Musician-centered biopics, or films that portray the lives of famous real-life singers, have become a notable subgenre that, although present since the inception of cinema itself, seems to keep appearing and disappearing.
As soon as audiences began to grow tired of them, they’d stop being made for a while, such as the 2000s boom after the release of “Selena” in 1997 and remained popular until the subgenre was thoroughly mocked in “Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story” in 2007.
Outside of notable examples like “Straight Outta Compton,” musician biopics hibernated for a while. Then, the subgenre found its next big boom following the release and ensuing awards sweep of “Bohemian Rhapsody” in 2018, which we are still seeing the effects of today.
But after almost a decade of mediocre movies, it’s time to stop the trend.
The past couple of years have seen the release of “Bob Marley: One Love,” “Back to Black,” “Better Man,” and “A Complete Unknown” in 2024, and “Springsteen: Deliver Me From Nowhere” this year, with “Michael” on the way next year. There are even biopics based around Britney Spears and all four of the Beatles already in production.
It’s getting to the point that biopics are being made about artists who already have one or two to their name. Two biopics about Bob Dylan have been nominated for Oscars within the past 20 years, and Netflix released a show about Selena with none of the glamor or staying power of Jennifer Lopez’s iconic portrayal.
Biopics about tragic figures like Amy Winehouse in “Back to Black,” directed by controversial figure Sam Taylor-Johnson, have been heavily criticized for exploitation, thereby alienating any fans they might be hoping to capitalize on.
In general, though, exploitative films about victims of the industry are being phased out in favor of films about relatively safe public figures who, in adaptation, have had all their edges sanded down. This is nearly always the case when the musician or their family is directly involved in the film’s production.
Elton John can’t be anything but an unambiguous hero in a film he’s producing, and Queen can’t sell tickets to their reunion tour if they let their studio’s film show too many unsavory details.
This historical whitewashing has even proven to be the case for biopics about artists that, in our modern era, are considered “problematic.” “Elvis” controversially downplayed the star’s relationship with Priscilla Presley, whom he began courting when she was fourteen and he was twenty-four.
Whenever another biopic is announced, with or without a casting decision attached, it’s almost always followed by outrage from super-fans and disinterest from general audiences. So why have they continued to release?
University of Iowa Adam Kempenaar teaches several film classes in the university’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication and said he believes musician biopics stand to have strong staying power.
“They seem relatively inexpensive to make, are generally profitable, and, when done proficiently, can garner a lot of awards attention,” he said.
UI music professor Nathan Platte had a positive outlook on the subgenre since he said he thinks the films capture the special feeling of being moved by beloved music.
“Biopics also get us thinking about the ways film itself can depict, or fail to depict, the energies that animate an artist, their music, and their audiences. Biopics are notorious for often getting it wrong. Turns out, it’s easy to make an inspiring musical experience look corny. But it’s also a worthwhile challenge,” he said.
Corny is the operative word here. As intriguing as a film about a famous artist may be, more often than not, you’ll be getting the same tired rags to riches story we’ve all seen a million times.
Both the aforementioned “Walk Hard” and the more recent “Weird: The Al Yankovic Story” have parodied this tired formula, yet that hasn’t stopped uninspired screenwriters from defaulting to time-honored tropes to this day.
“It’s not the reverence that’s the issue. It’s all the clichés,” Kempenaar said.
Even if the script is clichéd as all hell, it’s at least worth it to have fun with the presentation. The first Bob Dylan biopic, “I’m Not There,” made the novel decision of having six actors portray the artist during different points in his life, including the late Heath Ledger, Cate Blanchett, and Marcus Carl Franklin, a young Black actor. “Better Man” chose to have the singer play a version of himself that just so happens to be visualized as a CGI ape.
“From my perspective as a film fan and film critic, historical accuracy isn’t something I’m seeking from a narrative feature,” Kempenaar said. “The filmmakers should have some creative license, and besides, they’re going to need it, there’s no other way to compress a musician’s life story down to two hours.”
If these cheap musician biopics really are here to stay, the best they can achieve is to be weird and brutally honest. I’ve seen enough of these types of movies, so studios better start making them worth my while.