New FM Drama Doc on UK TV

Can't see why everyone is getting so hung up about this.

A couple of inaccuracies and a couple of bad wigs on characters with all of 20 seconds screen time! What the hell were people expecting? A multi-million dollar, Steven Spielberg directed blockbuster?

And there are people on the facebook page who seem to be confusing Freddie with Cliff Richard.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xGcZI0XJYc

One of the worst parts was Freddie telling Mary, Jim and Phoebe that he had AIDS.

They were all seated round a table - as if Phoebe was on the same level as Mary in terms of how Freddie felt about them. And Mary's response to the news was "oh God, Freddie, you poor thing".

It was so cringeworthy that I stopped the documentary there and haven't finished it. Might try to finish it tonight.

That said, it was good to see Terry Giddings in it - not because he had much to say, but because I'd been wondering how he looked today. And Peter Straker, amongst a few others, had a few mildy useful contributions to give.

But defnitely a documentary about Freddie's illness, not primarily about the music, which is a shame.

Hard to make documentary about the music when they don't have the rights though

Which brings into question why make it at all then, the answer of course being that it is meant to satisfy those viewers who enjoy the "Michael Jackson/Anna Nicole Smith/etc.: Autopsy" type documentaries about celebrities.

There were some tidbits here and there which were interesting in this one though, from Mack etc.

[QUOTE] [b]Supersonic_Man89 wrote:[/b]

Thoughts as i watched it:

Why is Freddie calling him Peter, he would have called him Pheobe.
Why is it implied that before any performance, all Freddie fucking does is go 'Day-oh!'
Whoever cast Roger Taylor is a bloody fool. I mean...nothing, nothing like the bloke.
Such shit script and dialogue "There you are Mary"....why would you say your friend's name in a nightclub like that?
Freddie smoking in 1975? Really poor research.
At least research how Freddie broke the news to Mary...Mary and David Wigg have said in interviews more than less how it went - and not like that.
What is that 1979 haircut??
Why cast somebody who doesn't look a thing like Paul Prenter...and then get him to introduce Freddie to a new lover...who does actually fucking look loads like Paul Prenter?!?!
How often does Freddie wear his bloody Live Aid outfit and jeans? It's like he didn't have anything else to wear? It's 1985...so he wore that all year round did he?
Darling, Darling, Darling....jesus, such a cartoony character.
Bullshit Knebworth theory...Freddie's voice didn't wane because of Aids. Even the crackpots on this forum haven't suggested that.
Peter Freestone has stated that Freddie was never diagnosed with HIV, but instead was told he had AIDs. So what's this period of time where apparently he knew he was HIV positive all about? Where have they got this info?
Another reveal of news...another incorrect portrayal.
Live performance of Barcelona did the narrator just describe that as. "He's singing well"...no, he's miming well.
Doesn't seem on death's door 24 hours before he dies...seems fed up and playing with his ring. Rubbish directing.[/QUOTE]

The constant "darling" this and "darling" that were extremely annoying.

I didn't think it was that bad.

I'm sure the shooting schedule mostly consisted of establishing shots with few characterized scenes; explaining the "oh darling, ..." fuss. just as the budget for garden lodge included only two rooms. Just like the wigs looked horrible.

I know it's tasteless to reenact Freddie's demise, but unfortunately that's a huge part of the story.

the thing I found offensive (*besides Brian looking like some short heavy set guy with a big nose; probably a carpenter on the production) was that John was summed up like this.

1: Completely silent, may nod head
2. always holding a drink.
3. oh alright always holding a beer/cocktail

It's probably just UNINTENTIONALLY funny.


on the plus side:
The guy got some Freddie mannerisms down. The first person testimonials are resourceful, respectful and insightful.

the characterization of Freddie is sympathetic for the most part. Most of the scenes consist of establishing shots. the few that don't are consigned to his private life with Jim, those seem respectful.

I enjoyed it, possibly because I had expected to laugh and mock it

One thing I was slightly surprised by was how, erm, "loose" Barbara Valentin was. I knew she had done soft-porn films in her past and that she was basically a retired soft-porn actress (although she did act in a couple of respectable films as well), but the documentary portrays her as being sort of a very sexually-wild companion to Freddie, in terms of her being his accessory on frequent sexual adventures with multiple partners.

