Blog powered by Typepad

« Payback is hell, Senator | Main | Protocols of death »

December 03, 2004



Philadelphia was a relatively sterile movie about homosexuality. It didn't even get into the nitty gritty, and felt very much like A Beautiful Mind, Forrest Gump, and any number of the other best picture movies that screamed "Love Me."

The Crying Game was a stupid movie, not even about homosexuality. When Forrest throws up after seeing Dil's penis, I was thinking "yup, this is really a homo-friendly movie." I'd seen much better from 1971 with Pink Flamingos (re-released in 1996).

As for Alexander, its Showgirls. Pure and simple. The acting, script, and everything but the plot and timeling reeks of Verhoeven's now-camp-classic. Alexander is a bit long (Showgirls was only 132 minutes compared to 3 hours) for that type of nonsense, but it sure is awfully hilarious. I agree, it isn't the homosexuality that sends people away (though it is dealt with with all the subtly that Stone mustered for NBK), it is the film itself.

When will we get a tolerable gay movie? I dunno, does Boondock Saints count?

P.S. Mike, Stone made some awesome movies 1994 and before (NBK, Wall Street, Born on the Fouth of July).

P.S. Scott, The Last Temptation of Christ does not denigrate an icon. It put an icon into realistic terms, not to degrade it but to make it accessible to people who don't believe in him. Its a more realistic spin on the fantastically ridiculous Bible which makes the story more palatable to those who aren't Christian/Catholic.

Zendo Deb


The prime story was about a gay and his death from aids.

Didn't this win best picture, in addition to making a boatload of money and winning Hanks Best Actor?


The clinical term for irrational hatred for homosexuals is uranophobia. The clinical term homophobia actually means irrational hatred of self. That being said, audiences are avoiding this film not because of its sexual overtones. They are avoiding it because it a bad movie, poorly written and poorly directed, and visually unappealing. The plot bears little or no similarity to the actualy events. Alexander's most significant contributions to civilization, the most influential events of his life that formed his character, and his greatest achievements are glossed over if not completely left-out. There is simply no historical evidence of any kind that Alexander was bisexual. He may have been, but we do not know. The Greek historians who wrote of him us a different term to refer to his relation with Hephaiston than that to refer to a homosexual relationship; their relationship may have homoerotic but not necessarily sexual. Stone simply constructs a character, a fop really, based on his own misperceptions of homosexuality and misunderstanding of how his audience views homosexuality. Alexander is presented as a conflicted bisexual with a domineering mother and a vicious wife, torn between his lust for conquest and his love for a boy. I see it as analogous to Farenheit 9-11 or The Last Temptation of Christ, a propanganda film in the culture war meant to denigrate an icon. One of the great figures of Western History is demeaned and mischaracterized, his great accomplishments downplayed, in such a way as to insult the other side and ridicule Western culture and history. It should do well in Europe.

Posse Incitatus

Actually, "The Crying Game" was about both: the way one acted (gender) and one's sexuality.

The point is not to subdivide homosexuality into its various types, otherwise one must argue about what is "really gay" and what is not.

The core love story in "The Crying Game" was between a man and another man and it featured kissing, implied sexual acts and full frontal male nudity.

All of these would seemingly be an intolerable affront to the alleged prudishness of homophobic Americans, yet they put down millions of dollars to see it.


Actually, you've got it dead wrong about the Crying Game. The core issue was transgender identity not homosexuality. Neither Forest Whitaker (the British Soldier) nor Steven Rea (the main protagonist) was a gay "type" and neither would have likely identified themselves as gay. Jaye Davidson (Dil, the boy-girl) was pretty cute by any hetero standards and the power of the film for heteros was how blurry the line was in following up the attraction. Also, as I remember, Rea ran away from Jaye horrified when he found s/he had a penis and I don't believe that they ever consummated the relationship sexually. It was a loyalty thing.

The transgender identity issue was also at the core of Boys Don't Cry. It was Hilary Swank's killer who confused transgender with gayness.


Salvador. Platoon. Wall Street. Talk Radio. The Doors. And co-wrote Scarface. A pretty good track record early on. Enough success (unfortunately) to systematically ruin a career by creating nothing but dreck over the last 10 years.


I'm not Mike.


Mike: "The Birdcage" grossed $121 million in 1996 and was the 9th highest grossing film released that year.

And don't forget "Interview With the Vampire" ($106 million in 1994).

richard mcenroe

And of course, The Producers tanked on Broadway, because who wants to see a bunch of queens camping it up in SS uniforms?

Oh, wait a minute...


What were the grosses for The Birdcage a few years back with Robin Williams and Nathan Lane as a Miami Beach gay couple?


Has Oliver Stone ever made a really good movie? His reputation, in my mind, is completely undeserved, and based on Hollywood liking movies nobody else does.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)