board77

The discussion in the Gay Day thread about "Larry and Chuck" reminded me of a post I've been meaning to write.

There's an argument that these movies laugh at gay people and denigrate them, which may well be true, but there's the counter-argument that in doing so they make the subject matter more accepted. If people are laughing at what they used to fear, surely thats a good thing? Well, in the short term, no. Its pretty obvious that homophobics will get exactly what they want to get out of these movies. But what about the long term?

I'm reminded of a TV programme I grew up with. "Different Strokes" was one of those kiddie comedies where a rich dad with a white daughter and a maid adopted two streetwise black kids. Now, looking back, the stereotypes were laughably offensive. Of course the rich person was white and the poor kids were black! Thats life! The only rich black people were the Huxtables in "The Cosby Show", and thats cause Mom was a lawyer and Dad was an obstetrician.

But however heavy handed the morality lessons in those shows, they helped to break down barriers. The same is true of "Ellen" and "Will and Grace". Those shows would simply have been inconceivable even 10 years ago.

So, do we cut them slack and give them credit for going as far as they do, or do we criticise them for not going far enough?

Quote:

So, do we cut them slack and give them credit for going as far as they do, or do we criticise them for not going far enough?

Both, in the proper context.

Thats a little glib, Ax. Care to elaborate?

This has been on my mind, obviously.
One simple-to-say-hard-to-define answer that has occurred to me is the difference between laughing at and laughing with. That was part of why I brought up the Blackface analogy, (which black actors of the time played a part in) now widely acknowledge to be clearly racist. But I can't see a clear line between it and movies like Larry and Chuck (and some others *E* rightly brought up that mock other groups). I know that the Larry and Chuck trailer I saw felt like it had hypocrisy practically oozing off the screen. But last night a gay friend said he was looking forward to seeing it. It's a tough line to draw.

I tried to construct a post like the one Alatar opened this thread with and failed. Alatar, you said basically what I wanted to say...

And Ax, you beat me to the punch with your response.

We give them credit for going as far as they do AND we criticize them for not going far enough. Both reactions are necessary and both are valid. That is how change comes.

IMHO, of course.

You have to be very careful about the praise and criticism though. Too much of one or the other could tip the balance in a dangerous direction.

yovargas, you are just one guy. Maybe other gay guys feel differently. Is there not a danger or some inappropriateness in an assumption by someone, say, like me, that "all" gay guys think alike on any given subject?

If I say, "My friend yovargas thinks this movie sux and he's gay, therefore it sux!" That kind of thing.

Indeed, vison. In fact, one of the few good reviews (14 out of 98 right now) I read on Rotten Tomatoes was by a gay guy. As I said, one of my gay friends is looking forward to seeing it. And two other straight friends were telling me the day before how insulting it looks.

You don't need to be in the minority group to be bothered by insulting or insensitive remarks about that group. But also just cuz you are in that group doesn't mean you'll be insulted by them.

Uh, IOW, everybody's different. Big revelation, I'm sure.

Well, I'm not likely to be seeing it, although Tay wants to see it cuz Adam Sandler's in it. I told him we'd check Rotten Tomatoes first, or ask Uncle R.

I might want to see Hairspray, though. What's the buzz on that? Wasn't it already made into a movie? John Travolta is a guy I sometimes think is John Revolta, but there's no denying he has a comic gift.

I remember the original Hairspray movie - it was kind of a cult classic, with Divine playing the mother (the part John Travolta is playing.)

The musical was just okay, but kinda fun.

However, this new movie has apparently gotten VERY good reviews. So I might go see it!

[/OT]

I definitely won't be seeing "Chuck and Larry" though. I am not a fan of Adam Sandler; I have never like anything I've seen him in and this movie just looks puerile.

vison wrote:

yovargas, you are just one guy. Maybe other gay guys feel differently. Is there not a danger or some inappropriateness in an assumption by someone, say, like me, that "all" gay guys think alike on any given subject?

As far as I saw, though, yov never asked anyone to make that assumption. He spoke for himself, as yovargas, and stated how he felt. It would indeed be absolutely inappropriate for you to assume that all gay guys think alike on any given subject, and I am sure you will not do so. In fact, yov himself repeatedly referred to other gay guys he knew who were interested in seeing this movie.

