as you were so apt to put it. It was simply a quote from the very book from which the movie was written. And so, are you willing to admit that the movie was based on "gay porn", since my quote from the book is about the very same movie in question, taken from the very quote that you refer to as "gay porn?" So, I guess, according to you, I guess it is. It really is quite disgusting isn't it? So much so that you referred to it as "gay porn"....Yawn...
First. I haven't seen the movie and my post had zero to do with it - Except that it appears in a thread that is primarily assoicated with the movie. As is typically the case at Gspot , threads having to do with homosexuality tend to generate a variety of responses. Mine was such.
I was citing a very real example of someone in my former neighborhood who was on a self-appointed crusade to "educate" people on the depravity of homosexuality. So he downloaded gay porn and printed it out (in high res color) and showed it to people and wanted to go over in great detail why it was all wrong. Lots of people, even some hardcore religious right types, weren't comfortable with his "shock and awe" campaign (Another neighbor called it the "c**k and awe" campagin). He was asked to stop showing his "Examples" around especially in the vicintiy of youth. He couldn't understand why people didn't want to be "enlightened" but eventually responded to some not so gentle suggestions that either he stop or be prepared to discuss with the police why he was so fond of showing color printers of porn to people - some of whom he didn't even know. Now is this guy gay ? I don't know but I've known guys like this who eventually came out of the closet which supports the ancient wisdom of "that which we so loathe in others is only because we loathe it in ourselves".
I wrestled in high school and college and obviously this sport is of a high contact nature. So much so that its also the "butt" (no pun intended) of many jokes but no one got upset about it - well mostly because the typical guys making these jokes didn't want to get their tails kicked but no one on any of my teams had the "homo fear" except for maybe two over a period of 7 years. Both of those guys turned out to be gay but prior to their debut they were relentless in their tirades against gay people and sought to work in
the word "fag" into every sentence. It just got to be so boring to hear and after a while it was just part of the banter. By the way. For one season we did have a wrestler who was one tough opponent and no one could pin this guy. Tough as nails. He dropped out after one season and later "came out". Thats a shame that he quit because he had the goods to take it to the olympics but he
just dropped out without explanation. Of course having a vocal homophobic team mate probably didn't help.
My point here is that there are plenty of people who oppose the idea of homosexuality and they seem to be able register their discontent without employing hatred, obscenity, and "examples" of various sexual acts . Those who do , in my experience, ARE
struggling internally with something. It doens't mean that they are gay - it could be that someone in their family is and perhaps they
simply can't accept it so they act out. But anyone who makes it a personal campaign (as if there aren't other problems in life) has
There is a fine line between allowing people their freedoms to live sexually as they choose and yet not <B><I>sanctioning</I></B> those choices. I don't think its good for a society to approve of parenting with no commitments. I think its detrimental to children to be brought up in one parent homes. The statistics bear me out thus far and its not a religious thing. Marriage is the bedrock of Asian non-Christian countries and has been for a few thousand years. All the sociologists know this but want so badly to explain it away. Children raised in non-traditional homes (a mother and father) don't fare so well.
<center>sudo</center>
Well Sudo, this is rather a blanket statement. With all due respect I raised my two daughters all by myself and the one just graduated from college and the other is in 10th grade and just aced all her final exams for the semester. Some of her grades were top of her classes. They have never been in trouble with the police, the oldest a virgin until 20 then came to me for birth control advice when she was ready to be with her boyfriend of two years, they don't do drugs (I know for sure), they aren't sleeping around, etc etc etc. The college graduate moved to Chicago and is making $20.00 an hour..........Everyone compliments me on what great kids they are, yet you seem to imply that my home was a second class home. This is the problem with black and white statements. I was commited to them.
Just how did me being a single parent flaw them or give them any less advantage? Its the parent not the number of them at home.
And so, why then did it get all of the accolades since it was a lousy movie?
Can you possibly explain how in the world the movie got not one but four Golden Globes, three Critics Choice awards, and the Producers Guild Award?
And one request for some speculation: Will you have any disbelief if it takes home any Oscars?
At least one reason comes to mind:
The lousiness of this movie is my opinion. My review was not "objective." It was not "balanced." It was my opinion of a moviegoing experience, and others might have a difference of opinion.
Do I think there's a political agenda at work here? Yes and no. I think the producers of this wanted to tell a good story, the actors wanted to work with a renowned director, and, frankly, when Hollywood decides to make something about gay issues that's NOT insulting or stereotypical, the rest of Hollywood tends to go a little overboard in its accolades. Tom Hanks is a great, great actor, but Philadelphia was a TV movie of the week as far as quality is concerned.
