Camp Classic

Stonewall Has Been Nominated For A Film Award…Really

Colorlines Screenshot Stonewall Poster 082815

The Gay and Lesbian Film Critics have just released their nominations for the Dorian Awards, and everyone’s favorite flick Stonewall got a surprise nomination!

Stonewall joins The Boy Next Door, Magic Mike XXL, Fifty Shades of Grey, and Jupiter Ascending as a nominee for “Campy Flick of the Year.”

Hey, a nomination is a nomination…right?

As you may remember, Stonewall attracted instant ire the second the trailer was released. People accused it of “whitewashing” LGBTQ history, the stars were forced to defend it, and when it finally did come out, it was savaged by critics. Director Roland Emmerich promised Queerty that people “wouldn’t hate it once they saw it,” and he was right…they despised it.

Stonewall died a quick death at the box office and currently sits at a dismal 9% at Rotten Tomatoes.

As far as the quality gay cinema that got real nods from the group, period lesbian drama Carol got multiple nominations (though we found it a bit dry) and transgender comedy Tangerine got nods for LGBTQ Film of the Year, Best Director for Sean Baker, and standouts Mya Taylor and Kitana Kiki Rodriguez were both nominated for the “We’re Wilde About You!” Rising Star Award.

The winners are announced on January 19th, and will be feted in L.A. in early March.

As for Stonewall? Well let’s just say it’s one step closer to becoming the camp classic it was destined to be.

We hope Emmerich will show up to accept in person if the flick wins. That spectacle will undoubtedly be more entertaining than the movie.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #entertainment #awardsandnominations #carol stories and more

41 Comments

  • Xzamilio

    The Stonewall poster didn’t make me want to invest in this movie… it just made me want to punch them all in the face. They just look annoying… it’s stupid, I know.

  • mujerado

    Some people despised it, for reasons having nothing to do with film making and everything to do with politics. It was a well-done, entertaining movie with a role that was nominated–justly–for a Golden Globe and would be deserving of an Oscar nomination. Jonny Beauchamp was riveting and heartbreaking, and if for no other reason than that the movie is worthwhile.

  • Claude61

    The Stonewall film bashing reinforces me wanting to see the movie as soon as it is released in Europe. It’s always easy to bash someone’s work… It’s more difficult to be objective and be constructive in critics… But maybe I’ll change my mind when I see it… Critics from all sides are praising the Film Carol… You found it dry! Maybe you’re “blasé” and need to take a step back…

  • bobmister250

    I’m pretty ashamed of the LGBT community for bashing this film. We should be applauding it even if we didn’t agree with EVERYTHING about it. The mainstream is never going to make a film about a black trans woman. EVER. NEVER EVER. Why? Because it won’t sell tickets. It just won’t. People don’t want to go to the movies and pay their $15 to watch a black trans woman being unruly and getting arrested. They can turn on their TVs and see that. They want to be uplifted and this movie does that.
    Also, where’s the proof that all these black trans women were at Stonewall? Outside of their own assertions, there’s really no proof. Photos of the time depict white protestors. People who were at Stonewall dispute the assertions of some of the trans people who claim that they were there, so I’m just not buying this “criticism”. While I haven’t yet seen the movie (don’t live in a market where I can), I’m very interested in doing so.

  • corey

    From what I understand, the movie is as inaccurate as the belief that the founders of this country didn’t have slaves, but workers. I always bring up Stonewall when some Gay or Lesbian says the LGBT community need to conform more, to integrate into “normal” society so people will see that they aren’t bad. It’s a stupid belief, and a movie more accurately, historical, politically factually showing what happened at Stonewall, would be mostly filled with characters who could never “fit in” to society even if they wanted to. It’s offensive to me when people de-gay anything about LGBT history, and leave out those who truly suffered and paid the price, for fighting back, to get more rights, respect and protections. It’s the elite LGBT that usually vote Republican who do this the most. Selfish, self-serving, and not caring about anything outside their comfy privelidged world!

  • Aranos

    After all the bashing I was not expecting much of this film, but as it turned out I found it brilliant. There are so many far worse LGBT-themed films out there, I really do not understand why anyone should bash this one. The claims about transphobia and whitewashing are totally absurd. The acting is amazing, and Stonewall would have been an excellent opportunity to educate the wider public. Sad. As usual in the history of mankind, a few idiots ruined it for all.

  • Aranos

    One last thing: if you quote “Rotten Tomatoes”, why not mention the “Audience Score” which says that 91% of the viewers liked it.

  • AndYouWillDeal

    Stonewall was a good movie. It was just maligned by the hateful trans people of color. Same ones who talk crap about a movie they didn’t even watch.
    Analysis of the photographic evidence of the Stonewall riots who there were plenty of white “cis” males to be seen on the front lines. The trans movement has lied repeatedly. Stonewall wasn’t even a bar where drag queens were allowed, so how could they supposedly be the majority during the riots? LMAO

  • Chris

    Meh, a movie stands or falls on its own merits. And regardless its historical inaccuracies (such as they may be) this seems like not that bad a movie.

