part of me is really excited about the upcoming movie about freddie's life, but the other part of me doesn't want this movie to be made out of fear that they might ruin it.
for the most part i think freddie led a very private life and only his close and personal friends really know him well. how people see him on tv has usually been described as being an over the top flamboyant homesexual, which i believe was his alter ego taking control and was not the way acted all the time. i just hope they get his story right before they make this movie. it could be really embarrassing to watch if they don't get the facts right. and he was bi-sexual, not gay. he had girlfriends.
as long as the script is well written and they portray his life accurately it could very well turn out to be a very powerfull film. but on the other hand it might end up being one of the worst films ever.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Part of me doesn't want to see that movie either, other part of me agrees with the first part of me.
Well it seems we'll all have plenty of time to ponder it. According to a message on Brian's site recently, it's just in the idea stages and won't be a reality for quite awhile. Not to be negative or anything, but movies sometimes take many years to finally get made.
I agree with you Serry and 'don't try suicide'. I'm also afraid that some topics will ruin Freddie's image and cause 'false pity'... I dream myself of making a film about Freddie - seriously - with a rather symbolic, and not too direct, meaning...
I read in an article that Brian and Roger initially planned to base the WWRY music on Freddie's life, but then dismissed the project as the outcome would have become too tragic and personal.
I read in an article that Brian and Roger initially planned to base the WWRY music on Freddie's life, but then dismissed the project as the outcome would have become too tragic and personal.
I said this a long time ago... I think I had a better paraghraph / essay, but I tried to find it and gave up (the thread might have been deleted, anyway)...
Here goes...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Audacity of Charles wrote :[/QUOTENAME]
The idea of a movie like that just makes me feel ill...
Knowing this "Hollywood" beast, I just dearly hope it's not too tasteless or overly doting upon things they think will get an award (if they even care about that) - like that AIDS thing.
If they're going to do it and go through his personal life, they might as well go all the way and present him as an actual person - good and bad, and not just a scandalous story.
I think it would be great if people walked away thinking they saw something they weren't supposed to. Maybe being grateful for their own privacy.
But fuck that, Hollywood will do whatever it damn well pleases.[/QUOTE]
If this movie happens, I doubt I'll see it. I do not want to read a book about him - I do not want to see a movie. This is my choice, as it is the choice of others to go see it if they so choose.
Here goes...
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]The Audacity of Charles wrote :[/QUOTENAME]
The idea of a movie like that just makes me feel ill...
Knowing this "Hollywood" beast, I just dearly hope it's not too tasteless or overly doting upon things they think will get an award (if they even care about that) - like that AIDS thing.
If they're going to do it and go through his personal life, they might as well go all the way and present him as an actual person - good and bad, and not just a scandalous story.
I think it would be great if people walked away thinking they saw something they weren't supposed to. Maybe being grateful for their own privacy.
But fuck that, Hollywood will do whatever it damn well pleases.[/QUOTE]
If this movie happens, I doubt I'll see it. I do not want to read a book about him - I do not want to see a movie. This is my choice, as it is the choice of others to go see it if they so choose.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]dont try suicide wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=teal>Edgarlicious! wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]dont try suicide wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, though that's a nice thought. I think everyone is bisexual. Some just aren't willing to act on it ;) While there might be a dominant preference, I believe it's possible to get close to, and fall in love with anyone to the point of consumation. Especially if you're drunk enough.
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, though that's a nice thought. I think everyone is bisexual. Some just aren't willing to act on it ;) While there might be a dominant preference, I believe it's possible to get close to, and fall in love with anyone to the point of consumation. Especially if you're drunk enough.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=teal>Edgarlicious! wrote: [/QUOTENAME]http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I agree 303% (if that were possible, but I guess I'll settle for 100%) with that Bunny fellow of the ever-changing name.
I'm pretty sure the fellows in ancient Rome boinked both men and women (and sometimes... well, we just won't go there).