My criticism of this movie left out any good stuff, and there was some. The scene where Michelle Williams finally confronts Heath Ledger is tense and very, very well done. Likewise, Anne Hathaway lights up the screen. And Jake what'shisname, I should say, gives a sincere performance. Every movie has its good and bad, and it's up to the individual viewer whether the good outweighs the bad. I thought the bad outweighed the good in this movie, but Oscar will disagree, whether "he" has seen the movie or not.
...when Hollywood decides to make something about gay issues that's NOT insulting or stereotypical, the rest of Hollywood tends to go a little overboard in its accolades.
...I thought the bad outweighed the good in this movie, but Oscar will disagree, whether "he" has seen the movie or not.
I work with two gay men who went to see the movie and came out with totally different opinions of the movie. (I have not seen it, but would like to, if for no other reason than because of the hype).
One: "It sucked! Total waste of time! Why does every mainstream gay movie have to be about total dysfunction and have such depressing endings? We're always portrayed as freaks, drug addicts, sex addicts and completely irrational. Everything ends in deaths, AIDS, divorces, murders, etc."
The other: "I thought it was a great love story. I thought it was beautifully written, very realistic with superb cinematography and so what if it didn't have a happy ending? Do gay love stories in real life have happy endings? Some, yes and some, no. Why pick on the negatives? It was a good movie and I'm happy to see something about real life gay couples in the mainstream."
Most of their gay friends didn't like the movie either for the same reasons as "one". They felt it was so wrongly stereotypical and would have wished for a happy ending. I think that Hollywood, because it so emphatically embraces the gay community, is promoting it because of the subject matter as opposed to the actual qualities of the movie, which is sad. If they want to promote the lifestyle, fine, but why not make a truly awesome movie about it that is unquestionably superior and worthy of awards?
And, as a side note to Sudo:
My little brother taught English to grade school kids in Taiwan for five years. Those bedrock marriages? They are typically filled with mistresses, fights, abuse and no time for kids to be kids. Those kids are always studying, reading, practicing something and being deprived of real live childhoods. They are treated like little robots.
It was depressing to my little brother. He took the kids outside and taught them how to play hackey sack, soccer and basketball but got in trouble every time. He finally wrote it into the class curriculum as a way to help them understand and learn English terms and words. More than a few times he got into arguments with some of the fathers who didn't like their children being taught to think for themselves. Not all marriages are butterflies and rainbows like yours must be. In some cases it is better for the kids to be raised by one devoted parent. Each situation is different, imo, and can't all be categorized one way or the other in a general or generic manner.
I don't mind endings that aren't "happy." I do mind endings that aren't good or satisfying. To me, a movie ending should say that the story I've just witnessed ends here. There are exceptions, such as trilogies: you know, watching The Lord of the Rings, that the story doesn't end until the end of the third movie, so you're willing to forgive the endings of the first two for not resolving the entire story.
This movie's ending doesn't feel like the story's over, mostly because the story wasn't that interesting to begin with. "Total waste of time" seems to be the phrase I would pick.
) -- "Brokeback Mountain," the story of two male ranch hands who become romantically involved, led all films with eight nominations for the 78th annual Academy Awards.
"Brokeback," based on a short story by E. Annie Proulx, picked up nods for best picture, best director (Ang Lee), best actor (Heath Ledger), best supporting actress (Michelle Williams) and best supporting actor (Jake Gyllenhaal). Its screenplay adaptation, by Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, also received a nomination.
Crash is indeed a good movie and when it came out , it was mentioned as being Oscar worthy. It was also mentioned that since it came out so early in the year that that would hurt its chances for a win. I don't know enough about the history of the Oscars to know if something like this is in fact true but when I recently heard that Crash was nominated I was thinking "wait, isn't that movie a couple of years old ?" but I was wrong of course. I realize that the judges aren't supposed to care about this type of thing but I've also heard that since this is an industiry sponsored event that they tend to push heavily whatever movie tends to have the most momentum at the time simply to insure that at least one movie attains blockbuster status well after the Oscars have waned. I'm not the movie buff or an Oscar's buff so if anyone knows if movies released early in the year tend to do worse at the Oscar's then I would like to know that.
That may be true... but Crash has certainly gotten rave reviews everywhere I've seen and picked up a few awards along the way... maybe there's a chance for it...
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
13
7
7
10
Popular Days
Jan 20
29
Jan 18
25
Jan 23
12
Jan 19
9
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 13 posts
CoolWaters 7 posts
J0nny Ling0 7 posts
markomalley 10 posts
Popular Days
Jan 20 2006
29 posts
Jan 18 2006
25 posts
Jan 23 2006
12 posts
Jan 19 2006
9 posts
dmiller
deleted -- don't want to stir up controversy here.
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Maybe I'm not "liberal" enough...but the sight of two men kissing makes me want to "whistle carrots"...
