Everyone’s got an opinion. Some people even have informed opinions. Then there’s the storm brewing around the pending release of Stonewall, action director Roland Emmerich’s vision of what happened at the mythic 1969 riots in New York’s Greenwich Village with a petition launched to boycott sight unseen and based solely on viewing the trailer and the perception that trans and people of color are underrepresented. We’ve reported on this curious phenomenon of people many times here with the film’s director, screenwriter, star and even noted curmudgeon Larry Kramer offering their opinions on why people need to chill out until they actually see the historical drama. Now BuzzFeed has taken to the street (or, rather, what appears to be the BuzzFeed office) to poll a cross-section of folks on their opinions of the trailer.
Some are optimistic and wish for “an elegant, beautiful” retelling of the seminal event in queer history and appreciate the music and fashion on display in the trailer. Others are concerned that it will be told in a way that “doesn’t really reflect what actually happened.” Some are even less satisfied, wondering why historical characters such as Miss Major and Marsha P. Johnson aren’t present. “Oh, cool, a white guy,” one remarks.
See how they all feel about it below.
Peter McKinney
What doesn’t make transgenders angry?
PRINCE OF SNARKNESS aka DIVKID
Film looks more diverse than the (albeit limited) photographic evidence of the actual event… unless more have come to light?
Dieter Michaels
Being treated with dignity and respect would be my guess Peter…
JessPH
The film is “inspired by real events”. That means it is mostly fictional including the protagonists.
If the survivors of the Titanic were still alive in 1998, i don’t think they could give a rat’s ass that James Cameron’s film featured totally fictional main characters.
Whiners should simply not watch the film if they don’t like it. It’s utterly pointless to campaign against it.
QJ201
I don’t see myself represented, bwhahahaha.
There’s complaining about historical accuracy and then there are the internet hoardes who go ape shit over any perceived slight.
No worries they’ll all be enraged by something new in a week
Tobi
@JessPH: You mean Rose and Jack weren’t really there?!! What were they, transexuals?!!
Masc Pride
Who cares? Not like anyone’s really going to see this anyway. Really, how many Americans would be interested in seeing this even if it was more fact-based?
Mykaels
I am trying to remember when a damn movie trailer caused so much commotion. It’s a trailer people! It’s not the whole film! Sheesh
Tackle
First off, I believe this movie is going to be DOA. The mainstream movie going public is just not gonna be interested, and it’s antagonizing too many in the LGBTQ community, and too many people of color in that community. And watch, certain members of the LGBTQ community are gonna be blamed for it’s failure, as opposed to “maybe” it being a sh!tty movie, with no originality. It looks to be a copy of the 90’s Stonewall movie, all the way down to the White protagonist being front and center.
And to the White men coming on here mentioning about people whining. That’s easy to say when the shoe is on the other foot, and the hero is being played by someone young, White and attractive.A person that gays have been condition to idolize. Many of you know damn well that if the fictional character Jesus Christ was being played by a Black man, you would be up and down the block whining your damn selves.
Ummmm Yeah
There are clearly too many black, hispanic and transgenders in this trailer. Look at the pictures from that night. Almost everyone in them is a non-trans white male. They need to stop black, brown and trash washing history.
Clark35
@Peter McKinney: LMAO very true.
Talking with trans people is like thermonuclear war. The only way to win is not to play. Whatever you say, no matter what it is and what your intentions are, it will offend them. Because they thrive on being offended. It gives them permission to externalize their rage. And they enjoy the power that comes with being a moral judge over others. So they will look for any opportunity to be offended. If you don’t provide it, they will invent it. If you abide by all of their “trans etiquette” rules, they will invent new rules or change the old rules.
If you find yourself caught in a trans attack, whatever you do, don’t apologize. Listening to you grovel will only add to their pleasure and mark you as an attractive target for more abuse. LGBs are already their preferred victims, so don’t add to it by satisfying their sadistic drive.
Cagnazzo82
@Masc Pride: This is true. If not for the coverage on various gay sites I would not have any idea this movie was releasing.
To top it off however, you’ve seen one gay movie you might as well have seen ’em all.
I’m not sure why anyone’s surprised by the casting. The reason there’s some abercrombie model (who incidentally doesn’t at all look like he’s from the 70s) cast as the protagonist is because that’s literally the only way you can sell a gay movie to a gay audience.
