What better pair for a Saturday Novmeber's Movie Club poll and more about that bad boy indie movie producer.Hope that everyone finds a movie they would like to watch and discuss with others. Can be tough be think we can find one for Movie Club - Friday November 21 and Sat November 23rd.
With Milk coming out in select markets first and then more later, we may need to look for a date in December or later so that that everyone who wants to can get a chance to see it and discuss it here.
And sneak peak of One Tree Hill Monday night.
6.10 “Even Fairy Tale Characters Would be Jealous”
Tension fills the air backstage at Peyton’s USO Show, as Lucas deals with Peyton and Julian's romantic past. Haley battles stage fright and Nathan struggles with a decision that could change his career. Brooke gets a call that threatens her relationship with Sam. Millicent confronts Mouth on his relationship with Gigi.
Pictures: Austin Nichols Journal - thanks again Spooky2th
Shelter stands head-and-shoulders above most other films in its genre (gay romantic dramas, not “gay surfer movies”) thanks to its solid cast, its intimate, kitchen-sink feel, and its reluctance to play to the clichés that generally plague “coming out” movies.
ReplyDeleteRowe in particular shines here as the older, wiser, and almost impossibly good-natured Shaun. He’s sexy, easygoing, and dignified, and seems incredibly at ease in his own skin, which is not always the case when straight actors take on gay roles.
And relative newcomer Wright’s detached, polite moodiness melts away beautifully as his character develops, giving Zach a satisfying arc. Supporting players like Holmes and Ross Thomas as Gabe, Zach’s straight best friend and Shaun’s younger brother (the scene where Zach reluctantly comes out to Gabe is definitely a highlight), lend the film an authentic, understated beach-town feel.
Shelter’s avoidance of the standbys of coming-out movies makes an otherwise familiar story feel fresh. There are no gay bars, no drugs, no drag queens, no circuit anthems, no gay-bashings, no AIDS scares, and no screaming parents to speak of. Sure, some of these elements will likely enter any gay man’s life at some point or another, but Shelter’s focus on Zach’s first love and how it fits into his working-class surroundings lends a wonderful authenticity.
http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2008/3/shelter
Well I read a synopsis for most all of these movies and I've only seen Latter Days on Sundance and Beautiful Thing on IFC...my vote went to Beautiful Thing because I enjoyed it.
ReplyDeleteIf I had to recast my vote, it would be for Shelter...maybe I should have thought and picked something I haven't seen :D ha.
Sophia Bush on Prop 8 Passage: "I'm Embarrassed"
ReplyDeleteAdd Sophia Bush to the growing list of grousing stars upset over the passage of California's gay-marriage-annihilating Prop 8.
"I'm really proud to be an American," the One Tree Hill star said of the election of Barack Obama, "and I'm embarrassed to be a Californian right now."
Speaking to E! News at Thursday's DSquared2 party in the penthouse of Hollywood's Chateau Marmont, Bush said she was psyched to see Obama win, especially since she campaigned for him. She also hopes to attend his Jan. 20 inauguration. But her excitement was tempered by the narrow passage of Prop 8. "It's just so sad that when we've been so progressive, we've also taken so many steps backward," she said, choking up.
"I'm disgusted. In a world that is so full of hatred and bigotry and war and famine? We're criticizing two people for loving each other. I think that it's devastating."
I voted for Dying Gaul (again), but Shelter also sounds good.
ReplyDeleteNice bit about Sophia.
For those who pick one of Austin's movies for Movie Club - let us know which one you'd like
ReplyDeleteEven though I suggested Angels in America, I voted for Shelter. I've heard lots of good things about it on the web, and Angels would require a huge investment of time. We would have to do one episode at a time I think to pull that one off.
ReplyDeleteI'm happy to see all the negative reaction to Yes on 8. I just wish it had come sooner, before the vote. Does anyone watch Bill Maher (sp?). He was great last night, gloating a bit about Obama but the panel got into a Prop 8 discussion as well. Brokeback Mountain was sited as an example of Hollywood not really be as pro gay as people might think. The reference being to its not winning best picture when it clearly deserved it.
I always watch Bill Maher, and I thought the conversation from the one guest about homophobia in HW was interesting. Given how quiet so many supposedly gay-friendly stars have been, I'm really beginning to think HW is more homophobic than we realize. Or is it just fear of offending the homophobes? Either way, that has been just as disturbing to me as some of the other issues swirling around the loss. So many spoke out too late too--Madonna is getting some real criticism about that.
