- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bohemian Rhapsody RT Score 53% 30 Reviews In
Posted on 10/23/18 at 11:45 pm to Fewer Kilometers
Posted on 10/23/18 at 11:45 pm to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Why the hell would you need nudity and violence to tell a Queen biopic? We don't have to see a parade of dicks to know the guy was gay.
I’m sure a behind the scenes look of a huge rock band would be very R rated regardless of who the movie is about
1
Posted on 10/23/18 at 11:52 pm to jg8623
quote:
I’m sure a behind the scenes look of a huge rock band would be very R rated regardless of who the movie is about
Basically all it would be is foul language, drugs, and tits. That's pretty much every rock and roll band ever.
The only way this film would have worked critically is if it would have focused on the final years of Freddie Mercury's life. It probably would have begun sometime in 1986/87 and featured a lot of gay sex, drugs, and partying before his diagnosis. Then it would have shown his quiet determination and slow decline post-diagnosis until his eventual death at the end of the film.
As a fan of Queen, I would not have been interested in that story. I'm more interested in the celebration of their music and I'm pretty sure that's what Freddie would have wanted, too.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 12:13 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Bohemian Rhapsody was a single.
Light my fire as released as a single was under 3 minutes.
Fail.
Light my fire as released as a single was under 3 minutes.
Fail.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 12:21 am to Rhames
quote:
I knew there would be issues with it when they went the pg 13 route.
Same. It was a huge red flag
Posted on 10/24/18 at 12:30 am to WicKed WayZ
Such a shame. This was such a good chance to make a groundbreaking film. 
Posted on 10/24/18 at 1:16 am to nateslu1
It sounds like they made a Disney film.
Skirted all the issues.
Even Ray they showed him as a raging heroin addict and Cash as a backstage womanizer but I guess some vices are off limits...because that can't be portrayed as a negative to overcome.
So what's the real struggle in this movie?
Ray had drugs.
Johnny had drugs and tons of vagina that he had to overcome.
Queen had lots of behavior to overcome...but then again, you can't show that as a weakness or a fault. If you heterosexually womanize, you bad - character flaw (important to show in film)...if you gay bathhouse by the 1,000's Caligula-style to a reckless degree...you good.
So if they are not going to even attempt to show reality, what's the point? But I guess no one would want to watch that. But skirting the issue makes for poor movies in the end...because they are just hollow facsimiles. It's just Disney a few songs and Justin Beiber.
Skirted all the issues.
Even Ray they showed him as a raging heroin addict and Cash as a backstage womanizer but I guess some vices are off limits...because that can't be portrayed as a negative to overcome.
So what's the real struggle in this movie?
Ray had drugs.
Johnny had drugs and tons of vagina that he had to overcome.
Queen had lots of behavior to overcome...but then again, you can't show that as a weakness or a fault. If you heterosexually womanize, you bad - character flaw (important to show in film)...if you gay bathhouse by the 1,000's Caligula-style to a reckless degree...you good.
So if they are not going to even attempt to show reality, what's the point? But I guess no one would want to watch that. But skirting the issue makes for poor movies in the end...because they are just hollow facsimiles. It's just Disney a few songs and Justin Beiber.
This post was edited on 10/24/18 at 1:17 am
Posted on 10/24/18 at 1:20 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Can you point out a single gay bath houses by the 1000s...you good.
Surely the list will be extensive. I look forward to educating myself on this.
Surely the list will be extensive. I look forward to educating myself on this.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 1:42 am to dawgfan24348
If you got AIDS in 1984 you literally had to be popping poppers, living in the bathhouses and as an AIDS expert said at the time having anal sex partners reaching the thousands per year.
The AIDS epidemic hit S.F. in 1982 and they still refused to close the bathhouses.
They marched against it. And then the AIDS epidemic hit worse in 1984 and they said...well maybe close one.
99% of people who were not hemopheliacs or IV drug users or didn't have constant random anal sex...or didn't live on antibiotics or severely malnurshed...would never have to worry about AIDS.
The AIDS epidemic hit S.F. in 1982 and they still refused to close the bathhouses.
They marched against it. And then the AIDS epidemic hit worse in 1984 and they said...well maybe close one.
99% of people who were not hemopheliacs or IV drug users or didn't have constant random anal sex...or didn't live on antibiotics or severely malnurshed...would never have to worry about AIDS.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 2:57 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
but I guess some vices are off limits...because that can't be portrayed as a negative to overcome.
