yep, that was simply John's in the 80's. It was the typical white dad style- any kind of oversized short sleeved shirt tucked into jeans with a black belt and white sneakers. made up about 90% of Deacy's style in the 80's and 90's.
Yeah that the other members were portrayed as upstanding and not at all interested in the lifestyle made me straight up chuckle. Its quite known that both roger and brian not only loved parties as much as freddie but also cheated on their girlfriends or wifes pretty often and were not the ones to leave the party early with them. And I gotta disappoint ya but Deacon really did look like that even if you think thats boring 🤣
I watched the movie without knowing anything about queen as people but you did get the subtle hint they cheated (it was so subtle and quickly denied tho I just thought Freddie was stirring things)
Shhhhh! That's too smart for these people who want to be fake mad over something they didn't know about until they read a "10 Things Bohemian Rhapsody Lied About" BuzzFeed list
honestly the biggest problem in the movie was that Freddie was the only one who tried to leave the band - they all tried to leave the band at some point and like Freddie wasn't even the first to try. That just kind of changed the band and made Freddie seem like he was a little worse than he really was, like I was fine with the ending and like the AIDS diagnosis being before live aid because it did make for a more satisfying ending but the whole Freddie being the only member who wanted to leave kind of maid the rest of the band seem like angels and Freddie like he was Satan or something
Yes, “it’s a movie, not a documentary.” That doesn’t mean the screenwriters/producers/etc. should be freewheeling and manipulative in depicting real-life figures and events. They can still put greater effort into conveying their point and sharing their perspective while maintaining the integrity of the factual historical narrative of the film’s subject. I mean, amirite?
I'm so glad that they focused mostly on Freddie and Queen's love of music. His personal life was none of our business yet he was harassed about it for years! So I'm glad that they highlighted it but didn't go too into it. Also until Freddie's final days, he only wanted to talk about his music, which is lovely. I really enjoyed this movie, more than I thought I would and I don't mind them changing elements for the entertainment and the smoothness for a movie :) plenty of excellent documentaries to watch if you want the truer story
dude, right on. i thought it was a great tribute to Freddie. he wouldn't have wanted his entire private life played out on the screen. like you said, if you want a truer story, watch a documentary
100% agree. I will replay this movie for years cuz it makes me happy. even tho i know they changed a lot of things. had they gone with a more accurate dark approach it would've been too sad and distracting.
Didn’t he knowingly give people aids? That was pretty much a death sentence back then right? Like, isn’t this boi a murdering piece of trash? Am I mistaken? Tbh I really hope I am, someone please tell me
@@stylesmarshall6990 i mean... sure he probably gave it to someone. I don't think he did it intentionally tho.. i believe he was with his partner Jim hutton since before he was diagnosed until he died. Jim did get HIV i think. But he died in 2010 from cancer.
John Deacon ( the Bassist) also was 100% NOT involved in this movie along with Mary. He hasn’t done anything public with Queen since 1997 and has left everything to Brian and Roger!
I see all these comments about the timeline not mattering and if one wants an accurate depiction of the events, they should watch a documentary. What I do want to point out is that it is entirely possible to do a biopic in the spam of 2 hours without reinventing the story. I personallg love biopics because it allows me to get a private and personal insight into the life of an artist, thing in which I find this biopic to be very lackluster. If I want to rewatch a series of Queen concerts I can easily just go on youtube as well.
So, I am a millenial, which means I never grew up with queen around. But I still knew a lot of their hits from my parents and could sing along with some. Queen to me always was this band that got insanely hyped and I really liked their music, but as I was too young to tell good and bad singers apart I never really felt it. (Didn't concern myself with Queen in recent years). When I saw the movie being announced I was really interested. I didn't have very high expactations but I was very interested. (But as was pointed out in the video, I didn't know anything about Queen, not even Freddies sexual orientation. All I knew was the name Freddie Mercury, his classic looks, his amazing voice, he died of Aids, and he had an amazing stage presence). Then i watched the movie with my parents in Imax and it was amazing. It's been quite some time since I had such a great time watching a movie and I feel like it's gonna end up on my list of favourite movies. I learned a lot from it I now consider myself a fan of queen whereas before i just knew them and liked their songs a little more than the others in my grade. (I even learned to play bohemian rhapsody on the piano because of the movie). Through this video I learned that some of the depictions where not quite accurate or even false, for which I am great. (I still love the band and the movie though). My point is, this movie is awesome and in my oppinion all the changes made are fine because they do not completely stray away from the real story, they just make for a better movie.
@@kreia187 I am also a millennial and while I do agree this movie is a good way to spark new interest in Queen and Freddie, I also think the movie could have been a lot better. I really enjoyed it, but learning that some of the main plot points were invented or changed, (the going solo fight/break-up which just didn't happen, learning about his AIDs way earlier so the Live Aid concert has a completely different context than it had in real life) did detract from my appreciation of the movie. Plus the way they got to know each other was totally different in real life as well. They really couldn't have tried to be a _bit_ more accurate? No biopic is a 100% accurate, I know, but it seems like things were made up solely for the point of creating drama or making it a better crowd-pleasing movie. It wasn't bad, but it could have been better.
Now that the Oscars are starving for ratings and have even created a "Popcorn Oscar" category, he probably will. But even a year ago he totally would not have been nominated as you didn't get nominated just for being the best performer in a garbage movie.
His acting was good. It was a good rendition, but not exactly Freddie. He didn't really match the tone of Freddie's voice or his speaking patterns. If you compare it to Natalie Portman's performance as Jacqueline Kennedy you'll notice she went all out and matched everything; From the accent, to the speech patterns and tone of voice.
This video means well, however, Freddie Mercury was known to be an extremely private person. Brian and Roger wanted to make sure that they stayed true to Freddie and made sure they did not overstep what he would have wanted. No biopic will ever be true and stay to the facts completely, because if that was the case it'd be a 5 hour long movie. I believe they had Freddie tell the band in the movie before Live Aid because otherwise they couldn't have had the opportunity to say it in the actual movie other than the post concert screens.While this movie jumps around time, none of it is fabricated for the benefit of the band members of Queen, they simply wanted people to understand Freddie Mercury in this day and age.
Julianna Kropla there’s a way to stay to what happened and for a movie to not be 20 hours long. Ray the biopic about ray charles does really well. Its got both his greatest music and a bunch of things I never knew about him. There’s a way to do it they just didn’t do it in this film. And if Freddie Mercury was that private why make a film in the first place.
@@karmicobsession1636 First, Ray Charles and Freddie Mercury are two people who lead two completely different lives, so comparing that is not a good way to go around it. Second, they made this film so people of this generation who didn't grow up with Queen can see this film and know the life of actual rock legend Freddie Mercury. They followed the life of Freddie very well done, and obvious fans of Queen can see that. Thank you for your reply though!
SaysSalad Isn’t it obvious that the fact that Roger and Brian were very much involved in making this movie spoke volumes ? I am fan of Queen for a long time. Personally, I am not interested in “digging deep” into his sexual inclinations. It is Freddie’s private life and in my opinion, we should respect that. He is not someone from a freak show. Freddie Mercury is a musical genius, a priceless gem, and a true gift to this world. This movie made me happy and emotional as it has celebrated his great talent. That is what I paid my money to see three times in a row. Not about drug and his sex life. I hope this movie introduced Queen and Freddie to a new generation of fans. If anyone wants to peep Freddie’s private life, just watch the documentary.
Bruh, the bass player John Deacon DID look like a squeaky clean looking guy like he worked for for HR Block 😂😂 he’s described as the “accidental rock star” John Deacon is a legend though
Mike Myers' character is actually based on Norman Sheffield who ran Trident Studios and effectively managed Queen in their early days. For the most part the way Myers' portrays him is spot on with how they treated the band, milking them for as much as they could and demanding hit songs irrespective of their quality.
its a biopic. meaning biographical. it wasnt inspired by his life's events its supposs to be about his life's events so the least they could have done it put stuff in correct order
As a huge Queen fan i noticed all the changes you point out while watching it (and many more) and I understand how it can seem like the original band members tried to lie to the audience, BUT this is not a documentary (if you wanna see one watch "Queen, Days of our lives", its amazing), it is a film that wants to excite you and give this band and Freddie the recognition they often didn't get. Roger Taylor and Brian May loved and lost their friend and tried 10 years to get his story on to the big screen, I respect that and can look past some of the the historical facts that have been changed, so that the film they wanted to show us all could work better.
Yes and I'm not trying to claim that this is the movie Freddie wanted, like you said we will never know, but from all the things I have read and what Freddie has said in past interviews you really get the sense that he was very private in his personal life and I believe that's why the band members didn't wanna do the "all out there-biopic" with Sacha Baron Cohen. I personally would have love to see it but I'm also very happy with what we got !
Nah. Making Freddie look terrible and making themselves look like angels was wrong. You're telling me that three 80's rockstars belonging to one of the biggest bands led squeaky clean lives? BS.
@@deviantmoore9744 yeah.. and on top of that, apparently they just lied about Paul prenter which was supremely screwed up considering he still has family alive. you can tell Brian may was intent on making himself look incredible.
@Tuscan417 Also Disney at one point hired a known convicted pedophile to direct some shit for Disney channel. Don't remember all the details but it was the director of the Jeepers Creepers movies. But you know, some 10 year old jokes that were already apologized for before they hired him is much worse.
also they wanted to end with Live Aid. which i appreciate. but they can't have a Queen movie without actually recognizing Freddie's AIDS. people would be so upset
Iliyana Serrano live aid was the pinnacle of the film- and having aids was so much of Freddie’s legacy you couldn’t not have it in the film: so I’m ok with the timelines alterations
Originally Brian and Roger wanted Freddie to die of aids like not even halfway through and have the rest of the movie be about them and how they moved on and all that and that's partially why Cohen left.
TheShadowfire204 thank you! He talks about that on the Howard Stern radio show, you can watch it on TH-cam. And the editing was poor cause Brian May put in their contracts that every member of Queen has to have equal screen time. The man’s a cock.
Thank you for addressing every single problem with the movie. Thank you Still I enjoyed it. I do want to see it again now. The amount of times you encourage me to go the cinema. Thank you!
