The Biopic Spectrum: From Factual to Fabricated
Written and Graphic By Sierra Ball
Countless celebrities are idolized every decade, and some are just special enough to have their life stories portrayed through film. Biopics have been around since Georges Melies wrote a story based on Joan of Arc in 1900. However, in recent years, some of these series and movies have become more damaging than people may realize. Are biopics honoring the public figures we adore? Or should we leave the storytelling to them and their loved ones?
In 2022, one of the most anticipated biopics was released: “Elvis.” We saw Austin Butler win a Golden Globe and a BAFTA for his portrayal of Elvis Presley. This movie depicts Elvis Presley’s rollercoaster of a career and his relationship with Colonel Tom Parker, a money-hungry villain who disguised himself as a passionate manager. We see aesthetics with vibrant and muted colors, and dazzling to dim lights to represent the range of emotions and events in Presely’s life. In this case, the movie was supported by Presley’s loved ones. Priscilla Presley, his ex-wife, was happy to share on her Facebook page that the story was “told brilliantly and creatively,” and called Butler’s version of Elvis “outstanding.”
“Bohemian Rhapsody,” the Queen biopic, was made with the help of the band’s guitarist, Brian May. The movie showcases events in Queen’s timeline from the recording of the song, “Bohemian Rhapsody,” to their legendary Live Aid performance in 1985. May tells Daily Star that he felt the movie was made in the right respect for frontman Freddie Mercury. These biopics, and others, such as “Rush'' and “Rocketman,” were made in good taste, the former even being produced by the story’s subject, Elton John. Unfortunately, this does not apply to all biopics.
Marilyn Monroe was a bona fide sensation of the 1950s and 60s. She is remembered for her projects like Gentlemen Prefer Blondes and Some Like it Hot, as well as the challenges she battled as a woman in the film industry. In 2022, Blonde, directed by Andrew Dominik, was released on Netflix. The film depicts an embellished version of Monroe’s life, based on the book Blonde by Joyce Carol Oates. Unfortunately, many viewers found that it diminished the star’s true impact on the world and instead focused on her romantic relationships and traumatic experiences throughout her life. While those things are important to who she was, the movie fell flat in honoring her talent, passion, and kindness.
Dominik tells Sight and Sound that, “in the end, it’s about the book. And adapting the book is really about adapting the feelings that the book gave me.…I think the film is about the meaning of Marilyn Monroe.” When asked if any part of the story is optimistic, the director responded: “I mean, no. Blonde is supposed to leave you shaking…It’s a howl of pain and rage.”
Andrew Dominik didn’t intend for the film to be upbeat in any sense, and was just creating a version of Oates’ book, which is exactly the reason why audiences were unsettled after watching Blonde. It romanticized the pain and suffering Monroe endured.
Another film that falls short is Stardust, the 2020 David Bowie biopic directed by Gabriel Range. Dylan Jones, GQ’s former Editor-In-Chief and author of two books on Bowie, had more than a few issues with the movie: “Bowie’s estate point-blank refused to license any of his music for it,” he wrote. Jones added that Johnny Flynn, the actor who played the singer, “isn’t good enough, the script isn’t good enough, the direction isn’t good enough and without Bowie’s music the film is nothing but a sideshow.”
I will say, Dylan Jones is better than me, as I couldn’t even make it 20 minutes into the film without feeling the need to Google it’s Rotten Tomatoes score (a whopping 19%) and then turning it off. Needless to say, myself and plenty of others disappointed by Stardust are anxiously awaiting a biopic that will live up to the magic that David Bowie exuded.
Whether you love them or hate them, biopics will remain a prominent version of storytelling in the film industry for many years to come. Icons of Gen Z, such as Coco Gauff, Harry Styles, and Virgil Abloh, will be highlighted in this way soon enough and presented to the world to be picked apart and praised. They’ll be seen by fans and critics who will judge how well the stories embody their favorite, and least favorite, people. Keeping in mind that films are enhanced in the name of interest and creative freedom, hope is held that filmmakers can pay respect to the true essence of people’s lives, on and off the big screen.