...and I don't care if they are cowboys or work for H&R Block.
Now, two girls kissing...for some reason that doesn't offend me as much...but that's just me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Raf,
Since you are now the subject matter expert on this movie, a couple of questions:
Can you possibly explain how in the world the movie got not one but four Golden Globes, three Critics Choice awards, and the Producers Guild Award?
And one request for some speculation: Will you have any disbelief if it takes home any Oscars?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
First. I haven't seen the movie and my post had zero to do with it - Except that it appears in a thread that is primarily assoicated with the movie. As is typically the case at Gspot , threads having to do with homosexuality tend to generate a variety of responses. Mine was such.
I was citing a very real example of someone in my former neighborhood who was on a self-appointed crusade to "educate" people on the depravity of homosexuality. So he downloaded gay porn and printed it out (in high res color) and showed it to people and wanted to go over in great detail why it was all wrong. Lots of people, even some hardcore religious right types, weren't comfortable with his "shock and awe" campaign (Another neighbor called it the "c**k and awe" campagin). He was asked to stop showing his "Examples" around especially in the vicintiy of youth. He couldn't understand why people didn't want to be "enlightened" but eventually responded to some not so gentle suggestions that either he stop or be prepared to discuss with the police why he was so fond of showing color printers of porn to people - some of whom he didn't even know. Now is this guy gay ? I don't know but I've known guys like this who eventually came out of the closet which supports the ancient wisdom of "that which we so loathe in others is only because we loathe it in ourselves".
I wrestled in high school and college and obviously this sport is of a high contact nature. So much so that its also the "butt" (no pun intended) of many jokes but no one got upset about it - well mostly because the typical guys making these jokes didn't want to get their tails kicked but no one on any of my teams had the "homo fear" except for maybe two over a period of 7 years. Both of those guys turned out to be gay but prior to their debut they were relentless in their tirades against gay people and sought to work in
the word "fag" into every sentence. It just got to be so boring to hear and after a while it was just part of the banter. By the way. For one season we did have a wrestler who was one tough opponent and no one could pin this guy. Tough as nails. He dropped out after one season and later "came out". Thats a shame that he quit because he had the goods to take it to the olympics but he
just dropped out without explanation. Of course having a vocal homophobic team mate probably didn't help.
My point here is that there are plenty of people who oppose the idea of homosexuality and they seem to be able register their discontent without employing hatred, obscenity, and "examples" of various sexual acts . Those who do , in my experience, ARE
struggling internally with something. It doens't mean that they are gay - it could be that someone in their family is and perhaps they
simply can't accept it so they act out. But anyone who makes it a personal campaign (as if there aren't other problems in life) has
problems in my opinion and experience.
Edited by diazbroLink to comment
Share on other sites
outofdafog
Well Sudo, this is rather a blanket statement. With all due respect I raised my two daughters all by myself and the one just graduated from college and the other is in 10th grade and just aced all her final exams for the semester. Some of her grades were top of her classes. They have never been in trouble with the police, the oldest a virgin until 20 then came to me for birth control advice when she was ready to be with her boyfriend of two years, they don't do drugs (I know for sure), they aren't sleeping around, etc etc etc. The college graduate moved to Chicago and is making $20.00 an hour..........Everyone compliments me on what great kids they are, yet you seem to imply that my home was a second class home. This is the problem with black and white statements. I was commited to them.
Just how did me being a single parent flaw them or give them any less advantage? Its the parent not the number of them at home.
Edited by outofdafogLink to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
At least one reason comes to mind:
The lousiness of this movie is my opinion. My review was not "objective." It was not "balanced." It was my opinion of a moviegoing experience, and others might have a difference of opinion.
Do I think there's a political agenda at work here? Yes and no. I think the producers of this wanted to tell a good story, the actors wanted to work with a renowned director, and, frankly, when Hollywood decides to make something about gay issues that's NOT insulting or stereotypical, the rest of Hollywood tends to go a little overboard in its accolades. Tom Hanks is a great, great actor, but Philadelphia was a TV movie of the week as far as quality is concerned.
My criticism of this movie left out any good stuff, and there was some. The scene where Michelle Williams finally confronts Heath Ledger is tense and very, very well done. Likewise, Anne Hathaway lights up the screen. And Jake what'shisname, I should say, gives a sincere performance. Every movie has its good and bad, and it's up to the individual viewer whether the good outweighs the bad. I thought the bad outweighed the good in this movie, but Oscar will disagree, whether "he" has seen the movie or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Excellent points!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Golden Globe Awards (my opinion)
Best Picture: Not deserved
Best Director: Not deserved
Best Screenplay: Not deserved
Best Song: Didn't even notice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex70sHouston
[quote name='GrouchoMarxJ
Now, two girls kissing...for some reason that doesn't offend me as much...but that's just me.
