Watch McQueen

McQueen

McQueen is a movie starring Bernard Arnault, Joseph Bennett, and Detmar Blow. The life and career of fashion designer Lee Alexander McQueen: from his start as a tailor, to launching and overseeing his eponymous line and his untimely...

Other Titles
McQueen: Muodin kauhukakara, Alexander McQueen - Der Film, 時尚鬼才:McQueen, Alexander McQueen, McQueen, modets enfent terrible, Alexander McQueen - Il genio della moda, マックイーン モードの反逆児
Running Time
1 hours 51 minutes
Quality
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Genres
Biography, Documentary
Director
Ian Bonhôte, Peter Ettedgui
Writer
Peter Ettedgui
Actors
Detmar Blow, Bernard Arnault, Isabella Blow, Joseph Bennett
Country
UK
Year
2018
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Subtitles
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

デビッド・ボウイやレディー・ガガといったアーティストをはじめ、キャサリン妃にも愛されたファッションデザイナー、アレキサンダー・マックイーンのドラマティックな生涯を追ったドキュメンタリー。1969年にロンドンの労働者階級に生まれ、23歳で失業保険を資金にファッションデザイナーとしてデビューしたマックイーンは、27歳の若さでジバンシィのデザイナーに大抜擢される。自身のブランドで展開した過激なショーから「モードの反逆児」と呼ばれる一方、ボウイやガガなどの衣装、ビョークのMV監督、プーマやティム・バートンとのコラボなど精力的に活動を展開し、34歳で大英帝国勲章を授与される。しかし、成功の絶頂の中で2010年に40歳の若さで自ら命を断ってしまう。マックイーンの波乱に満ちた人生を友人や家族たちのインタビュー、発掘されたファッションアーカイブなどから迫っていく。マックイーンの友人でもあったマイケル・ナイマンが音楽を担当。

Comments about biography «McQueen» (21)

Madison Franklin photo
Madison Franklin

I am a huge fan of the director/writer/actor, Terrence Malick, so I was not surprised to see this documentary coming out on HBO, but I was intrigued by the filmmaker's (not to mention Malick's) response to it. I have always had the feeling that most documentaries that I have seen, were either ones that were less than 100 minutes long or none at all. For example, the documentary on the "controversial" Little Miss Sunshine is about 50 minutes long, but it is such a fun and inspiring story, it might be a bit long. It's like Malick is saying "Oh, and by the way, it's all great, but it's also very sad". "The New World" is also about 50 minutes long, but it is so well-made, I was just as shocked at how much was left out as I was by how much was included. I would say that Malick's documentary is a must-see, but if you are looking for a documentary that will enlighten and entertain, watch "The English Patient".

Joshua photo
Joshua

From the moment we see the King's black guards in the opening scenes of The Devil's Advocate, we are certain that the film is going to be a cinematic experience we will never forget. We are not wrong. The film is also wonderfully acted and beautifully shot. The acting is by far the best I have seen in any film this year. Jamie Foxx gives an amazing performance, perfectly capturing the tension and paranoia that is currently gripping the streets of Los Angeles. Naomi Watts is also superbly cast as the depressed, mentally ill "vixen" Elizabeth Harper. We see her on her journey from the mercy of her husband to the church where she must hide her true identity. She gives us an interesting character and the film is all the better for it. Her performance is a joy to watch, and one of the most memorable performances of the year. Ryan Gosling gives a strong performance, displaying the emotions of the "vixen" without ever seeming over the top or overacting. The film is also filled with some very powerful and emotional scenes. The scene between the two leads in the church is one of my favorite scenes in any film. The fact that the audience can actually feel the tension between the two is amazing. The two leading actors are also very emotional, in particular the work of Gosling. The film is also very powerful in a number of other ways. The cinematography is incredible, and the film never disappoints in its visual style. The sound design is also very memorable, and there are some truly incredible moments in the film. The film is a beautiful and powerful film, and it will not disappoint anyone who has seen it. It is a must see.