I wasnt even mad that they moved him getting aids 2 years earlier, im mad that they skipped every important album that wasnt A Night At The Opera and Queen I.
I'll give the writers the benefit of a doubt and say they wanted to keep everything in a 2-or-so-hour run time. If it was a Netflix series, I bet they would have gone into other albums like Queen 2, News of the World, or Sheer Heart Attack
Pretty sure the reason why they chose to only really show those two albums was because the first is their debut album and thats kind of a big deal and Night at the Opera is such an Iconic album, that they couldn't leave it out. I would also have liked to see New of the World, but then it would add almost another hour to the movie, so they had to cut it down.
Magic Books and if they went into their whole discography it would have to be multiple films and that just doesn't work, even if they still ended the film at Live Aid that's still fifteen years to cover.
Actually, Freddie Mercury wasn't Indian. He was Parsi, which is an ethno-religious group of Persian Zoroastrians who fled to India a long time ago to escape religious persecution. So while he grew up in India, he was ethnically Persian.
@Adelaide McMillan I don't know where you're getting that info from, but if you go to Mercury's wikipedia page, under Early Life, first sentence of the second paragraph, it says "Mercury spent most of his childhood in India." Yeah obviously he was born in Zanzibar, but he was sent to school in India.
It's important to remember that John Deacon wasn't involved in the making of the movie, after Freddie's death he completely left the music world. some accounts say that John Deacon remained int eh band all those years because the band was a family to him, when Freddie died it must have been like your family actually falling apart. I don't think John Deacon would have been involved in any of the antics of Brian May and Roger Taylor, so I think it's safe to say that May and Taylor were protecting their image and brand, not Freddie's memory.
Because huge events should stay true Freddie didn't break up the band or know about his aids Those are major events that shouldn't have been changed smaller things can definitely change that's okay but now because this was put in a we'll received movie the general audience now believes the movie to be fact Many people I know believe that Freddie broke up the band among several other things Biopics should find a balance on what to keep and what to omit which this movie does a poor job of It's still a great film to watch and fun with but what it does to the general audience is form a perception of what happened that gets accepted by most That's what's wrong with it
@@ebonywine having Freddie break up the band by going solo is a huge problem because now everyone who doesn't know any better will believe it When I told my friends about it they were all pretty annoyed and didn't like the movie as much anymore That one event needs to be written over Plus the band members that aren't Freddie are all painted in a positive light, they never get in trouble like Freddie does when in reality all of them were wild dudes who got into trouble They made themselves look good and portrayed Freddie as wreckless as well as just making up characters that didn't exist But I can live with those changes what I can't live with is the band choosing to have Freddie break up and "kill queen" when they went solo before he even did It's not right because people now believe this series of events to be fact
Smash Bros. Ultimate Trailers yeah I wouldn’t mind if biopics admitted they aren’t 100%?accurate but so many people take them as gospel that the changes do matter
The AIDS thing is the only real problem with the film's accuracy that REALLY matters. Everything else is just squashed into something short to fit the time, which is understandable. Then again, this film would have gotten more hate if his illness wasn't portrayed. Before the film was released, the people hating it were Twitter SJW's calling it White/Straight Washing and ignoring his AIDS diagnosis. After it was released, they stayed silent while nitpicky critics pointed out all the flaws and what they believe should have been shown more. Both sides are wrong to critique the movie in that sense because A; Critics don't know EVERYTHING about Queen (A lot of Big Queen fans loved this movie, so up yours!) and the SJW's hadn't even seen the film yet and just judged based off the trailers. Here's the thing. This movie was a celebration of Queen and Freddie Mercury. A party, if you will. The people trashing the movie are the buzzkills that are telling you to calm down and turn off the music. Just nitpicking everything wrong with the scene. Those who can find the enjoyment of the film and not care about the mistakes have found the true purpose of the film. Freddie wanted to be remembered, not as a homosexual, an AIDS victim, a Playboy, or a Coke addict. He wanted to be remembered as a Performer and a Legend, and that's what this film honors; His well-respect Legacy.
Roman Ruiz People were jumping to conclusions saying it was ignoring his sexuality and AIDS on just the first 30 second teaser. Look at Brian Fuller's tweets from then. He went all SJW batshit crazy. Had he just done some research, he would know that it was indeed going to be made clear in the film.
THANK YOU. I did feel it would have been nice to follow his final days (especially given some of the really sweet stories Freddie's boyfriend has about them, like when Freddie told him "You can leave if you want to. I would understand." and he chose to stay anyway because he loved him), but overall I wasn't all that mad at how his diagnosis was portrayed. We didn't need the nitty-gritty details. Showing him coughing up blood was more than enough.
Silke As I've already said, Roger Taylor's albums were different. He stuck with EMI and even collaborated with the band which isn't so much to separate them. What Freddie was doing was signing with a whole other company and made music separate from the band with no collaborations whatsoever. Paul Prenter was his manager which, obviously, the band hated.
I did like the movie, however, I also agree with some of what u said. I did think it was fast paced and I would like to have seen more in-depth breakdowns in certain conversations. I think they were trying too hard to market to the family aspect and I would love to have seen it R rated and more raw...
Brown Beauty80 it was meant to be PG 13, not R18. Tell them to make a documentary instead if you want the raunchy stuff to be involved. People who really idolized Mercury watched the movie for the the lead and the band they loved not for the explicit details of the dying singer.
I think pretending this film was amazing when it was just ok is moronic. I think pretending like this criticism isn’t totally valid is moronic. As musical biopics go it was average
Jaybird J Didn't say the movie was amazing dumbass. Please be more original with with the adjectives, can't believe you thought your comment was 'smart' by using the same word twice
I have to admit they got a lot of stuff wrong to build drama... 1. He didn’t live with his parents... they were still in Zanzibar... he lived with SMILE after he got out of boarding school 2. He was a backup singer for smile before the lead singer quit 3. Mary never ignored him... she was with them through all of their tours and she was completely fine with him being gay 4. AFTER (you were saying before) they broke up all of them were offered solo deals... Freddie’s just took the longest to make But you still make some mistakes 1. He did have an overbite... so why are you complaining 2. They did come up with all those song very VERY fast 3. The band said no to him that was it... he was fired 4. The band looked squeaky clean because they didn’t go to his extravagant parties... 4. DEacon was famous for being the boring guy This movie is great, but it does messes up some stuff (Got most of the stuff from either Queen by Phil Sutcliffe or Mercury)
@@_the_rizzler Are you saying its close enough because it seems like Rami indeed has an overbite or because Rami's prosthetic is close enough to Freddie's real overbite?
@@connorw2k A little bit of both. There were moments where it DID look like Freddie's, but I was convinced he had overbite the entirety of the movie. It looked like Freddie's around 1975, when they were writing Bohemian Rhapsody
@@gabrielasanchez6204 But this is a case where if they had followed the true story, we would have a better movie. This is not like an Aaron Sorkin movie.
I remember an S.B.C. interview with Howard Stern from a few years back where he talked about that failed pitch. He claimed the band had wanted Freddie’s death to be halfway through the film, so the second half would be them recovering from his loss. That made me worry about this exact issue even when I saw the first announcements. After some confusion about it, here is a link to the interview clip: th-cam.com/video/xq-M4JA3fIU/w-d-xo.html
Bilal Pickid I kinda understand that, but I think that did reveal something about their ego. Having it end with a show of the remaining band members is understandable, however having Freddy be in only half of his own biopic is something else entirely.
I'm pretty disgusted how his so called friends would fabricate so much negativity about Freddie. Making up an entire prima dona persona that broke up the band. From what I've seen Freddie was a pretty humble guy who loved performing and respected anyone he worked with. There may have beem negative aspects to his character but they should have shown that instead of fictional ones. The guy was a beautiful person who deserved better than that. They said they wanted to "respect his privacy" so they decided to make him look like an asshole instead. The guy was so passionate about music and performing he did while dying of Aids. And he made 18 albums with Queen! If he was such a self centered musician you'd think he'd have left the band early, but in real life he was nervous to do a solo act and would regularly call the band mates for advice. Kind of like in "Straight Outta Compton", how they put all the negativity on E; at least there Eazy E wasn't as good of a person in real life. It feels like if Freddie could see this movie he'd have been hurt.
You're completely right A lot of my friends came out the movie thinking that Freddie was a dickhead when he wasn't They believed everything the movie showed smh
Crazelord91 ok please if you’re one of those people that say they love queen but only love Freddie and drag down the other band mates then I don’t even need to read your whole comment.
Freddie is so private person, maybe that's why they get the story in other members of the queen and his family? But other than that, he's doesn't look like an asshole in the film, you can see his suffer and success
First of all, He did not seem like a dickhead in the movie, he was hilarious and knew exactly what he was worth, he seemed human. And second of all, have you heard of people not being what they seem? You honestly would't know if he was an asshole behind closed doors, or if he was a diva. And his friends sure as hell wouldn't tell you about if he was, now when he is dead and people love him so much, they would be hated by so many if it was the truth and they told it... Simple fact is, you don't know what he seemed like. To me, the interviews I have seen, he doesn't seem all rainbows and unicorns, he seems like he is confident and know what he is worth, exactly like he was in the movie!!!
This is meant to be a film not a timeline. If you want all the true facts read a book or watch documentary. All the shuffling of the film had to be done, due to the fact that it needed to be packed into a 2hr frame. Plus the whole scene of the band breaking up is not about Freddie going solo....its about freddie getting 4million for a SOLO career. Completely disagree with you on this one Atz.....Plus "Jobs" is guilty of doing of the same things as "Bohemian Rhapsody" so dont bother.
That's what he was saying about the "jobs" movie with Ashton Kutcher; he was talking about the second Steve jobs movie that came after that one. Plus, he had more of an issue with them painting themselves as angels and yet they kinda put him in this negative light of doing a solo album when TWO of them had already done the same thing.
@@scarletvalencia8172" then that would really be a rushed film ending. " I was saying it was rushed as it was.Also there is a big difference between 2 hours 10 mins and 2 hours and 30 mins, I am making the srgument here that it should have been 2 hours and 50 minutes.
