QueenZone discussion #1553257

Invisible Woman wrote: I still think that the movie could have been much better, especially about Freddie's private life, and I will not change my opinion only for fact that the movie has achieved success and earned a lot of money.

dysan wrote: No one is right or wrong liking what they like, or seeing reason for not liking something. We're all different and that's cool. NEXT!

Vali wrote: the Larry Lurex single was released before the first Queen album and we all know the story behind it, so.... like it or not, Roger Taylor will always be the first Queen member that released a solo project. And Brian after him. And Roger again after that. And after them, Freddie.

dudeofqueen wrote: Mr. Poor Grammar, I believe it was QPL themselves who trumpeted the film's attention to detail. They lied.

pittrek wrote: What the hell is wrong with today's society? Are people no longer allowed to have a negative opinion about anything?

FMBMJDRT wrote: The original poster asks "can you name one scandalous event due to their drugs use in the 1970-1985 period?" As I have posted elsewhere I found this at Deaky.net at the link below link "Dawkins' Memoirs Record producer/ record label chief Peter Dawkins' memoirs 'The Icecream Boy' is as much a glimpse into the corporate music world as his struggle against Parkinson's. Among some of the anecdotes: * Queen's John Deacon and Roger Taylor arrived for a promo tour, and Deacon disappeared for two days in Sydney, rattled after taking mushrooms in Bali and convinced that Rupert Murdoch was spying on him through the hotel TV set. Queen's management and EMI America kept ringing EMI Oz with threats they'd better find their boy. " I am sure that plenty more of these types of events have been kept hidden (the book was only published in Australia). We only know about Freddie's misadventures because he is dead.

pittrek wrote: What the hell is wrong with today's society? Are people no longer allowed to have a negative opinion about anything?

pittrek wrote: The movie was complete fiction, but there's a tiny little problem - it was supposed to be a biopic.

Mr. Poor Grammar wrote: Being a huge success, it doesn't stop Bohemian Rhapsody being hated by some Queen fans. Everyone here gave their opinions about the movie, but very few people actually did some research about that film. There are some elements the haters on this board didn't get. Of course, you have every right to not like the movie, but it is annoying to read mistruths on a Queen forum. First, Brian May and Roger Taylor have been blamed for every single flaw of the script and sometimes montage (someone almost blamed Brian for the singing-along during Hammer To Fall). Is this board and a huge part of the internet, they are rumored to be the executive producers of Bohemian Rhapsody movie. BUT, they are actually NOT. They are not co-producers either. They are executive MUSIC producers, which is something completely different. It's unfair to blame the music producers for what you consider to be script flaws. As far as I know, John Williams was never blamed for the existence of Jar Jar Binks, so why is May blamed for everything in Bo Rhap? Then, there are a few people here believing that Brian said the movie was factually accurate. But he never said that, in fact he said the opposite. Brian May: "It's not really about the facts so much." link The changes of facts were also not commanded by Brian. Graham King said: "I told May, ‘We’re making a film, not a documentary’". In the movie Freddie doesn't break up the band, Roger does. In fact, Freddie says he doesn't want Queen to stop and he doesn't leave the band, but his bandmates are pissed off and decide to split-up. There is something else you guys missed. If you were in a "Roger did a solo project first" mood, you forgot about this: link Yes, it is Freddie having a solo project in 1973. Though Brian and Roger appear on the a-side (as well as Taylor appears on Star Fleet and May, Deacon and Mercury appear on Strange Frontier), they don't appear on the b-side, hence why this single is considered as a Freddie release. And there is something else you didn't notice. What you didn't notice is that the band get pissed when Freddie tells them "I signed a deal with CBS". In fact, Freddie was indeed the first to sign a deal for a solo project outside EMI. And he was also the first who wanted his project to be more successful than the "last Queen album". Plus at the time, it was a common thing for singers to release a solo album and become more successful than their band (Michael Jackson, Peter Gabriel, Sting...). About the "We haven't played together in years" line, they didn't perform live between november 1982 and september 1984. Almost 2 years. Though Live Aid was the very last concert of The Works era, it seems to be placed at the very begining of the tour in the movie. Is that really a big deal? Plus, in real life they really had to rehearse and get trained because of the "more than one month break" link About May, Taylor and Deacon being portrayed as saints who went home to their families and never used drugs, can you name one scandalous event due to their drugs use in the 1970-1985 period? Plus, Roger's girlfriends are not hidden in the movie at all. He is clearly shown as a womanizer. Freddie even jokes about it twice in the movie. And in reality, Brian and John happened to bring their wife and kids on tour with them, so portraying them as family men is not too far away from the truth. About the depiction of Deacon, his contribution is not erased and he is not shown as a loser. Aside from Freddie, John's contribution is the most respected one. He is credited as the writer of YRMBF, SYW, AOBTD and IWTBF, while Brian is only credited for WWRY and SL (not named), and Roger for IMILWMC. The movie credits Deacy on twice more songs than Brian. About the depiction as a loser, the only thing that can indicate that is a "lack" of dialogue. But in fact, John used to describe himself as "the quiet one" of the band, and wasn't talking much in band's interviews. In a 2 hours movie, Joe Mazzello almost had more dialogues than John Deacon in 25 years. About the press conference scene, why all the hate? It's personally one of my favourites. The love story of Queen and the press being outlined in 3 minutes. I think some of you missed the point of this scene. I believe it was not about showing Freddie not being polite with the press, but to show how the press was nasty to Queen and specially to Freddie. And it does it very well. About the Fat Bottomed Girls scene, it was not only meant to show Queen perform live in 1974, it also shows Freddie questioning his sexuality. He is dating Mary, everyone believes he is heterosexual, but inside he knows he is not. About the "begging" scene, he doesn't ask to go back to the band. Though that scene might be a bit exagerated, in the middle of the movie the band rejected Paul Prenter and Freddie wanted Prenter in his life. He didn't listen to his bandmates. In that scene, he apologised for this and showed how humble he was. That's how I see it. Before someone brings up some useless movie critics, I would like to conclude with a Freddie Mercury quote from a 1981 Rolling Stone article: "What do I think about critics? I think they're a bunch of sh*ts". With love.

Mr. Poor Grammar wrote: Plus, some of the most hated scenes of the movie can be explained, like the press conference scene for instance. I believe some people really "didn't get" that scene, as well as some other things.

k-m wrote: Larry Lurex - who cares? We all know what it was like, so Roger was definitely the first one to go solo.

k-m wrote: May & Taylor executive music producers only? Well, in the name only. We all know they had a right to veto many choices or even pull the plug on the whole thing. Quite an influence.

k-m wrote: Brian did say the film was generally accurate, I am not even going to waste my time looking for the exact quote, I simply heard him say that, for example in a BBC Radio 2 interview.

k-m wrote: Freddie doesn't break up the band? Oh really, who invites them to his house then with Paul whispering in his ear "We cannot prolong it any longer". He clearly knew something serious was about to happen and it did. But no, it wasn't Roger who announced he just signed a major deal for two solo albums, it was the Fredster.

k-m wrote: Never heard about Deacon's contribution being erased claim, that's a new one for me. He's clearly credited with AOBTD and IWTBF so not sure where you got this accusation from.

k-m wrote: Same goes for the alleged press scene hate - really? One of the more truthful moments in the movie.

k-m wrote: The begging scene - once again, I think we watched different films then. It's clearly Freddie who phones Jim first asking for a meeting, then kicks it off with a long apology and is sent outside by Bri at some point while they make up their minds if they should let him back in.

mariah carey wrote: BoRhap sucks and that's it.

Queen Freddie Forever wrote: Personally, I loved the movie. It might not be completely accurate, but the humor/relationship between the band members and the scenes dedicated to their individual songs made it very enjoyable. I also appreciated that it helped spread Queen's story and their music.

pittrek wrote: What the hell is wrong with today's society? Are people no longer allowed to have a negative opinion about anything? During the last couple of years Hollywood keeps giving us one shitty re-make or sequel after another shitty re-make or sequel and if anybody dares to express a negative opinion, that critic gets attacked, publicly insulted, or told that they just "didn't get" the movie/TV show.And now even review aggregator sites like RottenTomatoes are changing their whole system because there are people who dared to say that they don't like a comic book movie. Hey, original poster, did you like Bohemian Rhapsody? Great, I'm glad that you could enjoy it. Did anybody here think the movie sucked? Also great, it's not the end of the world. I've seen the movie. I'm glad I've seen it but I don't think I will ever watch it again. There are good things about the movie, of course. For example Rami's performance was definitely Oscar-worthy, and the guy who played Brian looked like Dr.May's clone. It also motivated TV stations all over the world to check if they don't have anything Queen related in their archives, and many of them shared that previously unseen stuff with the rest of the world, which is fantastic. But honestly, that's it. The movie was complete fiction, but there's a tiny little problem - it was supposed to be a biopic.