| chromant 19.11.2018 17:25 |
link While I agree with most of the review, in the end it's a movie, not a biography, so I don't expect it to be accurate, it has to be entertaining. |
| mr mason 19.11.2018 18:20 |
A bitter dickhead! |
| The Fairy King 20.11.2018 10:15 |
He is spot on though. |
| miraclesteinway 20.11.2018 14:40 |
actually I see why he didn't like it. for a start he's Freddie's godson so Freddie is important to him in a way that he's not to us (not that Freddie isn't important to us but you understand....). I thought the film was good in parts, the early years were portrayed reasonably well, the Mike Myers character was clearly a stab at the Sheffield Brothers (he was even made up to look like one of them). It was obvious to me though that Brian was influential in the script writing, being portrayed as the grounded level-headed music director if you like who only cared about the music and was in bed before midnight (OK it didn't go THAT far...). Roger was portrayed as a womaniser but it wasn't really focused on, and of course it was made out that only Freddie partied. Roger has said in interviews that he and Freddie partied as hard as each other with the only difference being Freddie liked men. I don't think the film captured that. The film also made out that it was solely Freddie's fault that the band had problems, and while I don't doubt that Paul Prenter and Freddie's drug taking had a negative effect on the band, he wasn't the only one at it. Freddie's solo album is seen as a band splitter, but Roger's two solo albums from that time are not mentioned once. I thought they captured the essence of Freddie quite well, Rami was convincing enough, the actors themselves played quite well for all the lines Roger and John got (almost as if John wasn't really part of the band....), and I didn't really care that the story line was altered to fit the film. I didn't like that We Will Rock You was put into 1980 as Brian's antidote to Freddie's excesses (it came over like that to me, I know perception is everything). I don't mind that Freddie's HIV diagnosis was mentioned in 1985 instead of 1987, since it's pretty obvious that by then he'd have had a fair idea that something was wrong, but I think we can be certain he didn't tell the band at that point. Maybe he did? I've no idea. But nobody has given us any reason to think that he told them in 85 until now. I thought it was a bit ridiculous Freddie introducing Jim to his mum and dad, holding his hand and saying "he's my friend". Until now I thought the real story was he said Jim was the gardener, so as not to embarrass his parents who were very traditional. Kashmira said something about not wanting to ask Freddie about his private life because he didn't want to volunteer the information and they didn't want to make him feel awkward. Perhaps that doesn't go down so well in a film though because it kind of makes for a non-story. Anyway, at best it's an enjoyable movie for those who aren't too worried about facts. At worst it's a bit of a dig at Freddie that doesn't show the full extent of everyone's ego within the band. |
| Day dop 21.11.2018 02:13 |
I bet Roger Taylor secretly thinks it's a dodgy movie as well. |
| MisterCosmicc 21.11.2018 04:43 |
Day dop wrote: I bet Roger Taylor secretly thinks it's a dodgy movie as well.Probably. He didn't like the WWRY musical at all. |
| Ozz 21.11.2018 06:10 |
I side with most of Freddie Mack review too. And I 100% agree with miraclesteinway. In fact in documentaries they said very often that Freddie couldn't party after the concerts because he had to rest his voice. But brian has his own set of dark history too that is well reflected in his song lyrics (i'ts late for example). There's a nice paragraph about brian all over nancy wilson in the "heart" biography book. And Roger is the womanizer . ha! But to be fair, the movie is superb in the live sets , choreography, music and costumes. and had some good moments. It could have been way worse. The movie at least is fantastic outside the hardcore fan base, in those people who like music and don't care about facts. |
| bas 22.11.2018 18:25 |
Freddie Mack is 100% right! Shit movie, doesn t do the Queen and Freddie legacy justice Movie was made with one goal: money money money for the Maylor money grabbing machine |
| mike hunt 22.11.2018 19:23 |
That's Mack's son? |
| mike hunt 22.11.2018 20:01 |
Another one who knows and mentions Brian's ego is all over this movie...This man knew them... |
| mooghead 22.11.2018 21:59 |
Link doesn't work. |
| Saint Jiub 22.11.2018 22:34 |
mooghead wrote: Link doesn't work.I clicked on the link and it worked just fine. |
| mike hunt 22.11.2018 22:57 |
