Skip to main content

You look like an angry lizard!

Bohemian Rhapsody
(2018)

(SPOILERS) I can quite see a Queen fan begrudging this latest musical biopic for failing to adhere to the facts of their illustrious career – but then, what biopic does steer a straight and true course? – making it ironic that they're the main fuel for Bohemian Rhapsody's box office success. Most other criticisms – and they're legitimate, on the whole – fall away in the face of a hugely charismatic star turn from Rami Malek as the band's frontman. He's the difference between a standard-issue, episodic, join-the-dots narrative and one that occasionally touches greatness, and most importantly, carries emotional heft.


Which isn't to say the supporting players are slouches. I could have done without the indulgent cameo from Mike Myers, complete with Wayne's World reference, since it's a little too broad (and cutting back to him for no good reason during Live Aid is a bizarre decision – we last saw him a decade earlier – unless the director(s)'s under the assumption the entire audience recognises this as Mike Myers doing a comedy turn and that they want more of him), but his composite character of Ray Foster serves a useful function in emphasising the outré quality of Bohemian Rhapsody (the song). 


Freddie Mercury's band members are remarkably deft facsimiles, though. If they don't quite come alive the way he does, that's in part because they simply aren't even in the same arena of vitality and fascination, and because – as a consequence – they aren't afforded the same amount of screen time. Gwilym Lee is to be sympathised with for enduring an imitation of Brian May's massive perm, while Ben Hardy gets the closest to a defining presence with Roger Taylor's frequent clashes with Mercury. Joseph Mazzello, like John Deacon, slips by mostly unnoticed, as will this sentence. 


And if Aidan Gillen wheels out "dodgy Aidan Gillen" again as manager John Reid, minus his more outright Machiavellian aspects, Tom Hollander does his inimitably best Tom Hollander as personable Jim "Miami" Beach, the band's lawyer turned replacement manager. 


The biggest impressions are made by Allen Leech as Mercury’s personal manager and "bad influence" Paul Prenter, eventually telling all on the singer, and Lucy Boynton (Murder on the Orient Express, Apostle) as Freddie's one-time fiancée and lifelong best friend Mary Austin. If the picture effectively digs into the underlying bleakness and discontent of the period during which Mercury increasingly relied on Prenter, accelerating his gradual dissolution and isolation, it is equally adept at translating the warmth and genuineness of the bond between Austin and Mercury.

 
The picture particularly needs Prenter to provide some dramatic heft. There's little enough genuine conflict in the Queen story – I say this as an admitted ignoramus of lore, so I may be entirely wrong – such that Anthony McCarten and Peter Morgan have to diligently create some, along with various exaggerations of peak points along the way (McCarten is no stranger to such embroidery, having previously refashioned the lives of Winston Churchill and Stephen Hawking in Darkest Hour and The Theory of Everything respectively). 


Bohemian Rhapsody (the movie) invents everything from the future band's first meeting, to Mercury meeting later love Jim Hutton (Aaron McCusker), to the success of the first album (it wasn't that big), to the split with Reid (actually in 1977), to the reason Freddie finished with Prenter – he trashed Freddie’s house or told all, depending on which fact check you read – to the band breakup (apparently it was agreed by all that a break was appropriate after disco dud Hot Space, and they reunited for The Works in ’83 – which included Radio Ga Ga and I Want to Break Free), to songwriting credits (not actually shared until The Miracle), to the HIV diagnosis (it happened sometime after Live Aid, some suggesting he tested negative in '85 and then positive in '87). 


None of this is all together less or more than what you expect of a dramatisation (authenticity is what documentaries, ideally, are made for), but the structuring of the Live Aid grand climax – the band in tatters, no one talking to Freddie, their meet-up having not played in forever (they’d actually been on a World Tour with The Works that ended a couple of months before), the fractious relationship with his father resolved on the morning of the concert (his parents "went to most of Freddie Mercury's concerts"), Freddie being diagnosed with AIDS – is a multi-layering of artifice that rather underlines how little their story lends itself to a straightforward, peaks-and-troughs movie structure. That said, this assembly succeeds remarkably effectively, and poignantly, with due time given to the concert and triumphant, band-reinvigorating set. 


The consequence is that the back end of the movie is the more proficient. There's a big gap between 1975 and 1980 where you'd think nothing of note happened, and consequently we re-join Freddie, expanded tache, house full of cats (with their own rooms), increasingly secluded and yet paradoxically enjoying the gay club scene like a fugitive from Cruising, in a manner that has been lent insufficient prelude (no dwarves carrying trays of cocaine on their heads, though, which will only reconfirm all Sacha Baron Cohen's reasons for departing the project). 


