Stonewall is tanking at the box office in wake of attacks on the film that started within hours of the trailer’s release. People are primed to hate it, as they seem to be whenever anything gay comes out (hello, Looking).
In the decade since Brokeback Mountain, there are still very few major movies that are explicitly LGBT-oriented and fewer still that are gay oriented and still fewer that are successful at the box.
So, we leaves the question to you, Queerty readers: Are We Too Hard On Gay Movies?
Daveliam
This is a difficult question. I DO think that we, as a community, are too hard on gay films. But, when gay films are made specifically to allow ‘straight audiences’ an easier access point (as the director indicated happened with Stonewall), we SHOULD be hard on films. I don’t want to spend money supporting a film that is only a veneer of gay. I want gay films that are made with us as the intended audience. But I also am concerned that if I DON’T support mainstream gay films, studios will view them as too risky and we’ll go back to being ignored. It’s a tough balance. If I had to choose a side, my opinion is that we are too critical as a community, though. If a film features a white male lead, people complain about ‘whitewashing’. If a film doesn’t feature numerous communities within the LGBT community, people complain about how certain groups are marginalized. While I certainly agree that white males are disproportionately represented in mainstream films, not every LGBT film needs to feature every letter in the acronym in every shade of skin color in order to be supported. That’s just my opinion, though.
QJ201
I did the whole “go see every gay indie movie” during the 90’s thing (“the new queer cinema”)
Not everything touched by gays is gold.
bobmister250
We are way too hard on movies about our community. They are few and far between and bitching amongst ourselves is a great way to ensure that conservatives win on gay rights. We must stand united for our cause.
Brian
The problem with GLBTQ movies is that they are so self-conscious. Homosexuality is treated as the most important part of a person’s life. Any attempt at humanity is washed away by the gay theme.
Personally, I think the best movie to ever portray male homosexuality, albeit in a small sub-culture, was Cruising. It starred Al Pacino, and was released around 1980. The gay community at the time rose up in arms against it. However, I loved it because it treated male homosexuality in such a natural, non-pandering way.
AlliterationAddict
Oddly enough, I’ve never actually been a huge fan of Stonewall. There have definitely been some gay movies that I’ve really enjoyed, like Cloudburst or Pride. If any of you haven’t seen either of those movies, that’s definitely something that you should get on right now! I found Cloudburst to be particularly touching.
I just couldn’t bring myself to support Stonewall because it’s hard enough being a person of color in the gay community, and I’m not going to support something that perpetuates the same standards that I have to deal with every day. I shouldn’t have to choose between racism and homophobia when it comes to the movies that I watch. I think that gay people everywhere deserve better than that.
Robert Barber
Ya think?Noones going to be making any soon?
Nick Marriott
Perhaps it’s a ,’Sleeper’,tanking at the box office but all of us gay folks will hire it on dvd as it’s such a part of our history?
Giancarlo85
@Brian: Your tastes are just as bad as your understanding of sexuality. You would be better off not commenting at all, smeds.
We should be critical of these films. Stonewall was such an obvious piece of historical revisionism and was so poorly directed and acted.
There have been a few good movies about our community since Broke back Mountain, but those were made in different countries (European ones mainly).
JerseyMike
I’m hard on most gay movies because they are poorly made. Either the writing is bad or the acting is worse. Most gay movie producers think because you put a cute blond boy in it, we are suppose to like it. I will not watch any type of movie if its poorly made.
Raphael
No! First thing, forget “Looking”, that thing deserved to be canceled, it was boring as hell. Now, we want LGBT content that is, at least, interesting. We don’t need, nor should settle for tiny roles and projects, especially if they are crap. So, no, we are not being too hard.
Ummmm Yeah
The attack on Stonewall the movie had nothing to do with us being hard on gay movies. It was a coordinated attack by mentally ill men who pretend to be women in attempt to steal Stonewall the event from the mostly white gay men who were actually there just because a couple of transvestites were in Stonewall and participated in the riots. Transvestites and POC had contributed very little to the gay rights movement and now they want to lie their way into history. Just look at any pictures from Stonewall and any gay rights march, pride event, rally or any other public display and with a few notable exceptions it was white gay men out in the front. Now white lesbians have also contributed greatly to the repeal of DADT and marriage equality. But again POC and transgenders were not there for the fight. The few of them that did make a stand were particularly brave because they got no backing from the people like them.
