Was Brokeback Mountain as breeder-washed in its marketing as A Single Man? From Julianne Moore being made to hetero-ize the film to director Tom Ford’s press interviews insisting the movie is not a gay film, we were growing to expect any notion of homosexuality to be left on the cutting room floor by the time this went into wide release. But now Colin Firth’s smoke-y, lips-y scene with actor Jon Kortajaren has finally been approved for distribution.
And then there’s the moment Firth’s character learns his partner is dead:
Mike
You are such whiny bitches. It’s not your movie, and it doesn’t have to be advertised as GAAAAAAY!!!
Re-fucking-lax, you uppity queers.
Joseph
I agree with Mike!
Mr. Enemabag Jones
Mike and Joseph need to get back to the plantation.
ossurworld
If anyone had bothered to read the book, he would know that being gay in 1962 for the main character is an exercise in maintaining the illusion of ambiguity. He is a British professor of literature, living in California. It is a sensitive tale of one man coming to grips with life and death, not a coming out story. Isherwood probably never expected it to become a film, though he wrote many classic closet gay scripts himself.
Travis
So what, enemabag, every single movie that features gay characters is supposed to be strictly about how GAY we are? That’s really representative of our lives and our experiences. Maybe you still have some work to do, but a lot of us have already come out and put those demons to bed. We’d like to see gay men in movies moving on as well.
I’m very much looking forward to this HUMAN film with gay characters, whether it has enough sequins for enemabag’s taste or not.
David Ehrenstein
Actually he DID hope it would become a film, but didn’t expect anyone would have the guts to try. He would have loved the results.
And Don has a cameo in it.
John
Well, great, at least now I don’t have to watch the film to see what it’s about. Nice spoiler, Queerty.
(Forgive me, not having read the book, if that telephone scene comes at the beginning of the film and is not a spoiler at all.)
romeo
Is this film any good? If it sucks, I don’t want to pay for parking.
Fitz
For 90 minutes I watched a film which I think was about clocks, personal accessories, and furniture.
soul_erosion
@Romeo: I’m positive you won’t mind paying for parking on this one, I think it’s one of the best films I’ve seen in years. Besides great character development and dialogue, right down to the vintage cars, mid century furniture and Frank Lloyd Wright-ish home. Julianne Moore as a lush and her proverbial girl friend role who has known forever that you’re gay but still tries to seduce you. Can’t wait to have you post one of your stylistic snarky comments on the V-neck fuzzy mohair sweater that the androgynous student character wears. I think you will see that Tom Ford has a future in the industry.
romeo
@Soul_erosion: your post intrigues me. Sounds like I’ll like it. But please post your real name and address so I can send you a bill for the parking IF IT SUCKS! LOL
Fitz
@soul_erosion: CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT? I really didn’t see any development. It was a snapshot. No movement. Bring a deck of cards if you go.
Landon Bryce
A SINGLE MAN is very easily the best fictional big budget gay movie ever made. This is in part because, unlike PHILADELPHIA and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN it was actually based on a novel by a gay man and directed by a gay man.
It is a somewhat static, overly visual, very stylized film. Lots of people will hate it because it is subtle and demands a certain degree of intelligence and interpretation. Because it somewhat accurately reflects gay men’s lives in 1962, it’s also a depressing movie, although much less bleak than Isherwood’s novel. My boyfriend, who is about seventy and lost his husband of twenty-eight year two years ago, found it much more optimistic than I did (I’m in my forties), and I think younger audiences may lack the experience to really relate to the protagonist.
Go.