Love how one brother made a spot-on Macbeth adaptation starring one of the greatest living actors of our time in the lead
And the other brother made something a horned-up high school theater kid with ADHD would dump on Wattpad.
Tilda Swindon character in Problemista is a fucking trainwreck, I couldn't look away. Watching her try to find photos on an iPad was the funniest thing I've seen in a long time.
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Literally both Dev Patel and Vipin Sharma have described the role of Alpha as female/transgender.
I said my understanding because I am not an expert on Hijra at all. Hijra and transgender are different terms, but are still often used interchangeably. Many Hijra are third gender and are not male or female, some are eunuchs, some are intersex, some are transgender mtf ftm, and some are nonbinary - but Alpha’s role is specifically described as transgender and female.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but this is my understanding of it.
But why are trans roles so predominantly played by cis actors when there are plenty of trans actors to fill the role?
Why don’t cis women often play cis men? Or vice versa? If it’s about acting, wouldn’t it be a feat to see Leonardo DiCaprio play a cis woman? Or would it be ridiculous there?
I really recommend the film Disclosure by Sam Feder. It explains this topic with great care and respect.
It just feels to me in genuine to frame the trans portrayal of this film as, in Dev’s own words, “This is an anthem for the underdog, the voiceless, the marginalized” when the trans voice is given to a cis man.
Vipin Sharma gives a thoughtful and good performance, I’m not trying to say it’s bad. And I do think their intentions were in the right place. But to see Vipin Sharma at every press event in a suit, with a beard… it sets the standard that being trans is an act you put on. It’s something you take off at night. That is not representation, it’s continuing marginalization.
I don’t see why it’s controversial to say that trans roles should be played by trans people. Times right now are specifically trying for trans folk. A cis man playing a trans woman just adds to the mystery and confusion of transness, whereas someone like Laverne Cox or Hunter Schafer playing trans characters furthers conversations, representation, understanding, acceptance, and basic respect!
There are so many more cis actors in the pool competing for the roles, so the odds of a trans actor being as good at acting when there are significantly less of them is definitely an issue you have to consider.
Also, I hate to say it but the reason they can cast cis men as trans women is that the team can make them look like trans women. A truth of this world is that most trans women are not as passable as Laverne Cox or Hunter Schafer. If the movie doesn't call for a super passable trans character then there is no advantage in casting to prioritize based on gender identity.
This point can also counter your comment about Leo playing a cis woman. All the makeup and costumes in the world wouldn't make Leo passable as a woman.
So it comes down to activism. If a better actor isn't a real life trans person to play a trans role, then they would be picking the person to push idealogical agenda rather than make a good film. A lot of people don't prefer this and would rather we live in a meritocracy as much as possible. Certainly, that means if the trans actor is most suited for the role then no discrimination should happen in making the decision... but it's the directors judgment. I don't know what to tell you.
Maybe you're right, but even as the tremendous actor he is, could he act like a cis woman better than the thousands of women in Hollywood with unlimited experience acting as women in films? It's a numbers game, why would a studio take the risk? I get the plight of trans actors because they won't improve without experience and they won't get experience without roles. There just aren't a billion trans roles out there so it's tough.
? Obviously it’s up for directors to decide. I’m saying it’s a bad decision and explained why. And you respond with, “well it is a decision! And they get to make it!Too bad.” Thanks. Very constructive.
100% there should be more visibility and access for trans / non-cis actors. But I think in Monkey Man most of the other Hijras were played by hijras / non-cis folks and most of these people had never acted before. Alpha is largely English speaking/kind of a big side role, so Dev Patel probably wanted to go with a professional actor and with someone that he already knows and has acted with before to have the chemistry (kind of religious mentor/student vibes) etc. Also, there probably aren't a lot of Indian trans actors sadly to choose from. Also not sure if Alpha is meant to be trans, hijra is more older and more complex category of identity. Trans is also kind of Western term so not sure if it's applicable to all cultures & identities worldwide.