I guess I'm a little to redneck. Two girls kissing each other is a waste. Doesn't make the little head sture or anything.
I'm all for going back to the Dick VanDyke show. Married couple slept in separate beds. You knew it happened but it was a private act.
Sex is great. it just should be a little special. Two people in love making kids.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Agreed. I thought I was the only person on the planet who felt this way. Yea. It was a good story but just an
average movie that got so hyped one would think that watching it was supposed to impart secret wisdom or abilities.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I work with two gay men who went to see the movie and came out with totally different opinions of the movie. (I have not seen it, but would like to, if for no other reason than because of the hype).
One: "It sucked! Total waste of time! Why does every mainstream gay movie have to be about total dysfunction and have such depressing endings? We're always portrayed as freaks, drug addicts, sex addicts and completely irrational. Everything ends in deaths, AIDS, divorces, murders, etc."
The other: "I thought it was a great love story. I thought it was beautifully written, very realistic with superb cinematography and so what if it didn't have a happy ending? Do gay love stories in real life have happy endings? Some, yes and some, no. Why pick on the negatives? It was a good movie and I'm happy to see something about real life gay couples in the mainstream."
Most of their gay friends didn't like the movie either for the same reasons as "one". They felt it was so wrongly stereotypical and would have wished for a happy ending. I think that Hollywood, because it so emphatically embraces the gay community, is promoting it because of the subject matter as opposed to the actual qualities of the movie, which is sad. If they want to promote the lifestyle, fine, but why not make a truly awesome movie about it that is unquestionably superior and worthy of awards?
And, as a side note to Sudo:
My little brother taught English to grade school kids in Taiwan for five years. Those bedrock marriages? They are typically filled with mistresses, fights, abuse and no time for kids to be kids. Those kids are always studying, reading, practicing something and being deprived of real live childhoods. They are treated like little robots.
It was depressing to my little brother. He took the kids outside and taught them how to play hackey sack, soccer and basketball but got in trouble every time. He finally wrote it into the class curriculum as a way to help them understand and learn English terms and words. More than a few times he got into arguments with some of the fathers who didn't like their children being taught to think for themselves. Not all marriages are butterflies and rainbows like yours must be. In some cases it is better for the kids to be raised by one devoted parent. Each situation is different, imo, and can't all be categorized one way or the other in a general or generic manner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I don't mind endings that aren't "happy." I do mind endings that aren't good or satisfying. To me, a movie ending should say that the story I've just witnessed ends here. There are exceptions, such as trilogies: you know, watching The Lord of the Rings, that the story doesn't end until the end of the third movie, so you're willing to forgive the endings of the first two for not resolving the entire story.
This movie's ending doesn't feel like the story's over, mostly because the story wasn't that interesting to begin with. "Total waste of time" seems to be the phrase I would pick.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Not to worry, Raf. Like most movies, they'll have a sequel:
"Blowbac--err, Brokeback Mountain II: Return of Boy George."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Say, Raf...looks like you're right again.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Interestingly, it lost the SAG award for Best Ensemble (the equivalent of Best Picture) to Crash. There's hope yet.
The other Oscar Best Picture nominees were Capote, Crash, Munich and Good Night/Good Luck.
I've seen Capote and Crash. Both were WAY the hell better than Brokeback Mountain.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Thought I'd bump this thread up, since the Oscars are this weekend.
Any bets on what films are going to sweep Oscar?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I don't see any sweeping going on, and I'm hoping Crash upsets Brokeback Mountain for Best Picture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
"Crash" was/is a very good movie that kind of snuck in and out...
...if you haven't seen it yet, I'd highly recommend it... but be prepared, it will make you think...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Crash...definitely worth the time!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Crash is indeed a good movie and when it came out , it was mentioned as being Oscar worthy. It was also mentioned that since it came out so early in the year that that would hurt its chances for a win. I don't know enough about the history of the Oscars to know if something like this is in fact true but when I recently heard that Crash was nominated I was thinking "wait, isn't that movie a couple of years old ?" but I was wrong of course. I realize that the judges aren't supposed to care about this type of thing but I've also heard that since this is an industiry sponsored event that they tend to push heavily whatever movie tends to have the most momentum at the time simply to insure that at least one movie attains blockbuster status well after the Oscars have waned. I'm not the movie buff or an Oscar's buff so if anyone knows if movies released early in the year tend to do worse at the Oscar's then I would like to know that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Silence of the Lambs and Forrest Gump bucked that trend. But yes, early releases usually don't get Best Pitcure Oscars.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
That may be true... but Crash has certainly gotten rave reviews everywhere I've seen and picked up a few awards along the way... maybe there's a chance for it...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.