Skip to main content

Film Reviews Review: Bohemian Rhapsody should’ve spared Freddie Mercury’s life from this monstrosity

Rami Malek, right, as Freddie Mercury and Gwilym Lee as Brian May in Bohemian Rhapsody.

Photo Credit: Alex Bailey

  • Bohemian Rhapsody
  • Directed by: Bryan Singer
  • Written by: Anthony McCarten
  • Starring: Rami Malek, Lucy Boynton and Ben Hardy
  • Classification: PG-13
  • 134 minutes

rating

If one indulges one’s emergency stockpile of self-preservational optimism and wilful naïveté, the opening sequence of Bohemian Rhapsody can, with enough credulity, be interpreted as charming. Here we see the spellbindingly unparalleled late Queen singer Freddie Mercury at home amongst his cats, glamourously traipsing around in a bright floral robe.

As with the rest of Bryan Singer’s film, the biopic’s introduction lumbers along, unsure of whose gaze to pander to, eventually placing its bet on a close-up of Mercury’s signature mustache, the short, sharp trimmings of which fall into the bathroom sink. So obviously meant to convey intimacy, the scene comes off as gimmick – a quick laugh coasting on the simple recognition of a mustache, superficially acknowledging Mercury’s inner loneliness (the cats) and homosexuality (the robe), neither of which are ever worked through in a meaningful way.

Story continues below advertisement

With that, the disrespectful inelegance of the film’s idea of Mercury is made known from the start.

Played by Rami Malek, whose acting is at times wonderful but who is ultimately at the mercy of the script, Mercury’s character registers as a bombastic business negotiator, a capricious diva and an incoherent sexual morass. And it’s so, so sad, because this film could have and should been beautiful. Instead it plays out like an extended version of Saturday Night Live’s cowbell sketch.

By now it’s been well published that Bohemian Rhapsody inadequately, and perhaps homophobically, addresses Mercury’s sexuality. One could attempt the argument that the film’s apparent fear of being seen as a fully told queer narrative follows the trajectory of Mercury’s own coming-out process. (Mercury was at one time engaged to a woman, Mary Austin. The two broke up but remained soulmates.) Given the filmmakers’ consistently forceful heteronormativity, it seems likelier they were not equipped to reckon with the spectrum of queerness or that they just didn’t want to make this film too gay.

After Mercury died, of bronchial pneumonia resulting from AIDS, in November 1991, Austin scattered his ashes at a secret location, keeping her promise to not reveal the whereabouts. Much of Mercury’s fortune was left to her, a source of contention among his Queen bandmates. Austin made Mercury the godfather of her first child. Their relationship transcended labels, sexuality, circumstance and distance. Yet she is portrayed here by Lucy Boynton as a reluctant friend who only pops in when she’s obligated. As a result, when Mercury calls Austin “my love” throughout the film, it provides an impression of desperation and denial, instead of companionship and loyalty.

Mercury’s personal life aside, the story, rewritten by voices who’ve had it so easy their entire lives they can’t imagine anything being difficult, lacks a sense of struggle. When Queen guitarist Brian May gets the idea for We Will Rock You, he tells everyone in the studio to stomp their feet. Et voilà! A hit! So simple!

When the band visits their record label’s office to discuss the next album, Mercury ends a disagreement with EMI executive Ray Foster (Mike Myers) by putting out a cigarette on his desk. Mercury is domineering, but why? The audience is granted no further understanding, no exposition of autonomy or development, just trite rock-star clichés. The film’s press materials use the word “flamboyant” to describe Mercury, which is telling. But the viewer only sees him as arrogant.

Where the tactic of cloying familiarity does work, unlike in the opening sequence, is the ending, in which the audience watches a re-enactment of Queen’s hard-fought 1985 Live Aid reunion at Wembley Stadium. Here Malek plays Mercury brilliantly, at last allowing us to see him as dazzlingly complete. It’s not deep enough to be redemptive, but lasts long enough to feel satisfying, like having a dream about someone you miss.

Story continues below advertisement

In what is lost to revisionism, Bohemian Rhapsody becomes a testament to the importance of accurate historical preservation as a defence against erasure. For a film insistent upon getting the dramaturgically correct 1985 Pepsi logo into the frame, very little effort seems to have been applied to exactitude elsewhere. Freddie Mercury deserves better.

Bohemian Rhapsody opens Nov. 2

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Comments

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • All comments will be reviewed by one or more moderators before being posted to the site. This should only take a few moments.
  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed. Commenters who repeatedly violate community guidelines may be suspended, causing them to temporarily lose their ability to engage with comments.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.
Cannabis pro newsletter