Gene Shalit is in trouble for Brokeback critique

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Abbey Normal, Jan 7, 2006.

  1. Abbey Normal
    Offline

    Abbey Normal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    4,825
    Thanks Received:
    391
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Mid-Atlantic region
    Ratings:
    +391
    Looks like the left is once again, hypocritically, trying to stifle free speech when they don't like the content.


    GLAAD Mad at Shalit's "Brokeback" Breakdown By Sarah Hall
    Fri Jan 6, 7:44 PM ET

    For the most part, the critics agree that Brokeback Mountain is one of the year's most commendable films.

    Then there's Gene Shalit's point of view.

    The veteran Today show critic has been taken to task by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation over his negative review of the gay cowboy western, in which he referred to Jake Gyllenhaal's character, Jack, as a "sexual predator" who "tracks Ennis down and coaxes him into sporadic trysts."

    The group claimed that Shalit's statements, delivered during his "Critic's Choice" segment on Thursday's Today show, promoted "defamatory anti-gay prejudice to a national audience," and criticized NBC News for providing the eccentric critic with a platform from which to air his views.

    "Shalit's bizarre characterization of Jack as a 'predator' and Ennis ( Heath Ledger) as a victim reflects a fundamental lack of understanding about the central relationship in the film and about gay relationships in general," GLAAD said in a statement. "It seems highly doubtful that Shalit would similarly claim that Titanic's Jack ( Leonardo DiCaprio) was a 'sexual predator' because he was pursuing a romantic relationship with Rose ( Kate Winslet)."

    GLAAD demanded an apology from both Shalit and NBC News and urged supporters to contact the network and complain.

    In addition to offering his searing analysis of the romantic relationship between the lead characters, Shalit commended Ledger's performance in Brokeback and allowed that the film had a "few dramatic peaks." He concluded that Ang Lee's much-nominated oeuvre was "wildly overpraised, but not by me."

    "Shalit has every right as a film critic to criticize Brokeback Mountain," GLAAD retorted. "But his baseless branding of Jack as a 'sexual predator' merely because he is romantically interested in someone of the same sex is defamatory, ignorant and irresponsible."

    The group reported on its Website that GLAAD representatives had spoken with a Today show producer, who promised to bring their concerns to Shalit's attention.

    While Shalit may not be a Brokeback fan, his colleagues in critique have clamored to commend the cowboy drama.

    To date, the film has been named Best Picture by the Los Angeles Film Critics Association and the New York Film Critics Circle and deemed one of the year's 10 best films by the American Film Institute and the Broadcast Film Critics Association.

    The kudos don't stop there--Brokeback is up for eight Critic's Choice Awards, seven Golden Globes, a Writers Guild Award, a Producers Guild Award, a Directors Guild Award and four Screen Actors Guild Awards, to name a few. And that's before nominations for the Academy Awards are announced on Jan. 31.
     
  2. BATMAN
    Offline

    BATMAN Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Messages:
    209
    Thanks Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Ken-Tenn USA
    Ratings:
    +8
    I wonder if anyone at GLAAD has even seen the movie as to whether or not Shalit's view of this could be accurate.

    It's only made 18 mil so far, maybe GLAAD is the only ones whose seen it. :rotflmao:
     
  3. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
    Gene is the only one to have the guts to say what he really thinks, all the other critics are afraid, and that is so scary to me. Isn't that how dictators gain power??
     
  4. Hobbit
    Offline

    Hobbit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2004
    Messages:
    5,099
    Thanks Received:
    420
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Near Atlanta, GA
    Ratings:
    +421
    I saw a description of the scene in question on screenit.com and I have to agree with Shalit. It sounds like the guy in Fudgepack Mountain (I usually don't resort to such things, but I couldn't resist this one) tracked down somebody with a fragile, easily molded psyche, then coaxed him into sex acts against his will.

    What's funny is that this movie and Alexander are doing terribly, while "The Passion" and "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" are making a mint, and Hollywood's excuse is that the country's nothing but intolerant, Bible-thumping bigots, not that these movies are not only gross, but suck.
     
  5. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,529
    Thanks Received:
    8,159
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,148
    Its always easier to blame others for your own failures. Thats why hollywood doesn't understand.
     
  6. Gem
    Offline

    Gem BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    2,080
    Thanks Received:
    782
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +782
    This is very similar to people who criticized "Alexander." Stone, Farrell and others tried to claim that it was all because the critics were homophobic and unable to handle the reality of the fact that Alexander was gay.

    Sadly, this was anything but the truth. Most critics had no problem with the fact that Alexander, like most men of that time, had male as well as female lovers...and that he may have been ultimately, the most involved with Haphaestion, his male consort. What they had a problem with was that the movie was a) terribly acted (Farrell was pathetic, and Jolie as his mother was beyond absurd) b) poorly written (the movie looked like a drug induced porn - rather than a film about arguably one of the most brilliant and youngest military strategists of all time.

    As is often the case...the people screaming "HOMOPHOBE!" at anyone who raised a complaint actually succeeding in being more obsessed with Alexander's sexuality than the movies critics.

    Rather than make it a film about an interesting, complicated young man who conquered most of the known world in stunning, complex battles by the time he was 20....demonstrating that a man can love both men can love both men and women and still be incredibly powerful, brilliant, and leave a mark on the history of the world that will never go away....

    They chose to turn Farrell into a homosexual rock star...following drugs, sex, and the "rock-n-roll" style of fame that came from winning battles.

    I have not seen Brokeback Mountain...I might get it from Netflix when it is available...but I find it a very sad and a bit scary that when someone comes out to publically state that they did not buy the love story the director wanted to show he immediately is branded as a homophobe and a bigot.
     
  7. krisy
    Offline

    krisy Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,919
    Thanks Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +112
    It doesn't look like Shalit said he was a predator just because he was gay,but because of his actions. They are reading into it so they have yet another reason to yell "homophobe". I also feel like all these nominations for awards are just a way to try and make us all accept that way of life. If Hollywood loves this stuff,everyone else should too. They are the final authority on this kind of stuff after all. :rolleyes:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +490
    The movie, "Alexander" is nothing more than a revisionist piece of tripe, with "homosexual agenda" written all over it....

    First, off, Alexander was not "gay" in the same way as we understand it. Many men in upper class Grecian society (well, Athens, anyway) had sex with younger boys. The portrayal of Alexander the Great in the "Alexander" was not historically accurate (actually, it had to be nothing more than conjecture, since the Greeks didn't document the details of their sexual encounters)... I can't imagine Alexander the Great, conqueror of most of the known world saying to one of this generals "stay with me tonight..." like a love struck school girl.... it just didn't happen that way, these guys were a pretty tough bunch.

    Moreover the practice of homosexuality between two men as equals was frowned up. It almost always was older man/younger boy... it would be more accurate to say that the Greeks and Macedonians practiced (what we now call) pedophilia.
     
  9. archangel
    Online

    archangel Guest

    Ratings:
    +0


    another example would be the "Spartans" they also married but stayed in the regiment quarters...they would sneak over to the wifes home in the dead of night...the wife had her hair shorn short to mimick a young boy...so procreation could take place! History is history and I'm sure glad it is the past!
     
  10. musicman
    Offline

    musicman Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    5,171
    Thanks Received:
    533
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Ohio
    Ratings:
    +533
    That's ironic, too, isn't it - considering that it is always intolerant, Bible-BASHING bigots who are throwing any obstacle they can manufacture into the path of open, honest debate?

    Expediency > truth; i.e., the PC universe continues to unfold as it should.
     

Share This Page