"Are these films great art? Of course not. For one thing, they are consumed by conflicts of interest — the person or persons holding the rights to all the music always gets to massage how they come off. If living, that’s typically the stars themselves. But others get to burnish their own legacy, too."
...
“Yesterday” doesn’t seem like a rock biopic at first in that the leading character, played by Himesh Patel, is a fictional creation of Richard Curtis’ screenplay. But the requisite pre-awareness comes from the Beatles catalog, of course, which courses through the movie as if it actually were about the Beatles, albeit in absentia.
Patel's Jack Malik may not have a real biography to track but he follows the Mercury-John trajectories with remarkable felicity, even down to a dalliance and, ultimately, a personal crisis in mercurial Los Angeles, only to be followed by a rediscovery of gentler, purer, tea-sipping Britain and its girls next door.
Weirdly, the British pop star Ed Sheeran appears in “Yesterday,” playing himself and symbolically standing for the purer pop star, holding on to the ideals of the artist while fictional Jack carries the heavy weight of the traditional fallen-hero narrative. Sheeran, of course, really did marry his childhood sweetheart, a biographical fact that turns him into a kind of moral guide to a fictional character representing all striving pop stars everywhere.
In “Bohemian Rhapsody,” it’s the Brian May character who plays the Ed Sheeran role. He’s pretty much the moral beacon as talented Freddie flails around among those who care not for his well-being. In “Rocketman,” John’s former lover and manager, the real-life figure of John Reid, is played as the villain — the film insisting that he could offer John neither true artistic support nor the selfless love (as typified in “Yesterday” by a young schoolteacher player by Lily James) that every rock star needs. Reid also figures in “Bohemian Rhapsody.”
The takedown of Reid in “Rocketman” might well be fair enough, although some journalists have suggested that the truth of their relationship was, at a minimum, much more complicated. And the “Rocketman” conflict of interest, of course, lies not just in John’s supervisory role but in the presence of his husband, David Furnish, as an executive producer. By all credible accounts, Furnish and John (both of whom I’ve met and talked with together) have found true love, but wouldn’t you like the chance to take down your partner’s ex-lover, without any need to get their side of the story?
mariah carey · Member since
I don't think that Brian had that much control over the movie script, but for sure he had some influence on it. He said that they fought to keep the "Mercury wants to go back to the band" scene, which didn't happen like this in real life, because they never broke up.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]mariah carey wrote:[/b]
the "Mercury wants to go back to the band" scene, which didn't happen like this in real life, because they never broke up.[/QUOTE]
You weren't there, so how can you know for sure? Not everything that happened behind closed doors was written in a book or spoken about in an interview before 2018.
Yes, they didn't break up per se. But in 1985 they were a touring act purely on a professional basis, travelling in separate limos to and from the gig. They were internally a mess by that point largely because of Mercury's ego and drug issues which are well documented.
In reality, it was after Live Aid that the rest of the band held an intervention with Mercury, forcing him to choose between them and Prenter. You'd have to cultivate relationships with people who were around at the time if you want to learn more, but that's basically what went down.
mariah carey · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]mariah carey wrote:[/b]
the "Mercury wants to go back to the band" scene, which didn't happen like this in real life, because they never broke up.[/QUOTE]
You weren't there, so how can you know for sure? Not everything that happened behind closed doors was written in a book or spoken about in an interview before 2018.
Yes, they didn't break up per se. But in 1985 they were a touring act purely on a professional basis, travelling in separate limos to and from the gig. They were internally a mess by that point largely because of Mercury's ego and drug issues which are well documented.
In reality, it was after Live Aid that the rest of the band held an intervention with Mercury, forcing him to choose between them and Prenter. You'd have to cultivate relationships with people who were around at the time if you want to learn more, but that's basically what went down.
[/QUOTE]
Of course they had a lot of problems at that time and had meetings to discuss the band's future, but the movie's band meeting scene was just made up for the dramatic purpose only ("Mr Bad Guy" is a flop and Mercury understands that he's nothing without Queen and goes back to his "family" with a tail between his legs!).
