post

Bohemian Rhapsody

Bohemian Rhapsody
Rami Malek (Freddie Mercury)

Markus Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars

Possibly the worst thing I could say about a musician biopic is that if you are not a hardcore fan of the music and/or band, then there is no reason to watch this movie. And while “Bohemian Rhapsody” narrowly staves off this insult, it should be noted that that this is a movie where the character of Freddie Mercury is given only slightly more screen-time and lines than the other members of Queen. But if you’re a huge fan of the music, then who cares? If you’re a huge fan of the music, this film gives you exactly what you want, and nothing more.

Synopsis: “Bohemian Rhapsody” is the story of the band Queen, from their rise and culminating with their iconic 1985 Live Aid performance.

Directed (for the most part) by Bryan Singer (X-Men, The Usual Suspects) amidst his rather long fall from grace, with a script written by Anthony McCarten (The Theory of Everything, Darkest Hour) it is the story focus, the overall tameness and the actual formulaic writing which lets this film down. I mean, how many times can a “head of studio” proclaim how Queen isn’t going to make it or that in a few years nobody will know who Queen is? And don’t get me started on the lazy foreshadowing; *cough cough*.  As for the visuals, the stage performances (which there are many) are shot very well.  Even the drawn out finale, during which the audience must sit though the entire 20 minute Live Aid set after sitting though an almost 2 hour film, is handled as well as it could’ve been, almost reminding me of an X-Men battle sequence; this is meant to be a compliment.

It should be noted that Rami Malek, who plays front-man Freddie Mercury, gives a commanding performance, stealing the show (as he should). He stands alone as the only thing spectacular about “Bohemian Rhapsody”.

Final Thought: The biggest issue I had with this movie was throughout the film, the band is shown time and again taking issue with all members of the band not being represented equally. I suspect this was and still is the same in real life, since the characters of Brian May, Roger Taylor and John Deacon get nearly as much face time as Freddie Mercury. If you don’t know who these people are, then like me, you also don’t care about the other members of Queen. And therein lies the problem. Nobody cares about the other members of Queen outside of Mercury! So why is everyone getting nearly equal story time in this movie? That was the biggest flaw for me. And I have to suspect this was the biggest flaw for Sacha Baron Cohen when he left this project in 2013. You wouldn’t make a biopic about the Beatles and give Ringo and George equal story/screen time as Paul and John, would you? Oh, and don’t forget about Pete Best! Let’s not kid ourselves. Freddie is the star. We buy tickets to see Freddie. Before coming into my screening I had asked myself, “Why is a movie about Freddie Mercury not rated R?” And the answer is now perfectly clear; because “Bohemian Rhapsody” is about Queen and not Mercury.

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

post

Suspiria

suspiria-film-2018

Markus Rating: 2 out of 5 Stars

As the credits rolled, I stared up at the screen and couldn’t have been more confused; not only as to why this remake was remade, but also as to the content of the movie, literally uttering aloud, “what did I just watch?” It was at this moment that I surmised “Suspiria” to be no more than a non-scary horror flick that interrupts long stretches of meandering and literal mumbling with shocking moments of macabre, grotesque and ultra violence, spread over a span of 2 hours and 32 minutes. And the only question I was left with was, was this meandering and ultra violence mash-up justified by the story director Luca Guadagnino (Call Me By Your Name) and writer David Kajganich were attempting to tell? And the answer was a resounding no. In fact, if anything this is a story that could’ve been told in under an hour…and that’s being generous.

Synopsis: Set in Cold War Germany, an American woman (Dakota Johnson) joins a prestigious all female dance academy lead by an instructor played by Tilda Swinton; an academy which may be a cover for a witch’s coven. There is also a subplot about an elderly male psychotherapist (who for some reason is also played by Swinton) that can only be described as “an exercise in time wasting”.  Oh, and before you raise your eyebrow in interest due to Swinton playing two different characters, the truth is that she actually plays three characters. But, none of these characters lend themselves to powerful performances; only to rather alarming Nutty professor-esque makeup and prosthetics.

Anyway, as the plot pushes forward, “Suspiria” only becomes more unnecessarily messy and pointless. But that Thom Yorke score was really good. So, there’s that.

Not all of “Suspiria” is nonsense. There are some visually striking dance sequences and for a while the mystery aspect of the plot was something that interested me. But again, this movie is 2 hours and 32 minutes. I became disinterested in much of the plot by the end of the first hour.

Final Thought: Having never seen the original Dario Argento Giallo classic in its entirety, Guadagnino’s “Suspiria” was a stand-alone psychological horror/mystery piece for me; and not a very good one. Honestly, the only reason “Suspiria” gets the stars it does is that while I walked out of the theater savagely disappointed, throughout the runtime there was something which compelled me to keep watching and not zone out.  And while the acting is fine, but overshadowed by the repetitive visuals, and much that I feel is wrong with the movie had to do with the storytelling, Guadagnino had to have done something right for me not to absolutely bail on something I was absolutely confused with. At the very least this was a very slow moving, but compellingly filmed dumpster fire that put me into a trance. A part of me simply had to find out how big the fire would get and from what angles looked best.

Follow me @moviesmarkus