Stardust

There are many thing wrong with this film. The most obvious one being the failure of the producers to secure the rights to Bowie's music for a film about Bowie's music. The second issue is that the story is in accurate. The film implies that until Bowie invented Ziggy he was a failure in the US until the Spiders from Mars album was out. This is false. Before Ziggy and after TMWSTW Bowie released an album called Hunky Dory which had a US hit called Changes, an FM staple called Life on Mars, and a song that changed rock and roll, called Queen B*tch. The riff of Queen B*tch is maybe the most copied riff since Chuck Berry, especially by punk and new wave bands. So the fact that this film pretends this album never existed to serve some made up story is dishonest

Third mistake is having a 60 year old Marc Marin playing a 39 years old is very distracting.

I'm a rabid devotee and aficionado of Bowie. Frankly, I wasn't expectant to see a film of the highest order. I had qualms...and for good reason.

In my estimation to portray David Bowie is a fool's errand. The man was peerless with creative restlessness, panache and flair that no one absolutely no one could touch. Flynn's attempt to show us Bowie onscreen left me cold. He's not cut out to play David Bowie. I was underwhelmed to say the least. Yeah, an awful lot of people claim that he doesn't bear a slightest resemblance to David. To my mind it's not the case. The storytelling is slapdash, film's attempts to unveil the true story failed spectacularly. To crown it all the fact that this freaking film simply overlooked Hunky Dory is unforgivable. What's the hell??? That was a breakout album for Bowie, a step change in his music direction, the time when he recalibrated his sound and vision. I can go on and on.

Having said that, gotta give the devil it's due. The flick gave it a try to shine a light on the more obscure Bowie period. The time when his career was still at an embryonic stage. He tried to make his way as an artist and find his voice at long last.

Some fervent fanatics of the flick can slam me claiming that I'm in no position to criticize. But hey, I have a good mind to voice my opinion. David Bowie means the world to me.

If you wanna get into Bowie, this film is not a step in the right direction. In case you live and breathe Bowie, don't even bother.

David Bowie was a one-off. The mercurial artist was always on the move artistically. He was unafraid to switch gears. Bowie took chances thought his long term-career and seldom let up. Make no mistake his legacy will live indefinitely.

Terrible movie, Marc Bolan is a 60 year old woman in a black curly wig, Bowie looks like Noel Fielding's resurrected zombie twin. We couldn't watch it, turned it off about one third the way through, just dreadful.

It is sad when the most intriguing parts of a film are the vintage cars and hotel carpeting.

It's a shame the makers of this film ever invoked the name of David Bowie. It wasn't required by the script, and at the top of the film it is disclaimed as "mostly fiction."

Johnny Flynn as David Jones/Bowie presents an image I don't associate with Bowie: childish, kind of stupid, lacking direction or drive. We take a really long road trip with him and his road manager, and his flashbacks and daydreams add up to nothing much. I feel for Flynn. I think his role is poorly written and misdirected.

Mark Maron does a fine job as Oberman, Bowie's road manager. Perhaps the story would have been interesting told from hisp erspective -- what he saw and heard. Instead, the film tells about things it doesn't seem to know much about. It's mostly surface.

The parade of anecdotes lead nowhere, several music writers pass through to little effect.

Jena Malone delivers, but her wig is bad and distracting... and what happened to the big bump in her dress? I guess we'll never know. Nothing unites her character while pregnant with the slender post-birth iteration.

This film does not excel at complete ideas.

If I was giving the keys to direct a semi-true story about how David Bowie found his footing in the music world, I would never have taken this approach. What a buzz kills. You know you are going to get a slew of rabid Bowie fans to watch this; why make it look like Bowie is a stupid quack. I can't imagine much of this story is based on true events. Perhaps he had some struggles getting his music footing so don't spend 90% of the movie on that and leave your audience not excited about Bowie's rise to Fame; pun intended! There wasn't even any music or early tracks to hear even if they weren't big hits. This did try to paint a picture about Bowie's humble beginnings and how hard it was to reach stardom in America. And how he struggling to find himself in real life and trying to find who he truly is as an artist. It focused on his relationship with a publicist who believed that Bowie could be big in America. All solid points to build into a story. But the main problems were these: Zero character arc.

Zero enjoyment.

Zero Bowie music.

Zero new insights learned.

Who would choose to tell this story with a miniscule payoff or leave the fans excited to play some Bowie on the drive home?

The director and producer (rarely do I call out the producer) managed to make David Bowie uninteresting, flat and devoid of magic. I tinkled in a few rating points for cinematography, lighting and acting.