Also, the villain guy was not as villainous as presented in the movie. Also, all his male relationships (except for the last one which is almost completely brushed over) are presented as bad. It made it look like the gay guy, Paul, was leading him to the dark side or something. I know they had a falling out eventually, but damn they made him seem way worse.
Exactly. While its understandable that people don't like Paul Prenter because of how he outed Mercury to the press, how far out of the way the script goes to make Prenter gay evil incarnate is staggering in how appalling it is.
@@noodlepoodle3582 I never saw it that way, since it was clearly established that Mary and Freddie were friends, and only that. To me it was more like Mercury gets saved from the evil unprotected sex, drugs and depressive episode by being reminded that he has poeple that care about him. Also, didn't he start a new relationship with that Jim guy?
yess! and I took my mom to see the movie and her thoughts were: that Paul dude lead Freddie on and got him addicted to alcohol, partying and being okay with his bisexuality. My mom is not that open minded, and since the movie didn't do a great job seperating the bad and the good it didn't help either
Great video. You pretty much explained my biggest issue with the film. To a further point, Freddie's sexuality and search for love and companionship is painted as his downfall, when in reality, it was of the strength and freedom he had. In a few docs, he was said to have the mantra of proudly doing "everything with everybody" in the early days of the epidemic. In the film, it comes across as his bisexuality is a vice for him and the old and dangerous notion that HIV/AIDs is the cause of a promiscuous, homosexual lifestyle and the reason why the epidemic was allowed to kill as many people as it did. Almost as if it's a punishment for not choosing to live a "normal" life. I think the movie did a good job of introducing the band and Freddie to a new generation and it was entertaining as hell, but that is the biggest, glaring issue for me.
Hannah Taplin They weren’t saying at all that homosexuality or bisexuality was the reason for AIDS. They said he was hanging out with the wrong crowd who didn’t care about him. But that wasn’t a jab at gay people. They portray his relationship with Jim Hutton very nicely.
@@TheaterPup I don't think it was the intention. I actually went to see the movie again because it kept bugging me. Over the past week, I rewatched all the docs I had saved and interviews with Brian and Roger after Freddie's death. They truly cared and loved him but even they admit that he was such a private person, they didn't know he was bi/gay until much later on. They just witnessed his private life in the third person and the movie comes off in that manner, while they come off rather clean in comparison, other than little hints of adultery. They did not like Paul Prenter and witnessed Freddie get deeply involved with him and into the gay scene. Not saying it's all Paul's fault (takes two to tango) but he really immersed Freddie in the deep end and enabled him to pursue multiple sexual conquests. I wonder if that's where the perspective becomes skewed: leather clad queer men in bars and disco clubs dragging an introverted Freddie into a promiscious lifestyle. After seeing the movie again, I realize that perhaps my initial comment is a bit too scathing but there are elements to the editing and writing where it could be perceived - especially by LGBTQ critics - where Freddie's diagnosis is used as a punishment for living such a wild life at the worst time that he could be.
@Hannah Taplin I can safely say, I don't really care what critics of LGBTQ have to say. ;) I see what you're saying that it looked like the other three were married and settled down. But again I don't personally take that as a slap at being gay. It's pretty typical for biopics to have the lead character go all temporarily crazy and have the rest of the characters react to it. It's a standard formula, people are just questioning it more here because of this added element of sexual orientation.
It was more implied, at least if you ever read he has a secretly lonely person, that his desperate reckless search for love. And that his self respecting loving relationship, who was a good portrayl a gay person who was strong and not promiscios, was the vculmination of that love.
@@jonsnor4313 Goes to show that we, the public, knew the great, flamboyant Freddie Mercury, while he guarded a gentle and shy Farrokh Bulsara closely to his heart as he searched for someone. I wish the movie would have shown more than just five minutes of Freddie and Jim, because they were common law husbands, and Jim cared for Freddie in his dying days, even after being told that he didn't have to. To be reduced to a waiter and then not seen again until the near end of the movie for a coming out scene while Mary and Fred had a developed relationship from beginning to end? I suppose my biggest issue came from the implication that the other three in Queen were good little boys who didn't like to party and went home to their wives and kids (in the 70's and 80's rock scene???), while Freddie was 'lured' into leather bars and excessive sex parties and rampant drug use, leading him to get AIDS. So, you're right. It was implied. Heavily implied. I got that even more so on my time watching it.
They also changed the timeline to fit in with live aid finish. Also with the whole solo thing, they made Freddie's leave outrageous to add tension and emotion
yeah exactly. You really had no good place to end the movie other than LIve Aid, and had they left Freddie being sick out of the movie completely, people would be more outraged; it's a huge thing, you can't just leave it out. The solo thing isn't even made up, technically speaking they went and did their own things for a few years, the movie just takes and dials the drama up to 11, which, well, it's a movie, movies need to be overly dramatic that's what they do
But why would they make Freddie look like that, though? I get they want tension, but why would they make this dead man look like he was absolutely selfish and self-serving when in real life, two of the bandmates had already done what they were pissed off at him for? Messed up.
From another fan that knew the history and watching many documentary. I do feel a bit bamboozled myself. But I feel like that it wouldn't have been as hard hitting but I enjoyed it so much. plus if people want to get to know freddie more and Queen, people should just watch documentary that are on youtube. I love Queen, favorite band since I was a child. They made such good music and they blew everyone away with their live performances. Queen is unmatched in my eyes and they wrote their own music too! No one can beat or even match Freddie vocals. Brian amazing guitarist, John amazing and great bassist, and roger as well amazing and great drummer. Queen has so many great songs. Not just Bohemian Rapsody, We are the champions, and we will rock you. I love Show must go on, these are the days of our lives, I'm going slightly mad, the miracle, under pressure, scandal, princes of the universe, who wants to live forever, one vision, love of my life, friends will be friends, I want to break free, It's a kind of magic, I want it all, The invisible man, killer queen, another one bites the dust, fat bottom girls, bicycle race, flash, crazy little thing called love, you're my best friend, don't stop me now, and so on. I would have loved to see them live especially either at live aid or kind of magic tour at Wimbley '86. *Lastly Deacon had no part in the movie. He is reserved and very hush about his own personal life.*
Totally agree about the flaws. I can't overlook them and I think it is important to know that they distorted the facts so much. Yes, it's not a documentary, but they basically made it seem like Freddie actually abandoned them for what seemed like a year, and the poor guys didn't even play that whole time, didn't rehearse... they made him seem so dependant on Paul the manager guy that he didn't return calls... how can this be true if they made the Works and were on tour? This whole piece is then just a weird out of place fantasy. And yes, it's important. I don't know, knowing the facts it actually seems like someone tried really hard to show how good were the other members of the band - granted, without villifying Freddie too much, but those 2 dudes, they seems just so sugarcoated, it's impossible. And also the part before he realized he was gay (or bisexual with a very strong shift to gay side) seems distorted in a misleading way. People who knew Freddie said he never hid his sexuality, he was open about his experimentation, and everyone knew it. In the movie it seems like he had no improper contact with a man before he made that confession to Mary.
The only part that bugged me was their vilifying of the Mr. Bad Guy album, because that album is great, and he recorded it during the Works tour, and made sure not to conflict with the band. Other than that I loved the film despite its issues. It brought my favorite person to life.
I agree. And Brian May and Roger Taylor both had solo albums prior to Freddie ("Star Fleet" and "Fun in Space"). So Freddie was the last to have a solo album in the band. The movie gave the appearance that "Mr Bad Guy" flopped. It was a very successful album in many parts of the world during that time. Looks like the band still has sour feelings from that time frame.
After watching the movie I was inspired to read up on the band and was disheartened when I learned how inaccurately some of the story was told. Then I watched the actual Live Aid footage and was blown away by how Rami totally embodied Freddy. I appreciate the film now as a celebration of Queen's amazing contributions to rock culture. I watched it a second time and feel it is a love note to the amazing Freddy Mercury and I'm okay with that! I also feel that had the producers taken a fantasy approach to the storytelling (similar to the route Rocketman seems to take) then the frantic pacing and historical inaccuracies may have been less of a problem.
I don't think they were lying or manipulating in any way shape or form they were just moving around timelines so they would fit in the context of the movie. The speed didn't bother me because there is only so much you can show of this bands history in two hours. The movie was centered around the lead up to the live aid performance as the climax. Although in real life Freddy wasn't diagnosed until after the Live Aid performance the fact is that we all know what happened to him and by showing his diagnosis before hand it puts a lot more of an emphasis on why the Live Aid performance was so special. It wasn't a documentary, is a movie. I think they did an excellent job of capturing the essence of what the band was about, not nessicarlly an exact play by play of the events. BUT I do agree some of it was a bit off like the band being mad of Freddie for doing a solo carrer...but I guess that what you get when Freddie isn't here to tell his own story and it's instead through the eyes of his bandmates.
Just to compile the defense of how this movie changes things around. Even though some things are fabricated and the timeline gets shifted around the goal of these changes were meant to keep the feelings that the members had during their journey and sometimes that means sacrificing some explicit facts to fit it into a 2 hr frame. Yes Freddie wasn't diagnosed until years later, but he was getting sick long before then and he knew what was happening. Maybe he did or didn't tell his bandmates that he thought he was getting sick before the Live Aid concert, but the decision to put that in helps us to understand the emotional weight that they felt on stage that day. The part about Freddie breaking up the band still makes sense although some of the members did make their own solo albums. Idk what actually happened in the band but maybe the idea of Freddie leaving for 4 million dollars to make multiple solo albums really cemented him leaving the band for a solo CAREER. He said himself that he wanted to take a break from the band, however I think i read somewhere that they made another album while Freddy was making his solo ones. The film holds up to what made Freddy inspiring and is certainly going to turn on many people to Queen and to learn more about the band. The film did it's job and it did it well. Some might think it's generic, and although i agree it was weird at first, after leaving the theater i though all those montages and the quick pacing was exactly what i wanted.
It was never meant to be an exact documentary on his life. Rather it succeeds brilliantly as a dramatized tribute. A poignant character study of the trials and tribulations he went through and his journey to find his true self and be happy with who he was. Not sanitized, but not gratuitous, showing his flaws while still being reverent and respectful. AIDS had to be brought up at the end ironically because he never wanted to be defined by it. It was an important moment for him to say that he never wanted to be a poster child for AIDS and that all he wanted to do was play his music. It really completes his character arc in the movie so I think it worked.