I just don't think that it accurately showed what actually happened behind the scenes, because they didn't break up, they weren't that mad that Freddie went to release his solo album (Roger himself has said it) and he wasn't even the first one to do it. It's just that by that point, they were really tired of each other after more than 10 years of touring and recording. Prenter didn't help too. Also, there was this whole Sun City controversy and backlash, which probably had a big impact on them, and it was conveniently left out! Basically, it was more complicated than it was shown in the movie, which is mostly a very sanitised and a child-friendly version of Queen's history.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]mariah carey wrote:[/b]
the movie's band meeting scene was just made up for the dramatic purpose only[/QUOTE]
Once again - you were there?
[QUOTE]I just don't think that it accurately showed what actually happened behind the scenes, because they didn't break up, they weren't that mad that Freddie went to release his solo album (Roger himself has said it) and he wasn't even the first one to do it.[/QUOTE]
Circumstances were much different in 1981. Roger wasn't consciously trying to make an album as big as Thriller by writing 15 songs and using the best 11 without any outside input (about 500 songs were written for Thriller, by comparison). And Roger didn't receive a cash advance from a record label that was 4x the amount of Queen's previous album, causing extra strain on an already strained relationship.
Roger said they "weren't mad" the same way McCartney said Getting Better isn't about how Lennon used to beat his wife, insisting it was merely character portrayal in songwriting. It's called protecting the legacy and your friend in death. And if Roger said this before 1991, it's just good PR to keep your squabbling on the down low.
Mercury went out and hired a bunch of unknown session musicians to play like Queen. You'd better believe they were pissed at the time - Brian spoke about it years later on his blog (which, predictably, some fans thought was unfair because Mercury wasn't there to defend himself). The album flopped. Of course he returned to the band with his tail between his legs. He thought he didn't need them, and he was dead wrong.
Overall the film is a pretty honest recollection of how their relationship was splintering and what the causes were (by Hollywood standards, anyway). But indeed, it downplays how bad things were. There is only one casual reference to cocaine, and it's well known that cocaine can be an ego booster making one feel invincible. He wasn't showing up to mixing sessions to his own songs by 82, never mind 85. He was a completely different person from the one who created ANATO a decade earlier.
Mr Bad Guy was the lowest point of Queen's career up to that point, and after you know the facts, it takes a whole lot of mental gymnastics to believe otherwise.
Saint Jiub · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Yes, they didn't break up per se.
VS
In reality, it was after Live Aid that the rest of the band held an intervention with Mercury, forcing him to choose between them and Prenter.
[/QUOTE]
An ultimatum to dump Prenter is a whole lot different than Freddie begging to get back into the band.
Do you have a source regarding this ultimatum?
I'm sorry, I cannot take your statement at face value.
http://ca.linkedin.com/in/bobwegner ... "Selected by Brian May of Queen to be part of the North American production of We Will Rock You"
"History" is written and spun by the living.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
Yes, they didn't break up per se.
VS
In reality, it was after Live Aid that the rest of the band held an intervention with Mercury, forcing him to choose between them and Prenter.
[/QUOTE]
An ultimatum to dump Prenter is a whole lot different than Freddie begging to get back into the band.
Do you have a source regarding this ultimatum?
I'm sorry, I cannot take your statement at face value.
"History" is written and spun by the living.
[/QUOTE]
Sometimes a journalist can't reveal their sources. This is one of those cases.
I'll reiterate:
[QUOTE]You'd have to cultivate relationships with people who were around at the time if you want to learn more[/QUOTE]
I'm sure this idea won't satisfy you nor most, but don't shoot the messenger. All I can do is suggest you entertain the possibility that there's far more that goes down behind closed doors than ends up in biographies written by people who weren't there.
Saint Jiub · Member since
"All I can do is suggest you entertain the possibility that there's far more that goes down behind closed doors than ends up in biographies written by people who weren't there." ...