Colin McCoy
No. There’s already better movies about Stonewall.
martinbakman
Yes. There is a double standard.
But, there are plenty of decent movies with LGBT content for those that bother to look. Can we spend as much energy celebrating the good efforts as we do the ones the suck? Somehow I doubt it.
malekmouzon
Stonewall was event orchestrated by POC and Trans people anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know the history, doesn’t know google, is flat out lying to protect their love of white people or being white.
And the basic premise of this question is framed incorrectly. I feel like it’s offensive to even put Stonewall in the same camp as Looking and Brokeback Mountain. Both Looking and Brokeback were unapologetically/unashamedly gay stories that were made by gay people for gay people and whether you like them or not were groundbreaking.
Stonewall’s director literally said he made this movie for straight people and very specifically did things adding not just a white male lead but “straight” acting white male lead played by a straight actor to make that appeal. And to do this for a movie about gay culture and fight to be ourselves is more than shameful. My question is why aren’t more people harder on movies and shows that for whatever reason teach LGBTQ people to be ashamed.
Steven Burr
I wanna see a gay movie that is like a Sandra bullock movie movie where guy meets guy and falls in love etc. not SEX< SEXI>D>S. When they can make REAL movies like straight movies then maybe I’ll watch.
Avery Alvarez
Of course we’re going to be harder on Glbt movies because we’re expecting more from them, especially mainstream ones, which are few and far between. There’s just so many stories to tell, and when we do get them, they’re either cheap rom-coms, or laughably sad with someone dying in the end, or filled with so many tropes and cliches, or just plain terrible: terrible writing, terrible acting; terrible production. Although some treasure exist and we should give them praise.
@malekmouzon: “Stonewall was event orchestrated by POC and Trans people anyone who says otherwise doesn’t know the history, doesn’t know google, is flat out lying to protect their love of white people or being white.”
No. It wasn’t, and anybody who says otherwise is just a black person or trans person with low self esteem who wishes they were white. Stop trying to appropriate others’ work. You need to Google the history, and get rid of that chip on your shoulder towards white people.
@Ummmm Yeah: You’re 100% right. Normally I wouldn’t agree with such a statement but seeing as how the faux-victimhood is already strong in some of the comments.
Cam
Could Queerty please stop trying to pretend that people didn’t like “Looking” because it was some coordinated hatred of an LGBT community geared to hate everything?
Looking was given a chance, and if sites like Queerty, and the Producers of “Looking” excuse themselves from what was wrong with the series by saying “Oh, it was great, nothing was wrong with it, it’s just that the audience is stupid” then they will make the same mistakes over and over again. The audience articulated quite clearly why they were abandoning the show in droves.
As for whether or not we are too hard on Gay movies, I’m sorry, but when I spend $2.00 – $4.00 on Amazon to stream a gay film and feel like I have wasted even that little bit of money, then I think I have every right to bitch about the quality.
I don’t think our standards are so high, I don’t expect every movie to be a Brokeback, or even A Broken Hearts Club or a Trick, but some of them are so terrible, and I watch them because they are LGBT.
I paid to see them, I get to bitch about them. There are tons of movies I rave about. The guy who did “Looking” also did a movie called “Weekend” loved his movie didn’t love his TV series. Too bad, So sad.
Joe
Yes. I most likely go see “Stonewall” due to all the negative talk surrounding the film. I’ll wait until it hits Netflix or something of that nature. But also I saw the Trailers for the film, it did not move me enough to go out and see it more so than the negativity surrounding the film. Also, it didn’t look to me as a well made film.
I’d rather see a film with substance usually Independent. “Weekend” was good. “Broken Hearts Club” was also well made. I also feel mainstream films from the big studios are not going to any gay film any justice.
Joe
*Meant to say most likely NOT see “Stonewall.
Xzamilio
Frankly, we’re not hard enough on LGBTQ movies, because we’ve been conditioned to just accept any old thing that comes out because it’s “geared towards us”, even though the guy behind “Stonewall” admitted that he made the movie in order to coddle straight people by putting someone in there that they could identify with… bull-effing-crap. You can relate to a character that is written well or simply envelope yourself with a well-written character that is multitudes from who you are… and they look nothing like you or anything you’re used to seeing. “Priscilla:Queen of the Desert” was a movie I remember watching at 13 and my black ass couldn’t relate to anything going on in it, but still, I found myself laughing and crying (the end credits with the Vanessa Williams “Save the Best For Last” at the end? Perfect).
