Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Moriarty Takes A Ride On SHORTBUS!!

Just because you ride the shortbus, doesn't mean by CreasyBear	Oct 5th, 2006 06:07:45 PM
you're a bad person.
So I guess... by ldm882	Oct 5th, 2006 06:16:29 PM
...they're not even going to bother to submit this thing to the MPAA? Good. Fuck the MPAA. In fact, NC-17 style fuck the MPAA.
agenda movies aren't my cup of tea. by aestheticity	Oct 5th, 2006 06:30:46 PM
but they do pull in the haters/supporters.
Mori, seriously, quick question: There is no male gay by DEFENDERS	Oct 5th, 2006 06:41:03 PM
penetration in this movie, right? I saw a trailer for this this weekend attached to the French animation bore:Renaissance. I can deal with the explicitness. But I don't wanna get tricked into seeing actual penetrating mano a mano gay porn. I'll be scarred. So is it safe?
So is it possible for a man to give himself a BJ? by The Dum Guy	Oct 5th, 2006 06:48:00 PM
I heard it was in this movie...
DEFENDERS, you probably don't want to see this movie... by Lenny Nero	Oct 5th, 2006 07:05:16 PM
...if you think you'll be "scarred" by homosexual penetration.
DEFENDERS by TheRealMoriarty	Oct 5th, 2006 07:05:55 PM
See... I sort of especially want you to see it. You say you'll be "scarred." Really? Because imagine how often gay audiences sit through depictions of hetero sex, and imagine they go see this, and only the straight people get to "really" fuck, while everything involving them was back to the same sort of safe phony Hollywood stuff. That would be fairly insulting, wouldn't it? And that's not to call you out, either. I'm just saying... would you really be scarred? I'm willing to bet you wouldn't be, and afterwards, you might even be more empathetic towards the idea of human sexuality vs straight or gay. I think it's good that this movie will make you test your own tolerance level.
Sorry to harp, but... Gojira and Seven Samurai reviews? by GiggityGoo	Oct 5th, 2006 07:20:03 PM
Mori, I know I've been chasing you around the TalkBacks for a couple of weeks now asking for these DVD reviews, but it's because I'm a fan of your movie thoughts, and these are two of my favorite movies ever, and I'd love to read your scribblings on them. No hate here.
JCM is a REAL filmaker by DOGSOUP	Oct 5th, 2006 07:28:21 PM
He pushes boundries and makes real art. This is an important movie because we're all so fucked up mentally about sexuality and that's what he want to address. The actors weren't even actors, they were artists he got together to make another form of art. They got to know each other for 3 years just so the interactions would be real. The sex is real sure, but so's everything else. I know a lot of people wont be able to handle this movie because you have to actually understand sexuality in all forms and accept things different than your tastes. Even JCM pushed his own boundries and did something he had never done before-perform cunnilingus on a woman. That's dedication to your craft and this movie deserves to be seen by open minded people who understand where it's coming from. I'll be there.
Sorry Mori... by Banshee7	Oct 5th, 2006 07:47:14 PM
But I'm not watching any movie with "dude on dude" fudge packin'. Now two hot chicks? Bring it on, baby. Am I a hypocrite on this issue? Damn straight.
LOVE that poster! by Zeke25:17	Oct 5th, 2006 07:59:08 PM
But I also loved the movie version of Rent, so there! And regarding the whole man-on-man sex thing: wouldn't exactly look forward to seeing it; but I don't think it'd make me throw up either. My litmus test has always been this: if I met an absolutely smoking hot chick--who really was a chick, I must emphasize--that just happened to have a penis as well...I wouldn't be bothered by it. Hell, I could show her exactly how to give ME head: "No, no, honey, like THIS!" With that in mind, even though male lovin' ain't really in my menu, its depiction on film won't hurt me.
sounds like this is one of those cultural articles by aestheticity	Oct 5th, 2006 08:00:36 PM
that they need to put in the timecapsule for aliens to find in ten thousand years when they're wondering what the hell happened to us.
Oh, and if performing cunnilingus is dedication... by Zeke25:17	Oct 5th, 2006 08:01:48 PM
...to your craft: then I am one dedicated motherfucker! Num-num-nummies!
ive seen it by jonboy83	Oct 5th, 2006 08:09:03 PM
there is no penetration. but there is a facial at the end.
