QueenZone discussion #1449583

RS_Protos wrote: . It definitely makes senses what Cohen said and I believe it 100 percent. Very sad!

Day dop wrote: Of all four Queen members (who, it goes without saying, were extremely talented), Freddie Mercury was the one that shone the brightest by far - he's up there in the upper echelon of rock stars. And all in all, the character from the group who was the most entertaining, and the one who people (mostly) watched on stage, and the one who people are most interested in, even now. Surely Brian and Roger know that.

tero! 48531 wrote: I hate (at least figuratively) to admit it, but it fits exactly with the way Queen has been portrayed in the past years. In Brian's eyes Freddie was a member for less than half of the band's existence, and without Freddie holding them back they've reached into new heights with Adam Lambert. Those views have been published in their own press releases, and even the most die-hard stepfords will have a hard time spinning that black into white. Sad but true.

Costa86 wrote: Not sure how it took me two days to read about this, but anyway... long-form rant below. I was surprised to read what Baron Cohen said, and, of course we have to bear in mind that we might need to take some of it with a grain of salt, but I think the jist of it is genuine. >About half the film being about Queen+: I knew there had been loads of problems surrounding this film - but I didn't expect that "half the film" would be devoted to what happened after Freddie died. I do think that Baron Cohen is exaggerating for effect when he says "half the film". I think it would be natural for, say, the last two or three minutes to contain some depiction of what Queen have been doing after Freddie died. But anything more than that is unnecessary. This is a film, not a documentary. Good film making involves using motion picture to captivate an audience with a story. And the most interesting story of Queen happened while Freddie lived. More than that, the most interesting part of Queen is Freddie, by far. We don't need to see the last 2 or 3 years of Freddie's illness, that's in bad taste. But we want 97% of the film dedicated to Queen during's Freddie's years. Nobody gives two tosses about seeing on film what Queen did afterwards. We appreciate their efforts, some of us enjoy their shows with Lambert, and their previous work with Rodgers, but we don't need a film about this. It's not noteworthy. The film should have ended either with Live Aid, or, unless Brian and Roger are so bloody insecure that they only want to focus on 'Queen', they should have included a very short bit on Freddie's work with Monsty. And Freddie's resilience in the end should be shown as well. >About Brian and Roger trying to make the film a 'PG' story: This has been known for a while - that they've been trying to portray a more family-friendly version of themselves. I don't agree with the Wizard when he said a few posts up that he undestands why Queen would not want to have their drug taking depicted in the film, lest it tarnish their legacy. Queen were not a druggie band. Their drug taking was comparable to the average rock band of the day. We all know this. It's no surprise. We don't want our rock stars to be choir boys. Queen were legendary for their partying, and it was very much part of what made up the Queen image. People want to see this in the movie. 'Walk The Line', the biopic on Johnny Cash, showed Cash in his true light. He spent years as a drug addict, and he didn't treat his family right. But it showed that deep down he was a good man, but a human prone to addiciton nonetheless. And then it showed how he found the love of his life, and how they went through the ups and downs of life until they settled. It was a great movie, and it only made me respect Cash more. Had they only showed Cash in a tame 'PG' light, the movie would have been a piece of crap, and an insult to the intelligence of the audience. And not including drug use and lots of sex in a Queen biopic is just that - an insult to the intelligence of the audience. Yes, we want the movie to focus on the musical legacy, but the sex and partying and drugs were part of that legacy. We don't need some PC nannies (Brian and/or Roger) trying to tame the product for us, in fear of making them look bad. We already know Roger had a proclivity for drugs and pussy, while Brian was the less hedonistically-inclined intellectual. It doesn't make us think bad of them. Freddie was human. He was a bi-sexual sex addict, he liked cocaine (who can blame him?), he was a musical genius, an entertainer the likes of which have been very seldom seen, and, in the end, he was a man who most have described as generous, loving, caring, temperamental, impatient, and possessing a good sense of humour. Let's see this in the film. If what Baron Cohen says is right, they had potentially some great directors who could have made this a success. Brian and Roger are musicians. They are not film makers. And I do feel they have fucked this one up. They owed it to Freddie to do a good job, and I know they really tried, but in trying so hard, they failed. "Don't Try So Hard".

beemack74 wrote: The original idea was good. I'd be interested in a Queen movie that perhaps starts in the late 60's, perhaps focusing on Freddie's prior bands, meeting Smile then leading up to the formation in '70 and John Deacon joining in' 71,then some dramatisation of recording sessions and early tours, culminating in the mega Live Aid show or even the Magic tour.

Vocal harmony wrote: Freddie's use of Bolivian marching dust was well known to certain people including the Met drug squad who for a while were keeping an eye on Freddie.

