I don’t need a Straight White Critic to tell me about “Bohemian Rhapsody”
So I saw this film yesterday. Context: I have a theater degree, I’ve been a professional assistant for professors teaching film clases. I have at least a decent understanding how film analysis works. I also have a History degree and have a decent understanding how Hollywood stupidly erases and twists history sometimes.
More Context: I’m Latino, sometimes white passing-others not, and very bisexual.
So the reviews. People saying sexuality wasn’t focused on enough-others upset some historical inaccuracies. Other calling the film poorly done. The majority of the reviews REEK of sheer high brow snobbery focused on technicalities of cinematography, directorial holds, the length and cutting of a scene. They also REEK of straight people and biphobia.
I was struck to my core by the film. And anyone who is bisexual will be because the journey is so plainly obvious as a bisexual person what Freddie endures. He questions his sexuality, he questions the authenticity of himself by it-and what it does to his relationships-and as per what did actually-yes historically- happen-there biphobia ends one of the most important relationships of his life.
the binary exists that many bisexuals have felt of picking sides, of not understanding what is truly authentic for them. And so rejected from a heterosexual relationship, it’s clear he seeks more understanding in homosexual ones. I’ve had this experience as a bi person. Lots of people have. The film showcases how the rejection of his identity leaves him so very vulnerable to manipulation and other forces.
People are claiming this film didn’t focus enough on Jim, or wasn’t interesting. This film is the story of a person of color, overcoming the casual racism in his life-and then making a journey through his own self-acceptance to who he is. Obviously the narrative is trimmed and times in ways that make it fit in cinematic scope. How anyone can watch it though-and miss the importance of its ending-Freddie going to Jim and accepting he likes himself, presenting himself authentically to his parents, is coming from a position of intense privilege who have no idea what it means to make peace with yourself and how those around you will as well. Jim was in the end, because he symbolized the peace in Freddie’s life, the acceptance. Which is again not some Hollywood nonsense- because he was his partner until he died. Acting like Jim wasn’t important because of Mary’s presence is an example of biphobia and again puts the sexuality in a binary of one must be superior to the other. That’s such a monumental move on a Hollywood film, that they let the ending relationship (which are often symbolized as true love-or the ultimate endgame) be with another man. It elevated that both his female and male, sexual relationships were equally important to his life.
Additionally, the speech Freddie gives to band mates announcing his disease summarizes the entire thematic purpose of the film. He was not a man seeking to be summarized by his disease or sexuality but his ability to overcome the systematic oppression of both-to showcase his musical joy and work. The purpose of ending the film on a new recreation of live aid was triumphant celebration of his talent-of what he overcame. His bisexuality is proudly represented in the symbol that both Mary and Jim watch him with intense love from the sidelines, after he greeted them with such love before the concert. And that most importantly he is confident in himself about both relationships. Queen’s music is broadcast through the film, with intimate and brother moments with the rest of Queen because that was his found family, and his found acceptance in his journey to accept himself.
“Bohemian Rhapsody” isn’t meant to be a scene by scene biography documentary-but captures the real systematic struggles Freddie had to endeavor through-and did while shining as vibrantly as he did and breaking barriers. Anyone who is bisexual can see the film and recognize the arch and clear thematic purpose of the film as message of hope, as a message of perseverance and finding love in different forms and for yourself. Those who are too privileged to recognize that story, what those struggles look like, should do more research on these LGBT and POC experiences before bothering to spew clearly misunderstood reviews.
And those who want to fault the minor technicalities due to a poor director being originally chosen for production-should additionally check their privilege and utter tone deafness that they can overlook what a monumental film this is to be made on this kind of scale about the importance of a bisexual man of color’s feelings about himself and how he related to the world. There are plenty of technical “filmy” things that could have been better done. But I have seen films that drag like a dead beaten horse, such a “Spotlight” just a few years ago, receive best picture because the theme, purpose, and message of the film was so acutely picked up on by those who saw it. Funny how a film about straight white Americans gets a pass on that account.
In summary: White straight people can sit down and stay in their lane on this one if they aren’t going to contribute anything meaningful that goes beyond their limited scope.
andulkaphoto
gummygunk
stormborns
amandla
romaincrisis
theartofmadeline
gracieabrams