ReplyDeleteI don't want to put the spotlight on this issue and Point a finger, but I am an African American who watch Bill Maher often and I was embarrassed about the Prop. 8 results discussion. I found out about the percentage results on this site and could not believe it. I was also hurt. I did not pay enough attention to this cause although I don't live in Fla. or Calif.. My community is very far behind on gay causes, which friends and myself discuss often. The only thing that I can do now is to take a stand and to discuss or educate people in my community "who will listen" about a gay persons RIGHT to Marriage and that "WE" (gay people) will not be second class citizens to ANYONE!
ReplyDeleteGood for you, just sayin'. I am in agreement with you. I didn't know what Proposition 8 was about til OMGer's brought it up and I had to do a little online reading about it. I brought it up in my office at work after the election and all I got were blank looks. Heavy sigh. I think out of the 3 girls I work closely with and the 1 direct super. I work for, only 1 1/2 (lol, 1/2 person is my buddy. Her case is a little more complex.) of them has honest respect for the gay community. I love them all, but on that aspect, I'm talking to a cement wall. They're not mean about it or anything; it's just not a subject that comes up in everyday conversation. And Prop. 8 was definitely not talked about. I wish it could've been. I'm the lone wolf in the office and with friends outside of the office on this aspect. You are very fortunate you have friends in your circle who you can talk to about it.
ReplyDeleteJoin the Impact - Protest Prop 8 on November 15th!
ReplyDeleteWe can’t wait for any large scale organization to get the word out for us. We have 1 week to put together a NATIONAL PROTEST and start a mobilized movement for equality! When we all come together as one voice on November 15th, we will show the nation that we can do more than just talk, we can act! We won’t solve everything in one protest, but we will fuel the fire to a conversation that can not be silenced! If we stop talking about equality for all, then we will lose the battle. If we allow others to stop talking about it, then we will lose. Hate is not the lack of love, it’s the fear of that which we do not know. This protest along with many others gives us the chance to build on the conversation and educate the masses. It’s very simple: Infiltrate, Educate, and STOP HATE!
Join the Impact
Still deciding on a movie, but anything will be great. I'm planning to attend the protest on the 15th. I'm very shocked and disappointed about Prop 8, and I hope it can be overturned as unconstitutional. The right to marry was affirmed by the CA Supreme Court. :)
ReplyDeleteI'm happy to vote for Shelter as the movie selection for our next discussion.
ReplyDeleteWith the right to marry affirmed by the supreme court, how can an opinion poll, plebesite, proposition, or straw vote be allowed to limit or deny a civil right? Church and State were supposedly separated many, many years ago. It's a shame we still have to fight for the right to love, but fight we must.
Just saying, there is a lot of blame to go around, but I think a big chunk of it goes to the group that was leading the fight against Prop. 8, who really did a lousy job. The didn't do much until it was too late and after tons of money was raised on the other side--they were initially too complacent because polls initially showed the No on 8 side winning, early ads were not very good, they had no outreach of any kind to the black and gay community, or anyone for that matter. I was reading comments on Americablog, and people in California said they got all kinds of phone calls from the "Yes" people, plus visits, fliers, etc.--nothing from the "No side. Another example of how they fell down on the job--last weekend I got an email from the No people saying they needed 10,000 volunteers to help to hand out fliers at the polls--this should have gone out sooner!
ReplyDeleteThey also didn't do enough to frame it as a civil rights issue. The best ad, one done by Samuel L. Jackson, talked about how interracial marriage didn't used to be allowed either, but this one only started running about a week before the election.
And now they're sending emails to people basically saying people shouldn't blame the bigots for voting the way the did. Unbelievable.
A first person story from a black lesbian about the problems with the No on 8 group. LA Times
ReplyDeleteDestiny, I am afraid the only ones who can and should be blamed are the bigoted Californian hypocrites who voted Yes. I doubt more phone calls would have changed their minds. It is very hard not to see the bigotry in the Yes campaign, I don't think they could have been any effective unless they were talking to an equally bigoted audience. Why the No on 8 campaign supporters should have outreached the gay community, I would surely hope they voted no?
ReplyDeleteseaweed, it is called democracy. Seems silly or unfair or plain wrong, but sadly, majority said Yes on 8.
ReplyDeleteSeaweed said With the right to marry affirmed by the supreme court, how can an opinion poll, plebesite, proposition, or straw vote be allowed to limit or deny a civil right?
ReplyDeleteWhy? said seaweed, it is called democracy. Seems silly or unfair or plain wrong, but sadly, majority said Yes on 8.