It's possible for sexuality to change. It's possible to be attracted sexually to both sexes. It's unlikely to be a 50-50 attraction. But although, at this moment in me life, the majority of "people I would have sex with" are male, I can admit that there are girls that make that list, too (I don't keep the list in any written form - it would be too long and I'm pretty sure it changes every few days).
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I agree 303% (if that were possible, but I guess I'll settle for 100%) with that Bunny fellow of the ever-changing name.
I'm pretty sure the fellows in ancient Rome boinked both men and women (and sometimes... well, we just won't go there).
It's possible for sexuality to change. It's possible to be attracted sexually to both sexes. It's unlikely to be a 50-50 attraction. But although, at this moment in me life, the majority of "people I would have sex with" are male, I can admit that there are girls that make that list, too (I don't keep the list in any written form - it would be too long and I'm pretty sure it changes every few days).
All I'm saying is, go back in time one-hundred years.... Ask the people if they know what "bisexual" means, and they'd probably scratch their heads.
how about metro-sexual?
Regarding the 'bisexual'-terminus: even if the preference for both sexes was not termed hundred years ago it doesn't mean it wasn't there.
In my opinion, sexuality from a psychological approach is such a complex topic, that it is hard to push the sexual preference in an exactly defined category.
In my opinion, sexuality from a psychological approach is such a complex topic, that it is hard to push the sexual preference in an exactly defined category.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=teal>Snow <h6>~Hey Oh!~ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]All I'm saying is, go back in time one-hundred years.... Ask the people if they know what "bisexual" means, and they'd probably scratch their heads.[/QUOTE]
... 100 years ago = 1907...
Yeah... I think they would. I was going to say they might not know what the word means - but Merriam Webster puts its creation at 1824.
Now... just because a word didn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. And they may have had another word for it. OR - it may have been so normal that there wasn't a word for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
Yes, Wikipedia - but it's a good starting place, and I don't want to go track down individual links.
Quote :
"Many non-human animal species also exhibit bisexual behavior. This is, of course, common in hermaphroditic animals, but is also known in many other species. Examples of mammals include the bonobo Chimpanzee, orca, and bottlenose dolphin. Examples of avians include some species of gulls and Humboldt penguins. Biological examples are predominate in fish, flatworms, and crustaceans.[11] Bisexuality (behavioral and biological) has been observed in over 500 species."
I don't know about the animals - but you see, humans have sex for PLEASURE on occasion. I think it's perfectly acceptable for people to experience sexual pleasure from both sexes - each has something the other doesn't (discounting surgery or anything) - and they can do some of the same things, even !
If you're looking at it not in terms of "sex is fun" - and thinking about attraction of love - it seems perfectly easy for a person to have to capacity to love both sexes. After all, no person has 100% female habits and traits, and no one has 100% male habits and traits.
Of course, not all people would be open to a relationship with their "not preferred sex", or there may be something about that sex that gets in the way of sexual fulfilment (for example, if someone really disliked breasts and that just ruined it for them).
It's probably not as prevalent in HISTORY because a long time ago, the human race did need to keep having reproductive sex to increase its numbers - and therefore, homosexual relations would be discouraged (waste of sperm, vessel... et cetera). Repressed, if anything.
I don't think it's a really modern concept - and that's the argument that anti-homosexual people use - "If kids didn't know the word for it, it wouldn't happen" (I can scan the letter with that, if you want).
... 100 years ago = 1907...
Yeah... I think they would. I was going to say they might not know what the word means - but Merriam Webster puts its creation at 1824.
Now... just because a word didn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. And they may have had another word for it. OR - it may have been so normal that there wasn't a word for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
Yes, Wikipedia - but it's a good starting place, and I don't want to go track down individual links.
Quote :
"Many non-human animal species also exhibit bisexual behavior. This is, of course, common in hermaphroditic animals, but is also known in many other species. Examples of mammals include the bonobo Chimpanzee, orca, and bottlenose dolphin. Examples of avians include some species of gulls and Humboldt penguins. Biological examples are predominate in fish, flatworms, and crustaceans.[11] Bisexuality (behavioral and biological) has been observed in over 500 species."