  • Captain Obvious

    Ahahaha what happened to all the idiots defending this movie and saying how it didn’t matter that we weren’t going to support it? I guess they didn’t support it either. :)

  • inbama

    @Captain Obvious: We never had a chance to see it as it didn’t play anywhere thanks to Transylvanian butt-kissers like you.

  • sfhally

    @Aranos: Because that wouldn’t fit in with the narrative they’re promoting. Gotta keep re-writing history you know.

  • Prinny

    @sfhally: Its such a hard job to rewrite everything.

  • brandon

    i liked the movie

  • Dread Prince

    This is what happens when we allowed the multiculuralists and the SJW’s to infiltrate the gay rights movement, we get this nonsensical coopting of our movement, that isn’t focused on gay rights but on grievances from other political movements such as the SJW’s of the trans community, the feminists, and of the black community. The bad ranting and raving and the butthurt over this movie isn’t at all about the content, the story, the director or gay rights, but crying over not enough multiculturalism being presented.

    This is the kind of nonsense that is sympathetic to Islam but hyper critical of Christianity.

  • inbama

    @Dread Prince:
    Careful now, before you say something REALLY awful – like tell us you’re a man because you were born that way.

  • Vaike Emblem

    The loony marxist faction of the LGBT community pulled a Kim Jong-un on this movie. They basically did to this movie what Kim Jong-un did to The Interview.

    The marxists of the LGBT community damned the film before it was even released based simply on trailers and people flooded rotten tomatoes with negative reviews, even without seeing the movie, angry about so called white washing. They never rated the movie on appropriate criteria other than “hurrr not enough black people and trans people hur”. They sunk it with lies, and intimidation tactics with hordes of marxist lesbians and marxist trans protesting outside of movie theatres shouting out in their bullhorns, being obnoxious and disturbing movie goers. Anyone who mentioned on social media anything positive about the movie or mentioned wanting to see it was quickly rebuked and shamed.

    Most people never even had a chance to see it. The movie wasn’t showing anywhere in a 100 miles radius of where I live and that’s because of the intimation tactics used by marxists in the LGBT community, mainly the trans portion and those who bend over backwards to appease them even if they’re being overly sensitive or unreasonable, sort of like Carmen Carrera’s temper tantrum over “she-mail”. Give me a break.

    Crooning about how this is a victory is like rigging an election and then saying “the people spoke”. no they didn’t because you shut it down before it was given a chance. the only winner here was censorship and hysteria.

  • Kangol

    @bobmister250: Did you feel good about your [email protected] drivel? I hope so.

    You actually typed: “People don’t want to go to the movies and pay their $15 to watch a black trans woman being unruly and getting arrested. They can turn on their TVs and see that. They want to be uplifted and this movie does that.
    Also, where’s the proof that all these black trans women were at Stonewall? Outside of their own assertions, there’s really no proof.'”

    What “people”? Do you mean [email protected] white people like yourself? Have you read the various historical accounts of Stonewall, including by David Carter, and Leslie Feinberg, both of whom are white and say that Johnson was there? I think NOT. Marsha Johnson was there, and this is widely acknowledged, but you’re too out of it to grasp that. You perhaps were referring to Sylvia Rivera, but then again, you might not know the difference between “black” and “latina” or anything else.

    BTW what we see on TV nonstop is WHITE trans women. Like Caitlyn Jenner. She is the face of trans American, not women of other colors. You know this, but you’re too [email protected] to grasp it.

  • AtticusBennett

    it was, without question, the worst film ever made about the LGBT movement, and the LGBT experience. hands down.

    the absolute worst.

    it was badly written, badly cast, and an insult to everything that the Stonewall riots were about and what the movement continues to BE about.

    those who loved it have piss-poor taste in film, and little to no understanding and respect for the history of our movement.

    i saw the film. i cannot pretend it was good. it was mediocre, in every possible way.

    as for those who continue to deny it’s heinous twists of history, sit your @ss down and read the words of a man who was actually there:

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/art/stonewall-movie/

  • AtticusBennett

    btw, how nice of so many of you cowardly anonymous wimps to comment and vent your racism and pathetic self-professed (and always unproven, hence your anonymity) “manliness”

    the film was a piece of crap. don’t be mad that people avoided crap. be angry at the HACKS that took our community’s story and s*at on it.

  • AndYouWillDeal

    @AtticusBennett: I’ve read the words of the “trans pioneers” who were there and they themselves say Stonewall wasn’t even a bar where drag queens were welcome, so how can they possibly be the majority? ridiculous. If anything the movie included too many trans people of color compared to the truth.