What I want to know is... by Christopher3	Oct 5th, 2006 08:13:53 PM
Does it have bitchin songs like Hedwig.
Thanks, Mori. If we can engage in a mature discussion by DEFENDERS	Oct 5th, 2006 08:33:17 PM
about the acceptance of homosexuality. Let's say for the sake of argument that homosexuality was generally accepted as birth defect like Down's Syndrome and not really a choice, right? And that for every 20 males born that are attacted to females there was one who actually attracted to himself or other males, okay? Now we all accept the whole homosexual deal and no one is inpolite about it because let's say that it's proven that dudes are born like that, right? Just for the sake of argument. Even if it was natural. The ratio of 20:1 is still going to make some cringe at the thought of a man jumping the bones of another man. And it's not something that you would want to imagine. Put it like this on a scale of extremes. All can find something to be grossed out about and some things will cut deeper than others. For instance, horror. 1. Blood. 2. Knife Plunging. 3. Fake innards spilling. 4. An eyeball slice. 5. Real-life Human Cannibalism Blood is acceptable by most. Human cannibalism can hardly even be imagined -- yet alone watched. See? An image that I wish I never saw was the manitou slaughter in Apocalypse Now. The shit came outta nowhere. And it was real. I just wanna make sure my threshold is not pushed too far in Short Bus. I am totally wit' pushing it in art. But I know if I was watching a horror film (and I got my fulci stuff down), I honestly don't want to see full-on necrophilia penetration. see what I mean? Man on man sex (with on-screen penetration) is too much for me. Like in Jackass I didn't watch the whole scene of steve-o piercing his jaw with the hook. I did't watch the close ups of that guy's doo-doo (in the two shit scenes). I had to turn away. So I'm asking -- turning over my trust to you -- is it safe for a guy like me to see this flick? Is there on-screen, man-on-man penetration?
BSB, not just in "an" ass, but a by DEFENDERS	Oct 5th, 2006 09:06:55 PM
man's ass. That's pretty hardcore for some of us. It's definitely -- at least for me -- on par with on screen, full penetration necrophilia. I'll never pick a copy of Ass to Mouth 4 "Party In The Morgue". It's just too much for me. Sorry.
no love for "I've got it!"? by keepcoolbutcare	Oct 5th, 2006 09:10:50 PM
new album is a vast improvement over the last two decidedly mellow affairs. The opener, "Pass the Hatchet, I Think I'm Goodkind" is a face shredder of epic proportions. The band always delivers at least one facemelting moment at each and every show, and Painful remains one of my fave albums from the 90's...
I've seen this movie by conniebrean1	Oct 5th, 2006 09:48:18 PM
There isn't any real penetration, unless you count one guy sucking off another. One guy also shoots a load into his own face near the beginning, and another sings the national anthem into another guy's ass. But that's really all the gay material. Not even looking at all the sex, the movie really isn't very good. There isn't a single compelling character in the movie, the storyline has nowhere to go, and the most important aspects of the characters completely come out of left field in the last 20 minutes or so. It's not a good movie. I don't recommend it at all.
Like when we discussed it in the chat room, Mori... by mojorising74	Oct 5th, 2006 10:00:20 PM
It still feels like a stunt. You say the movie isn't about sex, yet when he described it 5 years ago it was self described as his "sex movie." The only thing different about this and something like 'the O in Ohio' is the fact that it has real sex in it. If the film could stand on it's own as an independent film about sex while actors actually act in it, then it would not need the extra publicity of "Real Sex Inside!"(and yes I believe you stop acting the moment a man sticks his penis in your ass. That's when it gets real. Really real. 'Oh my god I'm really in prison', Real.) I think that One's concern with the safety and well being of his actors would outweigh the need for what I am truely beginning to believe is little more than a publicity stunt. One that exploited the starving young actors in it to perform under the auspices of being "really real." John Cameron's next movie will up the ante by physically beating the shit out of all of his actors. No stunts or makeup. We're keeping it really real for everyone who wants to see what it's like without actually getting beat up. It's why they call it acting for christsakes. Doesn't anyone have respect for the craft anymore?
Horris-X?? by Mechasheeva	Oct 5th, 2006 10:03:49 PM
Is You Is Or Is You Ain't is a song by Horris-X . . . and I've never met anyone else who's heard of this wonderful band. Mori, is that the version that plays in the opening?