It’s a double-edged sword though, because that’s exactly why gay-themed movies can’t ever be taken seriously as well.
Louis
@Clark35: That’s not really fair to say man considering transgenders are just as much a part of this community as everyone else is.
If someone feels excluded or misrepresented of course they are going to feel offended, angry, or displeased.
The trailer to me looks powerful and inspiring while at the same time heartbreaking knowing these courageous souls had to fight back simply because our society was so ignorant and cruel back then.
It’s not fair to mock or diminish the significance or value of another human being simply because you believe they actively seek out being offended and enjoy and relish in it.
No one ever seeks out being offended but unfortunately there are some uneducated and callous people within this community who feel it is their right to project their own insecurities and intolerances simply because it is something they are unwilling to understand or educate themselves about .
In this specific case that would be being unkind and unfeeling towards transgender Americans.
Louis
@Peter McKinney: That doesn’t add up what you just wrote was nothing more then a personal bias.
We get angry as well as we have the right to do as Americans especially when we are being singled out, vilified, persecuted, physically threatened, or discriminated against.
Just as we have the right to feel offended by certain attitudes so do transgenders also have that rights.
That is our inalienable rights as not only Americans but also as human beings sir.
Franklin
@Cagnazzo82: Co-signed. I feel like many Gay men don’t have the attention span to watch a movie that doesn’t focus on a young, photogenic, white, male protagonist. Now, before you say it, yes I’ll admit that straight people are guilty of this to some degree as well. However, IMO Gay men take it to a whole other level. Also, I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts, that a contributing factor to the reason why so many of these same types of men get cast in these roles in gay films is that some of the director’s use their casting pools double as dating pools. That’s probably what Mara Wilson was alluding to when she threw shade at Roland Emmerich with her comment about his parties for fit, young, white men.
Cagnazzo82
@Merv: Brokeback Mountain featured Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger as the leads, was directed by Ang Lee, and was intentionally marketed to women in general on shows like Oprah. There were large groups of women that flocked to see that movie to the point where most theaters were filled with women moreso than gay men. So in general it wasn’t marketed as a ‘gay’ movie, but rather an actual love story/tragedy.
That’s what made it so unique. Very different case compared to this movie, and in general gay-themed movies that preceded or followed.
@Franklin: She is likely more right than not.
Ultimately this movie will come and go without much fanfare… and eventually will be lumped into the Netflix gay section with the other several dozen clone movies that follow the same themes and usual character sub-plots.
Merv
@Tackle:
“The mainstream movie going public is just not gonna be interested”
Maybe, but I’ve been surprised before. Brokeback Mountain did pretty well at the box office.
“it’s antagonizing too many in the LGBTQ community, and too many people of color in that community… “maybe” it being a sh!tty movie, with no originality”
People who think they can make a final judgement on a movie just by watching a short trailer are idiots.
“Many of you know damn well that if the fictional character Jesus Christ was being played by a Black man, you would be up and down the block whining your damn selves.”
Do you honestly think that most Queerty readers give a rat’s ass about Jesus?
Aromaeus
Transgender is plural stop adding an s to it you morons.
dmanhart
@Peter McKinney: What doesn’t make them angry? Anything and everything. The Trans community has a hatred against the drag queen community. One Facebook friend of mine, who had 15 minutes of fame on the internet for vid of her using a rock in a stand off against a religious asshole council member of her community.. She “unfriended” me for my statement that drag queens were the ones at the very start of the Stonewall Riot. She asserted drag queens are an assault on transgenders.. Somehow.. I don’t get her animosity on that. But she “unfriended” me for “defending drag queens who are disgracing transsexuals”.
I have yet to heard from any trans person who is active in promoting acceptance of trans to say anything positive. To say anything except “look how much of a victim I am! – you better hate who I hate or I will discard you.”
I am hopng my experience with that person is an abberation. That she does not represent the political Trans Community. If so, I have to relegate them to the exact same sidelines that I relegate Religous Right people. I have never met a drag queen I have liked (with one exception). But the role of the drag queen community in the start of the gay rights movement better not be questioned.