I thought they were mostly just friends, with the occasional orgy thrown in, but apparently it was the rule of the day for them to have threesomes etc.

I noted two new points in this programme that I wasn't aware of before:

1) Freddie cutting himself shaving and shouting at Valentin to "get out" of the bathroom in Munich (implying he may have been aware he was infected in 85' (or was it 84?)). Anyone else have a comment/other source on this?

2) Prenter giving Freddie poppers before his cake came out at his 39th birthday at Hendersen's, rendering him temporarily blind/starry eyed. I always wondered why, in the footage, Prenter is holding onto Freddie's arm as if he couldn't stand up. Seemed a bit odd, but now we know why.

You all have no taste. It was brilliant. I particularly liked the guy who played Brian May, despite looking to be about 5 foot 7 inches tall. I also wasn't aware Brian played an Epiphone Les Paul with Bigsby tremolo system at Live Aid. Glad they set the record straight on that one.

So I'm watching it right now. If I didn't know better I would think Freddie was just some random coke addict homosexual.

not bad for a docudrama, hopefully this does not turn into a major motion picture sometime... ever

[QUOTE] [b]vin221 wrote:[/b]

I noted two new points in this programme that I wasn't aware of before:

1) Freddie cutting himself shaving and shouting at Valentin to "get out" of the bathroom in Munich (implying he may have been aware he was infected in 85' (or was it 84?)). Anyone else have a comment/other source on this?

2) Prenter giving Freddie poppers before his cake came out at his 39th birthday at Hendersen's, rendering him temporarily blind/starry eyed. I always wondered why, in the footage, Prenter is holding onto Freddie's arm as if he couldn't stand up. Seemed a bit odd, but now we know why.[/QUOTE]

Regarding Freddie cutting himself shaving, that story came from Barbara Valentin herself and I remember reading it in one of the biographies - Lesley Anne Jones' I think. I'm not sure how much I believe all of Barbara's tales though.

I'd never heard about Paul Prenter giving Freddie poppers at his birthday party before, but seeing the footage it does make sense. Prenter was a piece of work who never had Freddie's interests at heart and, later of course, betrayed him.

watching it now...I think people need to take a breath and remember what this is; a low budget production with NO intent on shedding light on the musician Freddie Mercury.
minu
Now, if you don't like these sides of Freddie portraied - that's fair enough. Hell, Freddie would most likely hate for it to be on public display, even after all these years. My point is; if that does not sit well with you, then you're not going to like this one, or ANYTHING similiar. And again - fair play!

For me, it tells a BIT more of the story than we're ever going to get from an official product. Freddie was no saint, and while I would never "endorse" his lifestyle and I have a strong point of view when it comes to drugs etc, I feel it's necessary to paint a more complete picture of the man. In order to do that, you have to include some of the things that make some people uncomfortable.
He was a complex character with many sides to him, all of which went into his music. without the music, we wouldn't be here on this board.
This is also why I like alot of the stuff in Jim Hutton's book, in Freestone's book, etc - it tells a more complete story of the man behind the music. The man continues to intrigue me, and that's why I sit through YET another low budget production, and that's why I read YET another interview with someone like Freestone, Straker, Moran...hopefully to pick up some little minutia which further completes the picture I have of him.

About the film itself; the low budget I guess is the reason for awful wigs, the wrong guitar, (and the wrong Brian!) and for the most part, the horrible acting. The guy playing Freddie though, for someone without acting experience, he really impressed me. He had so much of the mannerism down, and at times he sounded very much like Freddie. Not to mention, he looked ALOT like him, especially the 80s version. Well done, I say! I hope he gets these positive feedbacks, and not just the criticism.

So...could there at one point be a documentary that shows BOTH the man, and the rock star Freddie Mercury? Unless they go for a 4 hr feature ala Tom Petty's Runnin down a dream, or The Eagles perhaps...I don't think so. Until they decide to do (which they won't...), we need to gather the bits worth keeping from a various selection of unofficial documentaries. And IMO, this one on Channel 5, did have some bits that were worthwhile.

OK I gave up after one hour. The only positive comment I can give is the guy who played Freddie was absolutely fantastic. He looks like him and sounds EXACTLY like him. Great choice. Unfortunately he was the only thing I liked in the hour