Horris-X? by potvsktl	Oct 5th, 2006 10:13:51 PM
Is You Is or Is You Ain't My Baby is most certainly not a song by any band called "Horris-X." It's an old song from the 40s: Words & Music by Billy Austin & Louis Jordan Recorded by Louis Jordan*, 1944 (#2)
Sex as empathy by blackwood	Oct 5th, 2006 10:36:10 PM
When people have sex, they are stripped down to need - naked, pure human desire is frightening and pathetic and attractive. I can see the merit of real sex in something that introduces itself as a 'real' film. All art works on empathy. Because sex, real sex, strips people down to desire it gives an easy point of access to any sexual being that sees it. Everyone knows what it's like (what it's REALLY like, outside ego and pomp and barroom talk). Perhaps, rather than see the mundane fact of plumbing, if you witness two people connect you will understand that it is the connection, not it's means, which is precious, vital and universal. Or maybe that's just me.
Defenders was not being homophobic by troutpencil	Oct 5th, 2006 10:49:51 PM
He said he wanted to see the movie filled with gay people but not actual penetration. That is reasonable to me. Go to www.boysfirsttime.com and you will realize that gay porn is not pleasant for heterosexuals.
But that can never be found... by mojorising74	Oct 5th, 2006 10:54:33 PM
...in a narrative based film. The actors are not stripping themselves down emotionally for one of the many true emotional responses that can be experienced during 'real sex.' The fact that there is a paycheck involved (as well as multiple takes)reduces the moment to, let's say it together, acting! Now I know when I emote, I usually do it through my genitalia, so in order to capture my full emotions of the scene, you would have to actually show my genitalia penetrating another, so you can see how happy it makes my johnson. "Look everyone, she's really conflicted. You can tell by the way her Vagina is quivering." The 'real sex' is no more real then two people introduced and paid to have sex with each other. Here, get this emotion on camera, "Yeah, baby, pay the rent!"
"She's really conflicted" by blackwood	Oct 5th, 2006 11:01:39 PM
HA! I don't think the circumstance necessarily cheapens the possible effect; bear in mind I haven't seen Shortbus, so I'm speaking hypothetically. But the possibility for it to be something more than thrill is there.
I'll concede that... by mojorising74	Oct 5th, 2006 11:11:54 PM
...due the fact that one, I also have not yet seen the film, and two, I also enjoyed Hedwig. It just feels so gimmicky. Like when we all went to Basic Instinct to watch Michael Douglas go down on Sharon Stone, or the whole Crying Game full frontal moment. I mean, Brokeback mountain had a fairly graphic sex scene leaving little to implication, but Ang Lee doesn't tote his film to critics as his gay sex movie. In fact he downplays those moments and allows them to speak for themselves as emotional moments of the charachters. Charachters acting out a scene. And the performance didn't feel any less real to me, even though somewhere I knew deep down that Heath and Jake wern't really doing the dirty. (at least not on camera)
Between Natalie and Scarlett... by mojorising74	Oct 5th, 2006 11:45:31 PM
...which one is the butch? I vote for Natalie after her whole Natalie raps bit on SNL. "We love you Natalie!" "Yeah I wanna fuck you, too!"
Reading a post like that... by mojorising74	Oct 6th, 2006 12:13:09 AM
...really takes me back to my days working as a congressional paige. Sigh.
I love it when queers find by John Dalmas	Oct 6th, 2006 12:55:42 AM
I love it when queers find ways to connect: it always makes for the best, most emotional movies. Everytime a fudge-packer realizes that his life isn't the be-all/end-all of existence, gosh it warms my heart. Queer men, while deserving of all the rights allowed every human being under American law, are still fundamentally clownish. That's right: fucking other men makes you a clown.
Seriously misinformed by Ravengrey26	Oct 6th, 2006 12:59:35 AM
It amuses me that Moriarty's thoughtful article talkback has degenerated into a discussion of "Who would be the butch?" between Portman and Johanssen. Just so you know, some of us gays don't feel the need to put ourselves into sexually exclusive roles. And just as a comment on the whole "scarring" issue, you watch pretty much any straight porn these days and see guys anally pumping some girl, and that's okay, but if you happen to see two men doing it, that would be scarring? If it was close up enough you might not even tell the friggin difference...