The Real Wizard wrote:

Vocal harmony wrote: Freddie's use of Bolivian marching dust was well known to certain people including the Met drug squad who for a while were keeping an eye on Freddie.

Citation needed !? That's quite the claim, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

bucsateflon wrote: Freddie biopic is for gay fanboys, I want a movie about the "Queen machine".Something like a Scorsese movie.

Mr.Jingles wrote:

bucsateflon wrote: Freddie biopic is for gay fanboys, I want a movie about the "Queen machine".Something like a Scorsese movie.

A Scorsese style Freddie Mercury/Queen bio pic will start like this... (Freddie narrating) - "For as long as I can remember I always wanted to be a rock star. To me that was better than being president of the United States. To be a rock star was to own the world". ...and trust me, that movie will include all the nitty gritty aspects of Freddie's lifestyle.

Mr.Jingles wrote:

bucsateflon wrote: Freddie biopic is for gay fanboys, I want a movie about the "Queen machine".Something like a Scorsese movie.

A Scorsese style Freddie Mercury/Queen bio pic will start like this... (Freddie narrating) - "For as long as I can remember I always wanted to be a rock star. To me that was better than being president of the United States. To be a rock star was to own the world". ...and trust me, that movie will include all the nitty gritty aspects of Freddie's lifestyle.

The Fairy King wrote: Don't feed the trolls. :D

Costa86 wrote: ^Queen: The Movie, by Pixar. Kids get a free John Deacon balloon and adults go in half-price.

EDWOOD wrote: I'm glad that John isn't involved as well otherwise the film would also show the extensive work that went into The Biggles Soundtrack. .

Mr.QueenFan wrote: I would like Freddie bio to be focused on his musical skills. What it took for him to become the wonderful composer that he was. His relationship with the band, and the impact that his death has had on the remaining Queen members when they were recording "Made in Heaven".

aion wrote:

Mr.QueenFan wrote: I would like Freddie bio to be focused on his musical skills. What it took for him to become the wonderful composer that he was. His relationship with the band, and the impact that his death has had on the remaining Queen members when they were recording "Made in Heaven".

How would that be an interesting movie to general audiences? What are the plot points in his musical career that are going to intrigue non-Queen fans and film critics? .

aion wrote: Think of "Amadeus", the acclaimed movie of Mozart by Milos Forman. It shows Mozart composing, but the movie isn't really about Mozart as a composer, it's about his life and particularly his relationship with Salieri. It's a great movie, but it wouldn't be so great if it only showed Mozart making music for two hours and ended happily with the main character smiling during end credits. .

aion wrote: You can't make a Mozart movie focusing on his musical skills, you can't make a Freddie Mercury movie on his musical skills..

aion wrote: Freddie was a great musician, but there have been lots of great musicians in the world and that's not enough to build a movie around. How about a comparison to Mick Jagger or Iggy Pop, two rockers who also lived a wild life in the 60s/70s? If you made a movie about Iggy Pop, where you leave out his personal life with drugs and parties and everything, and only show Iggy Pop at his profession, do you think it would be a fascinating movie for everyone? .

aion wrote: ... Freddie actually had an interesting life story, one that could be worthy of a movie, but then you really need to make it about his LIFE and not his music. (...) .

aion wrote: All the Queen and Freddie documentaries already exist for celebrating the musical legacy and fans don't seem to understand that an actual, scripted movie aimed at general audiences and cinemas is a completely different thing .

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Biggus Dickus wrote: Mr.QueenFan seems to be making assumptions here. (...) .

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Biggus Dickus wrote: Mr.QueenFan seems to be making assumptions here. (...) .

In a way you'r right and i'm sorry if someone felt offended. I'm more pissed at Sacha and Howard Stern for that segment than Queenzone users. Maybe we're talking about the same thing but picturing different things in our minds. Let me explain: Of course i agree with what you say in your post and i understand that we shouldn't create a Disney kind of movie of Freddie's life. But i just don't trust Sacha for this project. This guy has no filter whatsoever. As i said before there are ways you can portray Freddie's hedonistic lifestyle and not make people feel unconfortable in their seats at the cinema - Freddie's family, Queen members and the fans. And i don't think Sacha and his team are it, so i have to agree with Queen people on that! For the general public anything goes, but for me i really feel Freddie as family or friend. He and his music have been a huge part of my life since i can remember. Of course i want the best for him, and i want people to respect him as much as i do. A Freddie Bio should focus on everything- Music, Parties, Sex, Drugs and AIDS. The question is how much focus should go to each of these different aspects in Freddie's life, and how they would portray and connect each aspect to create Freddie Mercury. Chosing the right people for it can be the difference between a movie we can be proud of, or a lost opportunity. I just recently saw a movie about the life of the lead singer of "Joy Division", and i loved it. I don't know their music, so for me i didn't have any expectations for it. And i loved the movie - his family and fans can watch the movie without feeling unconfortable about it. That's all i ask for the Freddie's movie.