We have garbage for gay “cinema” now… the same paint by numbers nonsense. Put some cutesy white guys in it with great bodies, give them superficial problems or something “deep” enough to seem serious but never go below the surface because that would be too real… sprinkle in some porn stars, Andrew Christian models, add water, add water… presto!!!! You have a straight to DVD movie or a digital release on TLA. There are some really good movies for LGBTQ individuals that never see the light of day because the people playing in them aren’t pretty enough to warrant space on Towleroad or Queerty.
And ENOUGH about “Looking”… it tried too hard to depict “normalcy” and came across as contrived, boring, and poorly written… not to mention, it had the distinct honor of making characters so unlikable that it was hard to root for anyone.
Cam
@Xzamilio:
Thank you! Priscilla, Great example! Or Beautiful Thing, same thing, I wasn’t a British kid with an abusive dad growing up in a Council Flat, but I still loved the movie.
I don’t have to relate to them to really like them. “The Wedding Banquet” by Ang Lee, same thing.
1EqualityUSA
Films are usually in the works for a few years before finally making it to the screen. Our community has been rocking lately. By the time the flick hits the screen, the featured issue has become obsolete. Current films become referenced as historical.
AtticusBennett
no. reality is that often LGBT audiences are treated disrespectfully as horror-fans are.
being a horror film fan is tough – because most horror films are audience-insultingly stupid crap.
and many “gay” films are sloppily put together, hopping to just cash in on the niche audience
but there have been some spectacular ones. STONEWALL is not one of them. it may be the worst. badly made, terribly written, and everything involving Danny was an insult to everything the Stonewall riots were, and ARE, about. STONEWALL hasn’t flopped because “mean gays blah blah blah” but because it was mediocre on even conceivable level.
Hedwig and the Angry Inch. Shortbus. Get Real. Brokeback Mountain. The Imitation Game. Milk. Longtime Companion. Maurice. Parting Glances. Priscilla. The Kids Are Alright. The Boys in the Band. The Wedding Banquet. Beautiful Thing. Beginners. Weekend. these are worthy films.
hell, even TRICK has moments of cheerful brightness!
http://littlekiwilovesbauhaus.blogspot.ca/2008/09/shortbus-and-state-of-queer-cinema.html
( a little essay from years ago about the importance of Shortbus, in comparison to “gay films for straight people”)
Magnus
Yes definitely our community has been too tough on LGBT films. The whole uproar over the movie Stonewall was obnoxious and ridiculous. People were condemning it in droves way before it ever came out. All I could do is shake my head in disappointment over the silliness. I want to see Stonewall but it is not playing in any theatres near me, so I will have to wait until it is released on blu-ray. It’s a pity I cannot go out and see it in movies and show my support. I don’t know if it is bad or good, but I want to show my support for reason and sanity, in that I will not judge a movie before seeing it.
I’d like to see all these people who are boycotting it in book clubs discussing books. “What did you think of such and such book John?” “Well I didn’t read it or anything, but judging by the book jacket the entire book blows chunks and I refuse to read it.”
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
One movie that we were sadly NOT too hard on was that piece of cinematic drek “Brokeback Monutain”
Myself and friends eagerly anticipate viewing the movie and were left dumbfounded by how simply horrible that waste of time and talent was.
Simple Summary:
Closeted guy meets closeted guy
Meet on very unregular basis.
Both have horrible unfufilling lives
One gets beaten to death
Survivor continues horrible unfufilling life………………
Bisexual-Transwoman
No, we’re not hard enough on LGBT movies. A lot of them are not that good at all.
AtticusBennett
@Magnus: i saw Stonewall. and i will say, without reservation, that it is the worst film about our collective movement that I have ever seen. and i’ve seen them all
Xzamilio
@PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS: Yeah, I do find with LGBT cinema — at least the ones with actual substance — that happy endings are few and far between. Someone dies, or they go their separate ways, or they both die… or get together later in life… and die tragically. Hell, half the time, I saw something, the message was “Stay closeted, or you’ll be happy for ten minutes before you’re beaten to death by a mob of angry closet cases… or your dad, who’s also an angry closet case.
Jim
Yes! Stonewall was an excellent movie. It wasn’t meant to be a National Geographic history of events.