Malek is genuinely eye-opening in the lead role. He isn't as big as Mercury, but he makes up for it in presence and by inhabiting his subject's persona (admittedly, it's not very much of his voice singing the songs, mixed as it is with Mercury and Canadian singer Marc Matel); an irrepressibly camp, sensitive, preening peacock with a quick tongue and a devil-may-care courting of risk, his performance is one of warmth, self-destructiveness and indomitable self-belief. If you need to ask what the point of making a movie playing not just fast and loose with but observing wanton disregard for the facts was, look no further than Malik. It's a performance deserving of a Best Actor Oscar nod, whether or not he gets one.


So yeah, as someone largely indifferent to Queen (which means, I like any number of their songs, but I don't actually own any of their albums), Bohemian Rhapsody (the movie) worked just fine for me. I don't think it's a great musical biopic – very few biopics are great, let alone musical biopics; it's a genre that, by its nature, tends to be reductive, over-reverent and literal, unless made by a director with a clear vision – but it's an enjoyable, often amusing and affecting one, accompanied by an inevitably rousing soundtrack (although, I'd have steered clear of using their songs in the opening sections, until they're an established band). Iconic scenes focus on the inspirations for Bohemian Rhapsody (the song) and We Will Rock You (not the musical), and they elicit a clockwork, breezy enjoyment value given the hindsight of their stature, but for me the standout sequence might be Mercury, loaded, sweatily spinning out during an impertinently probing press conference.


And in terms of what might have been, I'm not convinced Sacha Baron Cohen would have been a great Mercury – who knows, perhaps he could have pulled it off, but you'd need to see a track record in dramatic roles before taking the risk – and until Dexter Fletcher gives an interview there's no way of ascertain how much persona non grata Bryan Singer (at least, it seems, outside of a Red Sonja set) contributed to the final film. Bohemian Rhapsody, the movie, on a scale of Queen tracks, might not entirely rock you and doesn't quite break free into greatness, but in its own way (not least at the box office), it's definitely a champion.


Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Comments

  1. Excuse my biased opinion (being a massive queen fan) but this cast portray the band and Mary Austin superbly. I understand the movie took ten years to make, something to do with disagreements between the director and Brian May/roger taylor!!!

    Well let me tell you this, it was well worth the wait. The amount of studying and research these young actors must have did is clearly testament to their performance in this phenomenal story of the greatest band ever to grace the earth.

    Without spoiling the film, all I can say is that a certain record producer must be gutted or certainly would have been. Definitely two and a quarter hours of your life you will never forget. By far the best film containing music about a life story I've ever seen.

    An absolute must watch folks

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…

She writes Twilight fan fiction.

Vampire Academy (2014)
My willingness to give writer Daniel Waters some slack on the grounds of early glories sometimes pays off (Sex and Death 101) and sometimes, as with this messy and indistinct Young Adult adaptation, it doesn’t. If Vampire Academy plods along as a less than innovative smart-mouthed Buffy rip-off that might be because, if you added vampires to Heathers, you would probably get something not so far from the world of Joss Whedon. Unfortunately inspiration is a low ebb throughout, not helped any by tepid direction from Daniel’s sometimes-reliable brother Mark and a couple of hopelessly plankish leads who do their best to dampen down any wit that occasionally attempts to surface.

I can only presume there’s a never-ending pile of Young Adult fiction poised for big screen failure, all of it comprising multi-novel storylines just begging for a moment in the Sun. Every time an adaptation crashes and burns (and the odds are that they will) another one rises, hydra-like, hoping…

You're waterboarding me.

The Upside (2017)
(SPOILERS) The list of US remakes of foreign-language films really ought to be considered a hiding to nothing, given the ratio of flops to unqualified successes. There’s always that chance, though, of a proven property (elsewhere) hitting the jackpot, and every exec hopes, in the case of French originals, for another The Birdcage, Three Men and a Baby, True Lies or Down and Out in Beverly Hills. Even a Nine Months, Sommersby or Unfaithful will do. Rather than EdTV. Or Sorcerer. Or Eye of the Beholder. Or Brick Mansions. Or Chloe. Or Intersection (Richard Gere is clearly a Francophile). Or Just Visiting. Or The Man with One Red Shoe. Or Mixed Nuts. Or Original Sin. Or Oscar. Or Point of No Return. Or Quick Change. Or Return to Paradise. Or Under Suspicion. Or Wicker Park. Or Father’s Day.

What about the meaningless line of indifference?

