Post by burrunjor on Dec 9, 2022 10:12:47 GMT
Which do you think are the best, assuming you've seen any?
To me there are 3 ways, broadly people tell the story of a famous person. One, they do their job properly and be neutral and talk to as many people in the persons life, compile their interviews and show a totally non biased account.
To me the 1988 film Imagine about John Lennon is a classic example of this, and it is probably the best biopic of a dead legend there is. It doesn't sugar coat Lennon's life, shows things like his poor relationship with his son, but it doesn't exaggerate them. It also lets people like Cynthia Lennon, Yoko and May Pang (his three most prominent lovers, who obvs all had a different perspective) speak, and it offers different accounts wherever it can.
Another is where they exaggerate the story of the person, but not in a nasty way. IE they make it more romantic, more heroic for the sake of drama and a story, like Dragon, the Bruce Lee story. Bruce Lee's relatives loved that film, even if they said it wasn't completely accurate. Another example of this would be An Adventure in Space and Time, which we all know had some inaccuracies, and was romantic like the final scene with Matt Smith, but was still clearly a loving tribute to William Hartnell.
Finally the other is where you sensationalise the persons life, make it as horrible as you can for clicks and notoriety, and demonise certain people in their life because every story needs a villain. Ironically John Lennon was also the recipient of this type of biography as well with that ghastly book The Lives of John Lennon, which still blackens his name to this day. He wasn't a wife beater contrary to what is always said. That comes entirely from this book and was denied by all of his partners, but it still pops up as an obnoxious meme to this day.
I also felt Amy 2015, was like this. A lot of people like it, because it was at least sympathetic to Amy, but for me it didn't do her justice. It didn't talk about her place in music history, the influence she had, it also demonised certain figures in her life, like her dad, and it left out soooo much all so it could paint her as a victim. In that respect I think it has done down her reputation, as now all people see her as is a victim, myself included, rather than an inspirational singer/songwriter. Obviously I'm not saying she wasn't a victim in some respects, and it would be important to talk about that in any biopic, but to dwell exclusively on that is a terrible thing to do. That's the sad thing about these biopics, is that they can actually affect the person's reputation as seen with Lennon and Amy, who are viewed largely as a wife beating scumbag and a poor little lost soul who needed someone to protect her by the masses these days.
Personally I think the families of these people should always stop things like Amy being made.
To me there are 3 ways, broadly people tell the story of a famous person. One, they do their job properly and be neutral and talk to as many people in the persons life, compile their interviews and show a totally non biased account.
To me the 1988 film Imagine about John Lennon is a classic example of this, and it is probably the best biopic of a dead legend there is. It doesn't sugar coat Lennon's life, shows things like his poor relationship with his son, but it doesn't exaggerate them. It also lets people like Cynthia Lennon, Yoko and May Pang (his three most prominent lovers, who obvs all had a different perspective) speak, and it offers different accounts wherever it can.
Another is where they exaggerate the story of the person, but not in a nasty way. IE they make it more romantic, more heroic for the sake of drama and a story, like Dragon, the Bruce Lee story. Bruce Lee's relatives loved that film, even if they said it wasn't completely accurate. Another example of this would be An Adventure in Space and Time, which we all know had some inaccuracies, and was romantic like the final scene with Matt Smith, but was still clearly a loving tribute to William Hartnell.
Finally the other is where you sensationalise the persons life, make it as horrible as you can for clicks and notoriety, and demonise certain people in their life because every story needs a villain. Ironically John Lennon was also the recipient of this type of biography as well with that ghastly book The Lives of John Lennon, which still blackens his name to this day. He wasn't a wife beater contrary to what is always said. That comes entirely from this book and was denied by all of his partners, but it still pops up as an obnoxious meme to this day.
I also felt Amy 2015, was like this. A lot of people like it, because it was at least sympathetic to Amy, but for me it didn't do her justice. It didn't talk about her place in music history, the influence she had, it also demonised certain figures in her life, like her dad, and it left out soooo much all so it could paint her as a victim. In that respect I think it has done down her reputation, as now all people see her as is a victim, myself included, rather than an inspirational singer/songwriter. Obviously I'm not saying she wasn't a victim in some respects, and it would be important to talk about that in any biopic, but to dwell exclusively on that is a terrible thing to do. That's the sad thing about these biopics, is that they can actually affect the person's reputation as seen with Lennon and Amy, who are viewed largely as a wife beating scumbag and a poor little lost soul who needed someone to protect her by the masses these days.
Personally I think the families of these people should always stop things like Amy being made.
