Hollywood Needs To Stop Letting Stars Author Their Own Biopics – Agree or Disagr…

Hollywood Needs To Stop Letting Stars Author Their Own Biopics - Agree or Disagr... 4

Hollywood Needs To Stop Letting Stars Author Their Own Biopics – Agree or Disagree?




  1. Am I missing a beat about what exactly was skipped over?

    Normally I’d agree with the central premise and Straight Outta Compton and Bohemian Rhapsody are prime examples of meddling but as far as I can tell, Rocketman didn’t seem to hold back??

  2. Well they still need permissions off them (or next of kin) whether they are alive or dead, it just depends how open they want to be about their lives. This is what made Bohemian Rhapsody a bit of a letdown as you can clearly tell Brian May and Roger Taylor we’re involved with it as their versions come off as complete angels in the film and you only need to do a small bit of research to know that Freddie Mercury was a lot wilder than the film showed. Same could be said for Dr Dre and Ice Cube with Straight Outta Compton.

    Elton John on the other hand is probably one who wouldn’t give a shit what people think and is a complete open book. Haven’t seen the film myself but I bet he doesn’t hold back. If he does it’ll be due to film makers having to make it ‘suitable for hollywood’

  3. Weird to write this piece after Rocketman which was excellent and in which Elton John has by all accounts encouraged the darker, meaner parts of his life. I think it just comes down to who it is, as with any author or other influence on a film. A good author will write good things. Bohemian Rhapsody shows when it doesn’t work, Rocketman shows when it does.

  4. I think they should be either dead or not take part. In Straight Outta Compton we had it skip over some of the bad Dr Dre parts since it was produced by him. With other ones you could have a star try and influence their coming legacy with what they write in their movie. I rather see how human they are in the biopics made after they pass.

  5. In theory, yes, but Rocketman is a different case because Elton John insisted Rocketman to showcase his flaws and not hide from it at all. As he said so himself, if you soften his edges, it’s not an interesting story. I agree with the premise, but I don’t think Rocketman is the best example of this.

  6. Really really depends. Elton John was comfortable about being portrayed as an asshole, so it varies from person to person and studio to studio executive

  7. It depends on the person. Rocket man isn’t a straight bio pic.

    When you do musical bios you need the artist or their estate. Otherwise you don’t get the music.

    Andre 3000 did a Hendrix bio but they couldn’t get music rights so you have a bunch of covers in the movie

  8. You’re right, no more autobiographies. Let’s leave everything to outsiders who may not have all context.

    Why can’t we have both?

  9. Chappelle had a classic joke on Antwon fisher with the same premise. Imagine if you let me write my own life story lol

  10. >The vast majority of faces from pop cultural history have treated a movie as a chance to shape and secure their legacy, the exact antithesis of the form, which exists to pick apart the public’s conception of a well-known figure and then defy it.


    >There’s only one right way to make a certain kind of film and I decide what that is.

    -Person who makes nothing

  11. As long as it’s a good, entertaining movie, I honestly don’t care that much. So maybe it’s a little biased, and I can’t speak to everyone’s preferences, but I’d rather see a good movie that twists the truth to its benefit than a honest movie that’s just bad.

  12. Film biopics, whether influenced by the artist or not are always going to gloss over/smooth over stuff to get the movies narrative across.

    Probably shouldn’t be looking to movies as actual biographies in any event.

  13. AGREE! I mean, Straight Outta Compton was straight Dr. Dre/Ice Cube propaganda. The credit scenes were particularly cringeworthy.

  14. I think this is unfortunately the limitations of movie as an art form vs. an educational tool. There will always be business interests to show people what they want to see instead of the nitty gritty details of somebody’s real life. If you want a real educational experience, you need to read the books these films are based on (biopics are almost always based on a book, even if it is an autobiography) instead of expecting to see a mainstream film that meets all of your expectations.

  15. The title is misleading. The Elton John biopic, and the others cited only had *input* from their subjects, they didn’t ~~write shit~~ have quite *that* much influence.

    It’s a tough subject. I get how artist involvement makes the film bland (the case of RBG in the article embodies this problem completely) by only showcasing what the person wants out there.

    On the other hand, you have tinstletown’s habit of making up shit to fit agendas or to make the story more entertaining (see every biopic ever made). I loathe the latter issue much more, so I’d rather the artist be involved.

    Just please, no more stars playing themselves in their life stories, that shit is more awkwardly terrible than anything.

  16. I think that it’s Hollywood and they are going to produce whatever they need to to make the most money- As far as i’m concerned, Elton John was and continues to be a man with unmatched talent who has given the world such great music and that music created great memories for me- one thing is that he’s turned his own success to give a lot of money to many great causes and for that, i say thank you-

  17. Unfortunately, there’s a huge market for sensationalist tales penned by Names….the same market responsible for much of the dross on daytime TV.

  18. Remember when some members of NWA produced a biopic about the group starring one of the group’s most successful member’s son playing his father? Pepperidge Farm remembers.

  19. It’s not a documentary and it’s their lives so I take no issue. If I want “the facts” I’ll do my own research or find a trusted source to give me the dirt. As it is, these are much like historical fiction, a fun look at history that shouldn’t be taken as gospel.

  20. Hollywood *needs* to do a lot of things.

    They never seem to do any of it unless *shamed* into it.

%d bloggers like this: