It was recently announced that four Beatles biopics would be released in the near future, each focusing on one member of the band, creating a Beatles cinematic universe. The films are noted for being the first cinematic project with the full support of Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the estates of John Lennon and George Harrison. This four-picture project is just the latest in an accelerated stream of artist biopics, both authorized and not, that have filled up cinemas in the past decade.
While they may seem like a new commodity exemplifying Hollywood’s current lack of original ideas, artist biopics are nothing new. “Harlow” tells the story of ‘30s actress Jean Harlow, 1975’s “The Buddy Holly Story” reintroduces the ‘50s singer to popular culture, “Amadeus” goes further back in history to give a portrait of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and scored eight Academy Awards, “What’s Love Got to Do With It’” was an Oscar nominated Tina Turner story and “Ray” gave Jamie Foxx an Oscar for his performance as Ray Charles. Musical biopics are nothing new, and neither are people getting awards for them, for all detractors like to attack Rami Malek for winning the Oscar for his work in “Bohemian Rhapsody” and starting a trend of expectations.
These biopics are just a subsection of the historical film genre, which has been producing biopics and fiction stories since the beginning of the movie industry. History makes for a natural source of entertainment and it is only logical for Hollywood to look to the past for inspiration — their job is to tell stories and history is one big storybook. And the process of making something digestible for audiences out of that storybook can be quite tricky, especially when people turn to movies for something they should not.
Biopics are responsible for telling entire lifetimes in two to three hours while still having a plot and structure for the audience to follow. They are not documentaries and are within their rights to rearrange the timeline of events, adjust facts or outright invent things to make the film “good cinema.” One should never turn to Hollywood for facts because that is not their job. Whether creating a drama, a comedy or even a musical, the primary purpose of a biopic is not to educate but to entertain. Movies can be filled to the brim with half-truths and alterations and it does not matter.
It can certainly be disconcerting for people overly familiar with a topic to go watch a movie and be able to spot all the “mistakes” present. Still, films must cater to general audiences, not nit-pickers. Naturally, making a movie bursting with lies and intentional misinformation can be irresponsible, especially when they are unauthorized works seeking to exploit a person’s life for entertainment. That said, as long as a biopic captures the spirit of a person and gets people interested in learning the truth behind the tale, it has done its job.
If you want the facts of a person’s life, go read a biography. If you want to have a good time, get yourself some popcorn and go watch a movie.