One More Thing by Ravengrey26	Oct 6th, 2006 01:06:39 AM
Anybody using the term "fudge-packer" is a clown...perhaps some sort of developmentally challenged, lowered mental faculties, kind of clown. John Dalmas, please refrain, in the future, from championing my rights in one breath and then making a comletely assinine comment in the next. It doesn't do anyone any good.
What's the problem? by DOGSOUP	Oct 6th, 2006 01:42:52 AM
I haven't heard one good argument from the gay hating faction why gay men are the downfall of society and the clearest example of repugnant activity. "Because it's Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve" isn't good enough. If you're christian enough to follow that then surely you realize that the only soul you can really save is your own. If it's "I'm ok with gay people I just don't want to see them fucking" Fine. Don't. Don't see Brokeback Mountain, Wet Hot American Summer, or this movie. Don't bitch about it just don't see it. If the argument is "It isn't natural" then take a good look around you and show me something that is that's not totally being used in unatural ways. What do you care any way? Wouldn't you be too busy turning your car into a biofuel machine, sorting through organic vegetables in the local farmers market, and using lamb skin condoms to worry about what people are doing in thier bedrooms? We're all people. We're all trying to not be miserable on our way to some maggots. If fucking people of your sex makes you happy then awesome. If fucking people that's the other sex makes you happy then brilliant. If fucking both makes you happy then why the hell not? As long as it's consentual and ethical who cares? Two grown gay men having sex with each other isn't cause for moral outrage, having sex with children is. And for you guys that are against gay men having sex in movies but love seeing women do the exact same thing, If all the woman-on-woman action in film isn't being portrayed by supermodel looking actresses and by actual real world lesbians with all thier real world flaws and status rejecting appearances. Moriarty is right, maybe the best thing for you homophobic/intolerant people to do is see a portrayal of people different than you acting in a way you can relate to. Maybe you'll see beyond the big bad word "GAY" and into the actual humanity of people. Take a look at Fred Phelps and wonder how close you'd like your ideology to be to that guy's.
Interesting and thoughtful review by BannedOnTheRun	Oct 6th, 2006 02:57:59 AM
But you apparently forgot that every single one of us Talkbackers lives alone in our parents' basement and has never had and never will have sex.
Catching this at Sunset 5 on Saturday by IndustryKiller!	Oct 6th, 2006 03:33:14 AM
Was so pissed I couldnt make tonights screening at the Egyptian. Is that the screening you saw Mori. Was Mitchell on hand?
Begin liberal backlash below by BannedOnTheRun	Oct 6th, 2006 04:50:15 AM
OK, let's derail this thread, shall we? I'm a proud political conservative but I'm also all for provocative cinema if there's a purpose aside from provocation. But damned if I don't keep hearing more and more about post-9/11 themes, e.g., "freaked out by 9/11 and the way New York has changed." Don't misunderstand: if 9/11 has changed the way people have sex, by all means, make a movie. That's interesting. But I'm starting to become suspicious of all the post-9/11 navelgazing. If I'm concerned about terrorist attacks and want to protect the country from them, to many I'm a warmonger and an enemy of civil liberties (didn't Michael Moore assure us, in all caps, natch, there is no terrorist threat?). I guess I'm just getting tired of browsing rottentomatoes and hearing how every movie now made is some sort of comment on 9/11: the post-9/11 zombie movie, the post-9/11 sex comedy, et al. Haven't seen Shortbus, maybe it's brilliant: but I'm concerned that the meaning and magnitude of an Islamist attack on the West can be so reduced through this level of introspection. OK, more coffee now. Peace.
Instead of watching sick perversions... by TomRothman	Oct 6th, 2006 05:04:38 AM
Buy the new X-men dvd.
Face it.... by Tunza	Oct 6th, 2006 05:58:38 AM
The reason most hetero guys don't want to see any gay sex is cos they're afraid they might get a boner. Which will make them think they're gay, which if they're homophobic will make them hate themselves, then they have to kill themself. No loss.
SHORTBUS was one of the best movie... by no-no	Oct 6th, 2006 06:27:10 AM
...I've seen in years. It's hilarious, witty, sometimes profond and the soundtrack kicks ass. Sex is OK, guys. It's natural and it only gives you pleasure. Let it go.
I really want to see this but..... by Fart_Master_Flex	Oct 6th, 2006 06:59:04 AM
I am not sure if I can see it in a theater. I don't know, somethihng about seeing graphic sex with a crowd of strangers seems pretty foreign. I don't consider myself a prude or anything, I just can't help but feel like it would be strange. But I so want to see this because I am such a fan of Hedwig (one of the rare rock musicals that actually rocks).