4:44 "This dude aint even a real person" Yeah... "Death on Two Legs" was just a fun little fantasy that Freddie thought up and not at all based in reality... Obviously that character isn't literally a real person, but he is a stand in for a few actual managers that the band had to deal with (notably Norman Sheffield, though there are other manager's influences in Mike Myers's character). If they literally used Norman Sheffield in that role in the film, Sheffield's estate would almost certainly sue the production company for defamation or slander. In fact, Sheffield **ALREADY HAS** sued the band for defamation - he did so after the release of "Death on Two Legs". There are actual legal reasons for it to be done this way. - I don't really get these complaints that people have. It's a biopic, not a documentary. It's not meant to be 100% factual, it's meant to tell a compelling story about a real person. If you go into a biopic not expecting to see made up characters, or made up events, or things not happening completely chronologically, then you simply don't understand what a biopic is. Most of the the stuff that happened in the film is completely accurate. That which isn't, for the most part, has just been slightly re-ordered for dramatic tension, and in the cases where that isn't the case (such as with Mike Myers's character), the made-up person or event is still a stand-in for something or someone that **WAS** real.
While Sachas movie might have been too raunchy for most people, this movie came off watered down and made Freddy seem like the bad guy.... Like bruh. At least Sachas movie would have been a true story. I think it would've pinned Aids as the true enemy in that film rather than his lifestyle
Sadly no one seems to care. It's all just "it's a movie not a documentary" and people blindly defending the movie without looking at any facts or any of the shit going on behind the scenes while this movie was in development hell.
How did Freddie come off as the bad guy? I did not see it like that. He was awesome in the movie, really likeable and charming and a bit arrogant, but are you a musician if you aren't arrogant? He came off as a human being, who had ups and downs and who knew exactly what he wanted and what he was worth!! Simply, to me he didn't come off as a bad guy, I honestly thought Roger came off as a dick most of the time :D
@@TKDDLJ09 in the events of "splitting the band, going solo, etc..". That was false. Other members released solo albums prior to him, and they were touring together leading up to the Live Aid concert. That's just one example, and I understand from a narrative perspective some events had to be pushed around for the film, but in some instances where they made him seem arrogant, in reality he wasn't.
@@AustinAtSt i know it didn't happen, but it's still a better narrative, than what really happened, because like it or not Freddie was the lead man and they are almost always the most interesting. I still found it fun to watch, and people who actually believe this movie to be true are then just stupid. They took liberties because it would make it flow better.
Biopics can never be trusted never matter how good they are. The truth was changed for "Selena", it was changed for "The Jacksons: An American Dream", it was changed for nearly EVERY Hans Christian Andersen movie made in America. And need I say more with "The Karen Carpenter Story"?
I agree. it was changed for Tina Turner (what's love got to do with it), with James Brown (get on up) etc etc... With films like these it's bound to happen ..
I loved the movie. I definitely have issues with it, especially the pacing and the inaccuracies with Freddie and the band as a whole, but I found myself loving the overall spirit of the film and it made me go back and rewatch interviews of Queen and concerts, (not to mention listening to their music on repeat for the past 3 months) and just fall in love with them all over again.
People have to remember this is not a documentary it’s a movie and sometimes things have to get changed around so it flows and doesn’t seem stupid, the ending where he tells them he had aids accurate or not just made the ending so powerful and gave so much more emotion than if he had told them after live aid.
If you love Rami, please do a video of LME with Mr. Robot! I have been in love with that show since the premiere episode. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it!
okay so I see where you´re coming from with your criticism and I can´t really argue against that but it´s a MOVIE not a documentary, for example revealing that he has aids before the live aid concert was simply to add some drama and feeling to the finish and to be honest it worked for me (even though i knew it was false)
They're begin to reign again..3 queen albums in the top 10 Australian charts now.. Bohemian Rhapsody soundtrack no. 2,greatest hits no. 3,platinum collection top 5..and also in U. K Top 4,top 5 and top 25 the three QUEEN ALBUMS..
"You're My Bestfriend" is their best song - so what's 2nd?
Intercut "face reveal" Podcast:
th-cam.com/video/MqMy17J9NSg/w-d-xo.html
Bohemian Rhapsody? Not biased .. it's quite great
I have a very strong personal attachment to "I Want to Break Free". So that one will always be my fave.
listen i need you to explain what was that vague 'itve been fun making videos' post dude what was that
Somebody to love" is their best imo. But since you asked for 2nd best "don't stop me now".
We will rock you. For sure. Its the baseball song lol
The original uncut film was 4 hours long. I want to watch it all
SO DO I! THAT IS MY ONE VISION! (besides fried chicken)
4 hours 4 hours
Same!!!
Me too!!!
onalleus cycillyus yessss
Does anyone remember Rami Malek was in the videogame "Until Dawn"?
Miguel Torres yes
Miguel Torres nah really? That’s how I knew about my dude
That's how i know him
Y E S
i knew him from the video game lol😂 most people recognized him from mr. robot but mine was from the until dawn video game😂
“When Freddie got that team 10 house for his cats..”
"...he made sure his best friend got the house next door so they could recreate that Taylor Swift video"
You were so exited to write this comment that you wrote it two times ._.
Sorry mr. Bot but I have alredy seen it and I did not like it so I dont feel like getting a virus just for that movie
I can't come up with a good username nah my phone just glitched.
I was crying
The bass guitarist did look like that, and he always did.
Of course PUTIN knows that
yep, that was simply John's in the 80's. It was the typical white dad style- any kind of oversized short sleeved shirt tucked into jeans with a black belt and white sneakers. made up about 90% of Deacy's style in the 80's and 90's.
Also it's important to note he didn't influence the film except for signing of songs
John is such a sweetie and Joe looks like him so much its spooky man
Huodinia John deacon was the most accurate of the band in the movie.
Yeah that the other members were portrayed as upstanding and not at all interested in the lifestyle made me straight up chuckle. Its quite known that both roger and brian not only loved parties as much as freddie but also cheated on their girlfriends or wifes pretty often and were not the ones to leave the party early with them. And I gotta disappoint ya but Deacon really did look like that even if you think thats boring 🤣
I watched the movie without knowing anything about queen as people but you did get the subtle hint they cheated (it was so subtle and quickly denied tho I just thought Freddie was stirring things)
lovelive trash Yep, they would tell Freddy to “watch it” then they would move on. I was like “👀 tf happened?”.
@@student8663 same, I knew their music but I didn't know them.
yes but the movie is more about freddie's life and not so much about queen itsellf
Mike Myers didnt play a real person but hes a representation of multiple people
Tristan Dyer A composite.
Shhhhh! That's too smart for these people who want to be fake mad over something they didn't know about until they read a "10 Things Bohemian Rhapsody Lied About" BuzzFeed list
He is Ros from game of thrones?
Didnt he play the guy from the documentary. The one killer queen was apparently based on?
Actually, there was a dude that turned down Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody. So he was playing a real person.
honestly the biggest problem in the movie was that Freddie was the only one who tried to leave the band - they all tried to leave the band at some point and like Freddie wasn't even the first to try. That just kind of changed the band and made Freddie seem like he was a little worse than he really was, like I was fine with the ending and like the AIDS diagnosis being before live aid because it did make for a more satisfying ending but the whole Freddie being the only member who wanted to leave kind of maid the rest of the band seem like angels and Freddie like he was Satan or something
Yeah. It's the blame the dead guy strat.
I just realized one of those dudes in Queen in the movie was the little boy from Jurassic Park
Moff Tarkin WAIT WHAT HOLY CRAP
Lol how long did Jurassic world come out I'm,old
Which one?
@@wakeeqq the one who plays John Deacon
@@Anthonycheesman33 1993
Freddie wrote, “Crazy little thing called love” in his bathtub on a napkin in ten minutes.
Yeah man
Man I’m dumb I thought Elvis was the original singer of that song
@@cboytv6735 😂😂it was written for Elvis, that’s why it’s in his style
@@tacosanonymous8440 oh! That makes sense
Yes, “it’s a movie, not a documentary.” That doesn’t mean the screenwriters/producers/etc. should be freewheeling and manipulative in depicting real-life figures and events. They can still put greater effort into conveying their point and sharing their perspective while maintaining the integrity of the factual historical narrative of the film’s subject. I mean, amirite?
*Freddy was never that petty* duuuude i screamed
Who is Freddy? U mean Freddie... ffs I mean if your a fan and you know he was not a petty person, at least you could spell his name correct.
@@shannonsmith1522 kskdkd chill I spelled it with a y to match the y in petty
Shannon Elaine Issa not that deep sis💀
From what sources do you know this?
"sPeLL FrEDdiE coRrECtLy"
I'm so glad that they focused mostly on Freddie and Queen's love of music. His personal life was none of our business yet he was harassed about it for years! So I'm glad that they highlighted it but didn't go too into it. Also until Freddie's final days, he only wanted to talk about his music, which is lovely. I really enjoyed this movie, more than I thought I would and I don't mind them changing elements for the entertainment and the smoothness for a movie :) plenty of excellent documentaries to watch if you want the truer story
dude, right on. i thought it was a great tribute to Freddie. he wouldn't have wanted his entire private life played out on the screen. like you said, if you want a truer story, watch a documentary
100% agree. I will replay this movie for years cuz it makes me happy. even tho i know they changed a lot of things.
had they gone with a more accurate dark approach it would've been too sad and distracting.
Kirsty Campbell
I am still kinda pissed they spent so much time on showing his relationship with that guy from Belfast.
Didn’t he knowingly give people aids? That was pretty much a death sentence back then right? Like, isn’t this boi a murdering piece of trash? Am I mistaken? Tbh I really hope I am, someone please tell me
@@stylesmarshall6990 i mean... sure he probably gave it to someone. I don't think he did it intentionally tho.. i believe he was with his partner Jim hutton since before he was diagnosed until he died. Jim did get HIV i think. But he died in 2010 from cancer.
John Deacon ( the Bassist) also was 100% NOT involved in this movie along with Mary. He hasn’t done anything public with Queen since 1997 and has left everything to Brian and Roger!
