Rami Malek’s portrayal of Freddie Mercury in recent film, Bohemian Rhapsody, sparked widespread debate in the LGBT+ community for its divisive portrayal of Mercury’s bisexuality. Going into the film as a bisexual myself, I wanted so very much to be satisfied with the film’s representation, but when I walked out of the cinema, I’ll admit I was unsure. I immediately sought the internet for some clarity and was met with even more confusion.
There were those who ripped into the film for Mercury not being gay enough, and there were others who believed the film dismissed his bisexuality by presenting him a full-fledged gay in denial. Many defended the film, praising it for the scene in which Mercury admits to his fiancé that he believes he “might be bisexual.” Keeping with this perspective, his fiancé’s immediate dismissal where she tells Mercury that he is in fact gay, is an accurate portrayal of what it is often like as a bisexual; everyone’s always telling you that you’re just a straight person looking for attention (or ‘exploring’), or alternatively that you’re really just a gay person in denial. Others have criticised the film’s negative portrayal of Mercury’s gay manager, Paul Pretner, who was shaped into the film’s manipulative villain, leading Mercury astray into a life of gay temptation and frivolity that lead to Mercury’s eventual downfall. I must agree that it doesn’t paint a pretty picture.
In a recent interview with The View, Rami Malek commented on the film’s coverage of Mercury’s sexuality. In response to interviewer referring to Mercury as a “gay icon,” Malek states, “There is definitely a story there we could have delved deeper into. I don’t think that it’s glossed over… He talks about not wanting to be a poster boy for the disease. He wants to make music, and I think that he’s a revolutionary because he lived his most authentic life.” Malek makes a point to emphasise Mercury’s bisexuality as he continues, “Little did people know that he did have a six-year relationship with a woman who he called the love of his life, who is the only person who knows where his ashes are. He was engaged to [her], put a ring on that finger, and then he discovered he was bisexual, was gay. He is definitely a gay icon and a hero for everyone.” Malek appears deeply invested in ensuring his portrayal of Mercury is both accurate and respectful, conscious to emphasise the significance of the star’s relationships with both the men and women in his life. That’s about all I can ask of an actor representing my sexuality on such a large scale.
I would say the good outweighs the bad in Bohemian Rhapsody, having recommended the film to many a friend since watching it myself. I don’t believe the filmmakers or the actors involved had any intention of portraying Mercury’s bisexuality in a negative or dismissive light, but I must agree that the matter was handled carelessly by the filmmakers. I think we must give viewers enough credit to be able to separate Mercury’s downfall from his sexuality, but the film certainly buys into a number of stereotypes and patterns in modern media that are harmful to perceptions of the LGBT+ community. I know I would have liked to see more explicit clarification of Mercury’s bisexuality, but I can understand how this detail may have been overlooked by filmmakers intent on telling a story about music. Whilst these are certainly valid points of discussion, they don’t make Bohemian Rhapsody a bad or homophobic film as some have claimed. We shouldn’t let these faults overpower the significance of seeing such widespread representation and discussion of bisexuality in the media. When I sat in the packed cinema and I heard the word ‘bisexual’ coming from the mouth of the icon that is Freddie Mercury, I felt proud; I felt seen, and no criticisms can diminish that feeling.
TheScreenReview 