Bohemian Rhapsody

[green]

Maybe I just took it too personally.
I just want to say I don't begrudge anyone who is seeing it differently.

 

[Spider-Fan]

This movie should have been a celebration of Freddie's queerness, which made him the icon he is today. Bi or gay isn't the real issue here but his choice to live his life the way he chose.
I felt the movie instead wanted to focus on his choices as being his downfall. In doing so I found it to be a failure.

The movie does celebrate Freddie living the way he chose to. See the moment he sees his family again and they watch him in the concert despite him distancing himself from their way of life about as far as he could (even changing his name). His family finally accepts the decisions he made for himself in that scene, and it reaffirms he made the right choice being true to himself. Freddie also comes to a place in life where he is ready to be with Jim Hutton, as Schlosser said is symbolically a light at the end of the tunnel. You cannot exactly ignore that Freddie had AIDS, and got it by having wild parties. It's part of the story. The movie is not saying him being gay led to his downfall. While Freddie did eventually die, the movie treats his life as being one well lived, and that he will be fondly remembered through his music.

 

[InvisibleWoman]

Ughhhh. I can't believe this won. Good for Rami, I think he was outstanding but other than that...
It insults Bisexuals by basically saying they don't exist and that they must be gay because you know someone can't possibly actually be open enough to both sexes.
It insults the gay community by once again vilifying them.
Bah, anyway I could go on but I just think this movie was a huge missed opportunity to actually say something rather than make a straightwashed fluff piece for the masses.

I don't get how it can be accused of being "straightwashed fluff" and at the same time, insult bisexuals by celebrating his homosexuality.

There's no doubt that although he had sex with women to begin with, after Mary Austin, he exclusively slept with men. Perhaps he considered himself bisexual as to not dismiss that relationship with Mary. Also there's no doubt that during that time... it was very dangerous to be openly gay. It wasn't like it is today (and how many stars are still in the closet?)

At the end of the day, it was his choice. It wasn't meant as an insult to any community. He just wanted his private life to be just that.

 

[Schlosser85]

The movie does celebrate Freddie living the way he chose to. See the moment he sees his family again and they watch him in the concert despite him distancing himself from their way of life about as far as he could (even changing his name). His family finally accepts the decisions he made for himself in that scene, and it reaffirms he made the right choice being true to himself. Freddie also comes to a place in life where he is ready to be with Jim Hutton, as Schlosser said is symbolically a light at the end of the tunnel. You cannot exactly ignore that Freddie had AIDS, and got it by having wild parties. It's part of the story. The movie is not saying him being gay led to his downfall. While Freddie did eventually die, the movie treats his life as being one well lived, and that he will be fondly remembered through his music.

 

[green]

The movie does celebrate Freddie living the way he chose to. See the moment he sees his family again and they watch him in the concert despite him distancing himself from their way of life about as far as he could (even changing his name). His family finally accepts the decisions he made for himself in that scene, and it reaffirms he made the right choice being true to himself. Freddie also comes to a place in life where he is ready to be with Jim Hutton, as Schlosser said is symbolically a light at the end of the tunnel. You cannot exactly ignore that Freddie had AIDS, and got it by having wild parties. It's part of the story. The movie is not saying him being gay led to his downfall. While Freddie did eventually die, the movie treats his life as being one well lived, and that he will be fondly remembered through his music.

I'm truly glad you feel this way and that it's what you took away from the movie. I hope that it is also what others do as well, sadly I didn't.

 

[AResistor]

The movie does celebrate Freddie living the way he chose to. See the moment he sees his family again and they watch him in the concert despite him distancing himself from their way of life about as far as he could (even changing his name). His family finally accepts the decisions he made for himself in that scene, and it reaffirms he made the right choice being true to himself. Freddie also comes to a place in life where he is ready to be with Jim Hutton, as Schlosser said is symbolically a light at the end of the tunnel. You cannot exactly ignore that Freddie had AIDS, and got it by having wild parties. It's part of the story. The movie is not saying him being gay led to his downfall. While Freddie did eventually die, the movie treats his life as being one well lived, and that he will be fondly remembered through his music.

Agreed. I mean there are bad lgbt dudes like the party that Freddie fell into.

As a bi guy, I hated that they had Freddie’s gf say **** like denying who he was and he didn’t stand up for himself. That said, Freddie didn’t say or act like he was one way or the other and reactions like hers are sadly a dime a dozen in real life as well. Just on that end, wished they had him say something.

 

[MOVIELORD101]

Guys, this movie wasn't trying to shame gay or bi-sexual people at all! The ONLY gay character portrayed negatively was Paul Prenter, but that's because he comes off as a manipulative weasel that even Brian and Roger hate, not because he was gay!

 

[jmc]

This movie should have been a celebration of Freddie's queerness, which made him the icon he is today. Bi or gay isn't the real issue here but his choice to live his life the way he chose.
I felt the movie instead wanted to focus on his choices as being his downfall. In doing so I found it to be a failure.