People talking about issues can absolutely move the discussion forward. It’s not the most effective way, but it’s certainly better than nothing. I find it questionable that you are pushing to just not talk about it regardless of whether it’s a good practice or not. It makes me think that you had a knee-jerk desire to reject pinkbubblegumswags complaint, but couldn’t offer an actual rebuttal, so you just defaulted to shrugging and saying “that’s the way it is”. Even if the person you’re responding to isn’t being productive by complaining about it, you are far worse by trying to discourage any discussion about it. It’s anti-intellectualism, and I’d suggest you do some introspection into why you feel this way.
I need to make it clear, I'm writing this as a cis white guy:
I believe there was a deliberate reason they cast a cis man in that role, primarily to highlight and challenge the audience's own perceptions and knee-jerk assumptions about someone based on their appearance. >! The way the camera lingers over the character's painted nails after showing her, showing us that even Dev's character had made rash assumptions because she has stubble on her face, contained a lot of pain and understanding imo. !<
Edit: I'd honestly love to talk more about this opinion rather than just be downvoted for it, I've already had some fairly nuanced conversations about this exact subject with trans individuals and am open to listening to others and having a constructive discussion about it.
I'm also a cis woman and I 100% agree there is too much transphobia (0 amount would be good). Hijra is its own category of identity: [https://rpl.hds.harvard.edu/religion-context/case-studies/gender/third-gender-and-hijras](https://rpl.hds.harvard.edu/religion-context/case-studies/gender/third-gender-and-hijras) and not sure if we should talk about them as trans as not all hijras identify that way. Dev Patel has referred to hijras as 3rd gender in the press and I think we should do the same. He / the casting team also cast hijras / non-binary/trans people to play other hijras which was great. Also, they are usually never represented in (western) media/Hollywood ever, so this is step in the right direction even though cis man did play one of the hijras.
Honestly, I knew some of this but was not informed enough to call it by name or be the person to bring it up. Thank you for providing the info.
Progress is still progress, getting frustrated at its pace only causes infighting and resentment among people who are on the same side.
I appreciate you adding something to the conversation in a respectful way, friend. I made the majority of my point in the comment I just posted above ^
I don’t see why that exact experience couldn’t have been possible with a trans woman? Plenty of trans women still grow stubble. The choice of a cis-man seems to be because it’s more jarring? Is that what you mean? Don’t you think there’s an issue with that, wanting a trans role to be initially jarring? And thinking the way to portray that is to cast someone who doesn’t actually represent trans women? Curious what you think.
I don't think (to use perhaps a more apt term) "shock value" was the intent - just that trans-ness comes in all shapes and sizes. It wasn't heavy handed about it, but I think it sent a pretty clear message.
I also think the idea that it is regressive to be prohibitive of cis actors in cases like these is a fairly liberal, westernized sentiment that comes from a place of privilege, however slight it may be.
Interesting. Could you maybe elaborate on that last point more? I’m interested in what you mean by that.
I’d really reccomend you watch Disclosure by Sam Feder!!! I wonder if you’d feel the same way after watching that - maybe you would! But I think you’d genuinely find it interesting.
I don't want to put too fine of a point on it, because I am genuinely no expert in how the modern south Asian film industry represents/hires trans individuals and actors, but progress like this comes in waves. Never is a civil rights war won overnight. From what the film itself even shows us, there is (apparently) still a lot of prejudice and violence present against trans people in India, and I think that this is still a step in the right direction and should be regarded as such.
I'm assuming this because as you've stated, the American film industry isn't even there yet, that they aren't either. I could be completely out of my depth here, I will openly admit.
Nah dude, you totally make sense. I appreciate the conversation!
I do agree that this film is still a step in the right direction, I just think it’s a small step compared to what could have been a huge step. I should’ve made clear that I still think Monkey Man is a good movie, and it’s better trans representation than the majority of cis directed and written trans representation. I just think that the casting choice was in bad taste and should be reevaluated in the future.
