Sunday , February 28 2021

Another night's opera "Bohemian Rhapsody"



There are several times that the film gives me so much mixed feeling when I recommend it and Bohemian RhapsodyAn exception is a cinematic gift that would be related to the legend and Queen's musical heritage on the big screen. Although this is a movie that is offered to offer us so close a sensory experience as seeing Fredy Mercury's living – and that is – it's still a seemingly biased story featuring a different kind of fiction that blends hopes for fans with a series of almost unpredictable mistakes , which distorts the artist's history. However Bohemian Rhapsody it would never be a movie that could become a failure in the cup, given that the group's repertoire is in the catalog of the universal hymn's music; What the tape can tell us after a hundred and twenty minutes, this is probably the only experience for fans who love to think.

This is a success in the bucket office. Music is the easiest way to fool the fan, because all that's needed is the voice of Freddy Mercury to create an epic movie. However, its exaggerated use in history ends, making its appearance artificial and unnecessary, trying to fill some of the disadvantages of the area and at the same time eliminating the holiday and meaning that some scenes need to live.

Although Freddie Mercury, of course, embodies the queen and therefore the film commits to his disordered history, the fiction of this narrative becomes suspicious, preventing viewers from telling Brian May, Roger Taylor and John Deacon other members of the group. At times, they cease to be stars that eventually turn into background noise, which is part of the tape, and which is not much known, except that some have wives and children. A series of errors that reduce the film's argument to an epithet in which it is difficult for the viewer to focus on their characters and know what happened outside the recording studios. However, the idea of ​​creating a more commercial movie trivializes the mercury figure to show him simply as a complex person who fought for self-acceptance during a time when gay was a social taboo and that he was acting to motivate the pain.

As the first minute of the film continues and the story unfolds, which has been established in 1970, it shows that the director needs to overcome the urgent need until 1975. But why, for what purpose? The first is to find out how the group is known by combining the first myth. In the film, the young Farrokh Bulsara sees the presentation of the smiley group and then looks for Brian May and Roger Taylor to tell them he's interested in becoming a new band member in the hope of replacing vocalist Tim Staffelli. The real story behind this scene suggests that, on the contrary, in May, Taylor and Staffell were Mercury's mother's mother ever, even in 1969, they worked in Liverpool with the Ibex group that Freddy owned at that time and soon it broke up. The same thing happens when Mercury meets Mary Austin and falls due to her beauty; What the movie does not mean, in fact, she was already a girlfriend from Brian for a moment, and she met Fredy in a presentation where both of them were shot.

This same fiction tells of how Freddy met with Paul Prenter and Jim Hutton, both men closer to their intimate life and who play a completely different role in the development of the film, despite the same purpose: Mercury First met in 1975 in a bar and two years later became his personal leader. Prenter is the perfect evil person everyone hates, because throughout history he managed to slip in the theft, and successfully with his intention to divide the band, take Freddie to the excessive and seized boundary until he broke his relationship with him and appears cynically on television, revealing his secrets to fellowship with the singer . Although this last event never happened, Prenter announced in 1987 the report that revealed the artist's private life. Jim Hutton, on the other hand, is a hero who has played a role in mercury and with whom he would spend his last years of life.

On the other hand, it is almost apparent to any viewer that a film with complete censorship manages the merciless aspect of mercury life that has been involved in parties, drugs, men and excesses, showing the artist's haughty, sweetened and politically correct version. This aspect is reduced to some of the mercury sculptures of the disease, where there are blood drops, a short conversation with a doctor and somewhat overly real conversations with other members of the group. Paradoxically, if there was something that characterizes Mercury, it was that he never worried about the opinions that others had about him, but the tape once again takes care of what they say, rather than reflecting the life of the singer in a fair way, neglecting its authenticity. He was so small that he took care of anyone who opted for a six-minute opera instead of three-dimensional rock music, in opposition to industry directives. If the intention is to explain the story of the legend, the film will not succeed, without first pushing the diseased powder between the viewers.

However, although this is not true, the screenwriter and film director uses Freddie's disease as a leading thread that gives the story a meaning. They use this disease so that the group, as soon as it is destroyed, will meet again, a historic event that never happened, and on the contrary reveals another unfinished fiction: any Queen fans will have realized that the dates of the film do not agree: "Live Aid "was established in 1985, and before that – on the tape, the AIDS diagnosis had already taken place. The true story reveals that this did not happen until 1987.

The roots of Farroh's parsing have also proved to be decisive and compulsory in shaping Mercury's personality and character, nor in the refuge he received during the reverence of his praise. The film portrays only their parents as an Indian family who emigrated for the first time to Zanzibar, and then went to London to settle down, forgetting the origin of the original musical icon in Asia, which triumphed in the United Kingdom and the United States. UU where there was no place for the Azians. Moreover, mercury also did not reveal to them their parents, which was its true connection with Jim Hutton, as it appears on the ribbon; In fact, when they asked him, he said that this was his gardener. Thus, the adoption of their parents is nothing more than an emotional concession that turns out to be enjoyable for viewers.

But not everything can be bad. Although the tape goes out of fuel until 1985, and his obsession with the fact that nobody meets anyone, it leads to decisions that make it a fictitious and unfinished biopic, transcendental script Bohemian Rhapsody it can only be saved by the acting actor of the main character and the last twenty minutes from the movie, in which we immerse ourselves in the near real-time redemption of Live Aid, which puts thousands of fans in the skins.

Although it is obvious that nobody will ever be Freddy Mercury, and that the courage to embody it and undergo criticism is much more liberated, it would be even more difficult, the chameleon interpretation of Rami Malek is masterful. He had the opportunity to turn into the most dramatic moments of the film almost organically and impeccably, in a few minutes he was able to transform the shy and clumsy Farroh Bulsara into a huge Freddy Mercury who steals the attention of all the cameras throughout the film. Although there are many who criticize Malek that he is not who interprets the original songs, I think it is unlikely that he could find someone who could, without singing, embody such a vivid, energetic, yet lonely human conviction, vulnerable and meditative to Freddy who could not fill his emptiness with all his excesses . In other words, Rami Malek brought him back to life.

If you find a syntax error, wording or spelling in the article, select it and press Shift + Enter o click here inform us. Thank you!


Source link