Ozz wrote: I side with most of Freddie Mack review too. And I 100% agree with miraclesteinway. In fact in documentaries they said very often that Freddie couldn't party after the concerts because he had to rest his voice. But brian has his own set of dark history too that is well reflected in his song lyrics (i'ts late for example). There's a nice paragraph about brian all over nancy wilson in the "heart" biography book. And Roger is the womanizer . ha! But to be fair, the movie is superb in the live sets , choreography, music and costumes. and had some good moments. It could have been way worse. The movie at least is fantastic outside the hardcore fan base, in those people who like music and don't care about facts.yup, It has It's good points. but, Brian was no saint as we know. A good man, but far from the perfect person he portrays In the movie. Oh, and didn't Roger write the first funk song on Jazz? In the movie they were acting like Freddie was the only one who wanted some disco funk. |
| MisterCosmicc 23.11.2018 02:09 |
mike hunt wrote:Good point. I read an old interview transcript a few nights ago that Roger was perhaps even the most open one to new genres including the dance fashion at that time, including new wave and disco. I think it was an interview with Mack about that the early 80's era. When they did Hot Space, apparently the members were wondering which direction they should approach. Roger thought the disco/dance direction was the one they should take. But in the end, Roger hates everything that sells, but it doesn't reflect what he promoted to begin with. Look at the We Will Rock You musical for instance...!Ozz wrote: I side with most of Freddie Mack review too. And I 100% agree with miraclesteinway. In fact in documentaries they said very often that Freddie couldn't party after the concerts because he had to rest his voice. But brian has his own set of dark history too that is well reflected in his song lyrics (i'ts late for example). There's a nice paragraph about brian all over nancy wilson in the "heart" biography book. And Roger is the womanizer . ha! But to be fair, the movie is superb in the live sets , choreography, music and costumes. and had some good moments. It could have been way worse. The movie at least is fantastic outside the hardcore fan base, in those people who like music and don't care about facts.yup, It has It's good points. but, Brian was no saint as we know. A good man, but far from the perfect person he portrays In the movie. Oh, and didn't Roger write the first funk song on Jazz? In the movie they were acting like Freddie was the only one who wanted some disco funk. |
| MisterCosmicc 23.11.2018 02:10 |
* Roger hates everything that doesn't sell |
| pittrek 23.11.2018 08:12 |
Who's Freddie Mack? Some relative of Reinhold? |
| Double-U 23.11.2018 10:50 |
Yes, it's the son of Mack. kind regards, W. |
| Double-U 23.11.2018 10:52 |
By the way did anyone find information about Reinhold Mack in connection with watching the movie and review it? regards, W. |
| Ziggy_SD 23.11.2018 12:03 |
Clearly, he thought the whole thing was schlock. I don't disagree with him, but I still enjoyed it. |
| mike hunt 23.11.2018 12:53 |
danielziri wrote: Clearly, he thought the whole thing was schlock. I don't disagree with him, but I still enjoyed it.Me too, I agree with him and all his points, but I liked It more than he did. |
| FunLovinCriminal 24.11.2018 00:29 |
Even though Freddie Mack comes across a little excessively cool, I value his comments. He is probably „a little“ biased, but his critic does not give any hints of him being snotty. If it is true (and it seems like it) that most of the input for the script came from May, than my suspicions of him having become increasingly angry grow even wider. Why would anyone even consider to re-write his or hers own history? It's a daring imposition. But if your history frustrates you, you might feel the necessity to do just that. FM had been the most important driving force in Queen. Period. May, Taylor and John Deacon have had their muso-/songwriting-moments in Queen, but FM sold the show. I couldn't believe the bullshit they have attached to his story. Him presenting Hutton to his parents in that way... that could have only come from a straight person. Trying to normalize Freddie is like trying to make sense of Donald Trump - it just doesn't work. But obviously it pays off again and again and again... |
| Sealion 24.11.2018 01:06 |