Man John Deacon has been playing a huge game of hide and seek with us since '97 and we still ain't found him
Both read and approved of the script.
@@coreykavanagh3804 nahhh i saw a news article on him after the film came out im sure he was at the film premier
@@fkatwigsisthequeenofenglan4748 no he wasn't.
SunyiSideUp plus John deacon was hit really hard after Freddie died.
“Looked your H&R Block advisor”. That guy looked a lot like John Deacon, and that was how he looked in the 80’s!
That's the kid from Jurassic Park
deacy was a humble man
@@_the_rizzler
Yep lol. It's crazy how far he's come since then.
@@_the_rizzler I was about to say that
I see all these comments about the timeline not mattering and if one wants an accurate depiction of the events, they should watch a documentary. What I do want to point out is that it is entirely possible to do a biopic in the spam of 2 hours without reinventing the story. I personallg love biopics because it allows me to get a private and personal insight into the life of an artist, thing in which I find this biopic to be very lackluster. If I want to rewatch a series of Queen concerts I can easily just go on youtube as well.
So, I am a millenial, which means I never grew up with queen around. But I still knew a lot of their hits from my parents and could sing along with some. Queen to me always was this band that got insanely hyped and I really liked their music, but as I was too young to tell good and bad singers apart I never really felt it. (Didn't concern myself with Queen in recent years). When I saw the movie being announced I was really interested. I didn't have very high expactations but I was very interested. (But as was pointed out in the video, I didn't know anything about Queen, not even Freddies sexual orientation. All I knew was the name Freddie Mercury, his classic looks, his amazing voice, he died of Aids, and he had an amazing stage presence). Then i watched the movie with my parents in Imax and it was amazing. It's been quite some time since I had such a great time watching a movie and I feel like it's gonna end up on my list of favourite movies. I learned a lot from it I now consider myself a fan of queen whereas before i just knew them and liked their songs a little more than the others in my grade. (I even learned to play bohemian rhapsody on the piano because of the movie). Through this video I learned that some of the depictions where not quite accurate or even false, for which I am great. (I still love the band and the movie though). My point is, this movie is awesome and in my oppinion all the changes made are fine because they do not completely stray away from the real story, they just make for a better movie.
Patrick Mieslinger all the changes really made for a worse film. It could have been so much better but it limited its self for whatever reason
@@kreia187 I am also a millennial and while I do agree this movie is a good way to spark new interest in Queen and Freddie, I also think the movie could have been a lot better. I really enjoyed it, but learning that some of the main plot points were invented or changed, (the going solo fight/break-up which just didn't happen, learning about his AIDs way earlier so the Live Aid concert has a completely different context than it had in real life) did detract from my appreciation of the movie. Plus the way they got to know each other was totally different in real life as well. They really couldn't have tried to be a _bit_ more accurate? No biopic is a 100% accurate, I know, but it seems like things were made up solely for the point of creating drama or making it a better crowd-pleasing movie. It wasn't bad, but it could have been better.
If Rami doesn't get an Oscars nomination I'll flip
tara thelen Oscar bait movie kinda
Now that the Oscars are starving for ratings and have even created a "Popcorn Oscar" category, he probably will. But even a year ago he totally would not have been nominated as you didn't get nominated just for being the best performer in a garbage movie.
His acting was good. It was a good rendition, but not exactly Freddie. He didn't really match the tone of Freddie's voice or his speaking patterns. If you compare it to Natalie Portman's performance as Jacqueline Kennedy you'll notice she went all out and matched everything; From the accent, to the speech patterns and tone of voice.
@@wellesradio They actually removed the popular movie category for 2019
@Notre Aira but he didn't sound like Freddie
i enjoyed the emotion in the movie. i think rami did a really good job, the breakup scene really got me.
Miniseries with them two 🔁
Nathan Perez same I almost cried
This video means well, however, Freddie Mercury was known to be an extremely private person. Brian and Roger wanted to make sure that they stayed true to Freddie and made sure they did not overstep what he would have wanted. No biopic will ever be true and stay to the facts completely, because if that was the case it'd be a 5 hour long movie. I believe they had Freddie tell the band in the movie before Live Aid because otherwise they couldn't have had the opportunity to say it in the actual movie other than the post concert screens.While this movie jumps around time, none of it is fabricated for the benefit of the band members of Queen, they simply wanted people to understand Freddie Mercury in this day and age.
Julianna Kropla there’s a way to stay to what happened and for a movie to not be 20 hours long. Ray the biopic about ray charles does really well. Its got both his greatest music and a bunch of things I never knew about him. There’s a way to do it they just didn’t do it in this film. And if Freddie Mercury was that private why make a film in the first place.
@@karmicobsession1636 First, Ray Charles and Freddie Mercury are two people who lead two completely different lives, so comparing that is not a good way to go around it. Second, they made this film so people of this generation who didn't grow up with Queen can see this film and know the life of actual rock legend Freddie Mercury. They followed the life of Freddie very well done, and obvious fans of Queen can see that. Thank you for your reply though!
@Julianna K So very well said !
But you actually don't know know what Brian and Roger wanted because you are not Brian and Roger. No matter how articulate you are...
SaysSalad Isn’t it obvious that the fact that Roger and Brian were very much involved in making this movie spoke volumes ? I am fan of Queen for a long time. Personally, I am not interested in “digging deep” into his sexual inclinations. It is Freddie’s private life and in my opinion, we should respect that. He is not someone from a freak show. Freddie Mercury is a musical genius, a priceless gem, and a true gift to this world. This movie made me happy and emotional as it has celebrated his great talent. That is what I paid my money to see three times in a row. Not about drug and his sex life. I hope this movie introduced Queen and Freddie to a new generation of fans. If anyone wants to peep Freddie’s private life, just watch the documentary.
Bruh, the bass player John Deacon DID look like a squeaky clean looking guy like he worked for for HR Block 😂😂 he’s described as the “accidental rock star”
John Deacon is a legend though
Mike Myers' character is actually based on Norman Sheffield who ran Trident Studios and effectively managed Queen in their early days. For the most part the way Myers' portrays him is spot on with how they treated the band, milking them for as much as they could and demanding hit songs irrespective of their quality.
It’s a movie, not a documentary
Yup!
As long as it wasn't like that John Belushi biopic, Wired. That one was pretty awful.
That’s the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard
But if you don't like the story don't tell it
its a biopic. meaning biographical. it wasnt inspired by his life's events its supposs to be about his life's events so the least they could have done it put stuff in correct order
As a huge Queen fan i noticed all the changes you point out while watching it (and many more) and I understand how it can seem like the original band members tried to lie to the audience, BUT this is not a documentary (if you wanna see one watch "Queen, Days of our lives", its amazing), it is a film that wants to excite you and give this band and Freddie the recognition they often didn't get. Roger Taylor and Brian May loved and lost their friend and tried 10 years to get his story on to the big screen, I respect that and can look past some of the the historical facts that have been changed, so that the film they wanted to show us all could work better.
Yes and I'm not trying to claim that this is the movie Freddie wanted, like you said we will never know, but from all the things I have read and what Freddie has said in past interviews you really get the sense that he was very private in his personal life and I believe that's why the band members didn't wanna do the "all out there-biopic" with Sacha Baron Cohen. I personally would have love to see it but I'm also very happy with what we got !
They could've made it more factual while still making it exciting
Nah. Making Freddie look terrible and making themselves look like angels was wrong. You're telling me that three 80's rockstars belonging to one of the biggest bands led squeaky clean lives? BS.
@@deviantmoore9744 yeah.. and on top of that, apparently they just lied about Paul prenter which was supremely screwed up considering he still has family alive. you can tell Brian may was intent on making himself look incredible.
I’m glad rami was in the movie instead of anyone else
2:41 "Bryan Singer who loves working with young talent" I see what you did there
Knowing that this is public knowledge, how is this guy still getting work?
Efren Zuniga that’s what I’m trying to figure out... it’s unbelievable
J Sindone
Talent gets you a few free passes. Lol
blackmail, pretty sure he's got loads of shit on the top execs who went to his underage pool parties.
@Tuscan417 Also Disney at one point hired a known convicted pedophile to direct some shit for Disney channel. Don't remember all the details but it was the director of the Jeepers Creepers movies. But you know, some 10 year old jokes that were already apologized for before they hired him is much worse.
also they wanted to end with Live Aid. which i appreciate. but they can't have a Queen movie without actually recognizing Freddie's AIDS. people would be so upset
Iliyana Serrano live aid was the pinnacle of the film- and having aids was so much of Freddie’s legacy you couldn’t not have it in the film: so I’m ok with the timelines alterations
Originally Brian and Roger wanted Freddie to die of aids like not even halfway through and have the rest of the movie be about them and how they moved on and all that and that's partially why Cohen left.
TheShadowfire204 sis what?
TheShadowfire204 thank you! He talks about that on the Howard Stern radio show, you can watch it on TH-cam. And the editing was poor cause Brian May put in their contracts that every member of Queen has to have equal screen time. The man’s a cock.
@@beaujacobs8294 You do realize that the "Live Aid" concert had nothing to do with AIDS? It was a benefit concert for people starving in Ethiopia.
I think even though their was some factual errors and some plot errors. The movie itself was pretty solid, and overall is pretty good.
100% agree with the hobi biased fella
i knew about the inconsistent timeline before watching the film but i didn't even care cause the movie was that good!!!
Nicoly Parapinski Moreira Im not hobi bias Im a Yoongi bias but I thought this was a cool name 😂
it wasn't factual errors, they had to chang it
Thank you for addressing every single problem with the movie. Thank you
Still I enjoyed it. I do want to see it again now. The amount of times you encourage me to go the cinema. Thank you!
Totally feel ya, same.
I wasnt even mad that they moved him getting aids 2 years earlier, im mad that they skipped every important album that wasnt A Night At The Opera and Queen I.
I'll give the writers the benefit of a doubt and say they wanted to keep everything in a 2-or-so-hour run time. If it was a Netflix series, I bet they would have gone into other albums like Queen 2, News of the World, or Sheer Heart Attack
Oh I agree ... The prophet song , liar , death on two legs story , and many more
Pretty sure the reason why they chose to only really show those two albums was because the first is their debut album and thats kind of a big deal and Night at the Opera is such an Iconic album, that they couldn't leave it out. I would also have liked to see New of the World, but then it would add almost another hour to the movie, so they had to cut it down.