I don't know about the animals - but you see, humans have sex for PLEASURE on occasion. I think it's perfectly acceptable for people to experience sexual pleasure from both sexes - each has something the other doesn't (discounting surgery or anything) - and they can do some of the same things, even !
If you're looking at it not in terms of "sex is fun" - and thinking about attraction of love - it seems perfectly easy for a person to have to capacity to love both sexes. After all, no person has 100% female habits and traits, and no one has 100% male habits and traits.
Of course, not all people would be open to a relationship with their "not preferred sex", or there may be something about that sex that gets in the way of sexual fulfilment (for example, if someone really disliked breasts and that just ruined it for them).
It's probably not as prevalent in HISTORY because a long time ago, the human race did need to keep having reproductive sex to increase its numbers - and therefore, homosexual relations would be discouraged (waste of sperm, vessel... et cetera). Repressed, if anything.
I don't think it's a really modern concept - and that's the argument that anti-homosexual people use - "If kids didn't know the word for it, it wouldn't happen" (I can scan the letter with that, if you want).
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=red>The Audacity of Charles wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]&lt;font color=teal&gt;Snow &lt;h6&gt;~Hey Oh!~ wrote: [/QUOTENAME]All I'm saying is, go back in time one-hundred years.... Ask the people if they know what &quot;bisexual&quot; means, and they'd probably scratch their heads.[/QUOTE]
... 100 years ago = 1907...
Yeah... I think they would. I was going to say they might not know what the word means - but Merriam Webster puts its creation at 1824.
Now... just because a word didn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. And they may have had another word for it. OR - it may have been so normal that there wasn't a word for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
Yes, Wikipedia - but it's a good starting place, and I don't want to go track down individual links.
Quote :
&quot;Many non-human animal species also exhibit bisexual behavior. This is, of course, common in hermaphroditic animals, but is also known in many other species. Examples of mammals include the bonobo Chimpanzee, orca, and bottlenose dolphin. Examples of avians include some species of gulls and Humboldt penguins. Biological examples are predominate in fish, flatworms, and crustaceans.[11] Bisexuality (behavioral and biological) has been observed in over 500 species.&quot;
I don't know about the animals - but you see, humans have sex for PLEASURE on occasion. I think it's perfectly acceptable for people to experience sexual pleasure from both sexes - each has something the other doesn't (discounting surgery or anything) - and they can do some of the same things, even !
If you're looking at it not in terms of &quot;sex is fun&quot; - and thinking about attraction of love - it seems perfectly easy for a person to have to capacity to love both sexes. After all, no person has 100% female habits and traits, and no one has 100% male habits and traits.
Of course, not all people would be open to a relationship with their &quot;not preferred sex&quot;, or there may be something about that sex that gets in the way of sexual fulfilment (for example, if someone really disliked breasts and that just ruined it for them).
It's probably not as prevalent in HISTORY because a long time ago, the human race did need to keep having reproductive sex to increase its numbers - and therefore, homosexual relations would be discouraged (waste of sperm, vessel... et cetera). Repressed, if anything.
I don't think it's a really modern concept - and that's the argument that anti-homosexual people use - &quot;If kids didn't know the word for it, it wouldn't happen&quot; (I can scan the letter with that, if you want).[/QUOTE]
Meh.
... 100 years ago = 1907...
Yeah... I think they would. I was going to say they might not know what the word means - but Merriam Webster puts its creation at 1824.
Now... just because a word didn't exist doesn't mean it didn't happen. And they may have had another word for it. OR - it may have been so normal that there wasn't a word for it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
Yes, Wikipedia - but it's a good starting place, and I don't want to go track down individual links.
