|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 17, 2020 11:12:50 GMT
It has some homophobic undertones but it was a decent movie. I don't have an issue with MC and any homophobic undertones it may have for some reason and usually I would be the first to jump on the phobic bandwagon.The film entirely encapsulates its era and attitudes. It does depict male hustling as being a sleazy last resort that only the desperate will engage in, but by the flip side, the same can also be said for female prostitution. Joe Buck was depicted in a movie theater getting blown, but that was out of convenience as well and was at the same time a sad and compassionate scene with the kid who couldn't then pay him. That kid did annoy me though, as he had no business taking advantage either if he had no money. He should have had a wank. Joe was depicted as selling himself to women in a proper apartment bed and he was with that old dude near the end in a hotel room. Ratso derided it as fa@@otry and referred to gays as "fruits", but it was in character and him and Joe had a very strong male bonding, even if not sexual. Who'd want to get it on with that filthy sewer rat anyway...  Hoffman tends to get most of the praise for this film, but Voigt was the revelation for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 17, 2020 11:18:07 GMT
It's one of my top ten favorite movies. Joe Buck is probably my favorite male movie character ever. It is a sad movie, yes.And a "tremendous" movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 17, 2020 11:25:51 GMT
Was I the only person on Earth who didn't like it? Same with Dog Day Afternoon.  I wouldn't say they're "bad" films, but neither one really "grabbed" me as much as they obviously did a lot of others. Though I'm probably not as enamoured with 70s American cinema in general as a lot people. I guess it depends on generation, yet 70's cinema really blew the lid on controversial subject matter and gave its presentations original, raw and real depictions that hadn't been seen before. It also had plenty of charm, magic and even naivety to spare in it more gentler productions. I hold 70's cinema in great reverence.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Nov 17, 2020 11:44:02 GMT
I wouldn't say they're "bad" films, but neither one really "grabbed" me as much as they obviously did a lot of others. Though I'm probably not as enamoured with 70s American cinema in general as a lot people.I guess it depends on generation, yet 70's cinema really blew the lid on controversial subject matter and gave its presentations original, raw and real depictions that hadn't been seen before. It also had plenty of charm, magic and even naivety to spare in it more gentler productions. I hold 70's cinema in great reverence. True, and there's definitely some great films, I just don't love the decade as a whole as much as a lot of others do. I'm probably more partial to the stuff that influenced that creative explosion, 50s and 60s European and to a lesser extent Japanese cinema.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 17, 2020 11:55:39 GMT
I guess it depends on generation, yet 70's cinema really blew the lid on controversial subject matter and gave its presentations original, raw and real depictions that hadn't been seen before. It also had plenty of charm, magic and even naivety to spare in it more gentler productions. I hold 70's cinema in great reverence. True, and there's definitely some great films, I just don't love the decade as a whole as much as a lot of others do. I'm probably more partial to the stuff that influenced that creative explosion, 50s and 60s European and to a lesser extent Japanese cinema. I like the actors of that generation better too. I haven't really delved as much into cinema pre 70's.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Nov 17, 2020 20:40:16 GMT
It has some homophobic undertones but it was a decent movie. I don't have an issue with MC and any homophobic undertones it may have for some reason and usually I would be the first to jump on the phobic bandwagon.The film entirely encapsulates its era and attitudes. It does depict male hustling as being a sleazy last resort that only the desperate will engage in, but by the flip side, the same can also be said for female prostitution. Joe Buck was depicted in a movie theater getting blown, but that was out of convenience as well and was at the same time a sad and compassionate scene with the kid who couldn't then pay him. That kid did annoy me though, as he had no business taking advantage either if he had no money. He should have had a wank. Joe was depicted as selling himself to women in a proper apartment bed and he was with that old dude near the end in a hotel room. Ratso derided it as fa@@otry and referred to gays as "fruits", but it was in character and him and Joe had a very strong male bonding, even if not sexual. Who'd want to get it on with that filthy sewer rat anyway... Hoffman tends to get most of the praise for this film, but Voigt was the revelation for me. It's been a long time since I saw the movie but the kid probably thought it was consensual sex. Movie theaters used to be popular cruising spots back in the day.
It just depicts the whole gay world as rather sordid. Also odds are that the cowboy was downlow and gay anyway. Any male prostitute who has sex with men is at least bisexual. I believe they hinted that he was gay. There is a dream sequence as well where Ratso imagines himself running shirtless on the beach with the cowboy. The homoerotic allusions run throughout the film.