It was NOT transgendered people who started the Stonewall Riots.. It was Drag Queens. And the person these shallow little people are attacking the movie over for not mentioning that one transgendered person? That person is PREDOMINATE in the movie. But the shallow little homos don’t care about that.
This 51 year old GAY man asserts shallow little bitches sniping like Chijuahahas need to STFU. You need to listen to your elders and know that being gay right now? You think it is so hard? Really? When I was in my early 20s, here in Sacramento, we had one of our bodies being found every 3-4 months in the secluded part of the American River. The newspaper, The Sacramento Bee, didn’t even report on the killings. We all knew the person though. And he HAD been told to be more careful about taking home the “rough trade”.
You shallow little fuckups need to listen to the generation before you. Just as I did when I was in my early 20s. Listening to the generation before me. The generation before mine were the heroes. My generation furthered on their efforts..
And drag queens were there at the very start.
They have EARNED a respect as a solid part of the founding of the gay rights movement in America. Leading to the world.
Any trans person wanting to make me go down a list of 30+ names for a sexual orientation matrix (cis, blah blah blah) will find me in solid opposition. Gay Rights history started with drag queens. Truth is what matters.
Tackle
@Merv: Who said anything about most of Queerty readers? I was only talking about the White men on this post, who are complaining about the whining they see going on about this movie. And since you posed the question, I will answer it how I see it. No the majority of Queerty readers do not give a rat’s ass about Jesus. But they would give a rat’s ass about a Black man portraying him. A difference there. Even though most of Queerty readers probably recognize/believe that Jesus is a fictional character. But because of the iconic status of this character and the power: wars fought, Kingdoms tumbled, Kingdoms born, multitudes murdered all in the name of Jesus, if given a choice, ( hypothetical)most Queerty readers would say that Jesus should be portrayed by what they been conditioned, as to how he looks, (White.) The LGBTQ community is a microcosm of the larger community in many respects. If the larger community got bent out of shape about the “Human torch” being played by a Black guy. That Rue in “Hunger Games” was played by a Black girl, and “Hercules” was played by someone Black/Samoan: all fictional characters. Sure most WOULD not really like the idea about a Black portraying Jesus. However, I doubt if most would admit it…
Merv
@Cagnazzo82: Perfect. If they could market Brokeback Mountain to straight women then maybe they can market this movie to straights, too. All it takes is a little imagination. Roland Emmerich directed Independence Day, so he has some credibility with hetero males. Maybe they can get the Tea Party Patriot types to watch this movie by playing up the angle of people fighting back against intrusive government. 😉
SeeingAll
@Dieter Michaels: Go look at the historical photos. There are actually even more people-of-color and gender-bender types, percentage-wise, in Emmerich’s trailer. (Although some loons are trying to explain that by saying it was ony white photographers at the riots who only took pics of the whites there. I swear I’m not making that up).
Bob LaBlah
His intentions were noble but his timing is simply too late for this movie.
Avery Alvarez
Statistically the LGBT community is prone to more mental health issues.
This whole debacle proved that yes, certain elements in our community are mentally ill. They have too many complexes to name.
I think many of the angry people outraged by this movie which hasn’t debuted yet should get off the internet, leave their house more often, try to find self-esteem. Actually connect to people in real life.
Find purpose and identity in real life.
Then maybe, you won’t be such pathetic losers that the fact that a Hollywood movie, which clearly has gone out of its way to include everyone in the LGBT rainbow, won’t make you completely lose what’s left of your sanity because you’re not the fcking starring role.
Tobi
@Tackle: Jesus was black. *sigh*
SeeingAll
@Avery Alvarez: You’re correct, Alvarez, about the internet addicts being a big percentage of the outraged loons, and- yes- they do need more real-life contact. (Sometimes I have to watch myself falling into that too).
Masc Pride
@Cagnazzo82: Yeah, that’s basically what I was just saying on another site in regards to this movie. The star almost HAS to be young, attractive, “assigned male at birth” and White. A bunch of Black, Latino and/or Trans people just aren’t going to generate enough interest (money), not even from the gay community. Too much black and brown and it becomes an “ethnic film”/box office suicide. People are fascinated by Trans the same way they’re fascinated by a train wreck, and people quickly want to move on to the next train wreck (as evidenced by the ratings nose dive I Am Cait has taken). We can’t forget that the people who invest time and money into films also expect to make money back. The subject matter is risky on its own without a whole bunch of extra risks.