AtticusBennett
@Xzamilio: the reality is that, though, for too many people, and for far too long.
Ennis and Jack’s story was a story about the cultural ramifications of a homophobic society.
doesn’t mean those stories don’t have worth and value – but we do as a culture need stories of love, triumph, and happy endings. i.e., something to give Hope, and reflect that we can make our own happy endings.
DavidIntl
I will still support LGBT-themed movies of whatever nature, and appreciate that they are being made. But I think many of us are longing for movies where the fact that some of the characters are gay is incidental and unremarkable, not central to the plot. For most of us the fact that we are gay is anecdotal, not the central theme of our lives. And I would really enjoy an occasional movie where the gay characters, in typical Hollywood fashion, live happily ever after, rather than dying tragically, if nobly.
DannX68
@Xzamilio: And others: The unhappy endings are typical of North American gay movies. See some European gay movies, or even Brazilian ones, and you will see a lot (but not only) well-acted, well-made, touching and poignant movies with happy endings.
Dave in Northridge
We’re not being too hard on LGBT-themed movies in general. We’re being appropriately hard on Stonewall, because, unlike all the other non-Stonewall productions discussed in this comment thread, it’s supposed to depict a historical EVENT. It does that badly, and the director didn’t help it along when he tried to explain why he made the movie he made by saying “straight-acting”
All the other productions, like Brokeback or Looking, might be flawed too, but none of the others is inaccurate in the way Stonewall is.
Cam
@DannX68:
That said, French LGBT movies always seem to revolve around a threeway confusion where two guys are flirting, coming closer together, and then a girl comes into the picture, and one leaves with her. I mean of course not all, but the plot seems overused there.
spanprof
Looking was just weird. I think its main problem was a lack of time to develop characters and storyline. In general, when the plot resembles “Will and Grace” or “Modern Family”, I object. I am not reflected in either of those series. Also there is a decided avoidance of anything sexual—-crack out the twin beds from the 50’s! In most series that I’ve seen, the writing is terrible. Maybe the writers are straight? That could create these situations because straight people DO Not understand our minds!
Marky
We are far harder on gay themed films than we are on straight themed films–or rather–all other films because we expect them to be some shining example of perfect cinema. I have never heard race or sexuality dissected as much as I have when people critique gay films. Honestly how many action movies are being critiqued as too “straight, white and cis-gender”. We need more lgbt writers writing more films of varying genres featuring an lgbt lead that doesn’t focus on their sexuality or transformation as opposed to a plot, instead of all of their effort and all of their resources being pooled together to produce quality films with straight leads for straight audiences. We also need more of a gay following for /gay/ films. I.e. if you would rather watch Legally blonde than something like Torchsong Trilogy or Looking (which is actually a really good show compared to a lot of the other garbage we’ve had to ingest over the years), you aren’t really helping the cause. The major reason why we don’t have any quality gay film or why there is a lack of it, is because of the lack of an audience. The more our subculture is assimilated into heterosexual culture, the more non-heterosexual films that you support in lieu of gay ones, the more invisible we will be in good quality cinema. Kind of getting sick of everything gay being shot on an f-ing handy-cam. Maybe gay investors need to step up as well.
mujerado
When one segment of our community has veto power over the rest, then yes we are too hard on gay-themed movies. Stonewall was roundly condemned by the trans community for perceived whitewashing of characters, only because a fictitious white man was given the lead role. The same thing happened in the earlier Stonewall film, which no one seems to have any trouble with now. Today’s film even includes real historical figures, portrayed as they were. Following the lead, most critics also condemned the movie, virtually assuring it would have a short run and disappear.
And yet, people who see the film generally like it. It has an audience approval rating of 93% on Rotten Tomatoes. It was never meant to be a historically-accurate, documentary of the events. It’s a fictional retelling, is no more inaccurate than the typical movie of a historical event, and in fact is more accurate than the worst of them.
Yes, we are too hard on such movies.
Joe
I’ve been hearing from friends of have seen “Stonewall” have all agreed it was terrible. Someone even mentioned on how it was hot as Marky mentioned, as to the effect as if it shot on a cheap video camera from the 80’s. I prefer films with substance and quality. Spielberg would have turned this into a gem.
1EqualityUSA
It’s a testament to our creativity that we question how others portray us. With our history of secrets and closets and lack of full disclosure, our BS-o-Meter is honed. There was a time when communities revered us for our ability of perception, a shamanistic quality. We use both sides of our brain when solving problems. Our understanding is next level. Art and film will be scrutinized for truth.
