddie´s estate have all the right not to want Sacha fucking five other men on film while portraying Freddie Mercury. There are many ways of making an interesting movie about Freddie and his sexual lifestyle without turning it into a porn.
And i´m glad that Sacha isn´t part of the movie as well. While doing his Borat movie and Bruno he takes advantage of people and puts them is difficult situations. I´ve heard that people lost their businesses because of the movies. But here are some links for those interested in why Queen people may have a problem with Sacha portraying Freddie:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/13/AR2006111300329.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borat#Controversies
But i also understand that my version of the movie wouldn´t be the more popular right now, unless public consciousness changed very fast, which is not going to happen considering the box-office blockbusters and musical charts.
It´s an Artistic decision that Queen people will have to make.