Magic Books and if they went into their whole discography it would have to be multiple films and that just doesn't work, even if they still ended the film at Live Aid that's still fifteen years to cover.
The thing is, Deacon pretty much did look an H&R Block adviser.
Actually, Freddie Mercury wasn't Indian. He was Parsi, which is an ethno-religious group of Persian Zoroastrians who fled to India a long time ago to escape religious persecution. So while he grew up in India, he was ethnically Persian.
He was born in Zanzibar off the coast of Africa. Doesn't that make him Zanzibarian... :-)
@@Jaykmrch Bro you need to chill.
@Adelaide McMillan I don't know where you're getting that info from, but if you go to Mercury's wikipedia page, under Early Life, first sentence of the second paragraph, it says "Mercury spent most of his childhood in India." Yeah obviously he was born in Zanzibar, but he was sent to school in India.
@Adelaide McMillan Of course, thank you!
Why are y’all attacking him, can’t you correct someone without being a total fucking dick.
It's important to remember that John Deacon wasn't involved in the making of the movie, after Freddie's death he completely left the music world. some accounts say that John Deacon remained int eh band all those years because the band was a family to him, when Freddie died it must have been like your family actually falling apart. I don't think John Deacon would have been involved in any of the antics of Brian May and Roger Taylor, so I think it's safe to say that May and Taylor were protecting their image and brand, not Freddie's memory.
Jacoby Boyer I’ve seen this film twice. I’m absolutely certain, Freddie wouldn’t be happy with it.
Jacoby Boyer everything felt so biased in the film
Biopic =/= Biography.
They couldn't cram 20 years of story into a 2 hour movie, why does it matter that the timeline was altered?
Yeah would make a 4 hour movies.
Yes, you could, just do 10 years in one hour.
The first 30 minutes sounds 5 years, soooo.....
Because huge events should stay true
Freddie didn't break up the band or know about his aids
Those are major events that shouldn't have been changed smaller things can definitely change that's okay but now because this was put in a we'll received movie the general audience now believes the movie to be fact
Many people I know believe that Freddie broke up the band among several other things
Biopics should find a balance on what to keep and what to omit which this movie does a poor job of
It's still a great film to watch and fun with but what it does to the general audience is form a perception of what happened that gets accepted by most
That's what's wrong with it
@@ebonywine having Freddie break up the band by going solo is a huge problem because now everyone who doesn't know any better will believe it
When I told my friends about it they were all pretty annoyed and didn't like the movie as much anymore
That one event needs to be written over
Plus the band members that aren't Freddie are all painted in a positive light, they never get in trouble like Freddie does when in reality all of them were wild dudes who got into trouble
They made themselves look good and portrayed Freddie as wreckless as well as just making up characters that didn't exist
But I can live with those changes what I can't live with is the band choosing to have Freddie break up and "kill queen" when they went solo before he even did
It's not right because people now believe this series of events to be fact
Smash Bros. Ultimate Trailers yeah I wouldn’t mind if biopics admitted they aren’t 100%?accurate but so many people take them as gospel that the changes do matter
I mean, not only Mary didn't want to get involved with the movie. John Deacon also didn't.
I just realized you weren’t leaving you were just saying it’s fun making vids. Happy your not leavin.
True
The AIDS thing is the only real problem with the film's accuracy that REALLY matters. Everything else is just squashed into something short to fit the time, which is understandable.
Then again, this film would have gotten more hate if his illness wasn't portrayed. Before the film was released, the people hating it were Twitter SJW's calling it White/Straight Washing and ignoring his AIDS diagnosis. After it was released, they stayed silent while nitpicky critics pointed out all the flaws and what they believe should have been shown more.
Both sides are wrong to critique the movie in that sense because A; Critics don't know EVERYTHING about Queen (A lot of Big Queen fans loved this movie, so up yours!) and the SJW's hadn't even seen the film yet and just judged based off the trailers.
Here's the thing. This movie was a celebration of Queen and Freddie Mercury. A party, if you will. The people trashing the movie are the buzzkills that are telling you to calm down and turn off the music. Just nitpicking everything wrong with the scene. Those who can find the enjoyment of the film and not care about the mistakes have found the true purpose of the film.
Freddie wanted to be remembered, not as a homosexual, an AIDS victim, a Playboy, or a Coke addict. He wanted to be remembered as a Performer and a Legend, and that's what this film honors; His well-respect Legacy.
Roman Ruiz People were jumping to conclusions saying it was ignoring his sexuality and AIDS on just the first 30 second teaser. Look at Brian Fuller's tweets from then. He went all SJW batshit crazy. Had he just done some research, he would know that it was indeed going to be made clear in the film.
THANK YOU. I did feel it would have been nice to follow his final days (especially given some of the really sweet stories Freddie's boyfriend has about them, like when Freddie told him "You can leave if you want to. I would understand." and he chose to stay anyway because he loved him), but overall I wasn't all that mad at how his diagnosis was portrayed. We didn't need the nitty-gritty details. Showing him coughing up blood was more than enough.
let's also not forget roger taylor came out with a solo album way before freddie did so that part of the movie isnt accurate either.
@@silkeHoekstra ah whatever that's just minor details. stop nitpicking every tiny thing
Silke As I've already said, Roger Taylor's albums were different. He stuck with EMI and even collaborated with the band which isn't so much to separate them. What Freddie was doing was signing with a whole other company and made music separate from the band with no collaborations whatsoever. Paul Prenter was his manager which, obviously, the band hated.
I did like the movie, however, I also agree with some of what u said. I did think it was fast paced and I would like to have seen more in-depth breakdowns in certain conversations. I think they were trying too hard to market to the family aspect and I would love to have seen it R rated and more raw...
Brown Beauty80 it was meant to be PG 13, not R18. Tell them to make a documentary instead if you want the raunchy stuff to be involved. People who really idolized Mercury watched the movie for the the lead and the band they loved not for the explicit details of the dying singer.
Claire C You couldn't have said it any better. She just showed that moronic and revolting people exist lol
I think pretending this film was amazing when it was just ok is moronic. I think pretending like this criticism isn’t totally valid is moronic. As musical biopics go it was average
Jaybird J Didn't say the movie was amazing dumbass. Please be more original with with the adjectives, can't believe you thought your comment was 'smart' by using the same word twice
Now you’re defensive after you called someone moronic and revolting lol of course you are.
I have to admit they got a lot of stuff wrong to build drama...
1. He didn’t live with his parents... they were still in Zanzibar... he lived with SMILE after he got out of boarding school
2. He was a backup singer for smile before the lead singer quit
3. Mary never ignored him... she was with them through all of their tours and she was completely fine with him being gay
4. AFTER (you were saying before) they broke up all of them were offered solo deals... Freddie’s just took the longest to make
But you still make some mistakes
1. He did have an overbite... so why are you complaining
2. They did come up with all those song very VERY fast
3. The band said no to him that was it... he was fired
4. The band looked squeaky clean because they didn’t go to his extravagant parties...
4. DEacon was famous for being the boring guy
This movie is great, but it does messes up some stuff
(Got most of the stuff from either Queen by Phil Sutcliffe or Mercury)
He's complaining about how the overbite doesn't look right.
@@connorw2k Well, it looked close enough. Of course it's not gonna be exact, but... it still looked like Freddie's teeth
@@_the_rizzler Are you saying its close enough because it seems like Rami indeed has an overbite or because Rami's prosthetic is close enough to Freddie's real overbite?
@@connorw2k A little bit of both. There were moments where it DID look like Freddie's, but I was convinced he had overbite the entirety of the movie. It looked like Freddie's around 1975, when they were writing Bohemian Rhapsody
@@gabrielasanchez6204 But this is a case where if they had followed the true story, we would have a better movie. This is not like an Aaron Sorkin movie.
*"TEAM 10 HOUSE FOR HIS CATS"*
It is possible Freddie knew he had Aids before he got diagnosed.
Not 2 years
Also there an entire scene where he gets diagnosed in the movie
2 years I doubt he knew but it's possible. also he may have not known but already been experiencing symptoms like in the movie
He might’ve just called HIV AIDS
Of course it is. It is also possible he knew he had it before he actually says he knew, cause he infected someone else and couldn't handle the guilt.
I remember an S.B.C. interview with Howard Stern from a few years back where he talked about that failed pitch. He claimed the band had wanted Freddie’s death to be halfway through the film, so the second half would be them recovering from his loss. That made me worry about this exact issue even when I saw the first announcements.
After some confusion about it, here is a link to the interview clip: th-cam.com/video/xq-M4JA3fIU/w-d-xo.html
that would not have been great, i think
Bilal Pickid I kinda understand that, but I think that did reveal something about their ego. Having it end with a show of the remaining band members is understandable, however having Freddy be in only half of his own biopic is something else entirely.
Bilal Pickid I was talking about my original comment, which was referring to SBC’s failed pitch for a biopic years ago. Look at what I said there.
Bilal Pickid Yeah, it’s hard to review these longer comments when on mobile before posting.
Mind blown that Freddie's female love interest is the girl from Sing Street.
Yeahh i screamed when i noticed her! She seems to always be the girlfriend of the leading musicians
"When Freddie got that Team 10 house for his cats" bruh I died💀
I'm pretty disgusted how his so called friends would fabricate so much negativity about Freddie. Making up an entire prima dona persona that broke up the band.
From what I've seen Freddie was a pretty humble guy who loved performing and respected anyone he worked with. There may have beem negative aspects to his character but they should have shown that instead of fictional ones.
The guy was a beautiful person who deserved better than that. They said they wanted to "respect his privacy" so they decided to make him look like an asshole instead.
The guy was so passionate about music and performing he did while dying of Aids. And he made 18 albums with Queen! If he was such a self centered musician you'd think he'd have left the band early, but in real life he was nervous to do a solo act and would regularly call the band mates for advice.
Kind of like in "Straight Outta Compton", how they put all the negativity on E; at least there Eazy E wasn't as good of a person in real life. It feels like if Freddie could see this movie he'd have been hurt.
