2 Major inaccuracies and disputable claims in Whitney Houston's unofficial documentary by Nick Broomfield

Whitney Houston's latest unauthorized biopic is getting closer to it's release in the United States - the biggest prospective audience for the much-talked about project.

The Nick Broomfield directorial feature, did not get a nod from Houston's estate as they had plans to release a story of their own with Oscar winning filmmaker Kevin MacDonald. Although, Houston's estate has already started the shooting and work of the superstar's first official documentary since her passing in 2012 - Broomfield has beaten them by quite a margin of time, by releasing his version first.

But with so many of Houston's close relatives, friends and co-workers not participating in the project, is it all told with complete honesty and accuracy of facts? 

Broomfield has previously produced a number of scandalous documentaries including, Kurt & Courtney - which was very engaging and entertaining, but somewhat dramatic and over-sensationalized.

Here in 'Can I Be Me?', although the filmmaker rightly captures the points related to Houston willingly burdening herself with taking care of everyone around her and Bobby Brown's jealousy of her unfathomable success - a large part of the story, told matter-of-factly, seems like a mere perception of the filmmaker himself. 

Perhaps a vision he had in his mind, when he thought of the project.

Wikimedia Commons
Here are 2 highly disputable points from the documentary that appear to have been made-up based on scandalous gossip column talks:

1) Whitney was gay!

Well, was she? To be fair, her relationship with Bobby was too passionate to even fathom she did not have any interest in men and was forced to live with one, because of industry and family pressures. Just switch to YouTube and watch her singing her heart and soul out belting 'Natural Woman' at her Brazil 1994 concert, as her former husband stands on the stage, receiving all the love.

Not denying that Houston never had an intimate relationship with her former manager and very-close friend, Robyn Crawford - but the two have never really answered the question themselves.

Houston's in-your-face, blunt and raw interview with OUT magazine in the year 2000 - gives you a great glimpse of how comfortable she was with her sexuality, and not this "sexually-frustrated" self-loathing gay woman, some of these claims are trying to turn her into.

At the most, there could be a possibility of her being a bisexual - but that would still be an assumption.

2) Whitney Houston was an image constructed by her label

Nope. What Houston was - was articulate, well-spoken and sophisticated. Somebody who finished her high-school education before being allowed to pursue her professional singing career. Somebody who came from a family, where every lady (and we stress on the worth 'lady'), had this charm and uppity-up demeanor about them. From Cissy Houston to Dionne Warwick - Whitney wasn't raised to speak street language - simply because she wasn't raised in the street. Houston belonged from a well-fed, decent, working-class family, but just because she didn't fit the perception of "what black must sound like, look like, talk or act like" - she was termed a 'constructed image' by the media.

Wikimedia Commons
But if you go back and watch her interviews from the 80's - you will know and understand that Houston was as real about herself, and as sharply sorted-out as a 22-something girl could be. It had nothing to do with her 'not acting black.' There was a well-spoken, well-mannered and well-taught young woman who just liked to behave and conduct herself with a certain manner.

So, assuming that she should act according to a "black personality stereotype" is not only a failure in understanding the woman, but also in a way, racist.

Houston's public demeanor only changed, when she married Bobby and developed this rugged-up, rough-on-the-edges personality - which was more of an influence of the company. Notice how she reverted back to her old-self, after their 2006 divorce.

Yes, one can argue that her music was made to sound more 'Pop' to appeal to a broader audience across the spectrum - but when you have a voice that is raised and fed in the church, no genre can really overpower that. 

Go back and listen to any random performance of her greatest Pop anthems from the mid 80's - and you will feel that gospel fire where her artistry burned the brightest. Even if it is a candy-sweet uptempo like 'How Will I Know' or a Michael Masser sweeping Pop ballad like 'Didn't We Almost Have It All' - Houston's voice wasn't born to be caged in a color or genre.

Although, 'Can I Be Me?' isn't malicious, but it still carries it's entire plot creating an image of 'Whitney Houston' - that is solely based out of assumptions, and may never have existed.

What are your thoughts on these two points?

Share them with us...

No comments