Last night's Lifetime premiere of Whitney, a biopic of iconic vocalist Whitney Houston was bound to be a controversial event, based on the reactions to the same network's attempts at an Aaliyah biopic during 2014. The performer's estate weighed-in with a last minute warning to fans of the performer on Saturday, prior to the airing (from Billboard).
"If you watch this movie, watch it knowing that Lifetime is notorious for making bad biopics of deceased celebrities and brace yourself for the worst," wrote Pat Houston, the vocalist's sister-in-law and president of her estate, via a post on the performer's website. "You should expect people will always rise to the occasion for prominence and profit...not love, respect or honor...I question the morality of the making of this because of the lack of experience knowing Whitney's life."
The statement claims that "selected members" of the Houston family were denied an advance copy of the film for consideration. So how did reality end up reflecting the Houston estate's real life concerns?
Well, the Twitterverse seemed to suggest that the film wasn't nearly as schlocky or desperate as many feared it would be (such as the notorious Brittany Murphy biopic the channel aired during 2014). It seemed that the producers behind the film were sincere in their intents to respect Houston's legacy and not take advantage of the more tabloid-ready aspects of her career. The worst complaints aired dealt with the film ultimately being "boring," although that came from The Daily Beast, a publication not afraid of stepping on toes.
"The expectation was that Whitney would be Lifetime's crowning achievement in campy biopic garbage-pile fabulousness," the publication published in its review. "What Lifetime gave us, though, was even worse than that. It was boring."
