.png "English"){kind=small}
While I still don't think that Luke Arnold looks as much like Hutchence as a lot of people are claiming, I have to admit that he nailed the look during one scene. This is video of the real deal
(The part re-enacted comes in at 04:02)
Now that I am over my emotions (mostly) about the film, I have some criticism.
First, it was a little bit disturbing how some things presented previously in the INXS book were done so differently in the movie. Here is where you're going to be able to tell that I am a super-fan:
- The scene where Hutchence was injured by the cab driver. (The book has him drunk and outside while Helena Christensen was still in the club.)
- Garry Garry Beers infidelity with a back-up singer. (Book: was hazier but the story seemed slightly different.)
- The drug use. (I'm Team-Tina Hutchence on this one. The book detailed lots of drug use by other band members - not just Michael. I really thought it was tacky that they portrayed him acting way higher at Rockpalast than videos of the actual concert.)
- The infidelity. (The book included accounts of some of the other guys chasing their share of ass. The movie portrayed them as almost saintly in their marriages. I'm just saying.)
- Some things were just touched on and then left to fade without explanation: Mrs. Farriss's illness and death. Whatever happened to Mr. Farriss.
- Not enough attention was given to the other band member's lives and accomplishments. (One of the greatest things about them as a band was that they worked hard to treat each other as equals, even when the world didn't.)
- I wish they had included more of Hutchence's history with Michele Bennett. (She's obviously a lovely woman. I always hoped that it was her that Michael had ended up living out life with - I mean, since it wasn't going to be me...)
- There was too much focus on sex. Fans have already heard how "sexual" Hutchence was. I think it would have been nice to show more of his intellectual interests and heart.
There are a couple other things that fans will find depicted in a more "for dramatization purposes" than the way it seemed to have happened in real life.
Now. I am going to have a little bit of a rant about a few things:
First - about the heat Tina Hutchence is taking from Chris Murphy - excuse me, C.M. Murphy. The guy is obviously genius when it comes to promoting artists, but I was put off by reports of how he responded to Ms. Hutchence's criticism of the film. One report talked about how he and the surviving members of the band have Michael's daughter's best interests at heart. They made this movie to show her another side of her father, blah, blah, blah. I'm not sure that Hutchence would be any more pleased than his sister with the way their mother was portrayed in the film. (The comment about Tina being a "side half-sister" was particularly nasty, in my opinion.) No matter what your feelings are within a family, No one outside should dis your mom or sibling. Second of all, Murphy hit low by implying that if Tina cared so much, she would have "been there" for Michael. Wow. Really? Well, the guys in the band were like his brothers and they weren't able to be any more "there" when it counted. Who could be? Michael was troubled, just as lots of people who take their lives are. I thought that was a low blow to loved ones of any suicidal person. If one claims to care so much about Hutchence's daughter, you'd think they'd be more careful in what they say about that child's aunt. (I didn't include links to these articles because I was too lazy, but you can find them easily.)
All in all, I am glad the movie was made. It's nice that the band's hard work is recognized by their country. I do think that it would take a full-length, cinematic-grade film to capture the whole story. I've heard that the movie to see is one being worked up by Richard Lowenstein. That's the one I'll be waiting for.
Peace
--Free