You're completely right
A lot of my friends came out the movie thinking that Freddie was a dickhead when he wasn't
They believed everything the movie showed smh
Crazelord91 ok please if you’re one of those people that say they love queen but only love Freddie and drag down the other band mates then I don’t even need to read your whole comment.
@Olive He just seemed frustrated & stressed... he seemed human
Freddie is so private person, maybe that's why they get the story in other members of the queen and his family? But other than that, he's doesn't look like an asshole in the film, you can see his suffer and success
First of all, He did not seem like a dickhead in the movie, he was hilarious and knew exactly what he was worth, he seemed human.
And second of all, have you heard of people not being what they seem? You honestly would't know if he was an asshole behind closed doors, or if he was a diva. And his friends sure as hell wouldn't tell you about if he was, now when he is dead and people love him so much, they would be hated by so many if it was the truth and they told it...
Simple fact is, you don't know what he seemed like. To me, the interviews I have seen, he doesn't seem all rainbows and unicorns, he seems like he is confident and know what he is worth, exactly like he was in the movie!!!
That duck from chicken little 😂😂😂😂😂
@Dasimah Emilsen no you scamer
😂😂😂 S A M E
Freddie and his girl really were the best part of the movie
You are maybe the greatest TH-camd ever. I agree with your opinion and your puns.
no ur the greatest youtubed ever
“Is this the real life?”
“Is this just fantasy?”
NO THIS IS PATRICK
"When Freddie got that Team 10 House for his cats"
LMFAOOO
This is meant to be a film not a timeline. If you want all the true facts read a book or watch documentary. All the shuffling of the film had to be done, due to the fact that it needed to be packed into a 2hr frame. Plus the whole scene of the band breaking up is not about Freddie going solo....its about freddie getting 4million for a SOLO career. Completely disagree with you on this one Atz.....Plus "Jobs" is guilty of doing of the same things as "Bohemian Rhapsody" so dont bother.
That's what he was saying about the "jobs" movie with Ashton Kutcher; he was talking about the second Steve jobs movie that came after that one. Plus, he had more of an issue with them painting themselves as angels and yet they kinda put him in this negative light of doing a solo album when TWO of them had already done the same thing.
Scarlet Valencia I have come across films that were two and a half hours long ,why wasn't the film two and a half hours long?
Scarlet Valencia it should have been almost three hours like maybe 2hours 50 minutes ,it felt short to me.
In my local cinema it said the film was two hours and ten minutes long
@@scarletvalencia8172" then that would really be a rushed film ending.
" I was saying it was rushed as it was.Also there is a big difference between 2 hours 10 mins and 2 hours and 30 mins, I am making the srgument here that it should have been 2 hours and 50 minutes.
Also, the villain guy was not as villainous as presented in the movie. Also, all his male relationships (except for the last one which is almost completely brushed over) are presented as bad. It made it look like the gay guy, Paul, was leading him to the dark side or something. I know they had a falling out eventually, but damn they made him seem way worse.
simplicitylost Holy shit, yes! All throughout the movie I couldn’t stop thinking about how homophobic and biphobic the script was.
Exactly. While its understandable that people don't like Paul Prenter because of how he outed Mercury to the press, how far out of the way the script goes to make Prenter gay evil incarnate is staggering in how appalling it is.
Will C But don’t worry, Mercury get’s saved from the evil gay by a reminder of his straight relationship, yay
@@noodlepoodle3582 I never saw it that way, since it was clearly established that Mary and Freddie were friends, and only that. To me it was more like Mercury gets saved from the evil unprotected sex, drugs and depressive episode by being reminded that he has poeple that care about him. Also, didn't he start a new relationship with that Jim guy?
yess! and I took my mom to see the movie and her thoughts were: that Paul dude lead Freddie on and got him addicted to alcohol, partying and being okay with his bisexuality. My mom is not that open minded, and since the movie didn't do a great job seperating the bad and the good it didn't help either
You make fun of those museum movies and I swear I’ll let myself explain how I’m gonna get yo ass demonetised
HE SAID THE DUCK FROM CHICKEN LITTLE. That took me out lmao
It’s both for me, I listened to Queen before Bohemian Rhapsody. And the movie made me love Freddy, Brian, John, And Roger even more.
Great video. You pretty much explained my biggest issue with the film. To a further point, Freddie's sexuality and search for love and companionship is painted as his downfall, when in reality, it was of the strength and freedom he had. In a few docs, he was said to have the mantra of proudly doing "everything with everybody" in the early days of the epidemic. In the film, it comes across as his bisexuality is a vice for him and the old and dangerous notion that HIV/AIDs is the cause of a promiscuous, homosexual lifestyle and the reason why the epidemic was allowed to kill as many people as it did. Almost as if it's a punishment for not choosing to live a "normal" life.
I think the movie did a good job of introducing the band and Freddie to a new generation and it was entertaining as hell, but that is the biggest, glaring issue for me.
Hannah Taplin They weren’t saying at all that homosexuality or bisexuality was the reason for AIDS. They said he was hanging out with the wrong crowd who didn’t care about him. But that wasn’t a jab at gay people. They portray his relationship with Jim Hutton very nicely.
@@TheaterPup I don't think it was the intention. I actually went to see the movie again because it kept bugging me. Over the past week, I rewatched all the docs I had saved and interviews with Brian and Roger after Freddie's death. They truly cared and loved him but even they admit that he was such a private person, they didn't know he was bi/gay until much later on. They just witnessed his private life in the third person and the movie comes off in that manner, while they come off rather clean in comparison, other than little hints of adultery. They did not like Paul Prenter and witnessed Freddie get deeply involved with him and into the gay scene. Not saying it's all Paul's fault (takes two to tango) but he really immersed Freddie in the deep end and enabled him to pursue multiple sexual conquests. I wonder if that's where the perspective becomes skewed: leather clad queer men in bars and disco clubs dragging an introverted Freddie into a promiscious lifestyle. After seeing the movie again, I realize that perhaps my initial comment is a bit too scathing but there are elements to the editing and writing where it could be perceived - especially by LGBTQ critics - where Freddie's diagnosis is used as a punishment for living such a wild life at the worst time that he could be.
@Hannah Taplin I can safely say, I don't really care what critics of LGBTQ have to say. ;) I see what you're saying that it looked like the other three were married and settled down. But again I don't personally take that as a slap at being gay. It's pretty typical for biopics to have the lead character go all temporarily crazy and have the rest of the characters react to it. It's a standard formula, people are just questioning it more here because of this added element of sexual orientation.
It was more implied, at least if you ever read he has a secretly lonely person, that his desperate reckless search for love.
And that his self respecting loving relationship, who was a good portrayl a gay person who was strong and not promiscios, was the vculmination of that love.
@@jonsnor4313 Goes to show that we, the public, knew the great, flamboyant Freddie Mercury, while he guarded a gentle and shy Farrokh Bulsara closely to his heart as he searched for someone. I wish the movie would have shown more than just five minutes of Freddie and Jim, because they were common law husbands, and Jim cared for Freddie in his dying days, even after being told that he didn't have to. To be reduced to a waiter and then not seen again until the near end of the movie for a coming out scene while Mary and Fred had a developed relationship from beginning to end? I suppose my biggest issue came from the implication that the other three in Queen were good little boys who didn't like to party and went home to their wives and kids (in the 70's and 80's rock scene???), while Freddie was 'lured' into leather bars and excessive sex parties and rampant drug use, leading him to get AIDS. So, you're right. It was implied. Heavily implied. I got that even more so on my time watching it.
They also changed the timeline to fit in with live aid finish. Also with the whole solo thing, they made Freddie's leave outrageous to add tension and emotion
yeah exactly. You really had no good place to end the movie other than LIve Aid, and had they left Freddie being sick out of the movie completely, people would be more outraged; it's a huge thing, you can't just leave it out. The solo thing isn't even made up, technically speaking they went and did their own things for a few years, the movie just takes and dials the drama up to 11, which, well, it's a movie, movies need to be overly dramatic that's what they do
But why would they make Freddie look like that, though? I get they want tension, but why would they make this dead man look like he was absolutely selfish and self-serving when in real life, two of the bandmates had already done what they were pissed off at him for? Messed up.
From another fan that knew the history and watching many documentary. I do feel a bit bamboozled myself. But I feel like that it wouldn't have been as hard hitting but I enjoyed it so much.
plus if people want to get to know freddie more and Queen, people should just watch documentary that are on youtube. I love Queen, favorite band since I was a child. They made such good music and they blew everyone away with their live performances. Queen is unmatched in my eyes and they wrote their own music too! No one can beat or even match Freddie vocals. Brian amazing guitarist, John amazing and great bassist, and roger as well amazing and great drummer.
Queen has so many great songs. Not just Bohemian Rapsody, We are the champions, and we will rock you. I love Show must go on, these are the days of our lives, I'm going slightly mad, the miracle, under pressure, scandal, princes of the universe, who wants to live forever, one vision, love of my life, friends will be friends, I want to break free, It's a kind of magic, I want it all, The invisible man, killer queen, another one bites the dust, fat bottom girls, bicycle race, flash, crazy little thing called love, you're my best friend, don't stop me now, and so on.
I would have loved to see them live especially either at live aid or kind of magic tour at Wimbley '86.
*Lastly Deacon had no part in the movie. He is reserved and very hush about his own personal life.*
AY, deaky was NOT INVOLDED
Totally agree about the flaws. I can't overlook them and I think it is important to know that they distorted the facts so much.
Yes, it's not a documentary, but they basically made it seem like Freddie actually abandoned them for what seemed like a year, and the poor guys didn't even play that whole time, didn't rehearse... they made him seem so dependant on Paul the manager guy that he didn't return calls... how can this be true if they made the Works and were on tour? This whole piece is then just a weird out of place fantasy. And yes, it's important.
I don't know, knowing the facts it actually seems like someone tried really hard to show how good were the other members of the band - granted, without villifying Freddie too much, but those 2 dudes, they seems just so sugarcoated, it's impossible.
And also the part before he realized he was gay (or bisexual with a very strong shift to gay side) seems distorted in a misleading way. People who knew Freddie said he never hid his sexuality, he was open about his experimentation, and everyone knew it. In the movie it seems like he had no improper contact with a man before he made that confession to Mary.
