Stonewall - A Film about the Stonewall Riots

This thing tanked hard. Didn't even break $115,000 so far. On average it didn't even make a thousand dollars per theater it was in. Also Emmerich would not stop going on and on about how "straight acting" main character Danny Winters (yes that is fictional white gay guy's actual name) is. So not only did he make Danny a self-insert character, he made him seem as straight as he could because he thought that would get more non LGBT people interested. Instead it drove anyway anyone who might have been interested. Nice.

For fuck's sake, he needs to lay off trying to attract the non-LGBT crowd in the first place. The ONLY people who would be that scared off by a gay character yet still attracted to the movie by a straight seeming one are far too outside the mainstream to make good numbers in the first place. This was Stonewall. It was about a pivotal moment in the subculture's existence. It should be about the ACTUAL INCIDENT.

Well, I understand the film waiting for the actual Riots to be the climax. But it apparently focuses on his stupid 'straight as you can get for a gay couple' romance far more than the actual events.

Like, Titanic focused on Jack and Rose a shit ton, but it made me care about them for when the sinking came and people were dying; I needed to care about them before shit went under the waves and it ENTIRELY switched gears when the actual sinking started and focused on the fight for survival with a romantic lens going on.

He should NEVER have focused on bringing in a straight audience. ANYONE that needs a gay character to be straight as possible to get them in seats; I will tell you 100% that they're not going to this film in the first place because of what its inherently about.

He should have ALWAYS made this film for the LGBTQ crowd and the mainstream will just follow if they hear its a good enough movie. By trying to make it as 'straight' as possible, he alienated his LGBTQ audience and mainstream isn't going to bat an eye if the core audience are fuming at the mouth.

Not only that but I know future generations could look at this as a definitive Stonewall movie and I'm appalled at that. ON TOP OF THAT, Hollywood might pull some 'Female Super Hero' bullshit and read this film's failure as 'People don't want movies about gays'.

I'm laughing because the audience reviews on Rotten Tomatos are clearly being messed with. Was at 98% last I saw and there's no way its getting that from the comments I read on there. It had a less than 10% Crit score, BTW. Ouch!

I'm divided on if I want this movie to fail. On one hand, its an awful movie. On the other... I want gay films in the future that I can identify with...

EDIT:

The white straight acting gay couple...

They slow dance...

To 'A whiter shade of pale'...

While the Puerto Rican not-love interest is sobbing...

Is there some punch line I'm missing because there's no way this isn't intentional...

edited 27th Sep '15 9:58:27 PM by InkDagger

Yup. RACISM FUCK YEAH!

ETA: If you wanted to be charitable, you could always call it commentary on the state of affairs in Hollywood, where the minorities are still being trod upon far more than necessary. However . . . other than Will Smith, who is one of those "socially acceptable" black guys that even white people are okay with, have you ever seen a minority person fare well in Emerich's movies?

I've only seen a few. I don't even know if I clearly remember a black guy being one of the main characters in Day After Tomorrow, but all the minority characters in Stargate (Not counting women) were tribals being downtrodden by ancient gods who the two leading white guys blow to Hell.

edited 29th Sep '15 8:42:39 AM by Journeyman

I believe there was a homeless Black Guy who survived in the Library in Day After Tomorrow.

And, I've only seen it once or twice, but wasn't there a Tibetten or Bhuddist Monk who survived 2012???

Though, I remember the homeless black guy being Comic Relief and the Monk being a side character that doesn't do much until the end.