What's that? by Shermdawg	Oct 6th, 2006 07:01:41 AM
"Natalie Portman and Scarlett Johanssen are two of the best actresses around" Since when???
This actually sounds by TheTalentedMrBond	Oct 6th, 2006 08:20:04 AM
This actually sounds compelling, unlike most other American films we've heard about recently.
People need more of a by TheTalentedMrBond	Oct 6th, 2006 08:22:26 AM
People need more of a Bohemian lifestyle now, in this age of fucked-up politics.
Very interesting by godzillasushi	Oct 6th, 2006 08:45:46 AM
I dont know quite what to think. The casting for it must have been a little different I would think.
All the anti-gay posters can take a flying fuck by Lance Rock	Oct 6th, 2006 09:52:38 AM
...preferably, with another man. Jesus, what is so threatening about homos to you guys? "Defenders," you compare being born gay to Down Syndrome?? Do you realize how ignorant you sound? Evolve, idiots.
Playing in Austin Tonight by RedSeminole	Oct 6th, 2006 10:02:38 AM
Shortbus is playing in Austin tonight as part of the gay and lesbian film festival (www.agliff.org). I'm taking a large group of friends. Gaybashers probably shouldn't come, though. My boyfriend benches 350lbs and he's been in a mood lately. =)
Defenders isn't the only one by Vergil	Oct 6th, 2006 10:12:09 AM
comparing being gay to having Down Syndrome. Most gays do to. I'm pretty sure that what he meant was "let's presume it's genetic", just like DS...
John Cameron Mitchell as edgy filmmaker by houndog	Oct 6th, 2006 10:17:38 AM
I consider myself a totally straight regular guy. If you had told me that I would walk into a movie about a guy that got his johnson cut off and he's a drag queen and its a musical and that I'd love it, I'd have to say uhh, right. But it happened. Hedwig and the Angry Inch is one of my favorite movies ever. It totally rocks, music and story wise. I totally trust that I will be able to see Shortbus and leave the theater knowing this man has brought me an experience like no other filmmaker has the guts to.
Hmmmm... by mojorising74	Oct 6th, 2006 10:23:10 AM
...I don't think that makes it any better. The problem is that a lot of people are not educated in the realms of homosexuality. Most males have experienced at least one gay-erotic moment in their life, be it a curious moment with some friends at a sleepover, or just accidently becoming aroused in a locker room. These types of instances can be frightening for boys because the last thing you want to be when you're a kid is different, especially in a way that makes everyone hate you. (The term 'gay" has become synonimous with youth to reference things that are bad.) Education could help a little with the awkward years of sexual development, when everything is so haywire you never know what's gonna set you off. But again, that understanding is needs to go both ways. Gay men and Women can't just scream to be accepted without understanding where the fear an homophobia originates. The call for sensitivity should be met with a certain level of sensitivity as well.
Poor mits777... by mojorising74	Oct 6th, 2006 10:47:48 AM
...it seems he has never had a BJ. This is sad, because some of my favorite moments are wrapped around blowjobs. Oh wait I'm sorry, I guess there is a difference between a man giving head and a woman giving head. A woman gives head so she can get pregnant. My bad.
He is right though... by mojorising74	Oct 6th, 2006 10:53:05 AM
...there is nothing genetic about "shlong sucking" no matter what the chick tells you about how good she is. A blow job is a conscience act that one person does for another, with the express purpose of giving the other person pleasure and maybe a brief moment of happiness. If only something that nice could be genetic. But I guess that would be an awkward moment the first time you meet her parents. "Wow, Mrs. Johnson. I can see now where Rebecca gets her fellatio from."
Oh Noes! Buttsex! by Plum	Oct 6th, 2006 11:02:00 AM
Really, people. You sound like third graders horrified by girl cooties. No one's expecting straight guys to be turned on by watching male-male sex, or even to be willing to watch it any more than others want to watch male-female sex acts, but to compare it to necrophilia and mutliation? It's a bit much. And yes, the movie's about sex- it's just not about sex in the highly commodified way porn is.