However, I think the much more immediate reason why gay movies aren’t taken seriously is because they’re usually super campy (unless they’re about AIDS).
@Clark35: A lot of them will also threaten to commit suicide at the drop of a hat (emphasis on “threaten”). Though a certain amount of mental instability should probably be expected when one’s identity has to be professionally diagnosed.
Avery Alvarez
@SeeingAll: Hell, I do, too!
Just reading about the eternal victims and how their depression, low self-esteem, low self-worth, passive aggressiveness, aggressive aggressiveness, hatred and bigotry towards others is actually “social justice” is enough to drive someone up the wall. How they try to mask it as “altruism”. NO. it’s your ego.
It’s not different than the religious right trying to make their many mental issues and bigotry as “morals and values”, and also try to present selfishness as altruism.
JennyFromdabloc
Again, we are so fortunate to have these young experts share accounts and opinions on such a pivotal event in 1969.
Kieran
How did watching the trailer make you feel baby? *Patting your head reassuringly*
stranded
@JessPH: The outrage at it’s core, i think, is more about what one of the commentators on the video said. History is taught through a white, male perspective and Hollywood goes along with that. It’s not about not having a white-lead actor, but it’s about including other races into those leading roles. I’m sure the movie is fine, but it’s that first decision to have this story told through the narrative of a white male that doesn’t sit well with a lot of people.
SeeingAll
@Avery Alvarez: You’re truly onto something there. And it’s easy to recognize the ones on Queerty (or Towleroad, or any of the others..) that are REALLY far gone.
SeeingAll
@stranded: Then let Spike Lee make a different film about Stonewall with backing from a black studio.
Clark35
I was going to see this movie but now I will not since it’s way too overhyped, and everyone especially trans people are butt hurt about it that it will probably be a very bad movie and one not even worth seeing.
Jacob23
“Some are even less satisfied, wondering why historical characters such as Miss Major and Marsha P. Johnson aren’t present”
– lol! Johnson was there, one of perhaps 12 cross-dressers out of a crowd of 400-500 and a cumulative participant roster of well over 1,000. Even so, a character based on Johnson seems to have been included as a major character in the film. However, Emmerich probably has altered the character to an extent, because the real Marsha Johnson (aka Malcolm Michaels) was psychotic, schizophrenic and delusional. He was at times very generous and kind and other times enraged and violent. He was banned from gay bars throughout Greenwich Village. I suspect (but don’t know) that the Black drag queen in the trailer is a more stable, relatable version of Johnson.
“Miss Major” Griffin-Gracy wasn’t there. There’s not a shred of evidence placing her there, other than her own claim to have been there. And I can’t find anyplace where she has ever shared any details about when she was there and what she did. She just claims to be a “Stonewall veteran” and people accept that and repeat it as if it were true, as the Queerty editors do above. BTW, she also claims to have participated in the Attica riot in 1971. So I guess that as soon as she finished defeating the NYPD at Stonewall, she committed a major felony, was arrested, went through the entire legal process and got convicted and sentenced, processed and sent to the maximum security prison just in time for the famous riot. For some strange reason, the NYS Department of Corrections inmate database has no record of a Griffin-Gracy, or a Griffin or a Gracy matching “Miss Majors'” demographic profile.
As far as I know, she has not claimed to have been involved in the Apollo 13 lunar mission, but if we just keep saying over and over that she was there, and if Queerty keeps reporting it, then it becomes true. And there will be no mercy for Ron Howard and Tom Hanks for their ciswashing.
Markajv
None of these people from Buzzfeed were even there. Wait until you see the entire movie and speak with the people who are actually there, You obviously know the story…. you are spouting out names. Anything that say’s Based on is not 100% the truth. The trailer for Everest is “Based on actual events
I read all of those books by the people who were up there during that tragic event and it wasn’t “Thrilling” like the trailer is calling it.They turned it into an action movie. I would not expect much out of Hollywood these days.
Bob LaBlah
@Jacob23: “As far as I know, she has not claimed to have been involved in the Apollo 13 lunar mission, but if we just keep saying over and over that she was there, and if Queerty keeps reporting it, then it becomes true. And there will be no mercy for Ron Howard and Tom Hanks for their ciswashing.”
