I have a very deep appreciation for this film; the era it examines and pays homage to is without a doubt my absolute favorite era in the history of rock.
Part of that appreciation stems from my connection to Bale's Arthur Stuart character in that my introduction to Bowie's Ziggy Stardust period came at an important time when I was trying to define myself as Arthur was and I found comfort in all of the glitz, make-up, and gender-bending. I think any further details of the parallels between myself and Arthur Stuart should be relegated to the appropriate forum, i.e., a therapist's office, so I'll leave it alone, but I will say that I find it quite difficult to watch the scenes of his youth, because they're a direct –and occasionally painful - hit. With that noted, I obviously disagree with VG being an emotionally detached film, because it’s about people finding themselves –or losing themselves - by wearing masks, by assuming roles, adopting myths and so forth. Arthur Stuart is in the same boat as his heroes, just on a smaller scale.
The only "problem" I have with VG actually stems from my being a huge Bowie fan. It's clearly not a biopic, yet it borrows so liberally from that period in his life and career that it seems intent on commenting on him regardless, and frankly, when you look at it from his vantage point, you can easily understand why he'd be as pissed as he was (I mean come on, "Tommy Stone" is a fucking huge slap in the face).
Slade is Bowie all over, right down to the Little Richard infatuation, the quotes “Rock N’ Roll is a prostitute…” and “I want to be a pop idol” (cleverly transferred to Oscar Wilde in VG) even the hokey American wife - although Angela Bowie is viewed quite sympathetically in the person of her tormented analogue, Mandy Slade. Hell, Velvet Goldmine even has a cameo by former Bowie choreographer, mime-coach and purported bedmate, Lindsay Kemp –the “Pantomime Dame” admired by young Brian Slade.
It’s difficult to watch VG having this awareness of Bowie’s life, career, contributions, and controversies and not seeing the potential breakdown of the partition between pure fantasy and character defamation. In fact, the first time I saw VG, I was kind of miffed that they discarded Bowie’s immensely creative period between the years of 1974 & 1980, once again forgetting myself and getting trapped in VG’s pseudo-biopic time-warp.
The aestheticist in me likes Velvet Goldmine for the sounds, the clothes, and the beautiful androgyne men speaking clever and making out with each other, but it manages to dig deeper in that it sort of connects me to all of the kids of that era that found something important and perhaps life-altering in something that out-and-out rejects reality and embraces pure fancifulness and star-gazing.
One last note: Todd Haynes denies it, but I’m pretty confident that glam-rock also-ran, “Jobriath” was an influence on this film. His fans erroneously attempt to build up his honestly lackluster career by proclaiming that because he was absolutely, undeniably queer, he somehow stands above Bowie as a symbol for that period. This is of course, total bullshit; he was gay, but he is to Bowie what the Monkees are to the Beatles, only far less successful. I like his music, but he just wasn’t very talented and whereas Bowie left glam behind to become one of the most lauded musicians/performers in modern history, Jobriath became a cabaret singer and died of AIDS in complete obscurity.
Not pretty, but pretty true.