Gay men's passions always lead them to death. It's homophobic but it was a much more homophobic world back then.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 18, 2020 0:51:36 GMT
I don't have an issue with MC and any homophobic undertones it may have for some reason and usually I would be the first to jump on the phobic bandwagon.The film entirely encapsulates its era and attitudes. It does depict male hustling as being a sleazy last resort that only the desperate will engage in, but by the flip side, the same can also be said for female prostitution. Joe Buck was depicted in a movie theater getting blown, but that was out of convenience as well and was at the same time a sad and compassionate scene with the kid who couldn't then pay him. That kid did annoy me though, as he had no business taking advantage either if he had no money. He should have had a wank. Joe was depicted as selling himself to women in a proper apartment bed and he was with that old dude near the end in a hotel room. Ratso derided it as fa@@otry and referred to gays as "fruits", but it was in character and him and Joe had a very strong male bonding, even if not sexual. Who'd want to get it on with that filthy sewer rat anyway... Hoffman tends to get most of the praise for this film, but Voigt was the revelation for me. It's been a long time since I saw the movie but the kid probably thought it was consensual sex. Movie theaters used to be popular cruising spots back in the day.
It just depicts the whole gay world as rather sordid. Also odds are that the cowboy was downlow and gay anyway. Any male prostitute who has sex with men is at least bisexual. I believe they hinted that he was gay. There is a dream sequence as well where Ratso imagines himself running shirtless on the beach with the cowboy. The homoerotic allusions run throughout the film.
Gay men's passions always lead them to death. It's homophobic but it was a much more homophobic world back then.
Yeah, that kid may have been a bit naive as to what those dudes were hanging around for, really waiting for a cash paying john. It just seemed like nothing was going right for Joe.
I agree about Joe Buck being bisexual. He could have gone back to work in a diner as a busboy/dishwasher, but he opted to whore himself out with the other fruits. He wanted to do it. A flashback sequence also alludes that he was raped along with his gf and this wasn't that subtle either.
The director was gay, so I'm not sure if what he wanted to depict was meant to come across as homophobic, or perhaps for the sake of a then easily shocked audience, he may have had to compromise a little. I think overall, considering the era the film was made, Schlesinger made a good balance of things in alignment with the attitudes. The film doesn't really project judgement either. It just unfolds matter of fact. I do find it a bit difficult to empathize with Joe towards the end after what he did to that self-loathing old man.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Nov 18, 2020 3:41:57 GMT
It's been a long time since I saw the movie but the kid probably thought it was consensual sex. Movie theaters used to be popular cruising spots back in the day.
It just depicts the whole gay world as rather sordid. Also odds are that the cowboy was downlow and gay anyway. Any male prostitute who has sex with men is at least bisexual. I believe they hinted that he was gay. There is a dream sequence as well where Ratso imagines himself running shirtless on the beach with the cowboy. The homoerotic allusions run throughout the film.
Gay men's passions always lead them to death. It's homophobic but it was a much more homophobic world back then.
Yeah, that kid may have been a bit naive as to what those dudes were hanging around for, really waiting for a cash paying john. It just seemed like nothing was going right for Joe.
I agree about Joe Buck being bisexual. He could have gone back to work in a diner as a busboy/dishwasher, but he opted to whore himself out with the other fruits. He wanted to do it. A flashback sequence also alludes that he was raped along with his gf and this wasn't that subtle either.
The director was gay, so I'm not sure if what he wanted to depict was meant to come across as homophobic, or perhaps for the sake of a then easily shocked audience, he may have had to compromise a little. I think overall, considering the era the film was made, Schlesinger made a good balance of things in alignment with the attitudes. The film doesn't really project judgement either. It just unfolds matter of fact. I do find it a bit difficult to empathize with Joe towards the end after what he did to that self-loathing old man.
Of course it was a product of its time. Now you know I rail against Will & Grace. But it makes me long for one silly episode of that show without out all the undercurrents of systemic hate in this movie.
And though the director was gay, he was as much a victim of this internalized homophobia as are we the cringing 21st century queer viewers.
But as I said before, the murder of his john is just more moralistic indictment that our love can only end in death.