This movie will be champions at the Oscars.Hopefully
Hopefully not
Hopefully best lead, Rami deserves recognition.
Going on a date to go see this movie next weekend. Wish me luck!
Have fun!
I love your videos btw never stop!
Christian First good luck!
That someone is lucky, picking a good movie to start a date. Good luck.
Christian First how’d it go? The date and the movie.
Bohemian Rhapsody
Freddie Mercury
Freddie died in 1991 November, 24 Freddie lives on today
On memory of him Freddie the legend.
I'm too young to have experienced Queen live, but man did those concert scenes give me chills!
Being 14 and in the cinema with the intense feel of the music through the room, I knew that'd be the closes I would get to a live concert
The only part that bugged me was their vilifying of the Mr. Bad Guy album, because that album is great, and he recorded it during the Works tour, and made sure not to conflict with the band. Other than that I loved the film despite its issues. It brought my favorite person to life.
I agree. And Brian May and Roger Taylor both had solo albums prior to Freddie ("Star Fleet" and "Fun in Space"). So Freddie was the last to have a solo album in the band. The movie gave the appearance that "Mr Bad Guy" flopped. It was a very successful album in many parts of the world during that time. Looks like the band still has sour feelings from that time frame.
After watching the movie I was inspired to read up on the band and was disheartened when I learned how inaccurately some of the story was told. Then I watched the actual Live Aid footage and was blown away by how Rami totally embodied Freddy. I appreciate the film now as a celebration of Queen's amazing contributions to rock culture. I watched it a second time and feel it is a love note to the amazing Freddy Mercury and I'm okay with that! I also feel that had the producers taken a fantasy approach to the storytelling (similar to the route Rocketman seems to take) then the frantic pacing and historical inaccuracies may have been less of a problem.
Sasha wanted to portray him in a bad light
And that's what the movie still did in the end
Voltaire put it best when he said "To the living we owe respect,to the dead we owe only the truth."
“team 10 house for his cats” lmao
"His soul's gon find you." I'm dead
I don't think they were lying or manipulating in any way shape or form they were just moving around timelines so they would fit in the context of the movie. The speed didn't bother me because there is only so much you can show of this bands history in two hours. The movie was centered around the lead up to the live aid performance as the climax. Although in real life Freddy wasn't diagnosed until after the Live Aid performance the fact is that we all know what happened to him and by showing his diagnosis before hand it puts a lot more of an emphasis on why the Live Aid performance was so special. It wasn't a documentary, is a movie. I think they did an excellent job of capturing the essence of what the band was about, not nessicarlly an exact play by play of the events. BUT I do agree some of it was a bit off like the band being mad of Freddie for doing a solo carrer...but I guess that what you get when Freddie isn't here to tell his own story and it's instead through the eyes of his bandmates.
Just to compile the defense of how this movie changes things around. Even though some things are fabricated and the timeline gets shifted around the goal of these changes were meant to keep the feelings that the members had during their journey and sometimes that means sacrificing some explicit facts to fit it into a 2 hr frame. Yes Freddie wasn't diagnosed until years later, but he was getting sick long before then and he knew what was happening. Maybe he did or didn't tell his bandmates that he thought he was getting sick before the Live Aid concert, but the decision to put that in helps us to understand the emotional weight that they felt on stage that day. The part about Freddie breaking up the band still makes sense although some of the members did make their own solo albums. Idk what actually happened in the band but maybe the idea of Freddie leaving for 4 million dollars to make multiple solo albums really cemented him leaving the band for a solo CAREER. He said himself that he wanted to take a break from the band, however I think i read somewhere that they made another album while Freddy was making his solo ones. The film holds up to what made Freddy inspiring and is certainly going to turn on many people to Queen and to learn more about the band. The film did it's job and it did it well. Some might think it's generic, and although i agree it was weird at first, after leaving the theater i though all those montages and the quick pacing was exactly what i wanted.
@The egg Maybe he performed really well at Live Aid because he was a good performer. Ever think of that? No, probably not.
The movie moved so fast so they could fit it all into the time they had which was just 2 hours. I loved it so much and I'd love to see it again!
It was never meant to be an exact documentary on his life. Rather it succeeds brilliantly as a dramatized tribute. A poignant character study of the trials and tribulations he went through and his journey to find his true self and be happy with who he was. Not sanitized, but not gratuitous, showing his flaws while still being reverent and respectful. AIDS had to be brought up at the end ironically because he never wanted to be defined by it. It was an important moment for him to say that he never wanted to be a poster child for AIDS and that all he wanted to do was play his music. It really completes his character arc in the movie so I think it worked.
Cohen wanted the movie mercury would've wanted.
And the band wanted a movie that made them look good...
...And have him killed off early in the film...
He was diagnosed later. But he knew earlier
John decon (bassists) had nearly no say it the movie FYI
He's retired, he didn't really want to be involved. I'm sure if he wanted to, he definitely could have given sum input
this was a short video but somehow you were able to put in so much information if felt long and i really like that, keep doing that 👍🏼👍🏼
I fall asleep to these videos way too much. His voice is so relaxing
4:44 "This dude aint even a real person"
Yeah... "Death on Two Legs" was just a fun little fantasy that Freddie thought up and not at all based in reality...
Obviously that character isn't literally a real person, but he is a stand in for a few actual managers that the band had to deal with (notably Norman Sheffield, though there are other manager's influences in Mike Myers's character). If they literally used Norman Sheffield in that role in the film, Sheffield's estate would almost certainly sue the production company for defamation or slander. In fact, Sheffield **ALREADY HAS** sued the band for defamation - he did so after the release of "Death on Two Legs". There are actual legal reasons for it to be done this way.
-
I don't really get these complaints that people have. It's a biopic, not a documentary. It's not meant to be 100% factual, it's meant to tell a compelling story about a real person. If you go into a biopic not expecting to see made up characters, or made up events, or things not happening completely chronologically, then you simply don't understand what a biopic is. Most of the the stuff that happened in the film is completely accurate. That which isn't, for the most part, has just been slightly re-ordered for dramatic tension, and in the cases where that isn't the case (such as with Mike Myers's character), the made-up person or event is still a stand-in for something or someone that **WAS** real.
I just watched this movie. It was amazing. Rami was incredible.
Ok thank god ur not dead
"team 10 house for his cats" I CHOKED SKSJANSN
When he got the team 10 house for his cats... I died 😂😂❤️
While Sachas movie might have been too raunchy for most people, this movie came off watered down and made Freddy seem like the bad guy.... Like bruh. At least Sachas movie would have been a true story. I think it would've pinned Aids as the true enemy in that film rather than his lifestyle
Sadly no one seems to care. It's all just "it's a movie not a documentary" and people blindly defending the movie without looking at any facts or any of the shit going on behind the scenes while this movie was in development hell.
How did Freddie come off as the bad guy? I did not see it like that. He was awesome in the movie, really likeable and charming and a bit arrogant, but are you a musician if you aren't arrogant? He came off as a human being, who had ups and downs and who knew exactly what he wanted and what he was worth!!
Simply, to me he didn't come off as a bad guy, I honestly thought Roger came off as a dick most of the time :D
@@TKDDLJ09 in the events of "splitting the band, going solo, etc..". That was false. Other members released solo albums prior to him, and they were touring together leading up to the Live Aid concert.
That's just one example, and I understand from a narrative perspective some events had to be pushed around for the film, but in some instances where they made him seem arrogant, in reality he wasn't.
@@AustinAtSt i know it didn't happen, but it's still a better narrative, than what really happened, because like it or not Freddie was the lead man and they are almost always the most interesting. I still found it fun to watch, and people who actually believe this movie to be true are then just stupid. They took liberties because it would make it flow better.
Biopics can never be trusted never matter how good they are. The truth was changed for "Selena", it was changed for "The Jacksons: An American Dream", it was changed for nearly EVERY Hans Christian Andersen movie made in America. And need I say more with "The Karen Carpenter Story"?
I agree. it was changed for Tina Turner (what's love got to do with it), with James Brown (get on up) etc etc... With films like these it's bound to happen ..
yet those are still really good films.
I clicked to fast and TH-cam glitched 😂😂
I loved the movie. I definitely have issues with it, especially the pacing and the inaccuracies with Freddie and the band as a whole, but I found myself loving the overall spirit of the film and it made me go back and rewatch interviews of Queen and concerts, (not to mention listening to their music on repeat for the past 3 months) and just fall in love with them all over again.
People have to remember this is not a documentary it’s a movie and sometimes things have to get changed around so it flows and doesn’t seem stupid, the ending where he tells them he had aids accurate or not just made the ending so powerful and gave so much more emotion than if he had told them after live aid.
If you love Rami, please do a video of LME with Mr. Robot! I have been in love with that show since the premiere episode. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it!
Just watched Eddie The Eagle recently. I never knew that Fletcher worked with Taron and Rami. :00
okay so I see where you´re coming from with your criticism and I can´t really argue against that but it´s a MOVIE not a documentary, for example revealing that he has aids before the live aid concert was simply to add some drama and feeling to the finish and to be honest it worked for me (even though i knew it was false)
schepper21 It’s not just a movie, it’s a biopic, so your argument doesn’t work
I did not realize how much of Queen's music I loved until I saw this movie!
They're begin to reign again..3 queen albums in the top 10 Australian charts now.. Bohemian Rhapsody soundtrack no. 2,greatest hits no. 3,platinum collection top 5..and also in U. K Top 4,top 5 and top 25 the three QUEEN ALBUMS..
Tbh this is the first one of ur videos I’ve watched that I’ve already seen in cinema or on my TV
Yeah, I always thought that SBC’s version wasn’t chosen was because the band wanted to whitewash their history.
They had the exact same cups on the piano during the Live Aid concert as the actual one many years ago. Mannnn stfu this movie is perfect
that's literally the easiest thing to get right..lmao
I just love how Jurassic Park kid plays John in this movie.
Biopic movie Bohemian rhapsody hit earned beautifully @box office 908 miliion Dollars and still showing @ netflix 2024 most watch biopic.. Amazing
When Freddie got that team ten house for his cats...