Similarly, I would imagine that no one would take my posts as speaking for "all" Asians, gays, fans of Judaism, attorneys, or even as speaking for "all" 20-something gay Asian female attorneys who belong to the Judaism fandom. (On second thought, that last one *might* be pretty safe because I'm not sure whether any others exist. )

I haven't seen "Chuck and Larry" and I don't intend to, mostly because I'm not too interested in patronizing most "mainstream" movies anymore. I'm fortunate to live in an area with a lot of indie film festivals, and I'd rather direct my money in that direction. Moreover, indie films tend to be a great source of accurate portrayals of various minorities. I spent a lot of time volunteering at the LGBT Film Festival in June, and I'm looking forward to attending a couple of movies from the Jewish Film Festival in upcoming days.

As a general rule, I'm not really interested in humor that appeals to straight people, who in all their wisdom, have become enlightened enough to conclude that "there's nothing wrong with being gay," but are still proud of being "non-PC" enough to attend movies that laugh at, rather than with, most gay people. (From what I've read in the gay media, this sounds like one of those movies.) Those straight people can have their laughter and their enlightenment...I'm not trying to stop them, but I'm sure as hell not going to join them. If that's "progress," I'll climb on the "progress" train a little later on, when it's further along its journey.

I guess what I'm trying to say with that last, is...I absolutely recognize the progress inherent in homosexuality having transformed - in the words of one successful gay California attorney - from the "love that dares not speak its name" to the "love that can't shut up." Or, in the words of the 1980s gay movement (now co-opted by the AIDS activist movement), "Silence = death." Talking about prejudices is the surest way to force them to diminish over time. But, in my experience, when people talk about their prejudices, it's not necessarily easy to hear. And, in my experience, it is a lot easier to view that sort of dialogue as "progress" and worthy of receiving credit when you are NOT a part of the targeted group. (e.g. if we were to see more shows and movies in America that, say, humanized and somewhat-more-accurately depicted the Muslim population, I would readily applaud them as progress. A step in the right direction. But a Muslim viewer of those movies might feel far more offended than me, if the movies had some residual misconceptions or stereotypes, whether borne out of ignorance or prejudice.) So, extending that analogy,it chafes a bit when straight people admonish me that even highly stereotypical movies are reason to celebrate how much better things are than they used to be. But I get where they're coming from.

tolkienpurist wrote:

Similarly, I would imagine that no one would take my posts as speaking for "all" Asians, gays, fans of Judaism, attorneys, or even as speaking for "all" 20-something gay Asian female attorneys who belong to the Judaism fandom. (On second thought, that last one *might* be pretty safe because I'm not sure whether any others exist. )

Perhaps this particular trailer bothered me so much because I thought we had made more progress than this already. All the jokes (usually the "big" jokes in a movie) look like jokes that would have been stale 15 years ago. Seriously, if the jokes looked like new or creative gay stereotype jokes maybe it would've at least felt farther along in progress. You know, that at least we've moved past some of these things in the last decade or two?

I keep bringing up blackface cuz I think it's an interesting starting point for this discussion. It's a form of entertainment that is really just very silly and goofy but has been widely acknowledged as being offensive and inappropriate. Why?

Larry and Chuck opened at #1, btw.

Never underestimate the pull of Adam Sandler, or black holes. One is a violation of everything we intuitively understand about how the universe should work. The other is some sort of odd astronomical thing in space.

Alatar--

What JS said. Imperfect work requires complicated and nuanced responses to respond to properly, recognizing the good, the bad, AND the ugly in it.

Only perfection can produce an unalloyed reaction in people.

My initial thought on Chuck and Larry was "Wow this movie really didn't need to be made" it didn't look funny and it certainly wasn't going to teach me anything. I like Adam Sandler's old stuff Billy Madison/Happy Gilmore even Click was humorous, but C & L just looked dumb.

I certainly wouldn't go to a movie like that expecting cinematic quality and don't care about their views on homosexuality or how they choose to exploit it even if it's supposed to be poking fun.

Um, oh dear, er, When I was very little and very uneducated, one of the first TV programmes I watched was Amos ' Andy. I can hardly remember a thing about it now and I bet if I watched it now it would make me cringe, perhaps even explode in anger. I would have known absolutely nothing about the black American experience at my young age but, but, but I remember loving it and missing it when it finished and identifying with the people in it. Who knows what people take from bad art?

I wonder which does more actual harm, a film like "Chuck and Larry" or a movie like this:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/bratz_the_movie/

A reviewer wrote:

For all its blather about 'letting your spirit soar,' it’s really about furthering an MTV-defined version of cool, which means too many clothes, too little education and too much money.

I think they should have used stop-motion animation of the dolls to make a Bratz movie, myself.

I think they should do a post-High School Bratz sequel where they all reach their destiny of being rap video strippers.

You's can haz me laffing out loud