So Let Us Rewrite BoRap

It's so easy...
1) don't mess up the chronology
2) don't invent things that never happened
3) respect who these people were / are
4) don't use ridiculous plot lines to amp up the drama


Bring back this cast and give them a decent script. Then say, "Yes - that's the Band I love and that's how it went down."

otherwise find the script writer and hit them repeatedly about the head for being daft.

:0)

Unfortunately $850,000,000 talks ... and a decent script walks ...

I don't really have a huge problem with some freedoms with chronology. FBG fit very well in the 1974 story, as one example. Also, I don't have a problem with actual events taking place earlier than they actually did. It was refreshing that the movie ended with Live Aid (so tired of the documentaries where the hero always dies in then end!) and it was only natural that they had to fit the AIDS conversation before that. What I have an enormous problem with is totally invented events, especially since they make Freddie look like a total asshole (maybe he was at times, but not because of these reasons). They did not have a two-year break from performing prior to Live Aid. Period. Freddie did probably not have to beg to be invited back to Queen. Period. Freddie did not suffer a mental breakdown during a press conference. Period.

To be honest I'm not that bothered about things they've changed in the film. I agree with what Sheldon said above works well being changed. Without doubt Freddie would've suspected that he had aids a while before Live Aid.

I can understand where they made it look like they had a two year break before Live Aid as on The Works Tour they all got bored as it lost its favour quite quick (Roger admitted it too). So tensions would've been high between each other and so they probably would've had at least a year gap like they did between Hot Space and The Works. It's not known how keen Queen were to do Live Aid but it's certain that if they hadn't of played at Live Aid there would've been no more Queen for a while or quite possibly the end of the band.

I've read comments about Freddie's behaviour saying that it's been dramatised but how do we know that he didn't act like that? I mean they probably all had their moments but none of us really know what happened and robably only Brian, Roger, John and Jim know as there the ones to have spent the most time with Freddie in situations. All we do is assume and we'll probably never know what it was like to be in Queen.

So really it's annoying about the chronological order as I know all the dates for things but I don't think it matters at all in the film.

Freddie Mercury, 1982 - "It's only a bloody film, people get so excited about these things".

At the end of the day it's a film not a documentary. The film has to appeal to the masses and it has.

[QUOTE] [b]MusicFan15 wrote:[/b]

Freddie Mercury, 1982 - "It's only a bloody film, people get so excited about these things".

[/QUOTE]

I really don't think this applies here. No, it's not a documentary, but it is about one of the most important singers (and bands) in history. It's not something that should be "loosely based". I doubt Freddie would be saying "it's only a bloody film" had he been aware they were going to talk garbage and make him look like a tit. The chronology is annoying at first ban can be seen past. Many of the things in this movie are frankly unforgivable.

It's not just a case of subjective taste over a piece of music. This is something people feel passionately about.

[QUOTE] [b]MusicFan15 wrote:[/b]

At the end of the day it's a film not a documentary. The film has to appeal to the masses and it has.[/QUOTE]

Yes, and unfortunately if you take away the M, you also get asses.

I get that a film has to appeal. But when the man's own band-members and so called friends have a great deal of control over the content, it's kinda sad that they took the route they did. And they're also misinforming a new breed who now think they know more about the band than we do because it was in the film.

They've taken a swipe at a man who can't defend himself and they're reaping the financial rewards as a result. That's just callousness. If the cash is more important than the legacy of the band, then they've lost all credit as far as I'm concerned.

I'm curious what do you think about the accuracy of an Oliver Cromwell film. Do you think it's accurate or just don't care?

Well, the Queen movie has the same general public who doesn't really care about accuracy.

Can't you just enjoy it like everybody else (or maybe more because you pretend to know additional facts), without stupidly claiming that the band's legacy was stained in exchange for financial rewards?

I'm not here to discuss Oliver Cromwell.

I don't claim to know "additional facts" - this is just another example of you not reading properly, or just taking something that's not there from a comment in an attempt to be snide.

If I don't like the film, I don't like it. Simple. Is it your goal to stifle the opinion of those who have alternate views from your own? I'm not stifling anyone else's views, or calling them stupid: I've read what they had to express, and now I'm expressing my view. I'm entitled to my opinion - and if my enjoyment is spoiled by the moments that simply weren't credible, I'll say.

It's not for you to call it a stupid claim - nor is it for you to talk for "everybody else". Not "everyone" enjoyed the film, and to claim so is bordering on the stupidity in itself.

If you enjoyed it, good for you :)

I know "stupid" as an offensive word, but I don't intend to offend you. Believe me, you will notice if this will happen.

The fact is that ... you're kind of stupid Thistle, and you can't do much about it.
It's a reality to me, and everything you post seems to confirm it.

Your post shows you up for what you are, but hey - If you say so.

I couldn't care less what you think, and I won't be drawn into any more discussions with you on this forum, regardless of the topic or pathetic jibe.

Don't worry, you don't offend me - I pity you more now, and your comments confirm just how "special" you are. Enjoy your life when you get one.

You complain about "difficult users" (users?), but in fact you are the difficult one, never assuming what you have just said.

"If I don't like the film, I don't like it. Simple." It's not so simple if it comes as the result of:

[QUOTE]...when the man's own band-members and so called friends have a great deal of control over the content, it's kinda sad that they took the route they did. And they're also misinforming a new breed who now think they know more about the band than we do because it was in the film.
They've taken a swipe at a man who can't defend himself and they're reaping the financial rewards as a result. That's just callousness. If the cash is more important than the legacy of the band, then they've lost all credit as far as I'm concerned.
[/QUOTE]
Do I have the right to contest this superb chain of thoughts without being accused of violating your freedom of expression? Apparently not, because some "users" are more equal than others.

[QUOTE] [b]aristide1 wrote:[/b]


The fact is that ... you're kind of stupid Thistle, and you can't do much about it.
It's a reality to me, and everything you post seems to confirm it.[/QUOTE]

True, he is STUPID. he even bragged like a retard about meeting Brian May.

Freddie’s sister liked the movie, and is now friends with Rami. Peter Freestone liked the movie, although he wishes there had been more humor (because as he said, Freddie loved to laugh). Brian’s wife, Anita, said she loved it and “cried buckets”. Brian and Roger are happy, and they are proud of “the boys”. I read here that one of John’s kids liked the movie.

Brian, Roger and Jim Beach are all getting older. They didn’t want other people (such as SBC) to make a big Hollywood movie about Freddie without their input and approval. They didn’t do it for the money. They did it for creative control and peace of mind regarding the story that is told about Freddie and the band. They wanted it to emphasize Freddie, the musican and friend.

No I didn't, bucsamoron. The post you're referring to was an ironic response to Gerry. Whereas you're just moronic and your band of trolls stick together.