Hollywood Doesnt Care About Gay Movies

[RationalLunacy]

Isn't Philip Morris a cigarette manufacturer?

 

[JasunStrikesBack]

According to the Wik it made 60 million Yankee dollar in takings across the pond; that's 3x what it cost (if i recall correctly it only cost about 20 million) to make, in addition to the 70 million it made elsewhere, so although they thought it might earn more it certainly wasn't a bomb.

Well except the theaters keep half the Gross money (meaning it only netted 65 million) and then they had a HUGE 6-month international marketing campaign and had to pay to distribute it.

Bruno did eek out a very tiny profit once it went to home video but only a small one. For all the effort that went into it, this is considered a bomb. It's also considered a disaster because it pretty much ruined the rep of it's previously bankable star (much like "Freddy Got Fingered" ended the career of Tom Green).

My friend who works for that studio said that Bruno changed a lot of things... mostly that movies like that have to be MUCH cheaper since they're such a gamble. They can pay off like they did for "Borat" and then they can be backfiring disasters like "Bruno."

 

[Jayden]

The film will be released. Just by a much smaller company. Marco perhaps you should do more reseach on your next topic.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

 

[MindBlast]

Marco, must you post in gigantic blue font? It's hard to follow. Anything larger than 12 point is hard to read.

I've seen a fair number of gay movies; most of them are bad. However, I do agree that mainstream film studios do have a bias against happy gay movies, whether it's for financial or otherwise reasons.

 

[blackbeltninja]

Well except the theaters keep half the Gross money (meaning it only netted 65 million) and then they had a HUGE 6-month international marketing campaign and had to pay to distribute it.

Bruno did eek out a very tiny profit once it went to home video but only a small one. For all the effort that went into it, this is considered a bomb. It's also considered a disaster because it pretty much ruined the rep of it's previously bankable star (much like "Freddy Got Fingered" ended the career of Tom Green).

The Wik didn't mention net or gross. If it was gross and your numbers are right then I see where you're coming from.

Freddy got Fingered was... hideously bad. In fairness, I was surprised Tom Green even got as far as he did. I'm all for random specialist/niche comedy, but I just didn't get his material. I wonder if perhaps some exec somewhere also didn't get it and assumed it was some sort of high art and greenlit all the stuff when he should have gone with his gut.

-d-

 

[Telstra]

YOU COULDN'T DRAG ME TO SEE A MOVIE WITH JIM CARREY IN IT GAY OR NOT ................HE'S ICKY.

JIM CARREY ISN'T FUNNY.

 

[Telstra]

When I had my hair lightened and longer, a couple people said I looked a bit like Jim Carey in pictures depending on the angle (face book comments). Do you think so?

mmm u look nice, your face is so smooth

 

[Spiff]

Wow, look at Jim go!

 

[Krakenbwool]

Wow, look at Jim go!

I know that it's a comedy movie, but this is so over-the-top that it's only going to reinforce the preconception that gay sex = gross. (Not over-the-top as in explicit, but as in cheesy.)

I'm still going to go see the movie, though.

 

[Groovymule]

"Hollywood", as in the studio system doesn't care about most things that won't guarantee it a return. That's the reason that we have so many comic book movies and sequels - films with a sizeable built in audience. Sadly gay interest films generally don't fall into that category and so you are relying on independent film studios and distributors.

I guess I am lucky in that I live in a city where with a bit of effort, I can see more or less anything released in the UK, whether in a multiplex or an arthouse cinema. All I can suggest is make your voice heard, email and tell the distributors what you want to see, ask your local cinema why they aren't showing x, y or z film not showing in your city and make sure you go and see those films when they are playing. Easier than it sounds but the film industry is based on known audiences so ergo you need to make yourself known.

What I would like to see are films where the character's homosexuality is incidental and just part of the character's persona rather than the driving force of the movie. That's why I liked A Single Man so much, Colin Firth's character was gay but that was just one facet of him, he was not solely defined by it. That said, at the screening I saw, at least 4 people walked out the first time they saw Colin Firth kiss Matthew Goode.

As for I Love You, Philip Morris - it's good but not amazing and some reviews over here charged the film with being quite homophobic. I didn't see it that way but others did. Jim Carrey is good and parts of the film are quite sweet.

 

[saymyname]

Do you really wanna see a gay guy and his twink boyfriend fight off robots?

Quite frankly, yes. Yes I do.

Can't tell if you're being serious or not. Seriously, who cares about gay films anyway? Why does everything has to be gay just because we are? Romance films suck anyway. THINK OF THE ASEXUALS, why do they have to watch our dirty, gross, disgusting sex scenes (gay or not)?.

[Text: Removed by Moderator] "Who cares about gay films?" Um, GAY PEOPLE. Hi. "Why does everything have to be gay just because we are?" Why does everything have to be straight just because most people are, and because some people like you pretend to be? No one is saying EVERYTHING has to be gay, just that we should have the same kinds of representation as anyone else. You really need to do something about this heterosexual colonization of your mind that you have going on.