Here's the scene with the kid where we are assaulted with the flashback of his glorious heterosexual romance as compared to his sleazy sex in a movie theater. It just makes us queer folks remember how much we've been assaulted with this heterosexist brainwashing all our lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by dirtypillows on Nov 18, 2020 4:40:55 GMT
It's one of my top ten favorite movies. Joe Buck is probably my favorite male movie character ever. It is a sad movie, yes.And a "tremendous" movie. I agree that "Midnight Cowboy" is a tremendous film, an excellent, emotionally shattering experience. Putting everything else aside, it is about the unlikely friendship that develops between two men who can never find their way in. Joe Buck is such a sweet, good-hearted person. One of my favorite scenes in the movie has Joe and Rico sitting in the diner, looking at the party invite those kids gave to Joe. After a bit of back and forth and some good-natured from Joe, he reveals his true blue colors about his friend... Did I say that? Did I? You watch me, I'll them... I don't go nowhere without my buddy here..."Midnight Cowboy" is a love story in the purest way possible. I couldn't care less that the characters can be homophobic from time to time. To me, it feels pretty authentic and neither one of the main characters is obsessed with hating gay people. It almost feels incidental and I would take an honest depiction like this over shallow, sterile, soulless PC platitudes any day. The book allows for more characterization. The ending of the movie stays faithful to the book's ending, where Joe, who has just the only real friend he has ever had, is now alone and scared. And then he did something he'd wanted to do from the very beginning, from the very first night he'd met Ratso at Everett's bar on Broadway. He put his arm around him to hold him for a while, for these last few miles, anyway. He knew this comforting wasn't doing Ratso any good. He was doing it for himself. Because of course he was scared now. Scared to death. |
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 18, 2020 10:24:12 GMT
Yeah, that kid may have been a bit naive as to what those dudes were hanging around for, really waiting for a cash paying john. It just seemed like nothing was going right for Joe.
I agree about Joe Buck being bisexual. He could have gone back to work in a diner as a busboy/dishwasher, but he opted to whore himself out with the other fruits. He wanted to do it. A flashback sequence also alludes that he was raped along with his gf and this wasn't that subtle either.
The director was gay, so I'm not sure if what he wanted to depict was meant to come across as homophobic, or perhaps for the sake of a then easily shocked audience, he may have had to compromise a little. I think overall, considering the era the film was made, Schlesinger made a good balance of things in alignment with the attitudes. The film doesn't really project judgement either. It just unfolds matter of fact. I do find it a bit difficult to empathize with Joe towards the end after what he did to that self-loathing old man.
Of course it was a product of its time. Now you know I rail against Will & Grace. But it makes me long for one silly episode of that show without out all the undercurrents of systemic hate in this movie.
And though the director was gay, he was as much a victim of this internalized homophobia as are we the cringing 21st century queer viewers.
But as I said before, the murder of his john is just more moralistic indictment that our love can only end in death.
Here's the scene with the kid where we are assaulted with the flashback of his glorious heterosexual romance as compared to his sleazy sex in a movie theater. It just makes us queer folks remember how much we've been assaulted with this heterosexist brainwashing all our lives.
I've never had any issue with Will & Grace myself and just liked the homo representation in the show, plus it was funny. I don't really politicize or idealize MC, than just accept it for when it was made, which I think was also very daring for its time. The look of the film is quite modern as well, even today, that it could be considered a period piece. There is so much more going on in this film than just nitpicking for homophobic attitudes which still exist today and only shows how dense the heterosexist can be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 18, 2020 10:36:33 GMT
And a "tremendous" movie. I agree that "Midnight Cowboy" is a tremendous film, an excellent, emotionally shattering experience. Putting everything else aside, it is about the unlikely friendship that develops between two men who can never find their way in. Joe Buck is such a sweet, good-hearted person. One of my favorite scenes in the movie has Joe and Rico sitting in the diner, looking at the party invite those kids gave to Joe. After a bit of back and forth and some good-natured from Joe, he reveals his true blue colors about his friend... Did I say that? Did I? You watch me, I'll them... I don't go nowhere without my buddy here..."Midnight Cowboy" is a love story in the purest way possible. I couldn't care less that the characters can be homophobic from time to time. To me, it feels pretty authentic and neither one of the main characters is obsessed with hating gay people. It almost feels incidental and I would take an honest depiction like this over shallow, sterile, soulless PC platitudes any day.