Quote :
&quot;Many non-human animal species also exhibit bisexual behavior. This is, of course, common in hermaphroditic animals, but is also known in many other species. Examples of mammals include the bonobo Chimpanzee, orca, and bottlenose dolphin. Examples of avians include some species of gulls and Humboldt penguins. Biological examples are predominate in fish, flatworms, and crustaceans.[11] Bisexuality (behavioral and biological) has been observed in over 500 species.&quot;
I don't know about the animals - but you see, humans have sex for PLEASURE on occasion. I think it's perfectly acceptable for people to experience sexual pleasure from both sexes - each has something the other doesn't (discounting surgery or anything) - and they can do some of the same things, even !
If you're looking at it not in terms of &quot;sex is fun&quot; - and thinking about attraction of love - it seems perfectly easy for a person to have to capacity to love both sexes. After all, no person has 100% female habits and traits, and no one has 100% male habits and traits.
Of course, not all people would be open to a relationship with their &quot;not preferred sex&quot;, or there may be something about that sex that gets in the way of sexual fulfilment (for example, if someone really disliked breasts and that just ruined it for them).
It's probably not as prevalent in HISTORY because a long time ago, the human race did need to keep having reproductive sex to increase its numbers - and therefore, homosexual relations would be discouraged (waste of sperm, vessel... et cetera). Repressed, if anything.
I don't think it's a really modern concept - and that's the argument that anti-homosexual people use - &quot;If kids didn't know the word for it, it wouldn't happen&quot; (I can scan the letter with that, if you want).[/QUOTE]
Meh.
The Freddie movie might not be in the distant future, but there's some great news on this one!
http://www.playfuls.com/news_0005339_Film_To_Be_Made_On_Milli_Vanilli.html
http://www.playfuls.com/news_0005339_Film_To_Be_Made_On_Milli_Vanilli.html
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]A very rich bunny wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]<font color=teal>Edgarlicious! wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]dont try suicide wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, though that's a nice thought. I think everyone is bisexual. Some just aren't willing to act on it ;) While there might be a dominant preference, I believe it's possible to get close to, and fall in love with anyone to the point of consumation. Especially if you're drunk enough.[/QUOTE]
You're both incredibly wrong.
Some people are gay.
Some people are straight.
Some people are bisexual.
There are three options, and any given person can be any one of the three.
Imagine a spectrum, a scale that is kind of like this:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% gay <-> 100% straight
A person can be all the way at the 0 end and express attraction ONLY EVER to members of their own sex.
A person can be all the way at 10 and express attraction ONLY EVER to members of the opposite sex.
A person can be anywhere the fuck in between, expressing preferences for one sex or the other. If the person is a five, he or she would express no preference, or equal preferences, to both sexes.
How God-damned hard is this to understand?
and he was bi-sexual, not gay.[/QUOTE]
http://www.queenzone.com/queenzone/faq_view.aspx?Q=163&CATEGORY_NAME=Freddie+Mercury&Q_KNOWLEDGE_BASE_CATEGORY_ID=5
I love people who avoid the truth kicking and screaming. Bisexual came round when "Spring Break in Cancun: Girls gone wild" videos started popping up everywhere. I think that's BS... You're either gay or you're not.[/QUOTE]
I have to disagree, though that's a nice thought. I think everyone is bisexual. Some just aren't willing to act on it ;) While there might be a dominant preference, I believe it's possible to get close to, and fall in love with anyone to the point of consumation. Especially if you're drunk enough.[/QUOTE]
You're both incredibly wrong.
Some people are gay.
Some people are straight.
Some people are bisexual.
There are three options, and any given person can be any one of the three.
Imagine a spectrum, a scale that is kind of like this:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
100% gay <-> 100% straight
A person can be all the way at the 0 end and express attraction ONLY EVER to members of their own sex.
A person can be all the way at 10 and express attraction ONLY EVER to members of the opposite sex.
A person can be anywhere the fuck in between, expressing preferences for one sex or the other. If the person is a five, he or she would express no preference, or equal preferences, to both sexes.
How God-damned hard is this to understand?