Its sad to see people like her who are now in their late sixties and early seventies looking back and realizing just what DIDNT happen in their lives. In your twenties and thirties you learn all you can. In your forties you make all you can so once you hit your mid-fifties YOU can decided if it is time to retire or keep on working. At least thats how an old queen (may he rest in peace) explained it to me. His advice sure as hell worked for me.
When I lived in NYC I used to wonder whatever happened to many of those queens who strolled the streets of the once infamous Meat Packing District. I bet I can guess but to be nice to them, I don’t. I bet many of them are in the same boat.
BigG
we would all love more diversity in films with race. but the bottom line is big studios will not fund movies with unknown actors, Especially of color. the minority actors that are huge are too expensive to get so they have to pick a white man to play it it’s just like that movie Exodus. Its not the directors fault. The studio finances it.
OzJosh
The only offensive thing here is a bunch of people (and that includes Queerty) attempting to judge a film on the basis of a trailer. It is just plain dumb, and cannot be anything other than ill-informed and misleading. It also betrays a complete ignorance of how film marketing works. For one thing, directors very often have nothing to do with the trailer, which can be wholly dictated by marketing people, or crucially adjusted by them to suit their specific marketing agendas. Which explains why you frequently get trailers for musicals that deliberately exclude any indication that singing is involved. It’s dishonest, but it’s a marketing ploy based on the idea that some people will immediately dismiss a musical, but might decide to see the film based on its stars or theme or look. In the same way, marketing people will often deliberately avoid making a film look “too black” or too diverse or too anything else. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if they consciously excluded most images of drag queens in order to give the film more mainstream appeal. You might be offended by that, but every single product you buy is marketed based on similarly blunt decisions. And, at the end of the day, if Stonewall is a success because it gets a wider audience based on its trailer, then it will lead to more films with gay themes. So the stupid outcry over the trailer may well be counterproductive. That’s if anyone is dumb enough to be influenced by it.
Clark35
@Jacob23: Don’t forget Sylvia Rivera, Eliot Tiber-he’s a charlatan who claims to have started the Woodstock music festival just because his parents owned a hotel that hippies, bands, and people traveling to the music festival stayed at-also claims to have been at Stonewall the night of the riots but in reality he was not, and all the other people who claim to have been there but really were not.
Franklin
@SeeingAll: You know it is 2015. There are black directors other than Spike Lee making films. Some of them even have been nominated for oscars.
Jacob23
@Clark35: It’s true. A lot of people lied about being at Stonewall, and by no means is this limited to transgenders/transvestites. It’s human nature to want to be associated with an event of great importance or with deeds of great heroism. That’s why you have this phenomenon of men who purchase war medals online and pretend to be heroes. This conduct, while not rampant, occurred often enough to prompt Congress to pass the Stolen Valor Act, which criminalizes fraudulent claims of having received certain medals.
Well, it’s really the same phenomenon at work with Stonewall. It’s easy for the human mind to justify deception. And there was a period of decades after Stonewall where anyone could make a claim and, unless the claim was outlandish, there really would be no practicable way of checking whether it was true. There was no internet and no professional effort to comprehensively and professionally investigate the event. So all you had to do is say, “Stonewall? Oh, I was there! I threw bricks!” and your social standing would rise and there would be no reason to believe that your little lie would ever matter, let alone be exposed. This is why we can’t blindly accept individual claims and have to try to test those claims against everything else that we know about the event.
Clark35
@Jacob23: True. I know people who lie about all sort of things including people who claim to have worked for the government, or done all sort of things or been to places, or events.
Prinny
@Peter McKinney: Uhh …. Ummmmm…. ………………………………………. It hasn’t been found yet.
SeeingAll
@Franklin: Cool. Plenty of them to make another version of “Stonewall.”
Tackle
@Tobi: Yes I got that. My presentation is for the sake of argument. According to his fictional bloodline, he would have been Black. But,,, he never existed…
dean3000
The director had he opportunity to make history and should have be aiming for an Oscar but instead it seems like a popcorn movie sanitised for Middle America. You don’t take on a story like this and wipe your backside with it.
Josh447
@OzJosh
Bingo.