Freddie Mack didn’t have any contact to Brian, Roger or even his other godfather John since he had been a little kid. He said so in an interview, that he gave to the German press, when he moved back from LA and rebuilt his band here a few years ago. He’s known as Freddie’s godson to a good deal of rock fans over here. That’s why some people go and ask him about things related to Queen. And he really likes to talk about it. But his opinion about the film is as valid as anyone else’s. He has no insider knowledge about how the script came together or how much input Brian or Roger had. It’s his personal opinion. And of course that’s biased. And that’s ok. Fans should just keep in mind, that Freddie Mack doesn’t know more about the film, than anyone of us. He’s just one of those people, who simply don’t like, that Brian and Roger carry on working under the name of Queen at all. He stated that a few years ago in that interview. |
| pholidota 24.11.2018 01:59 |
At least one of John's children loved the movie, according to his Facebook post. He also approves of Q+AL. |
| matt z 27.11.2018 06:22 |
Kinda wanted to avoid all things related to the film until it dropped off because, hell...even if the film is an amateurish wank shit......at least it's bringing *SOME* Queen music to the fore. I didn't emote quite as much as he does here, but the flick was clearly a sloppy mess. I read posted rumors (its the net, obv could be bullshit) that the budget was spent. The film shoot wrapped And The rushes were bad But the notion was it either gets released or canned. I'm as shocked as some that it succeeded. It was pretty haphazard and the script was by far the worst I've heard since an Ed Wood flick or a film deliberately trying to be "odd" Thanks, Freddie Mack. I'd totally forgotten about the name. I was shocked to have even seen MACK in the credits because I was hoping to see him. However....with a large budget it really seemed as if nobody thought to do ANY location shooting and that everything involving the band was relegated to SELF PRONOUNCING STATEMENTSA *in the same fucking office. I'm glad someone else recognized how poor a film it really is/was. Amateur stuff. Plot and character wise, I DO feel bad that I didn't take the lack of emotional weight as homophobic. ....but the STRUCTURE truly was. It denied Jim's place in his life. But as a viewer on an early Sunday, I was just USED TO IT by that point that the film was a mess. This is why I didn't talk trash about TCR much either until many months later. Who knows what is ultimately the truth. But it is a truly IDIOTIC film. |
| mike hunt 27.11.2018 18:45 |
matt z wrote: Kinda wanted to avoid all things related to the film until it dropped off because, hell...even if the film is an amateurish wank shit......at least it's bringing *SOME* Queen music to the fore. I didn't emote quite as much as he does here, but the flick was clearly a sloppy mess. I read posted rumors (its the net, obv could be bullshit) that the budget was spent. The film shoot wrapped And The rushes were bad But the notion was it either gets released or canned. I'm as shocked as some that it succeeded. It was pretty haphazard and the script was by far the worst I've heard since an Ed Wood flick or a film deliberately trying to be "odd" Thanks, Freddie Mack. I'd totally forgotten about the name. I was shocked to have even seen MACK in the credits because I was hoping to see him. However....with a large budget it really seemed as if nobody thought to do ANY location shooting and that everything involving the band was relegated to SELF PRONOUNCING STATEMENTSA *in the same fucking office. I'm glad someone else recognized how poor a film it really is/was. Amateur stuff. Plot and character wise, I DO feel bad that I didn't take the lack of emotional weight as homophobic. ....but the STRUCTURE truly was. It denied Jim's place in his life. But as a viewer on an early Sunday, I was just USED TO IT by that point that the film was a mess. This is why I didn't talk trash about TCR much either until many months later. Who knows what is ultimately the truth. But it is a truly IDIOTIC film.Succeeded Is an understatement, It's breaking records...Good film or not. |
| SpaceGrey 12.12.2018 11:23 |
chromant wrote: link While I agree with most of the review, in the end it's a movie, not a biography, so I don't expect it to be accurate, it has to be entertaining.QPL urgently need to pay him and then he will start to talk differently. |
| matt z 12.12.2018 18:35 |
SpaceGrey wrote:Nah. People who knew Freddie speak up regardless, out of a loyalty and HONESTY. (Which the films does not have)chromant wrote: link While I agree with most of the review, in the end it's a movie, not a biography, so I don't expect it to be accurate, it has to be entertaining.QPL urgently need to pay him and then he will start to talk differently. There are few merits to the crap film |