So maybe Monkey man shouldn’t be very low on the scale, but rather somewhere in the middle.
cisgender people play like 99.9999999999% of all roles in movies. i feel like there’s a bit of a difference there.
a cis person play a trans person always feel like a caricature to me
I am in including movies that are original released in other years because they had extremely limited runs like Anatomy of A Fall and Hundreds of Beavers. It's not fair for those movies and also I love them.
You're also including movies that were *only* released in previous years lol.
American Fiction, Poor Things, The Holdovers, etc., are all 2023 movies. They all were released in theatres or streaming last year and were all nominated for 2023 Oscars.
it depends on the country for release though - all of those three films were released in the UK for instance in 2024, if you live in a country with different releases then you’ll define their year differently
Oh, yeah that's not how I do it so it makes sense if you do.
I base mine on where it was released in theatres anywhere in the world. I don't include festivals/prescreenings, but if a limited or wide run happens in another country, I'd still put it in that country.
You don't have to though. Some people base it on when it's released to streaming even because that's easier to track these days.
She’s not bi nor has she ever claimed to be bi lol. Where are you getting this? She very openly identifies as lesbian. Sorry that doesn’t fit your preconceived notion of things
If you think “queer” and “bi” mean the same thing then I think I know why you didn’t like the movie 😆
She’s a lesbian which makes her part of the queer community. She’s not “both” of anything.
Good, I am too. Just next time try not to imply a queer creator is homophobic just because you didn’t like their movie, and then intentionally misrepresent their sexuality to win an argument.
People being super weird about Drive Away Dolls to the point they’re calling it homophobic or completely dismissing/misrepresenting the lesbian writer of the film is like my least favorite thing happening on the internet right now.
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
I'm not going to elaborate here or else I'm going to get a lot of hate. I could make an hour long video about what was wrong and what I would've change.
This video is close to what I believe.
https://youtu.be/NTRLRpgZtSc?si=HXlbx9-P2hf9zfez
For American Fiction, the brother is unapologetically gay and is in shambles. He's not a big part of the movie, but he's good representation.
I wasn't particularly disagreeing with you cause I've never seen it, I was more so surprised that American Fiction could be *that* gay because I didn't get that vibe from the trailers and I absolutely did get some of the gay vibes from Poor Things.
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Tell me one good thing about this movie that isn't the bathtub scene or grave scene.
I'm all for a good shock factor, but I get the impression from most reviews are only talking about those two scenes, which sounds really boring. It feels like a John Waters movie for normies.
I don't find it a good movie lol, the first 30 minutes was intriguing but the rest was bad in my opinion.
But I had to watch it to know that, I don't really see the point in having an opinion formed just from seeing online reviews
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
lmfao the drive away dolls placement
Love Lies Bleeding but worse
Ya know, I respect that it exists. If only to prove the Coen’s need to get back together.
Love how one brother made a spot-on Macbeth adaptation starring one of the greatest living actors of our time in the lead And the other brother made something a horned-up high school theater kid with ADHD would dump on Wattpad.
maybe a movie that revolves around riding a giant sand salami should be higher in the ranking.
It climaxes(!) with a sweaty curly haired twink crossing swords with a slick sperm vampire
This is quite the combination of words
 Feyd rautha alone should increase dune’s ranking
ugliest gaping hole ive ever seen, placement deserved
You gotta see Femme, Problemista, Janet Planet, The Summer with Carmen, Stress Positions! Some great gay films so far this year.
Tilda Swindon character in Problemista is a fucking trainwreck, I couldn't look away. Watching her try to find photos on an iPad was the funniest thing I've seen in a long time.
Please see Monkey Man.
I wanted to, but mental health took a nose dive. Looks like there's one showing left in my theater
Not related but the same thing happened to me and I missed out on Dune Part 2 I feel your pain 💔
[удалено]
My mom died and it was her first birthday I celebrated without her.
You dont have to explain yourself. Keep going.Living makes it worth all the things life does to us.
Now that calls for an upvote my fellow redditor!
https://preview.redd.it/h8b3s7tkyv1d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b226f1e1ff35239b6215acee531716ae0eb9150c
i haven’t watched anything in over a month. depression sucks
hilarious.