  • AndYouWillDeal

    @Kangol: Calling someone a [email protected] is meaningless when people like you use it as go-to attack for anyone who disagrees with your policy or ideology.

  • Vaike Emblem

    Cultural marxists such as Atticus are destroying the gay community from the inside out with this policy of appeasing anyone who has a grievance, even if it is not founded in reality.

  • Vaike Emblem

    @AtticusBennett: You didn’t even need to “avoid it” because it wasn’t showing hardly anywhere thanks to the grievance industry and people such as yourself, congratulations on promoting censorship. You represent everything that is wrong within some segments of millennials and some fringe marxist activists in the gay community.

  • AtticusBennett

    click my name and you’ll see who i am, and what i do. let’s see who “you” are, eh? show yourself :D hehe, you can’t. internet cowards never can. trolls for life, ye be :D

  • AtticusBennett

    https://www.nextmagazine.com/content/straight-stonewall

    my op-ed from Next magazine. i also provided a link to the words of an actual stonewall veteran. but you won’t read it. because it doesn’t suit your own insecure wimpy mindset :D we get it, boys. you’re a bunch of insecure closeted white losers and you ramble and rant on the internet, anonymously, because you’re too cowardly to stand up and actually show who are.

    which is ironic, you’d have been the first to run away at Stonewall. you can’t even show yourselves on here. get bent :D

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @AtticusBennett: Or maybe people don’t want you contacting them, harassing them, or perving on them. You kind of have a pervy stalker look to you, so theres a reason why people like me wish to remain anonymous. Also I find it humorous that you’re incapable of arguing just dismissing people as trolls so you don’t have to actually reason. I know logic must be hard for that brain inside your pervy looking head.

    @AtticusBennett: Stop spamming and shilling your junk here.
    >Flagged as spam

    @AtticusBennett:
    What was your problem with the film besides it not having enough black people or trans people, do tell?

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @AtticusBennett: Ironic how you were just accusing people of putting up manly facades, and then you hurl the insult that they would be the first to run away. Who’s putting up a masculine facade now you hypocrite.

  • AtticusBennett

    you’d be the first to run. you wouldn’t even be AT Stonewall – you’d be too busy sitting at home miserable complaining about everyone else leading an Open life ;)

    you poor wee worthless troll. ignored by your family, and ignored by the real world – only through internet anonymity can you raise your wimpy lil’voice. :D

    the film was badly written, with terrible dialogue and a vacuous central performance by the utterly-miscast Jeremy I.

    i posted a link to the words of an actual stonewall veteran, denouncing the film. he was at the riots. he denounces the film.

    but you’ll ignore that. after all, you’re a broken unloved troll who needs to hate on people of colour and transgender people because your own family wants nothing to do with you. keep trolling, the world has passed you by :D

    did you read the account by the actually-there stonewall veteran? :)

  • Doughosier

    I loved the movie. And I don’t see how it was historically inaccurate. It was baffling how this film was derided by our community, by people who didn’t see it.

  • AndYouWillDeal

    @AtticusBennett: Which one of us is constantly trolling here for your SJW, feminazi, hard left agenda? LMAO, and you dare say other people have no lives.

  • Paul

    @AtticusBennett: I just read your article at Next Magazine and thought you made some good points about having opportunities for LGBT people to play leading role LGBT characters as often as straight actors get to do! I will share it with LGBT people and allies. Thanks for the link.

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @AtticusBennett: This is my only screeny, more than one person in this thread apparently disagrees with you. Are you so full of yourself as to believe the majority of people here must agree with you? I don’t see anyone coming to your defense.

    Did you ever take a philosophy class in college? If you did you must have failed it. All you’re doing is using ad hominems and dismissing people because “you’re a troll”. That’s not an argument. You’re just looking for reasons to dismiss someone’s argument by attacking the person or trying to discount them in your mind.

    You have absolutely nothing to base your characterization of my life on, zilch.

    “you’re a broken unloved troll who needs to hate on people of colour and transgender people because your own family wants nothing to do with you. keep trolling, the world has passed you by”

    Where did I say I hate black people or trans people? Saying that I think the claims from certain black people and trans people that this movie is whitewashed and is trash because of that is absurd. Can I not disagree with someone. Or if I disagree with them am I automatically trumped with a race card or a trans card?

    And phew you’re way off on my family and social life kiddo, way off. Like I said you have nothing to base your assumptions on, you just don’t like what I have to say so you attach characteristics that you also dislike or pity to me as well. Psychology is my expertise so you that shit doesn’t really work on me because I know what you’re trying to do. I’m quite certain if I was on your side and anonymous and someone attacked me for agreeing with you, you would rush to my defense and attack that person even if they weren’t anonymous. You’re desperately grasping at any and everything even if you have to make it up in order to dismiss a person and feel justified in ignoring their argument. The funny thing though is you’re only making a fool out of yourself.

