Believe it or not, 4 years was a musical eternity back in the early 70’s. That usually meant 4 albums. For many bands that’s wildly out of context...but the bigger question, why not just do it right? They have plenty of material. Much of the film is about the creation of these songs, right? So, the sequence of events is important. And why was it a necessity to shoehorn “Fat Bottom Girls” four years into the future?
It's always a gamble making a movie, there's been plenty of films that didn't make much at the box office but did great as soundtracks.
Believe it or not I was alive then and know quite well how long 4 years was back then. It’s been explained many times why they choose to use it earlier in the time frame. Much of the film is about the creation of these songs, but FBG is not one of those. It does not appear in the film as something they were creating or releasing on record. Yes, they have plenty of material but I can not think of a single song of theirs from the first three albums that would work as well for the purpose this was used for. Can you?
The difference with casual fans or general audience goers compared to hardcore fans who know their music inside out is that they'll hear songs like Fat Bottomed Girls, or whatever other ones there were throughout the movie and say "Oh yeah, I remember that tune", or "I haven't heard this one in a while", or even "I've not heard that but I like it", and that's what gets people back into them, or even into their music for the first time enough to explore their catalog more. There's never been a live version of Fat Bottomed Girls on a greatest hits album, nor was Love of my Life on a greatest hits album. Same goes for Keep Yourself Alive (live), Doin' Alright, Now I'm Here (live), or the Live Aid stuff. So it serves to remind people of how great they were live too.
Because Brian and company wanted those songs in. This film wasn’t independent of them by a long shot.
They are credited as producers on the film, if I'm not mistaken. And they're the people who are going to benefit the most from the soundtrack album.
That still doesn’t explain why they felt the need to put them in the wrong year. If this was a Beatles biopic...imagine something from 1968 shoved into the Ed Sullivan Shoe.
In the context of the movie, Fat Bottomed Girls live didn't sound that far removed from Now I'm Here live in the sense that they were both live 70s rock music tracks.
Well, yeah. If you want me to take your biopic seriously, you need to stick to material that's clearly accurate. Putting songs in the wrong era is a major distraction, and not just for "purists". I'm a minor Queen fan at most - I own the greatest hits and that's all I like - but I'd be distracted by songs in the wrong era. As someone noted, you're essentially saying it'd be fine with you if a Beatles movie had them playing "Revolution" on their 1966 tour or a Stones movie made them do "Ruby Tuesday" in 1965. Disagree. Again, if they're just used "FBG" as a montage backdrop, then I'd not mind. But if they're shown actually performing the song years before it was written, that's a real distraction, and it shouldn't be excused because some parts of the audience don't know the difference...
No one says movies can't be good/entertaining even with factual errors. But I don't understand the excuses offered for obvious mistakes. BTW, I always viewed "LOA" as largely fiction and a fable. Maybe I'm nitpicking, but I never even saw it as a biopic! It's an epic influenced by real events but not something I think ever tried to be a "true to life" tale...
And the movie is taking off all over the world, making a total of $141 million (combined U.S. and other countries)... ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ Makes The Rockin’ World Go Round With $123M Global Weekend – International Box Office
I get what you are saying really. But the members of Queen were involved so these were decisions rather than mistakes.
That's quite interesting, as "We Will Rock You" is easily one of their most iconic songs. I haven't seen the film, so I'll take your word for it that the creative liberties make sense (assuming it's a fact that Queen wasn't performing "Fat Bottomed Girls" as early as 1974). Nevertheless, having Queen write the opening track to "News of the World" while they were putting out "The Game" just seems weird to me. On the other hand, I think I read that the band members consulted on the film, so if it works for them, I guess it (theoretically) works for me (well, maybe not--won't really know until I see the movie). I would also add that I mentioned Oliver Stone's film, The Doors, as a point of reference. If I remember correctly, that film does have Morrison singing "Moonlight Drive" on the beach before the band has even formed, and then singing "My Wild Love" during a drug sequence, while the band is still in its earliest stages. However, I think the implication is that Morrison had already written those songs while living on the roof in Venice, so it's different in my opinion. EDIT: Just read the above post(s), which confirms that the band members were indeed involved.
I saw the movie last night and just finished watching their actual Live Aid performance. They really did go through some considerable trouble to get everything correct technically, down to the right speakers, microphones and stands. I was watching this is someone who shoots concerts, and appreciating the work of the various camera operators, especially the guy on stage left, whose camera Freddie just played with, getting his cameras Triax cable tangled with Freddy's microphone cable. And the guy on stage right with the huge podium camera, leaning back out over the crowd like he's on a sailboat at around 5:35. There's no more joyous moment in shooting a concert than having a performer who will play directly to the camera. Freddie was a video director's dream.
Thoroughly enjoyed it after the snooze fest that was Star Is Born. Many scenes gave me goosebumps. It was full of text book story writing cliches but a fantastic tribute to a fantastic legend and band. I left wanting to play all my Queen records.
FWIW, according to setlist.fm, the earliest that 'Fat Bottomed Girls' was played live was October 1978: Queen Tour Statistics | setlist.fm
Maybe. This assumes the band members remember dates - a big assumption, given how crappy musicians' memories can be! I still view these as "mistakes" because they're inaccurate. Intentional or not, they're still mistakes in my book...
But Now I’m Here doesn’t convey that sense of “young guys on their first tour of the US” abandon in the same way, does it?
No. And that's the scene where they're all on the coach, isn't it? The one where Roger has a woman each side of him on the back seat (if I recall right?).