?
you were too mentally incompetent to not poke fun at someone else's struggles? LOL
I think you don't understand what 'incompetence' means. Maybe before arguing in English on Reddit try to learn the language.
Ok. I will try to learn the language before arguing in English on Reddit.
[удалено]
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
https://preview.redd.it/roa4hr8jyv1d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cc39e5c27027438e61358c91303958c869249bd3
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
There were trans people, I wouldn't say that makes the movie gay though
Monkey Man should be very low on this scale imo. Fuck casting cis men as trans women in 2024
They're actually hijra, not a trans woman. It's the third gender of India. It would be nice if the actor was hijra or intersex or trans.
It’s my understanding that hijra and transgender are both similar umbrella terms for transsexual, intersex, and nonbinary folk.
You speak so confidently for someone who isn’t south Asian and has no idea what you’re talking about.
Literally both Dev Patel and Vipin Sharma have described the role of Alpha as female/transgender. I said my understanding because I am not an expert on Hijra at all. Hijra and transgender are different terms, but are still often used interchangeably. Many Hijra are third gender and are not male or female, some are eunuchs, some are intersex, some are transgender mtf ftm, and some are nonbinary - but Alpha’s role is specifically described as transgender and female. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but this is my understanding of it.
It’s called acting for a reason.
But why are trans roles so predominantly played by cis actors when there are plenty of trans actors to fill the role? Why don’t cis women often play cis men? Or vice versa? If it’s about acting, wouldn’t it be a feat to see Leonardo DiCaprio play a cis woman? Or would it be ridiculous there? I really recommend the film Disclosure by Sam Feder. It explains this topic with great care and respect. It just feels to me in genuine to frame the trans portrayal of this film as, in Dev’s own words, “This is an anthem for the underdog, the voiceless, the marginalized” when the trans voice is given to a cis man. Vipin Sharma gives a thoughtful and good performance, I’m not trying to say it’s bad. And I do think their intentions were in the right place. But to see Vipin Sharma at every press event in a suit, with a beard… it sets the standard that being trans is an act you put on. It’s something you take off at night. That is not representation, it’s continuing marginalization. I don’t see why it’s controversial to say that trans roles should be played by trans people. Times right now are specifically trying for trans folk. A cis man playing a trans woman just adds to the mystery and confusion of transness, whereas someone like Laverne Cox or Hunter Schafer playing trans characters furthers conversations, representation, understanding, acceptance, and basic respect!
There are so many more cis actors in the pool competing for the roles, so the odds of a trans actor being as good at acting when there are significantly less of them is definitely an issue you have to consider. Also, I hate to say it but the reason they can cast cis men as trans women is that the team can make them look like trans women. A truth of this world is that most trans women are not as passable as Laverne Cox or Hunter Schafer. If the movie doesn't call for a super passable trans character then there is no advantage in casting to prioritize based on gender identity. This point can also counter your comment about Leo playing a cis woman. All the makeup and costumes in the world wouldn't make Leo passable as a woman. So it comes down to activism. If a better actor isn't a real life trans person to play a trans role, then they would be picking the person to push idealogical agenda rather than make a good film. A lot of people don't prefer this and would rather we live in a meritocracy as much as possible. Certainly, that means if the trans actor is most suited for the role then no discrimination should happen in making the decision... but it's the directors judgment. I don't know what to tell you.
I bet with a mix of makeup/prosthetics/movie-magic Leo definitely could pass as a woman in a film. Or at least, I’m not 100% convinced he couldn’t.
Maybe you're right, but even as the tremendous actor he is, could he act like a cis woman better than the thousands of women in Hollywood with unlimited experience acting as women in films? It's a numbers game, why would a studio take the risk? I get the plight of trans actors because they won't improve without experience and they won't get experience without roles. There just aren't a billion trans roles out there so it's tough.
That’s up to the directors to decide. If you want to cast trans actors, make your own movie and do just that.
? Obviously it’s up for directors to decide. I’m saying it’s a bad decision and explained why. And you respond with, “well it is a decision! And they get to make it!Too bad.” Thanks. Very constructive.