This movie was for Queen fans. It’s not an LGB movie.

 

[Schlosser85]

Well it’s inevitably kind of both...

 

[jmc]

There in lies the problem with the criticism levelled towards the movie. You've got people demanding that the film depict Freddie's struggle with his sexuality when the film obviously wasn't design with that in mind. It's a movie that puts a positive light on the band first and foremost. The bands legacy is far more important to Brian and Roger than what the critics wanted or even the historical accuracy. Bohemian Rhapsody is in essence the inverse of The Last Jedi. The critics hated it because they thought it was going to be something else, whilst the fans lapped it up.

 

[Greens]

I'm a huge Queen fan and the movie didn't do much for me. It felt like a surface level montage of things instead of a three act structure.

 

[Boom]

Yeah I'm a big Queen fan and this movie didn't move the meter for me either.

I normally hate doing this, but I imagine what this movie could've been like in the hands of someone like Damian Chazelle. There is a better movie here without having to put every aspect of Mercury's private life under a microscope.

 

[Greens]

Yeah I'm a big Queen fan and this movie didn't move the meter for me either.

I normally hate doing this, but I imagine what this movie could've been like in the hands of someone like Damian Chazelle. There is a better movie here without having to put every aspect of Mercury's private life under a microscope.

Oh man, Damien would have killed it.

 

[AResistor]

This movie was for Queen fans. It’s not an LGB movie.

It's both.

People really need to stop acting as though there's an "LGBTQ Genre" that's like saying there's a "Black genre" - it makes absolutely zero sense. That's like saying 'Walk The Line' or 'Jersey Boys' aren't "heterosexual movies."

The film features and doesn't shy away from showing that Freddie likes men, that's enough to file it with films that feature similar protagonists.

Movies with LGBTQ protagonists:

'Imitation Game' - spy thriller
'Call Me By Your Name' - romance
'Bohemian Rhapsody' - musical biopic
'Boy Erased' - family drama
'Pride' - political dramedy
'GBF' - comedy

All films are distinct from each other and the only aspect they have in common is who their protagonists like to f-. There is no LGBTQ genre, just films that feature LGBTQ characters. We don't think in terms of a film being a "heterosexual film." Films with LGBTQ characters shouldn't be boxed in like that either.

 

[Lily Adler]

I thought an LGBTABCD movie involved someone going full pickle.

 

[jmc]

It's both.

People really need to stop acting as though there's an "LGBTQ Genre" that's like saying there's a "Black genre" - it makes absolutely zero sense. That's like saying 'Walk The Line' or 'Jersey Boys' aren't "heterosexual movies."

The film features and doesn't shy away from showing that Freddie likes men, that's enough to file it with films that feature similar protagonists.

Movies with LGBTQ protagonists:

'Imitation Game' - spy thriller
'Call Me By Your Name' - romance
'Bohemian Rhapsody' - musical biopic
'Boy Erased' - family drama
'Pride' - political dramedy
'GBF' - comedy

All films are distinct from each other and the only aspect they have in common is who their protagonists like to f-. There is no LGBTQ genre, just films that feature LGBTQ characters. We don't think in terms of a film being a "heterosexual film." Films with LGBTQ characters shouldn't be boxed in like that either.

We categorise them because whether you like it or not the subject matter is usually specifically about a sexuality that differs from that of the vast majority of people. The genre exists whether you want it to or not.

 

[AResistor]

We categorise them because whether you like it or not the subject matter is usually specifically about a sexuality that differs from that of the vast majority of people. The genre exists whether you want it to or not.

There is no genre. You can say it's a sub-genre - but that would include ALL movies with LGBTQ protagonists - of which this is clearly is one. But it's incredibly naive to act like this isn't an LGBTQ movie since it doesn't fit in to you preconceived and narrowed focus of what that would be.

 

[AResistor]

It’s not an LGB movie.

usually specifically about a sexuality that differs from that of the vast majority of people.

And a film about a queer singer who discovers and comes to terms that he likes men, centering it around a song that is made to represent the coming out experience, while also dealing with the AIDS struggle in the LGBTQ community doesn't fit into your definition in what way again?

 

[jmc]

There is no genre. You can say it's a sub-genre - but what would include ALL movies with LGBTQ protagonists - of which this is clearly is one. But it's incredibly naive to act like this isn't an LGBTQ movie since it doesn't fit in to you preconceived and narrowed focus of what that would be.

The fact there's so much criticism directed at the movie for its portrayal of Mercury's love life says to me a lot of people see the genre as being defined by the coming to terms with and/or acceptance and exploration of ones sexuality.

 

[AResistor]

The fact there's so much criticism directed at the movie for its portrayal of Mercury's love life says to me a lot of people see the genre as being defined by the coming to terms with and/or acceptance and exploration of ones sexuality.

This film did that and did it near perfectly (for the first half, then it became a concert randomly - which I'd hold that criticism against any film that had that structure). Might some not like how that half was portrayed? Yes. But that's a far stretch from saying it wasn't there.

For me, as a bi man, the only redeeming factor this film has is the first half due to it being all of the things you're somehow trying to make claims that it isn't.

So again, how is a film about coming to terms with one's sexuality and AIDS not an - as you said - "LGB film"?

 

[AResistor]

The fact there's so much criticism directed at the movie for its portrayal of Mercury's love life says to me a lot of people see the genre as being defined by the coming to terms with and/or acceptance and exploration of ones sexuality.

Also do add, this would be a criticism one could bring against any film that features an LGBTQ protagonist - how it portrays an aspect of a character's life. It doesn't mean it's suddenly not a film about an LGBT protagonist just because some/many take issue with it. That is to say the attached qualitative value random people place on something doesn't automatically have it stop being what it is.

This was clearly a film made by a gay director to analyze what the troubled life of a queer singer was like. Was it that in totality? No. Neither are numerous other films with LGBTQ protagonists, a most obvious example being 'The Imitation Game' where it focused more on what being different meant rather than on coming out and romance. Another similar example to that - 'The Catcher Was A Spy.'

 

[AResistor]

If a film has a protagonist who is part of the LGBTQ community, then by very definition it's part of the subset of LGBTQ films.

Just like with films with straight, black, etc. protagonists - there is nothing set on what makes a film an "LGBTQ film" and what doesn't. This is because each LGBTQ individual has a different experience from the next, so naturally the protagonists would as well. That doesn't mean they suddenly stop being what they are, that just means they have a different approach - as they naturally should.

Acting as though all films with LGBTQ protagonists have to be one way - undermines the bold steps that each of these films are taking. To my knowledge, 'Bohemian Rhapsody' is the FIRST mainstream musical biopic to feature an LBGTQ protagonist - that's important. Saying anything else robs it of what it is.

 

[jmc]

This film did that and it perfectly. Might some not like how it was portrayed? Yes. But that's a far stretch from saying it wasn't there.

For me, as a bi man, the only redeeming factor this film has is the first half due to it being all of the things you're somehow trying to make claims that it isn't.

I think you're completely misinterpreting what I'm saying so I'll refine my comments. When I say the film wasn't an LGBT movie, I'm saying the primary goal of the film, the intention of the movie, was about putting Queen and Freddie in the best possible light first and foremost. It was made for Queen fans. The reason I think the film has gotten backlash is because a lot of people wanted the sexuality elements to be the primary intentions of the story and to a lot it simply wasn't good enough. If you wish to define things differently and consider it LGBT first, or equal to the other stuff, or label it a sub genre, then more power to you. I'm actually not disagreeing with a lot of what you say, but I do think it's a bit silly to say there is no genre. Anyway, I don't want to derail this thread with long winded discussions about what constitutes a genre or sub-genre, it's too tedious and people don't want to read it, so that's all I'm going to say about it.

 

[AResistor]

I think you're completely misinterpreting what I'm saying so I'll refine my comments. When I say the film wasn't an LGBT movie, I'm saying the primary goal of the film, the intention of the movie, was about putting Queen and Freddie in the best possible light first and foremost. It was made for Queen fans. By that definition, the film was far more of a biopic that was trying to paint them in a good light than it was about exploring the persons sexuality or seeing the viewpoint of someone who's sexuality differs from most. The reason I think the film has gotten backlash is because a lot of people wanted the sexuality elements to be the primary intentions of the story and to a lot it simply wasn't good enough. If you wish to define things differently and consider it LGBT first, or equal to the other stuff, or label it a sub genre, then more power to you. I'm actually not disagreeing with a lot of what you say, but I do think it's a bit silly to say there is no genre. Anyway, I don't want to derail this thread with long winded discussions about what constitutes a genre or sub-genre, it's too tedious and people don't want to read it, so that's all I'm going to say about it.

The word I think you're searching for is "romance" - if you had said that, you'd be correct. It just comes off as incredibly odd saying it's "not an LGB film."

This movie was for Queen fans. It’s not an LGB movie.

"This movie was for Queen fans. It’s not a romantic movie."

Would make a lot more sense, with that notion I'd agree, and it encapsulates what you are intending to say "this wasn't meant to be about Freddie's love life" -

Without robbing it of what it historically cinematically is - the first mainstream musical biopic with an lgbtq protagonist (especially considering the box office take with an lgbtq protagonist which is historic).

Genres: Science-Fiction, Romance, Action, Adventure, Thriller, etc.

Sub-Genre: Outer Space, Civil Rights, Gay Rights, Coming Out, Boy meets boy, boy meets girl, etc.

Genre is totality - it's saying there's only one set definition of what an LGBTQ film is. Sub-Genres are, more or less, additional elements. Some say - also why I took your post as an example - "all LGBTQ movies are the same" which really isn't the case, they're just as diverse as films with straight protagonists and hopefully will continue to become more diverse as more progress is made.

 

[jmc]

The power of Freddie Mercury lives on.