The Lion King (2019)
(SPOILERS) And so the Disney “live-action” remake train thunders on regardless (I wonder how long the live-action claim would last if there was a slim hope of a Best Animated Feature Oscar nod?) I know I keep repeating myself, but the early ‘90s Disney animation renaissance didn’t mean very much to me; I found their pictures during that period fine, but none of them blew me away as they did critics and audiences generally. As such, I have scant nostalgia to bring to bear on the prospect of a remake, which I’m sure can work both ways. Aladdin proved to be a lot of fun. Beauty and the Beast entirely tepid. The Lion King, well, it isn’t a badfilm, but it’s wearying its slavish respectfulness towards the original and so diligent in doing it justice, you’d think it was some kind of religious artefact. As a result, it is, ironically, for the most part, dramatically dead in the water.

Would you like Smiley Sauce with that?

American Beauty (1999)
(SPOILERS) As is often the case with the Best Picture Oscar, a backlash against a deemed undeserved reward has grown steadily in the years since American Beauty’s win. The film is now often identified as symptomatic of a strain of cinematic indulgence focussing on the affluent middle classes’ first world problems. Worse, it showcases a problematic protagonist with a Lolita-fixation towards his daughter’s best friend (imagine its chances of getting made, let alone getting near the podium in the #MeToo era). Some have even suggested it “mercifully” represents a world that no longer exists (as a pre-9/11 movie), as if such hyperbole has any bearing other than as gormless clickbait; you’d have to believe its world of carefully manicured caricatures existed in the first place to swallow such a notion. American Beauty must own up to some of these charges, but they don’t prevent it from retaining a flawed allure. It’s a satirical take on Americana that, if it pulls its p…

You know what I think? I think he just wants to see one cook up close.

The Green Mile (1999)
(SPOILERS) There’s something very satisfying about the unhurried confidence of the storytelling in Frank Darabont’s two prison-set Stephen King adaptations (I’m less beholden to supermarket sweep The Mist); it’s sure, measured and precise, certain that the journey you’re being take on justifies the (indulgent) time spent, without the need for flashy visuals or ornate twists (the twists there are feel entirely germane – with a notable exception – as if they could only be that way). But. The Green Mile has rightly come under scrutiny for its reliance on – or to be more precise, building its foundation on – the “Magical Negro” trope, served with a mild sprinkling of idiot savant (so in respect of the latter, a Best Supporting Actor nomination was virtually guaranteed). One might argue that Stephen King’s magical realist narrative flourishes well-worn narrative ploys and characterisations at every stage – such that John Coffey’s initials are announcement enough of his …

I don’t think you will see President Pierce again.

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs (2018)
(SPOILERS) The Ballad of Buster Scruggs and other tall tales of the American frontier is the title of "the book" from which the Coen brothers' latest derives, and so announces itself as fiction up front as heavily as Fargo purported to be based on a true story. In the world of the portmanteau western – has there even been one before? – theme and content aren't really all that distinct from the more familiar horror collection, and as such, these six tales rely on sudden twists or reveals, most of them revolving around death. And inevitably with the anthology, some tall tales are stronger than other tall tales, the former dutifully taking up the slack.

Kindly behove me no ill behoves!

The Bonfire of the Vanities (1990)
(SPOILERS) It’s often the case that industry-shaking flops aren’t nearly the travesties they appeared to be before the dust had settled, and so it is with The Bonfire of the Vanities. The adaptation of Tom Wolfe’s ultra-cynical bestseller is still the largely toothless, apologetically broad-brush comedy – I’d hesitate to call it a satire in its reconfigured form – it was when first savaged by critics nearly thirty years ago, but taken for what it is, that is, removed from the long shadow of Wolfe’s novel, it’s actually fairly serviceable star-stuffed affair that doesn’t seem so woefully different to any number of rather blunt-edged comedies of the era.

Is CBS Corporate telling CBS News "Do not air this story"?

The Insider (1999)
(SPOILERS) The Insider was the 1999 Best Picture Oscar nominee that didn’t. Do any business, that is. Which is, more often than not, a major mark against it getting the big prize. It can happen (2009, and there was a string of them from 2014-2016), but aside from brief, self-congratulatory “we care about art first” vibes, it generally does nothing for the ceremony’s profile, or the confidence of the industry that is its bread and butter. The Insider lacked the easy accessibility of the other nominees – supernatural affairs, wafer-thin melodramas or middle-class suburbanite satires. It didn’t even brandish a truly headlines-shattering nail-biter in its conspiracy-related true story, as earlier contenders All the President’s Men and JFK could boast. But none of those black marks prevented The Insider from being the cream of the year’s crop.