What's the movie actually about? by BizarroJerry	Oct 6th, 2006 11:53:34 AM
Maybe I missed it, or maybe I'm just not cultured enough, but I really like to have a brief sentence or two explaining the plot. And I'm not about to make a bunch of gay slurs (which is of course easy to do on an anonymous message board), but I really don't feel like watching some actual guy on guy action. Not afraid of it, not disgusted by it. I just don't wanna see it. As for real, graphic male-female penetration? Well, I don't have a problem with it, but I'm never comfortable sitting in a crowded movie theater with an erection...
I think it's about time John Dalmas was banned. by Lenny Nero	Oct 6th, 2006 11:58:48 AM
Mature discussion is one thing. Bigotry is another.
TomRothman X3 is a perversion of a different stripe by DOGSOUP	Oct 6th, 2006 12:01:37 PM
The kind that raped the Dark Phoenix Saga and every X-Men story in the ass with no lube. BSB, I did mention the contigent that weren't cleaning off bloody ropes tied to their pickups and addressed people who just didn't want to see it and to those people I offered the answer of "Don't." I still think Mits777 is the kind of guy who thinks Fred Phelps is a great man saying exactly what needs to be said to a pussy liberal elite that thinks gay people should actully live.
If a guy jerks off onto his own face... by mojorising74	Oct 6th, 2006 12:01:42 PM
...does that make him gay? What if he did it accidently? And secretly liked it?
One other question... by BizarroJerry	Oct 6th, 2006 12:02:13 PM
Are there any ugly people in the movie? Because if you really want to make a movie about sex that's honest and frank, and explicit, let's see some ugly people screwing. And as far as a possible gay agenda for this film, getting anti-gay people disgusted by straight people having sex may be a good idea. You must admit, Hollywood's use of really hot people in every situation is sort of ridiculous. Is there a single woman cop on a TV show that isn't far more attractive than any woman cop, ever?
Vergil--Defenders compares being gay to a birth defect by Lance Rock	Oct 6th, 2006 12:10:39 PM
so, yeah, I'm pretty sure he's a bigoted jerk.
Mori, you start something & then leave me at the mercy by DEFENDERS	Oct 6th, 2006 02:48:47 PM
of the talkbacker's misconceptions of what I wrote. Please come back and clear some of this stuff up. ----------------- Ok we're gonna talk about two things. I have to say that now so that I don't forget what the second thing is. So the first thing is homosexuality in and of itself. and the second is the acceptance of difference. ---------------------------- 1. Gay guys catch a ton of backlash because hetero guys can't figure out how could you not like pussy? How can you hate tits? How can the high arch of woman's foot (in tandem with everything else about her) not turn you on? How you can choose a sweaty-ass man over that? And if you choose these things you must be crazy and sick? Honestly, this is the way I thought for most of my life. I'm 30 now. And I could never understand in my childhood why a guy would switch his ass and walk like a girl. I mean if he looks like a guy. Why is he acting like a girl? Is he crazy? I mean if he looks like a guy and he acted like a lion wouldn't that make crazy? I could never understand why or how I guy could actually be attracted to another guy. But I was never into gay-bashing. Ironically, I think gay-bashing is actually gay. You just don't ridicule others for difference. But it doesn't mean I understood their differences. Or I choose it for myself. So about four years ago I stumbled upon this 16-page report at the campus library that detailed how homosexuality can be triggered by like an extra chromosome or some extra gland ot some shit prior to birth. But the bottom line was that there may be a possibility that these guys who were walking around switching and being feminine did not choose that just to freak me out or gain attention. But, however, they were born thataway. It is abnormal. It's something they can't control (possibly). So it's like any other genetic or natural birth abnormality: Down's syndrome, muscular dystrophy, whatever. Now where I come from you don't tease people who have autism or anything that they are born with that they can't control. However it still is different. Which brings me to 2. The acceptance of difference. See, take the Elephant Man. That was an actual case, right? He was born that way, okay? But does that mean I really want to see him and a female version of himself kissing on a big screen and rubbed all in my face? No. It's like, take an old southerner. He really doesn't want to see some young blond kissing all over some black dude. Doesn't mean he's backwards. Or a hick or a klan member. There are just some abnormal things that people are not adjusted to. Key word: abnormal. Somebody please give us the ratio of gay men to straight. Say it's like 1000:1 or even 4:1. It's still not commonplace. And for some of us rubbing our noses in abnormalities or extreme differences is akin to watching necrophilia or open-heart surgery. It's just not something that we stomach well. You can't force people to accept all differences. You can only ask they respect them. ---------------- Bearing that in mind I posed my question because I know I will be jolted if I see man on man sex on the bigscreen. I am just not ready for that.