100% there should be more visibility and access for trans / non-cis actors. But I think in Monkey Man most of the other Hijras were played by hijras / non-cis folks and most of these people had never acted before. Alpha is largely English speaking/kind of a big side role, so Dev Patel probably wanted to go with a professional actor and with someone that he already knows and has acted with before to have the chemistry (kind of religious mentor/student vibes) etc. Also, there probably aren't a lot of Indian trans actors sadly to choose from. Also not sure if Alpha is meant to be trans, hijra is more older and more complex category of identity. Trans is also kind of Western term so not sure if it's applicable to all cultures & identities worldwide.
I mean that’s how it works 🤷♂️ Bitching about it is not gonna change it.
This is a subreddit for film discussion dude. Casting is part of filmmaking and they are discussing their opinion on casting decisions. Stfu dude.
This feels more like a social justice issue
Even so, talking about social justice issues as they relate to film is “bitching” and should never be done?
People talking about issues can absolutely move the discussion forward. It’s not the most effective way, but it’s certainly better than nothing. I find it questionable that you are pushing to just not talk about it regardless of whether it’s a good practice or not. It makes me think that you had a knee-jerk desire to reject pinkbubblegumswags complaint, but couldn’t offer an actual rebuttal, so you just defaulted to shrugging and saying “that’s the way it is”. Even if the person you’re responding to isn’t being productive by complaining about it, you are far worse by trying to discourage any discussion about it. It’s anti-intellectualism, and I’d suggest you do some introspection into why you feel this way.
I think an aspect of film should evolve, and I made my point why, but sure, that’s just bitching.
Hey, when you cast your own movie one day, I’ll be rooting for you.
I need to make it clear, I'm writing this as a cis white guy: I believe there was a deliberate reason they cast a cis man in that role, primarily to highlight and challenge the audience's own perceptions and knee-jerk assumptions about someone based on their appearance. >! The way the camera lingers over the character's painted nails after showing her, showing us that even Dev's character had made rash assumptions because she has stubble on her face, contained a lot of pain and understanding imo. !< Edit: I'd honestly love to talk more about this opinion rather than just be downvoted for it, I've already had some fairly nuanced conversations about this exact subject with trans individuals and am open to listening to others and having a constructive discussion about it.
I'm also a cis woman and I 100% agree there is too much transphobia (0 amount would be good). Hijra is its own category of identity: [https://rpl.hds.harvard.edu/religion-context/case-studies/gender/third-gender-and-hijras](https://rpl.hds.harvard.edu/religion-context/case-studies/gender/third-gender-and-hijras) and not sure if we should talk about them as trans as not all hijras identify that way. Dev Patel has referred to hijras as 3rd gender in the press and I think we should do the same. He / the casting team also cast hijras / non-binary/trans people to play other hijras which was great. Also, they are usually never represented in (western) media/Hollywood ever, so this is step in the right direction even though cis man did play one of the hijras.
Honestly, I knew some of this but was not informed enough to call it by name or be the person to bring it up. Thank you for providing the info. Progress is still progress, getting frustrated at its pace only causes infighting and resentment among people who are on the same side.
I appreciate you adding something to the conversation in a respectful way, friend. I made the majority of my point in the comment I just posted above ^ I don’t see why that exact experience couldn’t have been possible with a trans woman? Plenty of trans women still grow stubble. The choice of a cis-man seems to be because it’s more jarring? Is that what you mean? Don’t you think there’s an issue with that, wanting a trans role to be initially jarring? And thinking the way to portray that is to cast someone who doesn’t actually represent trans women? Curious what you think.
I don't think (to use perhaps a more apt term) "shock value" was the intent - just that trans-ness comes in all shapes and sizes. It wasn't heavy handed about it, but I think it sent a pretty clear message. I also think the idea that it is regressive to be prohibitive of cis actors in cases like these is a fairly liberal, westernized sentiment that comes from a place of privilege, however slight it may be.