Brian
The best “gay movies” have been made by men who do not identify as gay. That’s because such men are not self-conscious in the way that gay-identifying men are. Self-conscious, gay-identifying men always make the worst movies.
1EqualityUSA
or, Jason Smeds, one’s narcissistic injury is so monumental that the rest of their days are spent trying to get people to become irate, denying orientation, insisting it is a choice. How much do the Koch bros pay you to keep repeating “gay-identifying” over and over in these threads? Do you think that “self-conscious,” gay men are horrible artists too?
Tackle
@Ummmm Yeah: What you are saying is foolish, and don’t make any since. It’s a silly play on numbers. That’s like someone bragging that most of our military, and the people who are in the front lines are White. Well of course it’s going be mostly White, since most of America is White. And since most of America was White back then, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that Most LGBTQ back then were White, therefor, making most gay men White.
The White gay men that you speak of did not show up until the violence was taken outside. And they were across the street. But the people who lit the fire, and got the ball rolling were anything but gay White men.
Tackle
@Avery Alvarez: It’s funny how you take the time to single out and say it just a (black or trans person with low self esteem.)So it couldn’t be a non-white Hispanic or Asian person with low self esteem, who wants to be white??
You need to stop generalizing and get the chip off YOUR shoulders towards Black and Trans people…
Marky
@Brian: Examples? Name some quote-unquote “good” gay movies. I guess non-self-conscious gay identifying men are decent producers of films? How do you identify?
RealBlast3
People were ridiculous about Stonewall before it came out. I can’t believe how sensitive they were to the casting. And as we’ve already seen in this topic, it’s not clear who exactly was at Stonewall but one thing that is clear is that alot of people were at Stonewall and it was not just one group or the other.
It’s one thing to be disappointed that a minority or trans character wasn’t in the Jeremy Irvine role, but to say that white people weren’t at the Stonewall riots at all…is ridiculous. It may not be your preference to have a white actor as the main character but to say it was “whitewashing” and “offensive” is ridiculous and offensive in and of itself.
We can debate to the cows come home who was at Stonewall but it was a diverse group – that much is certain. And the movie’s lead is a fictional character, anyway. This uproar over Stonewall has honestly been the first time I have ever heard that the only people who started the riots were minorities and drag queens/trans people. Talk about co-opting history! Many people were involved in the riots and fighting over who gets top billing has been such a sad state of affairs for our community.
That said, the movie was made by a Hollywood director better known for explosions and alien movies and got terrible reviews from the critics, so that’s a disappointment that has nothing to do with the casting.
Gothrykke
They make a gay Citizen Kane, hell, even a gay Road House, I won’t say one bitchy word about it. Until then, tell Holly Wood to put on their asbestos underwear and quit trying to make our lives all about straight people.
Giancarlo85
@mujerado: One should check IMDB instead. Stonewall was a terrible film and a rigged rotten tomatoes rating isn’t going to help. It was released in a great deal of theaters for a limited release, yet tanked horribly. And actual audience reviews shellacked the embarrassment of a movie. Put aside its grossly inaccurate retelling of history. It had a piss poor cast and terrible acting. The directing and story were also terrible.
asby
Why shouldn’t we be???? If you make a movie about slavery, yet portray the slavery owners as folk who treated their slaves like real people? Or Jews in the holocaust who willingly went to the nazi camps… There would be an uproar….Why shouldn’t we be mad that our history was not told in the right truth….This wasn’t Too Wong Foo or some campy movie.
Giancarlo85
Rotten tomatoes is disgustingly inaccurate and is mostly simple votes with no real reviews. iMDB had many reviews and the audience rating was 3.0 out of 10 (as of this post). Shit cast, shit acting, shit directing and an illogical idea that white gay men were behind it, when the majority were ethnic minorities and trans.
Arcamenel
I actually enjoyed looking so I won’t comment on that.
As far as movies go the only criticism I have for them is they need to be more diverse. You can argue that you shouldn’t need a character to look like you to relate to them but the fact is representation matters. To be a queer person of color and not even see yourself in queer media really does suck tremendously, especially for a community that claims to be accepting and nonprejudicial. That being said a bad movie is a bad movie. I also agree that there needs to be more queer films with happy endings.