Even though the US is "We The People" the people at large don't always know best. If the majority ruled in the US women would only exist as birthers, schools would be segregated every which way, gay sex would be illegal. The majority might not like court decisions but tough shit. I'll take educated Supreme Court justices over mob mentality any day.
ITA with you Destiny. No/8 made a lot of mistakes.
Celebs are just now coming out to support No/8. That's nice..nice and spineless.
Btw it was good of Samuel L. Jackson to do the voiceover for the "It's Against Civil Rights" TV ad BUT it wasn't until Destiny said who it was that I know why the voice sounded familiar. He'll do the voice for the ad but his name wasn't there? No "I'm Samuel L. Jackson and I...." No "Presented by Samuel L. Jackson" at the top while the ad was going on. Nothing that said "Samuel L. Jackson" in the ad. I wonder who made that decision..PR, No/8, Jackson himself? Another example of spineless.
Part of the early problem was that Yes/8 chose "Protect Marriage" as their logo so it was initially confusing.
No/8 supporters should have come out and blasted the Yes/8 signs which said "Protect Marriage" as really being more like "Protect Homophobia":
YES ON 8
PROTECT MARRIAGE
PROTECT HOMOPHOBIA
Ad-wise, No/8 countered the misleading Yes/8 views by presenting the ads "It's Wrong" "No On 8 Has Nothing To Do With Schools" and "It's Against Civil Rights" which was good.
IMO No/8 ads should have asked why marriage should be between a man and a woman, if marriage is about reproduction and if it is then why are childless straight people allowed to stay married? Since marriage is allowed only between a man and a woman, it implies that its purpose is for biological reproduction. If gays can't marry because they can't have a biological child together, then there should be a law stating that all married (straight) couples are required to reproduce and if they don't have biological offspring within a mandated 5 year time frame then the State pronounces their marriage invalid.
BUT THE MAJOR MISTAKE NO/8 MADE was overlooking the statement made by the Yes/8 proponents that gays already had the same civil rights granted to domestic partners in 2002 (or 2004, can't remember) for property, health, benefits, etc. and DIDN'T NEED the new marriage amendment decided by the California Supreme Court. No/8 should have addressed the differences between marriage rights and domestic partner rights. They also should have presented why most straight people get married instead of having domestic partners and that gays should also be able to choose. People voted Yes/8 not so much because they are bigots or gay haters but because they thought the domestic partner laws already in force are equal to the marriage laws and satisfactory enough to work for gay couples. Overlooking that was a MAJOR mistake.
Hopefully the California Supreme Court or the US Supreme Court will come thru and do the right thing. Gov Arnold S is a No/8 supporter so that's a good start.
It'd be interesting to see how many actors/actresses who have received recognition from GLAAD and other such organisations for work to the gay community didn't help in any way on NO on Prop 8 (donating money, doing ads, speaking out about it etc)
ReplyDeleteSurely those who didn't should be stripped of their previous award(s) or at least not be considered for any more.
I voted for Shelter. I could definately see that again although it wasnt as good as I thought it would be.
ReplyDeleteAngels in America would have to broken up in parts but im sure we would have great discussions on that one.
I've been reading about Prop 8 this morning in yesterday's papers. Almost no coverage of this issue here until the vote, the result of which must have come as a surprise to many.
ReplyDeleteI feel (as a cohabiting str8) that this whole issue is always clouded by marriage, which drags in the religious fundies and obscures the *basic civil rights* point. The poster above points out the obvious loopholes in any "religious" argument. The basic civil rights point is that an adult should be able to nominate another unrelated adult to benefit from equivalent legal rights to those conferred by marriage. Leave it to the individuals to determine the nature of the union and how they want to mark it publicly.
Endless amounts of effort and cash are already made on behalf of traditional family structures, with the non-trads being net contributors, always. Time to ask for something back. Respect would be a start!
Voting for Shelter, if I can get hold of it.
ReplyDeleteInteresting points about Prop 8. One thing to think about regarding the democracy v. the courts deciding issue is that often the courts are way ahead of the public in terms of equality issues.
ReplyDeleteConsider Loving v. Virginia, the case that made it illegal to restrict marriage based on race. At that time (1967), the vast majority of people in the United States would have been against interracial marriage. If it had been a ballot referendum, the vote would have been overwhelmingly against it. But the courts did the fair thing, rather that the socially popular thing.
Here is part of that decision-
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
And here is what Mildred Loving, plaintiff in the case, said in 2007-
I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others. Especially if it denies people's civil rights.
I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard's and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about.