Jordan photo
Jordan

This documentary was done by the actor and director, James Toback, and the only other person who is related to the subject, Thomas Hughes. Toback told me that he knew nothing about the subject until he learned of the movie "Walk the Line" and the history of the original "Made in the USA" suit that they had to wear. He was really impressed that the movie got such a high rating, and thought that this movie would be an interesting subject for a documentary. His belief was confirmed when the subject matter was also discussed. He was really moved by the subject matter and the feelings that he was having about the subject. He also was impressed that the film had been made. I was also impressed that this documentary was so well done. The subjects were really interesting. The filming was done really well, and the film itself was really well done, as well as the audio. Toback also said that this movie was his favorite documentary to date. He also said that he would definitely watch it again. Toback told me that the hardest part was to make a movie out of something that was so important to him, but he had to be a little slow at first. However, once he started to get into it, he found that it was not only a good movie, but also a very emotional one. The acting was really well done, especially by the actors Toback had chosen for the subjects. The other actors did a great job, too. Toback said that the only two people who could have made the movie better than the ones he chose were the director and Toback himself. Toback also said that it was really good that he could help put this movie in a good place. I was really impressed with the quality of the movie. It really is a very good movie. The subject matter was very interesting, and the fact that Toback had to deal with something so important was a great experience for him. It also really showed that Toback is a very good director. The film was well done, and I really would recommend that people see this film. It really is a good movie, and I really would recommend that people watch it. I really think that this is a good documentary. The subject matter was very interesting, and it really shows that Toback is a good director. The movie was also well made, and I would recommend that people see it.

Richard photo
Richard

This film had its moments. Some of it was pretty good. But it was a lot of filler and the time I was watching it I could only guess what would happen. I don't like to waste my time. The most annoying part of this movie was the time I would be watching it and it would be about 20 minutes later. I don't think the filmmakers were even trying. I don't think they realized the movie they were making was boring and didn't want me to watch it. It is one of the most disappointing movies I have ever watched. The movie had a great story and it was made well. But it was all filler. I think the filmmakers wanted to make a statement and they missed it. They could have made a better movie. There were also scenes that were weird and a lot of people wouldn't understand. Like the way the characters were dressed. It was really weird. But it is also a good movie because it gave a glimpse of what the country was like in the 1970's. I think this was a movie that had a good story but they just didn't use the time well.

Harold W. photo
Harold W.

I didn't see this film when it was originally released. I never had a chance to watch it when it first came out in theaters. Now that I'm more familiar with the subjects discussed in this movie, I really enjoyed it. This movie has some good points. First and foremost, it's important to remember that this is a documentary film and not a documentary that is meant to be watched with the intent of watching a documentary. To really understand the issues presented in this film, I recommend you first watch "Bowling for Columbine" or "Battle: Los Angeles" (also a documentary) and then watch "The Mountain" again. In addition to the documentaries, I think the best part of this film is the interviews with those involved. Not only is there some very interesting information about the events that occurred in Colorado, but there are interviews with many of the main players. This includes Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Matt Lauer, Chris Matthews, Ed Schultz, Bill Maher's son and others. There is also a good segment with Larry King and a few others that is very interesting. All in all, this is a very interesting documentary that is well worth seeing.

Peter Long photo
Peter Long

A great documentary. It tells the story of a whole community of fishermen in the tropics and what they have to deal with. The film shows a lot of the different types of work they do and what they endure. The fisherman themselves are really interesting and they are really portrayed as people. It's a great film to watch. It also shows the bigger picture of what is going on in the world and how that affects the lives of people. Definitely one to watch.

Janice J. photo
Janice J.

What is more interesting than any of the numerous "documentaries" that have been put out about Robert Kiyosaki? It is this: how and why Kiyosaki, the "John Wayne of Cambodia" - a name that has been used so many times and so much, but never used in a very satisfactory way - became a character that would be remembered, an unquestioned icon of cinematic attention, one of the most powerful figures in American cinema and one of the few Americans to receive a Best Actor Oscar for the role of the Nguyen brothers in Oliver Stone's "Platoon." The filmmakers of this film have a lot to answer for. They have brought together a large group of individuals, but, for the most part, they have avoided the media's temptation to broadcast interviews with Kiyosaki, so as not to make a film that is either offensive or irrelevant. Instead, they have chosen to concentrate on his career, his family life, and his work on the French side during the Vietnam War. For all of them, this is an interesting and enjoyable documentary. But it's also a fascinating portrait of a man who changed the world. And of the people who were there, and who were in that scene in that village - which Kiyosaki himself found so fascinating - when he was working on the French side. One of the most interesting things about the film is that Kiyosaki is able to bring this experience to the screen. He was able to keep his emotions in check and use the audience's own experience of war to make a compelling film. This is not to say that the film is a triumph, or even a particularly good film. It is simply a film that is able to capture the feelings of one man who was there, and who was able to show it to the world.

