Havin’ a good time

‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ one of best biopic films

Bohemian Rhapsody hit the big screen Nov. 2.

20th Century Fox

Bohemian Rhapsody hit the big screen Nov. 2.

Chloe Presley, Staff Writer

The lights dim as the awaiting film starts with an impatient audience waiting to see the ups and downs of the story that is Queen. They watch eagerly as the flamboyant rock singer named Freddie Mercury, portrayed by Rami Malek, dazzles the stage yet again, even after his death.

“Bohemian Rhapsody,” filmed by director Bryan Singer and released on Nov. 2, made more than $26 million on its opening weekend, making it the second highest grossing biopic film of all time. The film covers the life of Queen’s animated lead singer Farrokh Bulsara, or Freddie Mercury, throughout its entire two hours and 13 minutes.

A superior high to the film was the fact that it didn’t focus on Mercury’s struggle with AIDS, though many people were wanting that. Due to former band members helping with the production of the movie, they chose to focus on his artistry and struggle within the music industry.

“When I’m dead, I want to be remembered as a musician, of some worth and substance,” Mercury said before his death.

The people who worked on the film did just that. While AIDS and his sexuality was mentioned, it wasn’t the whole focus of the film.

Another significant plus of this movie is Malek’s undeniable, astounding performance of the lead singer.

However, not every movie is perfect. The low of this film was perhaps the rearrangement of dates. Some dates were switched around, most likely to make the film more dramatic. While many people find that it ruined the movie, in others’ opinions, the film only did it to focus more on Mercury’s struggles as an artist.

“Bohemian Rhapsody” was a film that could possibly go down in history as one of the better biopic films of all time. Malek’s moving performance of the late singer has moved hearts all across the nation, mine included.