Defender has a point, BUT.... by www.valiens.com	Oct 6th, 2006 03:29:59 PM
First off, it sounds homophobic to compare homosexuality to Down's Syndrome while at the same time thinking you're taking the high road. It's not a birth defect. No one is impaired here. However, I do see your point that there's a gag reflext that happens in the same way that horror or anything shocking has degrees of reflexive tolerance. However part II - Defender, in your examples you cited "Jackass 2" because you saw it. Why would you sit through Jackass and cover your eyes at the gross parts but not "Short Bus?" I mean if you want to see Short Bus, see it and if it gets to be too much at those 2 or 3 homoerotic scenes, cover your eyes or look away. What's the difference? (If you don't want to see it at all then that's a different story. And if that's the case, why are we wasting our time with this?)
pretentious porn! by ubersnarf	Oct 6th, 2006 04:39:24 PM
Can't wait for this to catch on. See, if they actually have LINES between the sex, it's ART.
Jesus was "The Word"; I am "The Final Word" by BannedOnTheRun	Oct 6th, 2006 06:02:31 PM
Apparently. I can't even buy an argument from you clowns. And BizarroJerry, I owe you a beer. Let's see some full-on Danny DeVito/Rhea Pearlman action. You want sex? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE SEX!
so the shortbus by jonboy83	Oct 6th, 2006 06:44:36 PM
makes you gay then. i knew there was something weird about the way those kids walked and talked
Oh DEFENDERS... by Ravengrey26	Oct 7th, 2006 02:25:37 AM
I give you a pass. You sound a lot like a friend of mine. His word choice is often a bit...off, and sometimes he says just a little too much (which then makes him sound a little extreme), but his INTENTIONS are good, and I do believe that you also have good intentions. I'm guessing you should probably just not see Shortbus. And as a personal favor, stop throwing around the word "abnormal." We don't have a "condition," we have certain traits, like being left-handed or having green eyes. And if you're basing the use of that word on majorities and statistics then non-Christians would be abnormal. Men would be abnormal (women do outnumber us on this planet you know). Groups can be minorities without being abnormal. But I still give you a pass.
Don't tell Quint, but by BannedOnTheRun	Oct 7th, 2006 04:19:42 AM
I just want to see "Bangbus" starring me and Ann Coulter.
The Defiant Orgy - An Excursion into the Theoretical by Harry Weinstein	Oct 7th, 2006 03:30:42 PM
Those who shout the loudest about the repressive "Islamofascist" menace almost always tend to share the same repressive cultural tendencies. This is regrettable. If we really want to show "the terrorists" that America doesn't bow to their whims, an epidemic of orgies across the country seems to be far more effective than emulating their atmosphere of religious oppression. The elimination of our beloved freedoms and constitutional protections - isn't that what we're supposed to be fighting against, not spreading? No, I say we need massive orgies in public places sponsored by Trojan condoms, Dial soap, Listerine, and FOX News. That will truly show the evildoers that America cowers before no one. Americans, deep down, no matter how we have been conditioned to behave by mass media and government's scare tactics, are no cowards. We have nothing to fear but fear itself - now let's commence the fucking. Believe me, it's what Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson would have wanted. Especially Franklin, that glorious perv. 18 and older only - that goes without saying.
Defenders... by slapshot	Oct 7th, 2006 05:08:27 PM
please shut the hell up. So far, you've compared being gay to necrophilia, genetic defects and cannibalism. Your further attempts to clarify your position are just making things worse, so do us all a favor and SHADDUP about it.
You're right slapshot and ravengray. I just read what I by DEFENDERS	Oct 7th, 2006 10:44:49 PM
wrote and it's laden with typos. Like this one: I could never understand why or how I guy could actually be attracted to another guy. ==== it should "A" guy. Not "i" guy. I was rushing through. But I think you got the gist of it ravengray. I just had to spit it out. Shortbus seemed interesting, and that was solid genuine advice about the headturning on the man on man stuff. I hadn't thought about that. It worked effectively in jackass. thinks for the insight.--------------- I'm just a guy talking.----------------- Out.