Good point. They can't do the standard Hollywood biopic w/ "He partied w/ midgets and dicks and coke and then he coughed until he died."
It's also tough when the main character just dies. I watched "I Saw the Light" with Tom Hiddleston as Hank Williams. He did a great job, but the movie pretty much comes to an abrupt end when Williams dies in the back of a car.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 7:24 am to Fewer Kilometers
quote:
Why the hell would you need nudity and violence to tell a Queen biopic? We don't have to see a parade of dicks to know the guy was gay.
It has nothing to do with him being gay or seeing dicks and everything to do with knowing by going the pg 13 route they were going more for a 2 hour music video with queen's greatest hits that's more on par with momma mia than an actual serious movie.
That doesn't mean that it won't be good on some level or I won't enjoy it, but it is what it is.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 9:21 am to Rhames
quote:
It has nothing to do with him being gay or seeing dicks and everything to do with knowing by going the pg 13 route they were going more for a 2 hour music video with queen's greatest hits that's more on par with momma mia than an actual serious movie.
So you're telling me that a biopic can only be serious if it's rated R? Some of the best biopics have been rated PG-13 and below. Hell...Patton was rated PG.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 9:24 am to dawgfan24348
Sounds like it was victim of production by committee. Shame was really looking forward to it.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 9:27 am to PowerTool
quote:
I watched "I Saw the Light" with Tom Hiddleston as Hank Williams. He did a great job, but the movie pretty much comes to an abrupt end when Williams dies in the back of a car.
I can guarantee that Bohemian Rhapsody will be ten times better than I Saw the Light. That film was terrible and Hiddleston had no business playing Hank Sr.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 9:29 am to RollTide1987
quote:
So you're telling me that a biopic can only be serious if it's rated R? Some of the best biopics have been rated PG-13 and below. Hell...Patton was rated PG.
It's kind of hard to compare a PG movie from the 70's/80's to a PG movie today, they used to show tits in PG movies
When I first saw a movie was coming out called Bohemian Rhapsody, for some reason I thought it was going to be the story in the song made into a movie. That sounded more interesting than what they made
Posted on 10/24/18 at 10:06 am to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
My god. Just stop. By the end of 83 there were 3k aids cases.
Your post is garbage.
Your post is garbage.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 10:49 am to dawgfan24348
Very disappointing.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 2:16 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
If you got AIDS in 1984 you literally had to be popping poppers, living in the bathhouses and as an AIDS expert said at the time having anal sex partners reaching the thousands per year.
The AIDS epidemic hit S.F. in 1982 and they still refused to close the bathhouses.
They marched against it. And then the AIDS epidemic hit worse in 1984 and they said...well maybe close one.
99% of people who were not hemopheliacs or IV drug users or didn't have constant random anal sex...or didn't live on antibiotics or severely malnurshed...would never have to worry about AIDS.
As a longtime member of TD, I've read some terribly misinformed rubish before but your post is perhaps the most ignorant statement I have ever seen posted on TD.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 2:40 pm to mizzoubuckeyeiowa
quote:
99% of people who were not hemopheliacs or IV drug users or didn't have constant random anal sex...or didn't live on antibiotics or severely malnurshed...would never have to worry about AIDS.
This is retarded.
I had an older family member who was gay and died of AIDS in the early 90s. He contracted it sometime in the 80s. He was a white collar professional with a long time partner. They lived together in Atlanta then Metairie for over a decade. He wasnt openly gay until he was diagnosed with AIDS. I was pretty young back then, but he was a pretty normal dude. My parents knew he was gay, but it wasn't really discussed.
Point being, not all homos are flamers taking cock 24/7. Even in the 80s.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 2:45 pm to FightnBobLafollette
quote:
Can you point out a single gay bath houses by the 1000s...you good.
Surely the list will be extensive. I look forward to educating myself on this.
What a fricking stupid response to that post...
quote:
FightnBobLafollette
Oh, never mind.
Posted on 10/24/18 at 3:30 pm to WicKed WayZ
quote:
I knew there would be issues with it when they went the pg 13 route.
Same. It was a huge red flag
Some of the best musical biopics of all time are pg and pg13. Walk the line, ray, the buddy holly story, and I'm sure more.
A good story trumps the rating all day. This has become the most common answer ever when a movie doesnt get an R rating and it ends up disappointing. If the movie sucks its because the story was bad, bad directing, or if its true to his life and not straight fiction then maybe his life story just isn't as interesting as people might have thought.
This post was edited on 10/24/18 at 3:31 pm
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News