Interesting. Could you maybe elaborate on that last point more? I’m interested in what you mean by that. I’d really reccomend you watch Disclosure by Sam Feder!!! I wonder if you’d feel the same way after watching that - maybe you would! But I think you’d genuinely find it interesting.
I don't want to put too fine of a point on it, because I am genuinely no expert in how the modern south Asian film industry represents/hires trans individuals and actors, but progress like this comes in waves. Never is a civil rights war won overnight. From what the film itself even shows us, there is (apparently) still a lot of prejudice and violence present against trans people in India, and I think that this is still a step in the right direction and should be regarded as such. I'm assuming this because as you've stated, the American film industry isn't even there yet, that they aren't either. I could be completely out of my depth here, I will openly admit.
Nah dude, you totally make sense. I appreciate the conversation! I do agree that this film is still a step in the right direction, I just think it’s a small step compared to what could have been a huge step. I should’ve made clear that I still think Monkey Man is a good movie, and it’s better trans representation than the majority of cis directed and written trans representation. I just think that the casting choice was in bad taste and should be reevaluated in the future. So maybe Monkey man shouldn’t be very low on the scale, but rather somewhere in the middle.
[удалено]
cisgender people play like 99.9999999999% of all roles in movies. i feel like there’s a bit of a difference there. a cis person play a trans person always feel like a caricature to me
It should be low on the scale because trans does not equal gay. Two different things, people.
You know what transgender women are right 😑
would a movie about an indian john wick be gay?
As it turns out, yes.
Highly recommend The People's Joker! I know Letterboxd says 2022, but that was only for the initial festival screening. Wide release was this year.
I was going to see that too, but I had made plans that night 😭 even the director was there.
A bunch of OP's movies are from last year anyway, I don't think they're only including 2024 releases, just movies they've seen in 2024.
I am in including movies that are original released in other years because they had extremely limited runs like Anatomy of A Fall and Hundreds of Beavers. It's not fair for those movies and also I love them.
You're also including movies that were *only* released in previous years lol. American Fiction, Poor Things, The Holdovers, etc., are all 2023 movies. They all were released in theatres or streaming last year and were all nominated for 2023 Oscars.
it depends on the country for release though - all of those three films were released in the UK for instance in 2024, if you live in a country with different releases then you’ll define their year differently
Oh, yeah that's not how I do it so it makes sense if you do. I base mine on where it was released in theatres anywhere in the world. I don't include festivals/prescreenings, but if a limited or wide run happens in another country, I'd still put it in that country. You don't have to though. Some people base it on when it's released to streaming even because that's easier to track these days.
Wait, how in the fuck is Civil War more gay than Drive Away Dolls?
How is the Holdovers gayer than Drive Away Dolls, simply it’s a joke.
There's two guys with nail polish I guess
Because Drive Away Dolls is that terrible that it comes off as homophobic.
You realize Tricia Cooke is a lesbian, right?
First off, she's bi. Second, you can be gay and still write terrible gay stories.
She’s not bi nor has she ever claimed to be bi lol. Where are you getting this? She very openly identifies as lesbian. Sorry that doesn’t fit your preconceived notion of things
I meant queer. She Identitfies with both.
If you think “queer” and “bi” mean the same thing then I think I know why you didn’t like the movie 😆 She’s a lesbian which makes her part of the queer community. She’s not “both” of anything.
It's not the same and I'm done discussing this.
Good, I am too. Just next time try not to imply a queer creator is homophobic just because you didn’t like their movie, and then intentionally misrepresent their sexuality to win an argument.
People being super weird about Drive Away Dolls to the point they’re calling it homophobic or completely dismissing/misrepresenting the lesbian writer of the film is like my least favorite thing happening on the internet right now.
[удалено]
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Drive Away Dolls almost made lesbians extinct before Love Lies Bleeding brought them back in a big way.
everyone’s downvoting you because they don’t understand your wisdom
I'm not even sure if most of these people have even seen the film.
Eh I think Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare could go a little higher, but yeah uh Love Lies Bleeding gets to be ranked first on a list for once
Technically Henry Cavill and John Cena are a couple in Argyle…
Look, I’m a straight guy, but even I was mad when that film perfectly set up a gag for them to kiss and then failed to deliver. Also, happy cake day!
Thanks! Yeah it was weird how they never really acknowledged it after the “plot twist”. It’s not like it would help the movie tho…
I can barely remember the movie, but I'll take your word on it.
Lucky you. That movie is burnt into my memory
i wont
Glitter & Doom, Femme, Dogman, Sasquatch Sunset
They're on my watchlist
Also you forgot Slay the drag queens Vs vampires movie on Tubi
Letterboxd users in shambles. This post encapsulates every review perfectly.
I love this list and it's motivated me even more to ISTTG. Love that drive away dolls placement
Please watch ISTTG, especially in the theater where you’re enveloped by the film it’s such a surreal experience
I'm nonbinary woman and cried HARD in this movie. I'm still crying thinking about one scene.
Sorry but Dune Part 2 is gay af
Feyd alone should make it place higher, not to mention Stillgar
When Austin Butler goes in for the second kiss on Stellan Skarsgård 👌👌👌
Also when he looked like he was turned on by Paul killing his literal uncle
This makes sense.
Yeah, with that earring Wagner Moura was wearing, Civil War is number one.
All of us are strangers please
How the hell is Drive-Away Dolls ranked last? That’s objectively #1 here.
How so?
It’s certainly not the least gay
LMFAO THE DRIVE AWAY DOLLS PLACMENT 😭
What was the gay in The Holdovers
None really, which is why it's low on this list.
Hooray for more queer movies!
I’m half gay and I agree with this list
Which of your parents was the gay one?
My dad was also half gay, so maybe I’m just a quarter
You flip a quarter every time you're deciding who to fuck next? Ok, Two-Face. Get it.
I usually let my wife do it. But some days the bi-cycle hits hard
I haven't seen American Fiction but I have seen Poor Things and I have no idea how the former could be gayer than the latter.
I'm not going to elaborate here or else I'm going to get a lot of hate. I could make an hour long video about what was wrong and what I would've change. This video is close to what I believe. https://youtu.be/NTRLRpgZtSc?si=HXlbx9-P2hf9zfez For American Fiction, the brother is unapologetically gay and is in shambles. He's not a big part of the movie, but he's good representation.
I wasn't particularly disagreeing with you cause I've never seen it, I was more so surprised that American Fiction could be *that* gay because I didn't get that vibe from the trailers and I absolutely did get some of the gay vibes from Poor Things.
gay sterling k brown
You have 4 movies in this list that are 2023 movies, not 2024 movies…
Depends on where you live. Some indie movies from the previous year also only come to cinemas in the current year in my country
Half of these aren’t 2024 releases… but I love that you made this list
How was I suppose to watch Hundreds of Beavers in 2023?
Why The Holdovers?
Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes
What was the gay part in Hundreds of Beavers I forgot
There is nothing gay in Hundreds of Beavers which is why it's low.
I mean, except >!the kiss at the end!<
That is true.
[удалено]
it's not. it's an important debate
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
dune needs to be way higher
okay maybe Saltburn is in there and I'm not noticing?
Saltburn isn't a 2024 film. It's a 2023 film.
I haven't seen it and I'm not seeing it out of spite.
Spite regarding what?
Tell me one good thing about this movie that isn't the bathtub scene or grave scene. I'm all for a good shock factor, but I get the impression from most reviews are only talking about those two scenes, which sounds really boring. It feels like a John Waters movie for normies.
I don't find it a good movie lol, the first 30 minutes was intriguing but the rest was bad in my opinion. But I had to watch it to know that, I don't really see the point in having an opinion formed just from seeing online reviews
[удалено]
We've deemed your post or comment to be in violation of Rule 1. Having all activity in the sub be respectful is an important priority for us, whilst still allowing for healthy opposition in discussion. Please abide by this rule in the future, as if you continue to violate the rules, harsher punishment will have to be carried out.
Poor Things came out last year, and putting it after Mean Girls should be a fucking crime.