    I swear you and Captain Obvious can be two of the most pretentious people on this board. Speaking of not having a life, you post WAY more than I do so perhaps you’re projecting your own insecurities onto me? Who knows, but you’re a fool and bad at arguing.

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @AtticusBennett: Also chill on the emoticons, people who overuse emoticons generally are either insecure, or are trying to hide an emotion they are feeling but don’t want to portray in their text.

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @Aranos: Funny how that works out isn’t it. One thing I’ve learned in my life is NEVER trust reviews. I have seen raving reviews for some of the crapiest movies ever and then denigrating reviews, such as the ones out there for stonewall which are completely without merit. Some people just like to create drama and stomp their feet if the entire world does not conform to their world view including media. When Atticus makes it big he is more than welcome to make his delusional take on Stonewall , based on someone who rebuked the film before it was even released. Yea real credible.

  • Atlas Shrugged

    @Aranos: As a question completely unrelated to this topic, is your name Aranos paying homage to Oranos the Greek Titan of the sky or is just making the name Aaron more Latin-esque?

  • inbama

    @Atlas Shrugged:
    On the subject of whether or not to believe critics, a thousand years ago, a college student tried to insult the late Judith Crist by saying, “You know there are a lot of people who see everything you hate and avoid everything you love?”

    She answered, “Then I am doing my job well. I am entertaining enough that they continue to read me even though our tastes differ. Secondly, whether they agree with me or not, they are still making their decisions based on what I say. That’s why the most important quality of a critic is not to try to be always right, but to be reliably consistent.”

  • dwes09

    @AtticusBennett: So you have a blog. So do fundamentalists and anti-science tin foil hat types (and they also have the same issues you do with anecdote vs statistics and fact vs fantasy). That does not change the fact that your analysis of others seems either cluelessly based on the dysfunction of your own family or an inability to tell the difference between facts and imagination. There is no academic, stylistic or any kind of review for a blog. They’re not reliable as information. They’re entertainment.

    So you write well. So do other people, many of whom have greater intellectual credibility than you display.

    So you apparently can sing and act. That is kind of impressive. But it is also common enough and it does not change the fact that you lash out at people cruelly when they question your opinion based, black and white view of everything (when you grow up you will understand nuance I hope).

    So you have modest good looks. Common as well, and given your penchant for bitterness and cruelty to others you’d better watch yourself when they start to fade. You’ll need an actual ability to engage others or be seen as the bitter queen you are so eager to accuse others of being, but fail to see inching into your reflection in the mirror. It is queer (in the conventional sense of the word) that you seem to mistake your innate bitter streak for progressiveness.

    And Jesus, stop the constant insistence that your family dynamic is common to all! Freudian bullshit of the worst sort. What do you suppose denying the truth of other people’s lives (which you seem to take real pleasure in doing) says about you. Seriously child, give that some thought.

    I was 18 at the time of the Stonewall riots, but upstate at Cornell, not yet home for the summer. My parents were certainly more upset by the death of Judy Garland than i was. I was still struggling with being gay and had no appreciation for that style of music anyway. The news all referred to the death of Garland as a reason that gay people were mad as hell and not going to take it any longer. And the pictures in the news showed a crowd that was overwhelmingly white and male with a sprinkling of women and people of color. Within a years I was attending dances and other events at the GAA Firehouse when i got to NYC. I was not out to my parents until around 1978, but had come out to all my friends starting in 69, and was out to all of them by 71.

    Who you are is not your blog nor is it the accomplishments you are most impressed with yourself. It is the sum of your actions and how others relate to them. What I do is chair a large annual horticultural exposition here on the west coast, do some gratis teaching on how to grow orchids, do some landscaping for clients and lead fitness bike rides every weekend for mostly hetero much younger people. I make sure they know i am gay given the opportunity (I get great pleasure making it clear that a 65 year old gay man can climb and sprint faster than they can, and they’ll have to work to reach my level of fitness). And I have been starting to do a small bit of catering. I probably should not be telling you all this (despite the rhetorical request on a previous post) as someone like you will doubtless find a way to insult or denigrate me based on it. Maybe, like the small dogs that are aggressive on leash and meek when free, that is just your persona when protected by your computer screen? That is common enough.

  • UltimateSin

    So many white tears, so little time. No one stopped you from watching your shitty movie. If you really did want to watch it then you would have. If it didn’t play near you then chances are you live in some backwater Podunk town.Sorry that you aren’t getting to enjoy your privileges without being called out on like your parents. Just kidding, I’m not sorry.

  • inbama

    @UltimateSin:
    That makes you SO SPECIAL.

Comments are closed.