I agree with you, and I'll even venture to say that Freddie was probably the most dysfunctional member of the band, but clearly the rest of the band was somewhat dysfunctional if the mid 80's, but Brian is not the choirboy portrayed by the movie.
Has any other credible source (besides you) corroborated "the ultimatum"? How close was your source to the band?
MisterCosmicc · Member since
Brian wished things like Made In Heaven and I Was Born To Love You were originally Queen songs. He dissed Freddie’s album while Freddie was alive and after Freddie died. He was really angry when he played guitar on some of Freddie’s tracks for Mr. Bad Guy, and then Freddie replaced them with an imitation. I think Brian hated the Mr. Bad Guy album, I also think he was worried Freddie would leave Queen... thus the scene and why Brian says it’s his favorite scene in the film.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]Saint Jiub wrote:[/b]
"All I can do is suggest you entertain the possibility that there's far more that goes down behind closed doors than ends up in biographies written by people who weren't there." ...
I agree with you, and I'll even venture to say that Freddie was probably the most dysfunctional member of the band, but clearly the rest of the band was somewhat dysfunctional if the mid 80's, but Brian is not the choirboy portrayed by the movie.
Has any other credible source (besides you) corroborated "the ultimatum"? How close was your source to the band?[/QUOTE]
One degree. Someone who worked for them for years. I heard it the one time. Some things you just hear once and you're lucky to get that much.
And yeah, of course they all had messy pasts. But methinks they could only have one "messy" person in the film for the sake of plot continuity. I don't think too many discerning people would assume Brian is a saint from watching a Hollywood biopic. Even he was the first to say it's not a documentary.
The Real Wizard · Member since
[QUOTE] [b]MisterCosmicc wrote:[/b]
He dissed Freddie’s album while Freddie was alive[/QUOTE]
Source? That's the first I've heard of it. Interesting that he and Roger switched roles in a sense. Brian is usually the PR guy while Roger is more blunt.
[QUOTE]He was really angry when he played guitar on some of Freddie’s tracks for Mr. Bad Guy, and then Freddie replaced them with an imitation. I think Brian hated the Mr. Bad Guy album, I also think he was worried Freddie would leave Queen... thus the scene and why Brian says it’s his favorite scene in the film. [/QUOTE]
That's actually kind of charming. We are all emotional beings, after all. Even the scientists among us.
musicland munich · Member since
Actually John was dissapointed ( in a polite manner) about Mr. Bad Guy. He mentioned that in a filmed interview for a italian tv program if I remember correctly
MisterCosmicc · Member since
Source
HelloDelilah · Member since
Thanks for the download. I can see why Brian was hurt by Freddie replacing the his guitar portion and why his solo album caused a riff between the band members. Sounds like Freddie was bored of the band and wanted something new and exciting in the early to mid-80s. Queen is stronger as a whole instead of its individual parts.
Holly2003 · Member since
Was this informant "in the room" when this happened or was he (or she) told a story by someone with a vested interest in that particular version of events, and who is now trying to turn it into 'fact' via a cash cow movie that uses Fred's epic songs to rake in that cash?
We're asked to believe serial relationship cheaters and failed solo artists Brian May & Roger Taylor lectured Fred on his personal life and solo career and threatened to kick him out of the Queen cash cow if he didn't beg to get back into a band that he had never left and which never actually broke up? Why would it infer in the film that Queen had been apart for years before Live Aid when they had just had one of their biggest albums and tours? Dramatic effect? Not needed: the story is dramatic enough. Instead, it's just a bald faced lie, one of many told by Brian as he rewrites Queen history and polishes the Queen brand for a new generation of suckers.
I wasn't there. Neither was anyone involved in this discussion. And probably the 'informant' wasn't 'in the room' either. So this is just my point of view (Don't take offence at my innuendo.) I don't doubt the band was pissed at Prenter but the version of events portrayed in the movie doesn't ring true at all. Prenter was threatening the money. Prenter needed removed. But Queen was the money. And without Fred there was no Queen and no money.