Bauhaus
@Xzamilio:
“Shelter” – one of my favorite gay, feel good movies.
@Cam:
Loved “Weekend”. Haven’t we all had our own version of “Weekend”?
sportsguy1983
The VAST majority of gay movies are just plain awful, especially the ones that almost exclusively gay actors. The acting and directing are just horrendous.
Giancarlo85
@sportsguy1983: There are actually some gay movies that are well acted and well directed… they just aren’t American movies lol. Funny how some of the best gay movies are British or German movies (I love Summerstorm – not sure if the actors are actually gay though, but I think a couple of them are). Summerstorm is free on Hulu if anyone has Hulu.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420206/
Now that movie has a 7.5 out of 10 on IMDB (and has many written reviews by audience members). Compare that to the 3.0 out of 10 for Stonewall.
Tackle
@RealBlast3: Who said, and where is it posted by any posters that ” White people were not at the riots?” Making a statement like that is ridiculous.
And you say claims of “whitewashing” and “offensive” is ridiculous, and offensive, in and of itself: to who, white people?? Because I can assure you that the many LGBTQ people of color do not feel this way.
And it is a well know fact, that the Stonewall Inn had a r@cial makeup that was evenly split between, Blacks, Hispanics and Whites, and that the people who sparked the fire, that started the riots( Inside) consisted of one gay white male. And I’m talking about INSIDE. After all, it was a private birthday party for Marsha P Johnson. Now you want to keep denying history?
Yes many were involved in the riots, after it moved “outside”. And what’s such a sad state of affairs, is that many gay white men like yourself, cannot handle the truth…
animaux
Stonewall was partially sabotaged by queer ethno-nationalists (joined by the homophobic straight media). They started attacking it even before it was made, constantly moving the goalposts. It all became a good aliby for straight audiences (who are actually the ones who decide about success of movies) not to see it.
animaux
But even in some reviews written by gay journalists between the lines you could sense powerlessness at the fact that they had to follow the party line (in order not to get labeled whatever), even though they couldn’t really explain why the film is supposedly bad. They were simply forced to judge it more harshly and look at it with more critical attitude.
animaux
Still, there has been a slow but steady re-evaluation of Stonewall as we speak. More knowlegable LGBT film critics, writing for smaller intellectually-minded media, have been calling it a masterpiece, especially the one’s who appreciate the work of the acclaimed screenwriter Jon Robin Baitz. Ordinary people who saw it mostly liked it. The ones who know a bit about cinema say it is going to be a cult classic.
Most importantly, since the initial bandwagon has passed, Stonewall veterans and historians have been rejecting the claim that it wasn’t accurate or that it shortchanged people of color. One such article appeared a few days ago on the CNN. History will eventually be kind towards this film.
Giancarlo85
@animaux: Sabotaged lol? You can’t sabotage a shit movie lol. A shit movie is self-sabotaging. Bad acting, bad directing, bad casting and a piss poor script… Stonewall is the Gigli of gay movies. You can’t get much worse than it.
Anybody who calls it a masterpiece needs to get some glasses and maybe some hearing aides too. IMDB audience reviewers panned it for being so hilariously awful. The vast majority of critics also tore it to shreds.
It’s simply a bad movie and an even worse piece of historical revisionism. The fact it used “Stonewall” as the title is also wrong as it is a fictional story that is in no way based on the actual events.
By the way, if you think I can’t explain why it is bad… re-read my post. I clearly pointed out several faults. Roland should stick to aliens. He’s just like Uwe Boll. LOL… even Uwe Boll could do a non-fiction movie better than him (the very accurate and grisly Attack on Darfur).
” Ordinary people who saw it mostly liked it.”
No they didn’t, and I direct you to my IMDB link.
“Stonewall veterans and historians have been rejecting the claim that it wasn’t accurate or that it shortchanged people of color.
You can’t name who these people are because you simply made this tid-bit up off the top of your head.
“History will eventually be kind towards this film.”
Nope. This film will always remain maligned for its terrible directing and piss poor acting, as well as being a piece of historical revisionism.
surreal33
@JerseyMike: Amen
surreal33
Because gay cinema is small niche we are fed a diet of GARBAGE films. Currently gay stories are everywhere so we do not have to tolerate sub-standard films anymore. Therefore when GARBAGE films are push on the gay community we are very vocal about our disdain.
Simply put we are not starving for content anymore so only quality films we be tolerated!!!