«
»
-
Dear John Travolta -
Another New Lost Boy! -
Indie Box Office Predictions -
RuPaul's Final Four Queens Speak -
Rick Springfield!
-
All Our Tribeca Posts -
The Summer of Female Indie Directors -
In Praise of "Yossi" -
Alan Cumming on Queer Complacency -
Peter Hearts 'Take This Waltz'
Watch Bateman, Arnett & Spurlock Talk 'M ...
Gleeks Mob Chris Colfer at Tribeca
Watch Julia Louis-Dreyfus Talk at Tribec ...
Tribeca Docs Paint Sad State of Affairs
Keanu Reeves: Digital Cinema Historian?
Avoid 'The Five Year Engagement'
Werner Herzog Discovers John Waters is G ...
Cannes: Tiger Beat Edition
Weisz and Davies Talk Tennessee Williams
The Most Insane Video on YouTubeThe "Brokeback Mountain" Approach
I had a slight bitch session about the heterosexualized poster for Tom Ford's not-so-heterosexual "A Single Man," and the recently released trailer just re-enforced those thoughts. Check out my story on indieWIRE about the remarkable de-gaying of "A Single Man" in its new Oscar-buzz emphasized trailer, and take a trip down memory lane with these For Your Consideration ads for "Brokeback Mountain" back in 2005, which are oh so gay themselves:
More whitewashing after the jump.
Email Updates
Get the latest headlines from The Lost Boys delivered to your inbox every day.
6 Comments
TexRex96 | November 22, 2009 7:48 AM
I'd like to agree with Brigitta, except that all three ads are concertedly heterosexual -- we are seeing straight couples sharing intimate moments in each. This is clearly quite deliberate. And these are not "most-likely-to-win-an-oscar elements" of the film, except maybe the last one of Ledger and Williams. I might even argue the first two are not even scenes from the movie at all. If they are, they were surely forgettable.
Victor | November 22, 2009 5:21 AM
The same thing was done with "The Talented Mr. Ripley". Ripley is a psycho who fixates on the character played by Jude Law but in the trailer it's made to seem that the character played by Guenneth Paltrow is his sexual prey.
Gary | November 22, 2009 5:02 AM
The poster could have had a rubber duck in a bathtub pictured; the film's theme and storyline doesn't change. The performances are the same and award potential should have nothing to do with an image on an advertisement. You can't hide a film's content once it is playing in theatre's. Word of mouth is the best form of promotion, or not. However, wouldn't a film company want moviegoers to be somewhat aware of what they are seeing? I have this vision of a minister and his wife (possibly homophobic) paying to see a film about the birth of a child from the poster above.
JM | November 22, 2009 4:49 AM
It took me a long time after seeing the movie to think of it as having a "gay" theme. I accepted the film as about two straight guys out on an adventure who happened to wake up to being able to have some fun in a different kind of way then became attached to each other. The scene showing Keith Ledger closely holding the shirt was especially a warm, touching statement about someone's love for another human. Beautifully done. Beautiful film and story.
Mary Alice Wilson | November 22, 2009 1:22 AM
I find those posters absolutely unbelievable. If they were on the Onion's website, OK. but for real - that's an education in movie politics.
Brigitta | November 12, 2009 12:40 AM
You could say that since these are 'for industry' ads, they're not so much selling the story of the film but the most-likely-to-win-an-oscar elements of the film. In this case the actors. I don't doubt that these are say more heterosexual than the film actually is. But I think the purpose wasn't to nastily de-gay the film. Michelle Williams was nominated too after all, and no doubt the marketers would have hoped Anne Hathaway would have been too.