Biggus Dickus wrote: Mr.QueenFan seems to be making assumptions here. Just because a lot of people want realism for the film, it doesn't mean we specifically want to see Freddie with five guys. I like to see all sides to Freddie's life. And let's face it; partying, sex and excess in all areas was a big part of his life for about a decade. If I want to see a Disney movie I go see one. This film shouldn't be one for the whole family.

Biggus Dickus wrote:

Mr.QueenFan wrote: I just recently saw a movie about the life of the lead singer of "Joy Division", and i loved it. I don't know their music, so for me i didn't have any expectations for it. And i loved the movie - his family and fans can watch the movie without feeling unconfortable about it. That's all i ask for the Freddie's movie.

I wasn't offended. I agree with you that Control was really good. However, it's not for us to say how his family and friends viewed that film. You didn't feel uncomfortable about it, but it doesn't mean that everyone who saw it agree with you .

Mr.QueenFan wrote: I don't care about general audiences or film critics. And who cares about film critics opinions anyway? They only going to like what they're going to like.

What makes Mozart an interesting character is His music. Probably the greatest composer that ever lived - to me anyway - and that's not interesting? It's their music and talent that makes Mozart and Freddie and Lennon and so forth, interesting in the first place.

Basically you don't find interesting nothing that has to do with talent. Yet, drugs and parties, and sex is what makes you and the general public go to the movies?

because i rarelly hear people talking about the great musician that he was. If he was only about being a great frontman, i wouldn't be here. His musical talent is what i find interesting.

I understand, but i don't care! Queen members and Freddie's estate have all the right not to want Sacha fucking five other men on film while portraying Freddie Mercury. There are many ways of making an interesting movie about Freddie and his sexual lifestyle without turning it into a porn.

Jake12 wrote: Cavill as Freddie?

Sheer Brass Neck wrote: ^^^ I saw Brian at HMV in Toronto in June '91. He was asked about touring North America amidst reports of Freddie's poor health. He responded by saying that Freddie wasn't dead yet. Certainly true, but didn't answer question of Freddie's health. He was asked if Freddie sang on TMLWKY as it sounded like Freddie was on it, but Brian said no, he was channeling Freddie even though Freddie sang on the BTTL track. He's lied countless times to protect Freddie and the band legacy, not sure why anyone would think e's being honest now and SBC is lying.

Mr.Jingles wrote: (...) but then when it comes down to talk about what Freddie's life was like, he wants to sweep the dirt under the rug.

Mr.QueenFan wrote:

Mr.Jingles wrote: (...) but then when it comes down to talk about what Freddie's life was like, he wants to sweep the dirt under the rug.

Like a true friend!

The Fairy King wrote: Brian May is the friend you want when you die. He will delete your browser history. <3

apeman wrote: Hi all, I don't think I have ever posted here before but I love the discussion of the greatest band here. .

apeman wrote: Hey Saif, you are right, too many time jumps would be hard to pull off, it would need to be very well done to be understood. I guess having the 'one time' as the anchor to all time jumps would make it a little easier to follow. I also didn't mean to make Freddie seem too heroic. Just start with him and show his strength and his struggle in Montreux. He was so ill that it could be a painful experience. I would finish that section with Freddie saying he needed a rest and would finish the song when he felt stronger. Obviously the end at Live AId would be a big 'hero's return' but everything in between would be time that could be spent on all his foibles. A 100 minute piece showing him as perfect would be boring. There needs to be falls, stumbles and failures not only to make a film worth watching but to make the Live Aid performance mean to the audience what what it did at the time for the band. Anyway, I haven't written up a treatment or anything. These are just thoughts on a movie I would watch and am enjoying discussing with you all. Cheers

The Real Wizard wrote:

Vocal harmony wrote: Freddie's use of Bolivian marching dust was well known to certain people including the Met drug squad who for a while were keeping an eye on Freddie.

Citation needed !? That's quite the claim, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Sheer Brass Neck wrote: ^^^ True, but this is a motion picture which is an industry where truths have always been elusive. I sincerely doubt that SBC was going to have or expect to make a movie that showed Freddie fucking anything that moved. But, his sexuality and his demons were part of him. Sanitized movies may be nice, but Freddie himself boasted about his love life and I believe Elton John said that Freddie could do ridiculous amounts of cocaine. That's part of who Freddie was. Not all, but part. Wouldn't want to see a movie about his sex/drug proclivity, then again, wouldn't want to see a movie about his work with orphans. "Do what you like, just don't make me boring." Who said that ;)