The book allows for more characterization. The ending of the movie stays faithful to the book's ending, where Joe, who has just the only real friend he has ever had, is now alone and scared. And then he did something he'd wanted to do from the very beginning, from the very first night he'd met Ratso at Everett's bar on Broadway. He put his arm around him to hold him for a while, for these last few miles, anyway. He knew this comforting wasn't doing Ratso any good. He was doing it for himself. Because of course he was scared now. Scared to death.I have the book at home but haven't read. Yes, the friendship is at the core and soul of this film and these 2 guys needed each other, more than any other people may have needed each other. Ratso was an opportunist and knew he could use Joe, but he also knew he needed Joe as well and took care of him in the best possible way he could, then it was Joe's turn. The homophobic attitudes inherent in some of the characters and even representation of its themes is negligible above all else. If anything, I am glad they are there, because it emboldens the attitude of the era. It all unfolds organically and like you said "authentically". These guys may have expressed some disdain for homosexual activity, but they didn't hate on it. For my money, it is one of the best, best picture Oscar winners ever. That other gay cowboy movie made over 35yrs later Brokeback Mountain is a real sludge and drudge in comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by gameboy on Nov 19, 2020 3:02:11 GMT
Of course it was a product of its time. Now you know I rail against Will & Grace. But it makes me long for one silly episode of that show without out all the undercurrents of systemic hate in this movie.
And though the director was gay, he was as much a victim of this internalized homophobia as are we the cringing 21st century queer viewers.
But as I said before, the murder of his john is just more moralistic indictment that our love can only end in death.
Here's the scene with the kid where we are assaulted with the flashback of his glorious heterosexual romance as compared to his sleazy sex in a movie theater. It just makes us queer folks remember how much we've been assaulted with this heterosexist brainwashing all our lives.
I've never had any issue with Will & Grace myself and just liked the homo representation in the show, plus it was funny. I don't really politicize or idealize MC, than just accept it for when it was made, which I think was also very daring for its time. The look of the film is quite modern as well, even today, that it could be considered a period piece. There is so much more going on in this film than just nitpicking for homophobic attitudes which still exist today and only shows how dense the heterosexist can be. Toasty, watch that video clip of the Cowboy and the Kid one more time. There is a furtive attempt for two men to make love. It's tawdry and shallow and unfulfilled. Yet all the time the Cowboy dreams of his perfect female lover. The Kid blows him and ends up puking in the toilet. This is why I said the film is homophobic.
This is the message queer kids have received over and over for generations: Homosexuality bad and it makes you puke. Heterosexuality good and it makes you happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toasted Cheese on Nov 24, 2020 15:22:12 GMT
I've never had any issue with Will & Grace myself and just liked the homo representation in the show, plus it was funny. I don't really politicize or idealize MC, than just accept it for when it was made, which I think was also very daring for its time. The look of the film is quite modern as well, even today, that it could be considered a period piece. There is so much more going on in this film than just nitpicking for homophobic attitudes which still exist today and only shows how dense the heterosexist can be. Toasty, watch that video clip of the Cowboy and the Kid one more time. There is a furtive attempt for two men to make love. It's tawdry and shallow and unfulfilled. Yet all the time the Cowboy dreams of his perfect female lover. The Kid blows him and ends up puking in the toilet. This is why I said the film is homophobic.
This is the message queer kids have received over and over for generations: Homosexuality bad and it makes you puke. Heterosexuality good and it makes you happy. Yes, I get your point, but like already mentioned, I don't see the film as misrepresenting homosexuality, just that for its time, homosexuality within' itself was misaligned. We know it still is today. It is now something just to be tolerated. That is the breeder issue to contend with. The kid probably wouldn't have been used to getting a gobful of goo either and Joe was dirty as well by then too. That is what I think of, even the first time I saw the film in the mid 80's, how dirty Joe was at that time. It took something away from any eroticness, even though I still found it arousing in a grimy sort of way. If that was the intention, then that was a great directorial touch.
I am more impressed with the visual metaphors contained in this sequence as well with the rocket ship. His tramp gf was trying to convince him she wasn't a slut, as in.."You're the only one Joe, you're the only one". It doesn't really paint her in a good light either. The other dudes were after a piece of her pie too, they took Joe's as well in another flashback sequence. I thought this was a brave depiction.
Just before that sequence you linked, there is a scene of Joe outside the cinema and showcasing all the other midnight cowboys. There is one of the cutest guys ever, that I like to pause on when watching.
|
|