Anyways, I basically agree with others - there are plenty of great gay films, you just won't fit them in hollywood very often. I think the OP has some good points and is a funny guy, but I don't think Brokeback Mountain is bad just because the gay sex scene was weak - it's not like straight films show ALL that much straight sex either. Although this is something that queer cinema gets criticized for a lot - it often represents their characters as depressed or it neuters their sexuality (such as in C.R.A.Z.Y., a film that had lots of potential to break boundaries, but instead didn't go there). This is something that the wave of New Queer Cinema is trying to do differently.

 

[Krakenbwool]

What I would like to see are films where the character's homosexuality is incidental and just part of the character's persona rather than the driving force of the movie.

THIS.

I find that TV generally does a lot better of a job with this than film. Particularly HBO. It'd be awesome to see more characters like Omar Little--characters that have more going for them than just being "the gay character." I don't really think we need more "gay-themed" movies more than we need well-rounded gay characters in the mainstream. After all, homophobic straight audiences aren't going to go see a "gay-themed" movie, anyway, but it'd be interesting if they went to see "James Bond" and found 007 kissing a guy.

 

[DigitalFudge]

Hollywood wants to make money.

 

[LESAINT]

You want to see 2 really really good gay related movie..... :

Xavier Dolan (born March 20, 1989), sometimes credited as Xavier Dolan-Tadros, is a Canadian actor and filmmaker. Formerly a child actor. He attracted international attention when his first film as a director and screenwriter, J'ai tué ma mère, won three awards from the Director's Fortnight program at the 2009 Cannes Film Festival.

J'ai tué ma mère has been sold to more than 20 territories, including a U.S. deal with Here! Films. It will be released theatrically in the U.S. in spring 2010.

After J'ai tué ma mère he directed his second feature film Les Amours Imaginaires (Love, Imagined), which was financed privately.] It follows the infatuation of two friends with the same mysterious young man. Inevitably, their friendship suffers. It premiered in the Un Certain Regard category at the 63e Festival de Cannes in May 2010, to standing ovation.

Dolan says that he is planning his third film called Laurence any ways, about a transsexual, with the script already ready.

Dolan is openly gay and has described J'ai tué ma mère as being semi-autobiographical.

picture attached: Xavier Dolan...

 

[G-Lexington]

Hollywood only cares about straight movies insofar as they make a profit.

A lot of people are throwing around some ad hoc reasoning here. Brokeback Mountain didn't prove there was a market for gay movies. It just proved that every single movie with a gay theme isn't destined to fail. By the same reasoning, you might argue that there's a market for movies with gay characters that end up unhappy. Or movies with gay bashing in them.

Sure, it'd be fun to see a gay couple take on the robot invasion. (As long as they didn't take them on by decorating their spaceship in clashing fabrics.) But robot-smashing movies are pricey ventures. They tend to be the movies with the nine-figure budgets. And when that happens, the studio isn't about to tinker with a formula. The movie is as likely to feature a gay couple as it is a jazz soundtrack or be devoid of urination jokes. "This worked last time, do it this way again."

Lex

 

[Ryuusei Boy]

[Text: Removed by Moderator] "Who cares about gay films?" Um, GAY PEOPLE. Hi. "Why does everything have to be gay just because we are?" Why does everything have to be straight just because most people are, and because some people like you pretend to be? No one is saying EVERYTHING has to be gay, just that we should have the same kinds of representation as anyone else. You really need to do something about this heterosexual colonization of your mind that you have going on.

Oh, hey Mr. I'm-always-in-a-bad-mood. You got your post modded, I bet it had something to do with me being the closet (it always does).

Back on (really old) topic: If more than 90% of people are straight, it's only natural that more than 90% of the films will be straight. That was my point 2 months ago, before you discovered my post, and it's my point now. And I didn't even need to be harsh to get it across, I'm just that awesome

Oh, and what Lex said

 

[SLOPPYSECONDS]

hollywoodbollywood all lot ofs dead wood fa wood

folk in world happy any person even shoe strings budget make movies ofs REAL LIFE

forgot this dead space

Dear jerk off movie studios please pull ya wood out ya butt ans support real life thankyou

 

[bounder]

Saw it on bootleg last week. I quite enjoyed.

 

[erobert]

I'm glad to see some more gay themed Hollywood movies being made like Milk but I still think there's a way to go still.

it'd be interesting if they went to see "James Bond" and found 007 kissing a guy.

That would be interesting. I would go see a gay Bond flick and I think a lot of people would too.

I think it would do better than expected, of course the writers would have to make Bond bi to retain the womanizing aspects of James Bond's character but people would still see it if Bond was bi. As long as there's explosions, car chases and cool gadgets they'll go see it. It would also add a lot of women as Bond fans add an interesting layer to 007.

I agree with Lex said too but some studios want to gain the fame of being the first to have a gay or bi action hero. Some studios want to bring a fresh perspective to the genre to set themselves about from tired old Hollywood formulas. Unfortunately, a lot of these studios are independent with much smaller budgets.

And I'm still waiting for Hollywood to move away from stereotypes. I like Kevin James but "Chuck and Larry" was ridiculous. Whatever closet case wrote that script should be ashamed of himself. It's 2010 not 1950.

Sexuality doesn't have to be central to a character but there's a big niche market (the GLBT community) which Hollywood is ignoring and in turn missing out on a lot of $$.

 

[LiquidSky]

I recently read that the film will have a Fall release. Smaller indie movie do better in the Fall.