Patrick photo
Patrick

This film is very well done, and clearly has had a great deal of time spent on it. It's also funny, very well produced, and has a fantastic music score. Even though I've seen this film so many times, I still find it very moving, and feel it deserves more attention. I give it a 9/10.

Randy H. photo
Randy H.

I found the film really interesting and I think it is a shame it was released without a proper promotion. The idea of keeping the film a secret until it was in cinemas seemed a bit strange but I am sure that with the internet it would have gone viral and people would have been able to see the film. I think that if the film was not well known it would have caused a lot of controversy and would have been banned. The film could have ruined me for life if I hadn't heard about it. I am sure that if the film was released sooner people would have heard about it and I think it would have been the reason to show it so the public would have seen the film. I think that the people who had the worst experience would have been the ones who were first to see the film and then would have changed their minds after seeing the film. This was just my opinion, I am sure that if you are more or less used to the idea of secret films then you would not like this film.

Benjamin photo
Benjamin

In recent years, documentaries have been made about the men and women who lost their lives while serving in the armed forces, and their families. The greatest of these is "My Honor Was Never Masked," which showed the effects of combat on the soldiers themselves. For the most part, they were filmed from a more personal point of view than is possible with most other films on the subject. "Troy," on the other hand, is set in modern times, and is about how one man, Justin Tran, was able to win $3.5 million from the American government. The film is shown almost entirely from his point of view. The film is unedited and takes no great liberties with the facts of the case. The "human interest" angle is present but is not used to the extreme that it could have been. The film is edited well and is very informative, even if it is somewhat difficult to watch. The film is also very well filmed. While it may be a bit hard to follow at times, I was able to follow it as I watched the film. The film is very well produced and the voice overs are very well done. The characters of Justin Tran and his brother Matthew are both well developed. The interviews of Tran's mother and sister are also very well done. The film is edited well, but it does not go into much detail about the case. Justin Tran was able to win the money, but the film does not explain how he was able to do it. In general, the film is very good. I recommend it highly. Grade B+

Ryan C. photo
Ryan C.

The film itself is remarkable, as is the way it was done. The only real problem is that this is one of the few movies that can truly stand alone, without any help. One can't simply add in the actors and scenes and call it a movie. It is very very difficult to translate a great book to the screen, and this is what the film did, it made a great book into a film, and this is the only reason to watch it. I was very surprised how much it was. You could tell that the book was edited, with the editing the scene was the opposite of the book, a few words were cut, and at the end of the movie, everything was in order, not just the last ten or so pages. I think there were some changes that were necessary, to make it fit into the movie. There were also some scenes that were cut, which I thought were very important. The movie was very long, but it made sense, and it had very few parts where the movie was boring. There were other parts where it was extremely interesting, such as the wedding, the death, and the first conversation between Jackie and Alex. These were some of the best parts, because they were very different from the book. There was also a scene with the blacksmith that was very important, because it was the last scene of the book. I think that if the movie had not been edited, the book would have been an incredible success. It was very well done, and I was very pleased with it. I would not say that it was the best movie ever made, but it was a very good movie, and I think that it would be very hard for any other film to stand on its own. I think that most people would probably be disappointed, but I think that people will be able to appreciate it for what it was, and the actors and actresses did an amazing job.

Sharon L. photo
Sharon L.

As a documentary filmmaker, my first instinct is to say, "this is a perfect documentary" as there is no exception. My next instinct is to say, "this is a perfect movie". When you think about it, this is the case as well. I also take a second look at it with a third and fourth look. Once you have a final look at the film, it is not a documentary anymore, but a movie. The feeling is the same, because it is an action movie, but you can say the same about this movie as you can about a documentary. The movie is about the activities of a single person. The film is about him, his situation, his life, his life now, and his life afterwards. The film is about his life, not his life. You don't need to see this film to know what it is about. There are some subjects that are difficult to study in a documentary, but I think this one is one of them. The story is about a man, one who has been a very good man for so many years, but in the last 15 years he started to act badly and in the last 15 years he started to act badly again. The film is about a man who could not stop his life until he became a criminal. What is fascinating about the story is that it is not what happened to him, but what he did with the life he had. I think that the film is a very good movie. There are moments when it is very hard to watch and you can say that it is not very informative, but I think it is worth watching to see what is really happening. I think that the film is not very educational, but it is very informative. This is the reason why I like this film and I think that it is one of the best documentaries I have seen.

Johnny Allen photo
Johnny Allen

Why would a Canadian citizen be filmed talking to a US citizen on the plane? As a Canadian, I thought it was wrong and should have been banned by the airline. If you are a US citizen, don't touch the phone. If you are a Canadian, don't talk to the other person while they are in the air. It is a ridiculous rule. Anyhow, this documentary is worth watching. The documentary is also a lesson in good documentary-making and telling the truth. I've seen many documentaries about the Kennedy assassination, and not one of them had the slightest interest in anything other than telling the truth. The only thing this documentary has is a lack of interest in the actual facts of the story, which is not surprising considering that it was all a lie. I don't want to hear about the "real reasons" behind Kennedy's assassination, it is always a lie. I'm glad that they made a documentary about it, instead of just the lies. Good documentary.

Lori Schultz photo
Lori Schultz

For anyone who is a real fan of Edward R. Murrow, then you will probably have heard of this documentary. While it is not as interesting as it could be, it does feature some clips from his interviews, and that alone is worth the price of admission. It is however, a bit too long and is quite boring at times. It's kind of a bit of a mix between a documentary, an interview with the subject and an overview of his career, with no real highlights. It is a very dry and very basic documentary, but not an awful one either.

Johnny C. photo
Johnny C.

This is an interesting documentary. The primary story is about how scientists came up with an idea to give a drug to people suffering from some form of terminal illness. That idea was in fact based on the same idea that we have about how to treat cancer. The drug that was developed was designed to treat a specific type of cancer. That drug was not designed to treat an entire group of cancers. The story here is a bit of a fictional story. However, it is more of a fictional story than a true story. I'm not sure why this film is called "The Story of a Drug" because the drug in question is not a drug. The drug was actually developed in the 1950s. It was designed to treat some form of cancer. The story here is that people didn't like the idea and it was banned. The story in this film is very accurate. This is a very entertaining documentary. It does a great job of getting you to understand the drugs we use to treat our diseases. The film does not just tell the story of the drug, it tells a very entertaining story of how that story was developed.

Alexander H. photo
Alexander H.

Like the first, but this time with a bit more depth and political commentary. There was more of a critique of the government, but it's still a good documentary. When I first heard about the film I didn't think it would be any good. But after watching it I changed my mind. The film is very well done, it has a good story, good music, and some good actors. It's definitely worth a watch, it's definitely worth a watch. I'd recommend it, if you like political documentaries, you might enjoy it. And if you hate political documentaries, you might not like it.

Laura Mills photo
Laura Mills

The stark reality of the "capitalism of the Twenty-First Century" is one of the best things to come out of the documentary format in years. I can't see any other way of seeing it than as an attack on the policies that have led us here. It's not that the film is a great overview of the economic system. It's just that the facts are so convincing and so relevant to the current situation. I think the point that the director wants to make is that capitalism works only when it is unchecked. It's true that certain parts of the economy, like energy and healthcare, have benefited immensely from "free-market" reforms. But so have others, like manufacturing and the banking system, and it's certainly not the case that they are the only ones benefiting from the new economic system. As the director explains, it's not just that the economy is growing, but that so are the other sectors of the economy, like government and health care. This is only one example of a very common phenomenon in our current economic system: the destructive impacts of the free-market system are concentrated in a few sectors, and only a few people have the power to make it change. Capitalism may have created the whole economy, but it has also created a system in which a few can make the system work better for themselves, and a few can make the system work worse for everyone else. This is a problem, and it's a problem that we need to start to address. But for a more in-depth look at the economic system, the documentary series "The Corporation" by Tom Paine is a more useful and accessible option.

Kyle Lawrence photo
Kyle Lawrence

While I have not read the book, I have read many of the many books that Mr. Eastwood wrote over the years, including "Bullitt," "Patton," "The Shooter," "The Last Picture Show," and many others. I have also read the many critical comments that have been made by various critics, as well as others. I believe that the critical criticism is fair, and that the only criticism that Mr. Eastwood has not been vindicated is his own. I personally believe that if we had to criticize something that has been so heavily criticized by others, it would be difficult to be objective. Mr. Eastwood has done a great job of bringing his own ideas and perceptions to the public, and in so doing, he has made it difficult to criticize the film. I am not sure whether it was because of the public's reaction to "The Deer Hunter," or the criticism that the public received, but Mr. Eastwood has not been vindicated. I believe that the public should have an opportunity to view the film, and that is what I was looking forward to when I saw the film. I believe that the public has to be given the opportunity to see this film, as I believe it is their right to do so, and that is what I was looking forward to. I believe that there was much that could have been done to make the public more aware of the film, including having the Director of the film present the film, making sure that the public was informed, and having other public officials speak out against the film. I believe that this is a good film, and I believe that it should be viewed by the public, so that we can discuss the issues raised in the film, and decide for ourselves whether we agree or disagree with them.

Ruth photo
Ruth

I saw this film at the 2011 Sundance Film Festival. I thought it was great. It's a great story about the possibility of a better world. The story is also interesting about the difficulties of women, or women in general. It's a great film and worth watching. If you are looking for a movie to watch this year, then you should definitely check this one out. The film is based on a book by a woman named Judith Sherwood. She is a former British political adviser who has written a book called "The New Rules of Women". The film shows Sherwood's life as she goes through the years as a woman in politics, and how that led her to the feminist movement that became women's liberation. I also loved how the film showed the struggles that women had when they started to become an activist. This film is a great movie about the future, and I think this is a good film for anyone who wants to see a great film about the future of women.

Aaron Walters photo
Aaron Walters

I remember reading some of the comments for this documentary, and it really is a very interesting look at the lives of some of the more influential people in pop culture. I'm not a big fan of pop culture, but I enjoyed this documentary. The history is interesting, and the filmmakers did a very good job of piecing together all the information they could about this period in pop history. The reason I enjoyed this documentary so much is because I am an avid fan of music history. The documentary is a great way to learn about some of the most influential bands in history, and the music they made. The fact that they did not paint the band members in a positive light just added to the significance of the interviews. The interviews are all very interesting and entertaining. I really enjoyed this documentary, and I would recommend it to anyone who is interested in pop culture.

Lauren photo
Lauren

This is a documentary about the real life of "Stiffler" a.k.a. Chuck Bower. This was a true story, and I would highly recommend it. Although I am not a Chuck Bower fan, I can't really say I wasn't impressed with this documentary. "Stiffler" is a real life that was great, but sadly and not so great at the same time. The main highlight of this documentary is the story of the people who was part of the Stiffler story. It is hard to understand why this person was so famous in the early 80's, and now. I would also say the story of this man was very much influenced by his drug abuse. For example, when he was introduced to cocaine, his mental state became worse and worse. He had a girlfriend who got pregnant and a girlfriend who was caught and that is the reason he was caught. I found out he was a meth head and it was something he told his sister about. He said " I am not going to be with anyone that is on drugs". This is something that the drug abuse that he had did not change. That was what he told his sister about. Another thing that I found interesting was that when he first became famous, he was probably the most successful drug user and he was in a very bad condition. He was probably on cocaine, and he was getting a bad skin condition and had no energy. This made him so much weaker. However, he overcame all that and did get his fame. In the end, he was the most successful drug user of all time. So I believe that the story of this man was amazing and that he was a huge influence on the world. However, in my opinion he was also the worst drug user ever and had a horrible mental state. His drug use also made him look like he had lost control of his life, and it did not work out as well as he wanted it to. Another thing that I really liked was that the documentary covered the whole story of his life and that he was never ashamed of his drug use. He was not ashamed of it, and he was proud of it. He was also proud of his accomplishments in the world of music. I believe that the best thing in this documentary was the story of his mother. I think that she was a great influence on his life and that she was very loving towards him. It was also a great life lesson for him. He learned about love, and that is something that he wanted to learn. This documentary was interesting and I highly recommend it.