Because, it seems, movie studios have decided that American audiences have an endless appetite for movies about fragments of famous people's lives, next up, the young John Lennon!
Now, I love the Beatles. I had a serious hippie phase in late elementary school that included a detailed drawing of Lennon's face in Sgt. Pepper mode on a "Make Love, Not War" sign that my mother wouldn't let me carry when I went trick-or-treating as a flower child. But this looks deeply tiresome. There's no music, no physical resemblance to jog those deep-seated, subcortical memories. It's only a family drama with a bit of guitar-playing (and Kristin Scott Thomas, who is lovely and aristocratic, but leaves me a bit cold) and accents. And this is the problem with biopics. Simply because people are or were famous, simply because they produced interesting work, doesn't mean they are themselves inherently fascinating.
This seems to be something studios have yet to figure out. And I'll admit it's unduly prejudiced me against biopics in general. I feel as if I can tell the difference: Malcolm X is interesting because of how far he rose in life, and the ideological shifts he went through along the way; Johnny Cash had an astonishing, intriguing marriage, and performed remarkable feats of self-mythology and creation. I don't know that, even though I love John Lennon's music, that I actually find him interesting (it could be I'm just burned out from reading far too many Beatle biographies). Amelia Earhart did extremely brave things, but the reasons she did it are basic psychology today in a way they might have been thirty years ago (a point I think is well-made in this week's New Yorker review). Frank Sinatra probably has the makings of a decent biopic, but it depresses the hell out of me to read about how actors--who may or may not be remotely suitable for the role--are scrambling all over it because biopic means Oscar. Given the American public's viewing preferences, it's not totally shocking that studios would mistake fame for substance.
But it does make me feel a bit petulant about biopics as a form: I honestly don't want to watch them any more because I don't want to encourage them. I don't want more Morgan Freeman shot from the side and behind to evoke the thrill of recognition we get when we catch a glimpse of Nelson Mandela, I don't want any faux Cavern Clubs. I want performances that are as glorious and creepy as Philip Seymour Hoffman as Truman Capote. But for every single one of those, we have to put up with an impersonation that goes no deeper than a razored hairline, a fake nose. For now, I'm done with it.