In 1984, British journalist Arthur Stuart investigates the career of 1970s glam superstar Brian Slade, who was heavily influenced in his early years by hard-living and rebellious American singer Curt Wild.
1971: Glamrock explodes all over the world and challenges the seriousness within the flower power generation by means of glitter and brutal music. Brian Slade, a young rock star, inspires numerous teenage boys and girls to paint their nails and explore their own sexuality. In the end Slade destroys himself. Unable to escape the character role of "Maxwell Demon" that he created, he plots his own murder. When fans discover the murder is not real, his star falls abruptly and he is quickly forgotten about. 1984: Arthur, a journalist working for a New York newspaper, gets assigned the tenth anniversary story about the fake murder of Brian Slade. When Arthur was young and growing up in Manchester, he was more than a fan of Slade. Reluctantly he accepts the assignment and starts to investigate what happened to his old glamrock hero.Written by
Courtney Love considered supplying music to the film's soundtrack; however, she withdrew after viewing a rough cut, claiming that the character of Curt Wild too closely resembled her late husband Kurt Cobain, both in character and physicality. The Wild/Cobain parallel later became a much-discussed point among critics, and while director Todd Haynes and actor Ewan McGregor have noted similarities between Cobain and Wild, both claim the resemblance was unintended. Haynes, for his part, notes that Cobain borrowed many style traits from Iggy Pop, who served as partial basis for the Wild character. See more »
During the "Death of Glitter" concert, the bassist of The Flaming Creatures takes his hands off the bass for several seconds to reattach the shoulder strap during the song "20th Century Boy", but the bassline of the song continues uninterrupted. See more »
I have a fondness for good artists that have skilled energy, grand scope and fearless ambitions. If they give us that, who really cares if a project doesn't meet its infinite horizon? Is it less powerful when it fails? Does it matter that the subject is about precisely this?
About the subject, a gay boy grows up with talent and contrives to make a lush production with extremes of sexual matters and societal thinnesses. Slade and Haynes.
Sure, I thought the flying saucer business extreme stylistic gaudiness, but isn't that the point? I found all the narrative threads broken, the first manager, the fan/groupie/reporter, the wife. Sure it was a Citizen Kane with big gaps. Sure it was an experiment in several, parallel narrative devices not entirely integrated. Wasn't that the point?
Contrast it to Oliver Stone's film of the Doors. Polished, emotionally safe. Does that make sense?
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.
13 of 18 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this