Ravengrey26 by Demetrius	Oct 8th, 2006 10:49:22 AM
It kind of seems a bit pointless to go see something like Shortbus if you're going to go into thinking of it on the kind of level you would Jackass. If you're going to cover your face during parts that you would consider "gross", but that aren't put in the movie for that purpose, then yeah, seems a bit silly.
err, I meant that in reply to www.valiens.com by Demetrius	Oct 8th, 2006 10:50:32 AM
My bad.
Defenders: ease into gay cinema with BRUCE LABRUCE by Daddylonghead	Oct 8th, 2006 12:50:55 PM
Really, everything the man's done is genius, you can't lose.
I'm cool on the whole gay cinema thing, "longhead". by DEFENDERS	Oct 8th, 2006 01:14:26 PM
Which is what I'm learning that this movie shortbus really is. I've heard from other professionals and they're like "oh the new gay and lesbian movie." So now that I know it's goes full-on into that category, my initial quetion was pointless. I thought it was like a regualar flick or something. ------ I'm not interested in Gay & Lesbian cinema. I wish Mori woulda prefaced this review "a new gay and lesbian film opens this weekend and..." ---- But alas, he tricked me again. ------------You know what's a funny movie? 9 dead gay guys. It's a murder-mystery comedy. Hilarious and bound to offend almost everyone. Out. Thanks for the insight, fellas.
lace rock...etc... by Buzzsawlenny	Oct 9th, 2006 09:17:20 AM
people who are truly offended by homoesxual activity do not generally believe in evolution they are still waiting for Jebus to come back. BTW dogsup is right i know alot of lesbians since i live in NYC and most are not what society would deem desireable and there is not always a "butch" sometimes they both are. When i was 15-22 i mighta been into watching chicks get down together also,then when it actually happened a reality dawns on you."these chicks want nothing to do with me or my penis" and thats a sad moment in a young mans life. So i dont see the whole watching lesbians is fun thing..its juvenile
"I'm tired of all this tolerance" by minderbinder	Oct 10th, 2006 01:40:53 PM
We have a winner. Quote of the thread.
I really feel sorry for the by Demetrius	Oct 11th, 2006 01:28:59 PM
I really feel sorry for the writers at this site. It's almost not even worth posting anything about any movies that are actually about anything substantial. 80% of the people who post in the talkbacks are incapable of comprehending even the most basic ideas. Plus, though Defenders whole stance maybe be a put-on, this movie seems more like "life" cinema than g&l cinema.
WHY must the homosexualtiy aspect of this by vivavitalogy	Oct 12th, 2006 04:19:00 PM
(or any film for that matter) cloud what this film means for cinema? It's great that this movie comes out a tad after a documentary about the MPAA hit theatres (or lack there of). While many will damn this film for being overtly sexual others will praise it for pushing the proverbial envelope. Why are people so afraid of seeing a little "gay sex" in a film but not by brutal rapes scenes and gruesome violence? I had about 80 other rhetorical questions that could spwan 10,000 tangents but will digress.
vivavitalogy by Demetrius	Oct 14th, 2006 10:10:26 PM
It probably has something to do with the fact that a lot of the people who post here have spent most of their lives sitting in their parents basements immersing themselves in whatever their own little personal geek interest is without much though put into what the real world is like.
This may shock some of you but.. by myfamilyandotheranimals	Oct 16th, 2006 11:30:03 AM
I don't think that it's necessary for there to be real sex in movies. I know I must be some sort of crazy person, I mean what could be more beautiful than two people engaged in lovemaking? I certainly don't have a problem with that, what does bother me (and a little personally as I am married to an actress) is the potential of extra pressure being put upon actors and actresses who are just starting out to perform "real sex" now that it is becoming more popular among filmmakers. It’s all well and good for a director to have a vision of how he/she wants their film to look but isn’t it just a tad exploitative to have people who are desperately looking for their big break (or any break for that matter) to perform intercourse in the name of "their art" and "their vision". How many people after finishing their theatrical training will now, if asked, feel pressured into performing in a movie of this ilk in the effort to further their career and get their names out-there? It's not like porn where people going into that industry know exactly what is expected of them, after all the actress from 9 songs has publicly distanced herself from that film not to mention the number of celebrities who have had an “Art” films from their past come back to embarrass them later in their careers. I know that some of you are going to say I'm repressed, a prude or the always hilarious "never been laid" so please try to be a little imaginative in your reply's, all I've done is try to give you something else to think about.

Talkbacks

Moriarty Takes A Ride On SHORTBUS!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks