Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Is Barry Jenkins' MOONLIGHT this year's Brokeback Mountain?

This looks like it has the potential to be brilliant. And it's from A24, the indie studio that's been killing it the last few years with Swiss Army Man, The Lobster, Room, Amy, A Most Violent Year, Obvious Child, Under the Skin etc.

[quote]The Barry Jenkins drama is based on the Tarell McCraney play 'In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue' and marks the big-screen debut of Janelle Monae. "At some point, you gotta decide for yourself who you gonna be," says Mahershala Ali in the trailer for Moonlight. "Can't let nobody make that decision for you."

[quote]Written and directed by Barry Jenkins, the drama from A24 and Brad Pitt's Plan B Entertainment follows a young boy named Chiron, who is coming of age in War on Drugs-era Miami. Based on the Tarell McCraney play In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue, the story is told across three defining chapters in his life as he experiences the ecstasy, pain and beauty of falling in love, while grappling with his own sexuality.

[quote]The cast features Naomie Harris, Andre Holland, Trevante Rhodes, Alex R. Hibbert, Jaden Piner, Ashton Sanders and Jharrel Jerome, as well as Janelle Monae in her big-screen debut.

[quote]Moonlight opens in select New York and Los Angeles theaters on Oct. 21, following its premiere at the Toronto Film Festival.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 325March 18, 2018 4:19 PM

I'm ready. Please don't suck, please don't suck, please don't suck.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1August 26, 2016 4:36 PM

I hope it doesn't suck, but I have to say I am TIRED of everyone forcing Janelle Monae down our throats. She's very good but not great. Even "Twenty Feet from Stardom" was mostly a publicity vehicle for Monae.

by Anonymousreply 2August 26, 2016 4:55 PM

Dear PR flack -

Saying a movie is "this year's" Brokeback after after 10 years doesn't make a lot of sense.

by Anonymousreply 3August 26, 2016 5:05 PM

Oooh.... Those men!!!!!

Mama just flooded her basement.

by Anonymousreply 4August 26, 2016 5:16 PM

[quote] I hope it doesn't suck, but I have to say I am TIRED of everyone forcing Janelle Monae down our throats. She's very good but not great. Even "Twenty Feet from Stardom" was mostly a publicity vehicle for Monae.

Please go away. Monae wasn't even featured in "Twenty Feet from Stardom." You've confused her with the other black girl.

by Anonymousreply 5August 26, 2016 5:18 PM

Oh for fuck's sake, I got it confused with something else -- Made in America, probably. Mea culpa.

by Anonymousreply 6August 26, 2016 5:51 PM

R6, Made In America? You mean, Jay-Z's music festival??

R3 - I wish I was a PR flak. I'm a laid off business development manager. I know it's unthinkable that someone could be excited about a movie, but sue me, I think the movie looks like it COULD be really good. Especially because A24's behind it and they've become a reliable brand in interesting, left-of-center indies in the past 2-3 years. Makes me think that for once we might get a sophisticated, well written and produced movie about queer people of color. As opposed to the usual straight-to-video tripe that's in abundance on TLA.com or the painfully awful tv projects like Noah's Arc. This might actually be good. That's kind of exciting to me. As for the Brokeback reference, isn't that really the last culturally relevant gay-themed film? A film with gay characters, about a gay experience that resonated beyond a tiny, limited, cult, ghettoized TLA-Video watching audience? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, I just thought with A24's caché, this might be the next one to break through.

by Anonymousreply 7August 26, 2016 7:53 PM

It has a solid 100 rating on Metacritic which is, of course, ridiculous.

So Moonlight is now the new Birth of a Nation which everybody claimed was going to sweep the Oscars until they found out the guy who stars in it, directed and co-wrote it had gang-raped and harassed a girl with his pal who co-wrote the movie.

by Anonymousreply 8September 5, 2016 11:18 PM

It looks good.

by Anonymousreply 9September 6, 2016 12:04 AM

Oh so I didn't just think it's gay from the trailer? It actually is a gay film?

by Anonymousreply 10September 6, 2016 12:12 AM

R8 well this is thinly-veiled racism, huh

by Anonymousreply 11September 6, 2016 12:19 AM

R11 - I'm not sure that R8's racism is veiled at all, let alone thinly. Yes, a 100 score is a bit ridiculous, but that' because there are only 7 major reviews counted yet. Once the film has beens seen by more critics, I'm sure it will come down into the 90s. But it does look like a good start for the creative team.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 12September 6, 2016 12:25 AM

Why do I feel turned on by the trailer?

by Anonymousreply 13September 6, 2016 3:18 AM

between this and Hidden Figures you have to admit that Janelle Monae has a great agent. This movie looks interesting, and it's black AND gay: now that Birth of a Nation is dead the Academy could really save face with this one.

by Anonymousreply 14September 11, 2016 2:45 PM

I love Naomie Harris. Why does the lead have a full grill??

by Anonymousreply 15September 11, 2016 3:05 PM

r2, what? I love her. She's one of those artists who needs to be more exposed. The fact that mainstream America hasn't got her yet shows how bad popular taste have become. But then again thats really no surprise. She very naturally beautiful.

I don't know why she didn't milk her success after the huge hit on Fun's ,"We are young". Don't know if she cant act, but willing to find out because she's very talented and interesting.

by Anonymousreply 16September 11, 2016 10:35 PM

OP have you everything you have said has been spot on.

by Anonymousreply 17September 11, 2016 10:37 PM

r14, doubt if black hollywood will be willing to save face with this one.

Actually I think most of the creatives in black hollywood would, but too many powerful blacks who care about what the fuck people think would exert their influence.

by Anonymousreply 18September 11, 2016 10:39 PM

The reviews have been AMAZING!!!! Darren Aronofksy and Jonathan Demme were at the morning screening. Demme asked Jenkins a question during the q & a session. Members of the DGA is showing up to screenings and asking questions....you know this film is fire!!! The ball is rolling for this film.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 19September 11, 2016 11:48 PM

Oh nice, R19! thanks for the update. Man, I hope this film doesn't get OVER hyped. I'm really looking forward to it.

by Anonymousreply 20September 12, 2016 12:54 AM

A poster on Reddit loved it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 21September 20, 2016 4:10 AM

Told you.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 22October 22, 2016 8:06 AM

Plan B has a very strong track record with the Academy, it could well get nominations/wins. Looks very good.

by Anonymousreply 23October 22, 2016 8:21 AM

Hated it!

by Anonymousreply 24October 22, 2016 8:53 AM

Oh gawd, with blackies in it, it's doomed. I won't go see it. No thanks.

by Anonymousreply 25October 22, 2016 8:59 AM

[quote]And it's from A24

That doesn't bode well. Their films are beloved by critics but will mostly be forgotten in 10 years time due to the fact they're all tedious pseudo snoozefests. Still looking forward to seeing it, though....

by Anonymousreply 26October 22, 2016 9:26 AM

Damn, those reviews from at r22 are great. Very excited about seeing this one.

by Anonymousreply 27October 22, 2016 4:43 PM

I want Mahershala Ali in me, quite deeply.

by Anonymousreply 28October 22, 2016 7:14 PM

Mahershala Ali already deserves an Oscar for Free State of Jones. He was brilliant in that. As for this movie, I'll see it but I'm a bit dubious about the reviews. Birth of a Nation was supposed to be the Greatest Movie Ever Made. So a lot of overcompensation going on.

by Anonymousreply 29October 22, 2016 11:46 PM

[quote]The reviews have been AMAZING!!!!

Nate "The Face of Black Masculinity" Parker must be seething.

by Anonymousreply 30October 22, 2016 11:51 PM

After reading the NY Times review I want to see it. I don't think anyone called BOAN the movie of the year. Dumbass Parker will only feel more victimized. There is something seriously wrong with him.

by Anonymousreply 31October 23, 2016 4:08 AM

The movie is too dark (skinned) for my taste.

by Anonymousreply 32October 23, 2016 4:13 AM

I would definitely watch this. I'm a bit of a sucker for movies like this. I tend to give them more credit, just for trying to show something that we never see in movies.

by Anonymousreply 33October 23, 2016 4:40 AM

Black gay men are not family to you, are they, r32? Explains a lot about the divide, although I know you're a garden variety troll getting your cheeto-stained rocks off.

by Anonymousreply 34October 23, 2016 4:53 AM

I saw this a few weeks ago at a SAG screening. It's an absolutely beautiful movie. Ali and Harris deserve Oscar nominations.

by Anonymousreply 35October 23, 2016 5:29 AM

I saw it this afternoon--it deserves all the praise it's getting, and then some. Writing, acting, directing, cinematography, music all work together to create one of the most beautiful and powerful movies I've ever seen. Anyone who skips this one is making a big mistake.

No, I'm not a shill and I'm not black (am gay).

by Anonymousreply 36October 23, 2016 5:37 AM

This looks genuinely great, and I'm very excited to see it. I'm expecting a DL backlash simply due to the overwhelming critical praise. As, I've seen time and time again across all sorts of artistic arenas - no one likes to be told that something is great, they like to discover it themselves. And, no one wants to be part of a fawning herd.

by Anonymousreply 37October 23, 2016 5:45 AM

Two friends who were at the screening with me thought it was "too slow." I disagree with that-the pacing is deliberate, not "slow."

by Anonymousreply 38October 23, 2016 5:48 AM

There's a difference between Moonlight's critical reception and BOAN's. Certainly at the time of Sundance when Fox Searchlight purchased BOAN, there was an incredible, positive buzz about the film. But, once the it was about to be released and the actual reviews came forth, they were indeed generally good, often nuanced and many were mixed.

The actual reviews for Moonlight have been glowing. That doesn't guarantee it's a great film, but I'm much more confident than with BOAN.

by Anonymousreply 39October 23, 2016 5:49 AM

I went into this thinking I would hate it. I loved it. It is really well done, powerful and understated at the same time.

BOAN is sort of the opposite in that it is really hamfisted. I wish a better film maker had made that story. As far an being Oscar contender, compared to Moonlight it looks like a student film.

by Anonymousreply 40October 23, 2016 5:51 AM

I almost never go to the movies, but I really want to see this in the theater. Tarell McCraney was on GayUSA this week and he was so charming and interesting that it made me even more excited to see it. Glad to hear other DLers enjoyed it.

by Anonymousreply 41October 23, 2016 5:58 AM

McCraney and Jenkins were on Fresh Air this week and they kept on almost crying, "having a moment." It was sort of adorable. Jenkins really should be gay, but he's not.

by Anonymousreply 42October 23, 2016 6:01 AM

#BlackBoysLookBlue

by Anonymousreply 43October 23, 2016 7:12 AM

How convincing are the gay relationship(s) and interactions in the film, if the writer/director isn't gay? I'm so looking forward to seeing this.

by Anonymousreply 44October 23, 2016 9:44 AM

Saw it yesterday: a little gem.

It's marvelously directed; beautifully filmed and acted. There are maybe two lines of dialogue that aren't absolutely perfect.

Otherwise, it's virtually flawless.

by Anonymousreply 45October 23, 2016 2:17 PM

This will definitely be nominated for some Oscars. Would love to see Ali and Harris nominated. Two actors who are ALWAYS reliably good, no matter what roles they play.

Plus, Ali is HOT.

by Anonymousreply 46October 23, 2016 2:51 PM

I'm so jealous of those who have seen this film. I've been keeping track of the brilliant reviews this film has received. I live in Madrid so it will be awhile before it is released here. Please don't give too many details about the film...but I keep checking the thread for your thoughts and feelings about the film.

by Anonymousreply 47October 23, 2016 3:18 PM

Rave Times review.

by Anonymousreply 48October 23, 2016 3:19 PM

R47, it appears you have a big gay film film festival starting in just a few days in Madrid. Unfortunately I couldn't find Moonlight in the program. I wonder if they're showing the film somewhere else during the festival? IMDb says the film has been on two other European festivals this month but unfortunately LesGaiCineMad didn't apparently want it, or couldn't get it.

In any case if you like Marco Berger's films you get to see his latest, Taekwondo, at the festival. The Connor Jessup film Closet Monster is showing as well.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 49October 23, 2016 5:14 PM

[quote]In any case if you like Marco Berger's films you get to see his latest, Taekwondo,

Not that poster, but didn't know he had a new film out. I have a real soft spot for Marco Berger, love his work and how good he is at crafting sexual tension on screen. Hawaii was a real gem.

by Anonymousreply 50October 23, 2016 5:16 PM

I'm desperate to see this but it doesn't even have a UK release date yet.

by Anonymousreply 51October 23, 2016 5:19 PM

Naomie Harris deserves the Best Supporting Actress Oscar as Chiron's crack addicted Mama. The film is beautiful, a bit slow, but very moving. It will be nominated. My only complaint is that as it takes place over at least a decade so the Chiron character is played by three different actors so you are not as invested in the character. Jannelle Monae is also excellent.

by Anonymousreply 52October 23, 2016 5:25 PM

R49, Muchas gracias...I appreciate the info. It's a shame that Moonlight is not part of the festival. "Below Her Mouth" is on the festival list, but it hasn't gotten such good reviews.

by Anonymousreply 53October 23, 2016 5:33 PM

R39, here. I meant to write:

There's a difference between Moonlight's critical reception and BOAN's. Certainly at the time of Sundance when Fox Searchlight purchased BOAN, there was an incredible, positive buzz about the film. But, once the it was about to be released and the actual reviews came forth, while they were indeed generally good, there were many mixed reviews, the good reviews pointed out some concrete flaws.

The actual reviews for Moonlight have been glowing. That doesn't guarantee it's a great film, but I'm much more confident than with BOAN.

by Anonymousreply 54October 23, 2016 7:13 PM

Moonlight is a great film.

by Anonymousreply 55October 23, 2016 7:29 PM

I look forward to seeing this movie.

by Anonymousreply 56October 23, 2016 11:43 PM

I saw it tonight. Theater was packed with several showings. Mixed audience too. This movie is brilliant. Great acting, including child actors. A very poignant and moving film with a beautiful ending. Standing ovation at end. Much much better than Brokeback!

by Anonymousreply 57October 29, 2016 4:56 AM

Ashton Sanders is spellbinding as teenage Chiron

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 58October 29, 2016 5:31 AM

I had the option to watch this for free. I took a hard pass. I actually want financially support a movie like this insteat of that bitch Madea- i mean Tyler Perry.

by Anonymousreply 59October 29, 2016 5:35 AM

Yay! The Gays might get another crack at the Oscars!!!

But first things first! How are the sex scenes? Do we get to see peen?

by Anonymousreply 60October 29, 2016 5:45 AM

There's no explicit sex scenes.

by Anonymousreply 61October 29, 2016 5:46 AM

Say what? How the fuck are there no sex scenes on a gay film in 2016????

by Anonymousreply 62October 29, 2016 5:48 AM

All gay films have to have explicit sex?

SPOILERS below (sort of):

The young Chiron is 9, so there's no sex.

Chapter 2 - high school Chiron has sex with a friend, but it's not explicit - you see the lead up and then the rest is implied. Chiron gets beat up - by that friend once other guys question his relationship with Chiron

Chapter 3 - adult Chiron has a reunion with that friend, but no explicit sex.

It works without the explicit sex. I can't explain it, it's not that sort of exploration of coming to terms with sexuality where the character progresses through a series of sexual experiences.

by Anonymousreply 63October 29, 2016 5:54 AM

The ONLY review of gay culture -- and specifically black gay culture -- that matters is that graciously bestowed on our ungracious beta asses by two MASCULINE black gay intellectual titans, nay, GODS who glory in the heroic names of Octavious Williams and Nicholas Delmacy:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 64October 29, 2016 5:56 AM

[quote]The young Chiron is 9, so there's no sex.

Sounds kind of unrealistic to me.

by Anonymousreply 65October 29, 2016 5:57 AM

Saw this film tonight. It's magnificent. There are so many wonderful performances - well, everyone is terrific.

The film is broken into three chapters. Each story is powerful.

Very striking images and great soundtrack.

It's very moving and like r63 said, there is no explicit sex but a kiss and a touch are very profound.

One of those rare films that live up to the hype, in my opinion.

by Anonymousreply 66October 29, 2016 5:58 AM

R65 made me laugh

by Anonymousreply 67October 29, 2016 6:00 AM

R64 video not embedding

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 68October 29, 2016 6:01 AM

The oldest Chiron is hot to death!

by Anonymousreply 69October 29, 2016 6:08 AM

Sorry I will wait for Call Me By Your Name next year. A more superior film.

by Anonymousreply 70October 29, 2016 6:12 AM

He ran track at the University of Texas. I think he said he was discovered walking around shirtless on campus. Seriously.

by Anonymousreply 71October 29, 2016 6:14 AM

r65 I know! WEHT cinema?

by Anonymousreply 72October 29, 2016 6:14 AM

Trevante Rhodes (Chapter 3 Chiron).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 73October 29, 2016 6:26 AM

Shirtless with his boyfriend

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 74October 29, 2016 6:28 AM

He's built like a brick house

by Anonymousreply 75October 29, 2016 6:34 AM

I like my gay films with less color

by Anonymousreply 76October 29, 2016 6:46 AM

The reason critics are able to enjoy the film is because it's highly sanitized. A peck and touch of hands is not a realistic depiction of a gay man. Broke back Mountain 10 years ago was more daring! How could this be??

by Anonymousreply 77October 29, 2016 7:18 AM

R77, is a troll. Lol. There's plenty of gay films with more sex if that's what you're after. Skip this, you;ll be disappointed. Or watch porn.

by Anonymousreply 78October 29, 2016 7:24 AM

It's a beautiful, intimate movie. Draw-dropping performances

by Anonymousreply 79October 29, 2016 7:33 AM

According to that Cypher Avenue podcast the last section (with the hot guy) is the weakest section though still good

by Anonymousreply 80October 29, 2016 7:44 AM

Moonlight star Trevante Rhodes spoke to PEOPLE about playing Chiron, the film's central character as an adult gay, black man. Rhodes is straight, but understands the value of the story and is clearly honored to tell it.

“It talks about a subject matter that is so prevalent today,” he says. “Being a black man in American is relatively difficult right now, being a gay man in America is incredibly difficult and so being a black, gay man, like I’ve said before, can be perceived as the worst possible thing right now. So it is something that we need, that the world needs, and I’m thinking it’s a beautiful thing that people are receiving it. I didn’t think we were ready for something like that. And it’s really surprising and really refreshing to me to see that people are.”

He continues:

“I was born loving women but I easily could have been born loving men,” he says. “It’s the exact same sensation… You don’t fall in love with someone [just] for their physical [traits], but for their mental.”

...

“I think the main reason why this movie is going to be so impactful, or I pray that it’s going to be impactful, is because in being so specific, it becomes universal,” he says. “If we can fathom stripping away sexual orientation, skin color, sex, we’re all the exact same: We just want connection. We just want love.”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 81October 29, 2016 7:46 AM

Unless there's a neck-rolling, shade throwing, fierce, sassy snap queen "reading" bitches to filth it's deeply heteronormative, homophobic and womyn hating and literally a hate crime.. and will be shut down!

by Anonymousreply 82October 29, 2016 8:11 AM

[quote]Say what? How the fuck are there no sex scenes on a gay film in 2016????

It's written and directed by a straight man. It sounds like a wonderful film, but it's in keeping with the general shift away from the icky problem of men having sex with men and more towards the sentimental "WE IS JUST BE LOVING TOO!" direction of the gay rights movement that coalesced around the fight for gay marriage. It's more palatable to straight audiences if they're not reminded of dicks going into assholes and men kissing each other for long periods (or even men lying in bed together), etc.

by Anonymousreply 83October 29, 2016 9:41 AM

There's a curious hypocrisy with these kinds of films that try to tackle homophobia, but chicken out of showing the very thing that disgusts homophobes the most, ie. men having sex with men. Making a film about gay men without any sex in is fine, obviously; but if your film touches on homophobia and you refrain from showing gay sex or at the very least sustained intimacy, then you're part of the problem. It's all just so TASTEFUL, isn't it?

by Anonymousreply 84October 29, 2016 9:51 AM

This reminds me of PHILADELPHIA, which I actually really like as a film (I'm a big fan of Jonathan Demme). Here you have a film about how horrific homophobia is and yet they actually cut out a short scene with Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas in bed together. Not having sex, just lying in bed together. So you have a film lecturing people on how bad homophobia is and yet they chicken out of showing the disgusting spectacle of two men lying in bed together. Virtually every action film of thriller that's been made in the last 40 years has had at least one superfluous scene of the male hero having sex with a woman, yet we're still stuck with this mentality that gay love is, for all intents and purposes, platonic and the rare exchange of fluids happens off-screen somewhere.

Okay, rant over. I'm still very much looking forward to seeing MOONLIGHT...

by Anonymousreply 85October 29, 2016 10:01 AM

I think people are missing the point..which is that he has been so traumatised by homophobic society and his own deep self-hatred that he has TOTALLY shutdown his true sexual nature... and his whole emotional romantic life subsists on the distant memory of a single teenage sexual fumbling that possibly meant nothing to the other boy. You want BBC throat gaggers 12

by Anonymousreply 86October 29, 2016 10:41 AM

Will this be a game changer in AA gay representation...in the same way Brokeback Mountain opened the floodgates to allllll those mainstream gay films? 🤔

by Anonymousreply 87October 29, 2016 12:55 PM

I doubt it. Gamechangers for any group in Hollywood never change the game much. In a few years, there will be another "gamechanging" gay or black or latino film that won't lead to consistent opportunities and representation.

by Anonymousreply 88October 29, 2016 5:07 PM

I think you missed the heavy sarcasm in r87's post, r88.

by Anonymousreply 89October 29, 2016 5:09 PM

Some of you are stereotypically sex-obsessed and pornographic. It's a heartbreaking coming of age movie that is not about sex, it's about family bonds, pain, race, adolescent, growing up, desperation, bullying, isolation, masculinity, intimacy, and connection. If you're looking for sex, keep watching your pornos.

by Anonymousreply 90October 29, 2016 5:11 PM

It's important not to shy away from male/male physicality r90, it is how you normalize it to people.

We still live in a world where a quick chaste kiss between the Star Trek character and his husband had to be cut out of the movie.

by Anonymousreply 91October 29, 2016 5:14 PM

Jharrel Jerome and Ashton Sanders from the movie ‘Moonlight’ attend Rome Film Festival Opening during the 11th Rome Film Festival on October 13, 2016 in Rome, Italy.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 92October 29, 2016 6:29 PM

Jharrel Jerome and Ashton Sanders

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 93October 29, 2016 6:30 PM

[quote]It's a heartbreaking coming of age movie that is not about sex,

What's heartbreaking is that you think a coming of age story about a gay kid in a homophobic society is "not about sex". What exactly do you think that homophobic society objects to? Men romantically falling in love with other men? Or men having sex with each other? Most straight films have some kind of sex or intimacy in them and most people don't bat an eyelid, but the prospect of gay sex/intimacy and you equate it with pornography. I'll never understand gay men who want gay cinema to be like something you see on the Hallmark channel, sterile, sexless, tasteful and inoffensive.

by Anonymousreply 94October 29, 2016 6:50 PM

Jesus, we get it. You think there should be more sex. No one wants gay cinema to be sterile like Hallmark Channel, but many think the non-explicit sex works in this one instance. It's one movie.

by Anonymousreply 95October 29, 2016 7:06 PM

R94 Is one of those edgier-than-though queer "radicals" who want to rub the filthy heteros faces in scat porn and double fisting. Because revolution.

by Anonymousreply 96October 29, 2016 7:08 PM

*Edgier-than- Thou

by Anonymousreply 97October 29, 2016 7:09 PM

r96 No one's talking about pornography, dear. The fact you think we are speaks volumes.

by Anonymousreply 98October 29, 2016 7:13 PM

Almost all the gay and bi Black men who I've talked to about it say they are glad there was no explicit sex. They think the tender, sweet approach was most effective and onscreen sex would have undermined the story

by Anonymousreply 99October 29, 2016 7:16 PM

I honestly get what R94 is saying, but I just feel the lack of explicit sex works in this instance. There can be a happy medium between no sex and porn-level explicitness, but I really thought Moonlight worked at the lower end of the sex scale. So, R94 seems to think this is a "nice" but compromised film, the edges of sexuality sanded off to make it more palpable to mainstream audiences, thus somewhat pandering and fake. There could be a kernel of that going on. But, ramping up the sex just to make statement seems equally forced. Maybe I'm being too negative, but do we really think homophobes are going to become accepting of actual gay sex (not just two men loving each other) if they constantly see it. R94 is insistent, but I don't think he's totally offbase. I just really loved the movie and thought it worked beautifully, including the lack of explicit sex. And yes, would also enjoy a well-written coming of age movie with more sex if it wasn't pandering to shocking straight people.

by Anonymousreply 100October 29, 2016 7:19 PM

Is there a gay character in the upcoming "Almost Christmas"? There should be.

by Anonymousreply 101October 29, 2016 7:22 PM

[quote]They think the tender, sweet approach was most effective and onscreen sex would have undermined the story

How would a sex scene undermine the story when the story is about a gay boy/man coming to terms with his sexuality? And it's possible to extend the sweet and tender approach of the film to a sex scene. The two aren't mutually exclusive.

No film is perfect, of course. All films have flaws. It seems a given that MOONLIGHT is a brilliant and exceptional film, but it seems to me that it contains a flaw all-too-common to films about homophobia and that's that it acquiesces to a feeling of distaste (at best) or disgust (at worst) of actually showing men being physical with each other. It isn't pornographic to show that. It's what we do and it's who we are.

by Anonymousreply 102October 29, 2016 7:24 PM

I think it works best as is. Most who've seen it agree

by Anonymousreply 103October 29, 2016 7:33 PM

i think it is a great movie. The lack of sex scenes did not bother me at all. Now, a question.....is Juan gay and closeted?

by Anonymousreply 104October 29, 2016 7:35 PM

I didn't think Juan was gay and closeted.

by Anonymousreply 105October 29, 2016 7:37 PM

I don't think it matters, but out of interest, apart from Tarell Alvin McCraney (whose play it's based on), is anyone involved in the film actually gay? I assume Janelle Monáe is, but she's never come out, so....

by Anonymousreply 106October 29, 2016 7:43 PM

I don't know about the two younger actors who portray Chiron, or the younger actor who portrays Kevin.

Ali and Trevante Rhodes (Juan and Chapter 3 Chiron) and Barry Jenkins (the director) are "not gay" in that they publicly have said they are straight.

by Anonymousreply 107October 29, 2016 7:48 PM

the play it was based on was never produced, which I just learned recently. And, the author won the MacArthur Fellowship (aka "genius grant") this year.

by Anonymousreply 108October 29, 2016 7:49 PM

Is there going to be a caucasian version?

by Anonymousreply 109October 29, 2016 7:51 PM

Juan is not gay

by Anonymousreply 110October 29, 2016 7:54 PM

99% on Rotten Tomatoes 🍅

by Anonymousreply 111October 29, 2016 7:55 PM

Ugh this idiot whose fixated on more explicit sex scenes..it's not that fucking film! It goes against the whole repressed and locked down yearning tone of it. Jesus.

by Anonymousreply 112October 29, 2016 8:02 PM

[quote]It goes against the whole repressed and locked down yearning tone of it. Jesus.

I think you're confusing the repression of the character with the film-makers' cautious avoidance of gay sexuality/sensuality, which is all-too-common. There is a sex scene in the film. When Chiron dreams of Kevin having sex with Teresa. So there's no avoidance in the depiction of straight sex. And no reason to equate that scene with pornography. It's a double standard.

All films have flaws, you know. It's okay to acknowledge them.

by Anonymousreply 113October 29, 2016 8:12 PM

Sex scenes ruin art! Rare exceptions prove the rule. There's a reason why even the greatest contemporary writers get included in the "bad sex award" -- ir's almost impossible to tackle outside of poetry and abstractly or side on rather than full frontal.

by Anonymousreply 114October 29, 2016 8:13 PM

R113 I don't know why you evince that scene as evidence. The fact that he can ONLY allow himself to process his sexual desires through a heterosexual coupling only serves to prove the point.

by Anonymousreply 115October 29, 2016 8:17 PM

[quote]Sex scenes ruin art!

There's a sex scene in the film. It's between a man and a woman.

by Anonymousreply 116October 29, 2016 8:18 PM

R113, it's a clothed sex scene from the viewer's perspective. There is no nudity in the entire film

by Anonymousreply 117October 29, 2016 8:20 PM

There's a sex scene between the boys! Fuck sake.

by Anonymousreply 118October 29, 2016 8:21 PM

I mean what what do you need to see ..cum shots?

by Anonymousreply 119October 29, 2016 8:22 PM

Come shots for some, miniature American flags for others!!

by Anonymousreply 120October 29, 2016 8:30 PM

You know it's fascinating. I always assume that filmmakers who make these choices to suppress homosexuality in films about gay men are solely catering to the straight audience. I mean, that's a fair assumption, right? But when you read actual gay men saying things like "Gay sex is pornography! This is your actual ART and bodily functions have no place here!!! What do you want to see cum for??? Yes, there is a straight sex scene but that's different! They have their clothes on! And, err, it's really about repressed homosexuality!" you realize that even some gay men reject in gay movies what straight audiences regard as no big deal in straight movies.

Apropos of nothing, I was just looking at Barry Jenkins' upcoming projects and it looks like he's already going down the Hallmark Channel/Oprah Book Club route....

by Anonymousreply 121October 29, 2016 8:31 PM

Instead of explicit sex, we can enjoy the people on this thread,who haven't seen the film engaging in extended mental masturbation.

by Anonymousreply 122October 29, 2016 8:38 PM

[quote]Instead of explicit sex, we can enjoy the people on this thread,who haven't seen the film engaging in extended mental masturbation.

Well, the people who have seen the film don't appear to have much to say about it beyond "ZOMZG!!1!! Best. Film. Ever!"; so it's a good thing anyone is talking about it at all, really.

What do you think are some of the film's major flaws? What does it do particularly well? What's the direction like? Is there any male/male sensuality in the film? How believable are the gay characters? Tell us about it.

by Anonymousreply 123October 29, 2016 8:46 PM

Victim R121 has triggered his gay martyr bomb.....run for cover!!!

by Anonymousreply 124October 29, 2016 8:46 PM

r124 Grow up, dollface. x

by Anonymousreply 125October 29, 2016 8:49 PM

Already posted my initial thoughts R123

by Anonymousreply 126October 29, 2016 8:53 PM

What's the significance of the title?

by Anonymousreply 127October 29, 2016 8:54 PM

Lots of godawful homophobic comments from straight black men on Facebook. Seems like a lot of them feel a film about a gay black man makes our community "look bad" and "emasculated ". I got so sick of the back porch comments I broke my iPhone reporting over two dozen of them to FB. Most of the positive comments came from GBMs and understanding black womenfolk.

by Anonymousreply 128October 29, 2016 8:56 PM

It's based on the play "In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue," R127. I think that's the extent of it.

by Anonymousreply 129October 29, 2016 8:59 PM

The lack of sex in the film may have been a deliberate choice to keep the rating down and reach a wider audience. Not only a younger audience, but some of the very people who need to see a film such as this.

by Anonymousreply 130October 29, 2016 9:01 PM

Since I haven't been a kid in a long time, do ratings keep people out of movies anymore. I mean I know 9 years olds for the most part aren't going to waltz into an R-rated movie, but I'd imagine 13 and above go to them without much trouble. Or, am I wrong? What is the actual age cutoff for R-rated movies - 17?

by Anonymousreply 131October 29, 2016 9:05 PM

So what will be this year's "Crash" and beat it at the Oscars?

by Anonymousreply 132October 29, 2016 9:11 PM

[quote]Sorry I will wait for Call Me By Your Name next year. A more superior film.

You're just embarrassing yourself at this point.

by Anonymousreply 133October 29, 2016 9:12 PM

I pity these culturally coarsened individuals who can't appreciate subtlety and complexity.

by Anonymousreply 134October 29, 2016 9:30 PM

"A more superior film"? Is that like your more best grammar?

For what it's worth, I think, if the film could get nominated for Best Picture, it might very well win it--both on its own merits and as the little-film-that-could-that-also-makes-up-for-Oscarsowhite-and-Brokeback-Mountain-getting-screwed.

by Anonymousreply 135October 29, 2016 9:33 PM

No future Heath Ledgers here....but possibly a Jake?

by Anonymousreply 136October 29, 2016 9:33 PM

I cannot wait to see this film.

by Anonymousreply 137October 29, 2016 9:34 PM

Is it up against any really big hitters for the Oscar?

by Anonymousreply 138October 29, 2016 9:59 PM

R138 Silence, La La Land, Loving, Fences and Manchester By The Sea amongst others are getting lots of pre-awards love.

In that group there's big hitters as far as directors, studios, performers and topic. On paper, it looks like a relatively good year.

by Anonymousreply 139October 29, 2016 10:05 PM

FENCES will win all the big awards. Everyone will pretend there are lots of contenders right up to the night, but I don't think anyone seriously thinks FENCES won't win all the major awards.

by Anonymousreply 140October 29, 2016 10:08 PM

Which Chiroc should be nominated for Best Actor?

by Anonymousreply 141October 29, 2016 10:19 PM

All the people whining about the lack of explicit sex in the movie have not seen it. You should all come back after you have seen it and point out exactly where in the story explicit sex would have added to the narrative.

by Anonymousreply 142October 29, 2016 10:42 PM

I'm expecting Fences to be very good, but not necessarily otherworldy. I think it could win awards but not ALL the major awards. And, make no mistake, Fences and Moonlight would be in direct competition. I can see the Academy going with Fences for adapted screenplay. Does Moonlight count as an adapted screenplay if the play it's based on was never produced? Fences has all the known actors. If they're going to award Best Actor to a black man, it's going to be Denzel playing the main role in true dramatic movie based on the play of a major black playwright, not one of the Chirons from Moonlight, though one or two of them (most likely middle aged and adult) might just be nominated for supporting.

We'll see. I can't wait to see Fences. I wonder if it will suffer from being too Hollywood. Very pleased to see Russell Hornsby in the cast.

by Anonymousreply 143October 29, 2016 10:43 PM

Will there be a porn parody to satisfy our hairy palmed contingent?

by Anonymousreply 144October 30, 2016 10:25 AM

[quote]All the people whining about the lack of explicit sex in the movie have not seen it. You should all come back after you have seen it and point out exactly where in the story explicit sex would have added to the narrative.

You mean the narrative about a gay man coming to terms with his SEXuality? That narrative? The one where they show a straight sex scene as an expression of the gay characters homosexuality? That one?

by Anonymousreply 145October 30, 2016 10:32 AM

Forget "Brokeback Mountain", it sounds like "Moonlight" is going to be this year's "Blue is the Warmest Color". A tastefully shot, pseudo-art gay film written and directed by a straight man, which is slathered with praise by the mostly straight film critics and festival attendees. The main difference being, of course, is that given the straight writer/director and straight audiences praising it, the attitudes to sex are tellingly different. In the lesbian film the sex is graphic and prolonged, whereas in the film about a gay man the sex is straight and ultimately suppressed.

by Anonymousreply 146October 30, 2016 10:44 AM

A very interesting Guardian interview with Tarell Alvin McCraney:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 147October 30, 2016 11:27 AM

And a very odd interview with McCraney in The Fader, where the words "gay" or "homosexuality" aren't mentioned once, or anything to do with that aspect of the film or McCraney's life:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 148October 30, 2016 11:48 AM

I'm not going to see Denzel's film. He and his wife are big homophobes who opposed gay marriage because of their beliefs. Denzel fucks anything in a skirt and she spends his money. Straight marriage rocks!!

by Anonymousreply 149October 30, 2016 11:56 AM

R147 " Q : The film’s had universal acclaim, but there have been some negative comments about the film being an offense to black masculinity by commenters on YouTube and I know Barry was trolled a bit on Twitter about it. Why do you think this very specific type of homophobia is still such a problem?

A: First of all, I know that there’s homophobia that is essentially misogyny masked as homophobia in all of American culture no matter how much we try and pretend there is not. That anti-feminism is rampant and I think when it comes to someone’s notion of what a black man should be like, it again is tying back into this understanding and it’s people who feel like there is a way to be masculine and that masculinity means a kind of superiority which is just misogyny. So I think that’s endemic in all parts of American society and it just comes out in different ways. I don’t think it’s particular to black culture. It may show itself differently but it’s all part of the same thread."

What a cowardly bullshit cop-out. Black homophobia is the only homophobia that conflates homosexuality with being an actual race traitor and tool of the oppressor and has wide popular currency in otherwise supposedly "woke" communities.

by Anonymousreply 150October 30, 2016 12:07 PM

* just to make that clearer: ....Has wide political currency in significant sections of supposedly "woke" communities such as Pan Africanits, black nationalists, black Muslim groups, black Hebrews hoteps etc all have influenced "conscious" hip hop and radical leftist thought popular with black youth that has no equivalence in white culture ((equivalent such as Aryan and KKK are fringe and not taken serious )

by Anonymousreply 151October 30, 2016 12:16 PM

^Sorry for the typos and bad grammar. On phone

by Anonymousreply 152October 30, 2016 12:18 PM

r150 To be fair, what McCraney says in the bit you've quoted and what you yourself say aren't mutually exclusive. He's saying that homophobia which stems from misogyny is endemic in all culture, which I think is very true and can't really see a convincing argument against such a statement. But he also says this shows itself in different ways across cultures, which is basically what you're highlighting with regards to the specific homophobia in black communities, which is tied into particular issues about black masculinity and race.

by Anonymousreply 153October 30, 2016 12:24 PM

This is welcome. If anything gay men are only usually portrayed as oversexualised with no impulse control or ability to delay (sexual) gratification..at the expense of REAL character, reflectivness, subtlety and nuance.

by Anonymousreply 154October 30, 2016 1:02 PM

In fact, the vast majority of gay characters in film are portrayed as asexual. The female star's gay pal types. The tragic victim types. Straight men are almost always portrayed as sexual beings even when the plot doesn't require it. Also, I find it an odd assertion that someone's sexuality is not an integral part of their "REAL character," especially so when we're talking about gay men whose world view (and the way the world views and treats them) has been significantly shaped by that sexuality.

by Anonymousreply 155October 30, 2016 1:58 PM

Yeah, yeah, but Is it as good as Noah's Ark tho

by Anonymousreply 156October 30, 2016 1:58 PM

It worked well without explicit sex. The actors are superb.

by Anonymousreply 157October 30, 2016 3:05 PM

I'm past the point of needing to see pointless boning in film.

by Anonymousreply 158October 30, 2016 3:08 PM

are there any musical numbers?

by Anonymousreply 159October 30, 2016 3:23 PM

Great score

by Anonymousreply 160October 30, 2016 3:30 PM

R155 , keep up dear! We're talking about GAY films or films with gay male protagonists, not US sitcoms or films from 50 years ago when it was still illegal.

by Anonymousreply 161October 30, 2016 3:38 PM

r161 Well, you've identified the tragedy of a gay film which still conceals the sexuality of its protagonist. A 50 year old attitude just about sums it up. Can you tell me all these films out there where the gay characters are shown as hyper-sexual and their depictions of gay sexuality is basically pornographic, then? I'm sure we can all produce a very long list of films where gay men are shown as totally asexual.

by Anonymousreply 162October 30, 2016 3:42 PM

"So what will be this year's "Crash" and beat it at the Oscars?"

The biggest anti-gay sting would be Mel Gibson's "Hacksaw Ridge." Not because of the movie itself, but because of the director.

by Anonymousreply 163October 30, 2016 4:00 PM

"" Q : The film’s had universal acclaim, but there have been some negative comments about the film being an offense to black masculinity by commenters on YouTube and I know Barry was trolled a bit on Twitter about it. Why do you think this very specific type of homophobia is still such a problem? "

How much should interviewers probe for answers to negative responses on social media? I know it's relevant to a degree, but at this point, there's SO much trolling, so much "I can say anything because I'm anonymous, let's see how obnoxious I can be". Everything gets ripped apart and attacked, yet artists are supposed answer to this like its anything else?

by Anonymousreply 164October 30, 2016 4:09 PM

While I generally disagree with the "more sex" poster for THIS movie (it worked beautifully as is), I don't think he should be dismissed in terms of his point about the broader depictions of gay sexuality, and I really don't think he's advocating explicit porn-level sex, but rather simply well-considered and well-constructed gay sex as an integral part of the story, by no means the whole story.

by Anonymousreply 165October 30, 2016 4:30 PM

R162 well "pornographic" is overdoing it a bit. Anyway "oversexualised" doesn't necessarily entail the deed being depicted (and to be clear nobody is arguing there wasn't censorship of gay sexuality or that it's all gone); for instance oversexualition is just as much a feature of the all-talk-no-action, slutty, innuendo-obsessed (who no straight guy is safe from his leering attention) trope beloved of Hollywood, even lazy gay ones. The problem is, it sees us as these one dimensional, wholly sex-driven caricatures not afforded the same complexity of straight counterparts. Also a lot of the "asexuality" is a hangover from the post-AIDS era and deliberate and sadly much needed ploy on the part of (mostly) GAY filmmakers/writers to garner sympathy for our community.

by Anonymousreply 166October 30, 2016 5:06 PM

*Hollywood writers, even lazy gay ones

by Anonymousreply 167October 30, 2016 5:07 PM

Oh dear-ing myself:

*From whom no straight man is safe from the leering attention of

(I think that's grammatical 🤔?)

by Anonymousreply 168October 30, 2016 5:11 PM

Hmmmm

by Anonymousreply 169October 30, 2016 9:24 PM

Looking forward to seeing the film next week.

Did anyone hear McCrane and Jenkins' interview on Fresh Air last week? I don't think there's much value in being the 'sexual orientation' police, but... one thing that McCrane said kinda bugged me. Toward the end of the interview he spoke about how he was (and continues to be) physically attracted to both men and women, but describes himself as gay. I mean, okay, your prerogative. But isn't that the textbook definition of BIsexual? You don't have to be in a relationship with a man and woman simultaneously to be bi. You don't have to have an exact, unequal, never changing 50/50 ratio of male and female attraction to be bi.

by Anonymousreply 170October 30, 2016 11:27 PM

R170 I'm the same way. It's hard to explain, and it's beyond logic, or basic physiological functions, but it doesn't sit well for some of us to say "bi"; it's not how we "feel", how we "identify", how we percieve ourselves on a day-to-day level, how we understand ourselves deep down at our most authentic self -- and we're all taught that's the only thing that matters these days (I know eyeroll but still..); certainly and OBVIOUSLY it's not through any motivation of homophobia or heteronormativity -- 'cause how would that even work? Just accept, don't let it bug you, and file it under "humans are complicated" !

by Anonymousreply 171October 31, 2016 12:19 AM

R171 - sorry if it sounded like an attack on those of you who choose to identify as gay or straight despite having attraction to both genders. I get it that it's your choice to identify as you wish and that human sexuality can be complex and not cut and dry for everyone.

That said, I'm curious to hear why you personally choose to identify as gay as opposed to bi. And, of course I understand that you don't speak for or represent all gay-identifying-bisexual men. Cheers!

by Anonymousreply 172October 31, 2016 12:45 AM

Gay black critic Armond White reads Moonlight for FILTH!

The title Moonlight sounds romantic and, yes, gay people deserve to have their passions recognized, but there’s a huge difference between validation and exoticizing. Writer-director Barry Jenkins dives so deeply into this film’s exoticizing tsunami that he also turns black males—America’s all-purpose fear-and-lust fetish—into equally useless exotica.

Jenkins’ hero comes from a stage play by Terrell Alvin McCraney (In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue), using a theatrical conceit that divides the character into three acts, three stages of victimhood.

Little (Alex R. Hibbert) is a schoolboy brutalized by bullies. Chiron (Ashton Sanders) is a hip-hop era teen whose crush on a sexually undeclared classmate leads to disaster. Black (Trevante Rhodes) is a tough-looking ex-con still longing for love. This concept might have made sense if the film was about three different males but the idea that hunched-over, introspective Little and the still-shy, inarticulate Chiron could evolve into a celibate criminal bad-ass simply pushes all the condescending buttons. This archetypal Black Gay Male remains an enigma so that people can project their pity, fear, and lust onto him.

And sure enough, Moonlight has become the new Precious, the vision of black pathos that adds emphasis on gay-bashing so that viewers can feel good about how politically-correct and sentimental they are, too.

I dare say that gays and viewers of color should respond more critically.

Jenkins attaches his story of adolescent woes to the social problem of racism. As a political movie, Moonlight is pointless but Jenkins adds black eroticism to the John Hughes teen movie genre—and this is the film’s one, truly gay advancement.

Think about it: The entire history of Hollywood movies has ignored black male sensuality—acknowledging it in passing, if at all. Handsome actors Sidney Poitier, Harry Belafonte, James Edwards, Jim Brown, Fred Williamson, Bernie Casey rarely became matinee-idols and, recently, Denzel Washington and Samuel L. Jackson both portray African-American males similarly—always angry and one-dimensional. But Mahershala Ali (as Juan, the possibly bisexual drug dealer who mentors Little) and Rhodes who portrays adult Black embody the first fully sensual black male movie characters since the 1930s films of Paul Robeson (who gay British scholar Richard Dyer explicated as a sex symbol in his essential book Heavenly Bodies: Film Stars and Society).

Ali and Rhodes have overwhelming screen presence—they could become Hollywood’s first officially gay pin-ups (Jim Brown and Fred Williamson were unofficial gay icons). Jenkins photographs them with sensual contours, recalling music video director Matt Mahurin’s eccentric exoticizing feature MugShot (1996). But despite sexy, intimidating façades, these characterizations remain opaque. The men never develop into recognizable people: Juan is as obscure as a comic book superhero’s alter ego and Black, with his prison-thug musculature and gold fronts, is simply a type—more closeted and sexually discreet than prison brothers in the Frank Ocean era need to be. While this flips precepts about black gay masculinity, its “secret” is not liberating but pathetic. When Little asks Juan “Am I a faggot?” it doesn’t pierce gay consciousness like the self-awareness expressed in Terence Davies, Andre Techine and Julian Hernandez films.

Even the name “Black” is unacceptable. It exploits the same stereotypical racial limits that African American males (gay, straight or trans) still suffer. In the coda where two ex-cons share these victim stereotypes, Jenkins criminalizes all gay black men for their social history and inability to be real with each other. Patrik-Ian Polk’s black gay comedy The Skinny provided a snap-queen counterpoint to this maudlin attitude. Jenkins’ notion of pitiable romance and pitiable queerness ruins Moonlight.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 173October 31, 2016 2:05 AM

Arming White is one of the most derided critics working today--he's the John Simon of black writers.

by Anonymousreply 174October 31, 2016 2:21 AM

Derided by whom? From experience, it's not those with taste, culture, or a breadth of film knowledge. And John Simon was an excellent critic. He could be mean and petty but his insights on film were invaluable.

by Anonymousreply 175October 31, 2016 2:30 AM

I found White's review interesting. I don't agree with all of it, but still interesting. It does seem overthought, but I hesitate to say that because he is, after all, a critic, and we want them to think and expound, no? He comes off a bit contrarian just to be contrarian, but, again, he makes some interesting points. People don't like runaway praise for any artistic endeavor and they certainly don't like being told "you must love this," so alternate opinions are expected, and welcome - even if you don't agree.

I just want to ask him if he enjoyed it. Turn off the critic's eye for one second (if possible), and just tell me if you enjoyed the film. He didn't say if he did or didn't.

by Anonymousreply 176October 31, 2016 2:36 AM

Yes, professional contrarianism is his pretty much the only purpose he serves, it's his USP. I discount most of what he says about the film (although he's right about Denzel & Samuel!) excepting he does kinda have a point about the believability of the three actors being the same person.

by Anonymousreply 177October 31, 2016 3:25 AM

White isn't contranian for the sake of being contranian-it's not a calculation. He just happens to come from a very different place than many critics and cinephiles.

by Anonymousreply 178October 31, 2016 3:33 AM

The Out.com review is slightly different than the one in National Review by White.

by Anonymousreply 179October 31, 2016 4:02 AM

They're equally as skeptical, but there's additional pointed criticisms in the Out.com piece.

by Anonymousreply 180October 31, 2016 4:02 AM

I do give credit to the director for allowing a black male character to be presented as a sensual being. Like Ed. White said there is more to him than just being a thug or the strong black male archetype that mainstream often presents. His emotionally vulnerable.

With that said, that there is no physical intimacy, call it sex scenes if you want, is jarring. The film is beautiful, but you walk away with the feeling that the film betrayed the essence of the story. The film failed to treat the subject of homosexuality in a true and humane way. The producers were clearly afraid of exploring male sexuality. How can you create so much intimacy yet be afraid to present the character as a sexual being? It reeks of fear and shame for the story they are creating.

by Anonymousreply 181October 31, 2016 6:40 AM

[quote]In any case if you like Marco Berger's films you get to see his latest, Taekwondo

Now that's a director who is gay and is not afraid of presenting gay men as human and sexual beings. There is another director coming from Argentinean too, that just presented a gay film in New York called "Esteros" And it is a beautiful film. Actually, it seems like that Gay film festival in Madrid will also screen it.

by Anonymousreply 182October 31, 2016 7:09 AM

Well, arguably, some of the characters in Bergers films never identify as or even, frankly, fully confirm a gay or even bi identity. But, yeah, Berger does a superb job of building and sustaining sexual tension.

by Anonymousreply 183October 31, 2016 7:54 AM

That's a typically brilliant piece by Armond White. To say he's contrarian for the sake of it is false. He was a great admirer of Pauline Kael and her ability to cut through the hype and see films with clarity. The fact that some here aren't saying how they disagree with him, just that he's not worth listening to, kind of proves his point when he says " I dare say that gays and viewers of color should respond more critically." If he's wrong, how is he wrong?

When he tweeted a link to the article, he prefaced it with:

[quote]A black gay movie for people who hate black gay movies #Moonlight P.C. gets more victims.

by Anonymousreply 184October 31, 2016 8:50 AM

Armond White's review of André Téchiné BEING 17 is extremely positive. It sounds like the best gay film of the year, by far....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 185October 31, 2016 9:56 AM

The Andre Techine movie sounds promising.

by Anonymousreply 186October 31, 2016 3:39 PM

Naomi Harris is wonderful in this

by Anonymousreply 187October 31, 2016 4:26 PM

In a glowing review for the New York Times, A.O. Scott placed the film in a pantheon of artistic meditations on race in America, writing, “Like James Baldwin’s ‘Go Tell It on the Mountain’ — or, to take a more recent example, like Ta-Nehisi Coates’s ‘Between the World and Me’ — ‘Moonlight’ dwells on the dignity, beauty and terrible vulnerability of black bodies, on the existential and physical matter of black lives.”

by Anonymousreply 188October 31, 2016 4:32 PM

I love how the movie in the last chapter portrays flirtation and romance between masculine urban men. From much experience I have had, it is very accurate on that account.

by Anonymousreply 189October 31, 2016 4:37 PM

R189 But there no fisting! You're such a heteronormative self-hater. Shame on you.

by Anonymousreply 190October 31, 2016 5:26 PM

[quote]But there no fisting!

They had to save something for the sequel.

by Anonymousreply 191October 31, 2016 5:43 PM

" ‘Moonlight’ dwells on the dignity, beauty and terrible vulnerability of black bodies, on the existential and physical matter of black lives.”

"Black bodies" is a current buzz phrase, used either in place of "black people" or to denote a slightly different idea than "black people," an aspect of black people. I'm sure the concept has been used throughout history in writing, but the recent uptick has to be due to Ta Nehisi Coates' using it in his last book. Now I see it everywhere. The Onion AV Club used it in their review of Luke Cage. I have no problems with it, but it just shows general herd mentality.

by Anonymousreply 192October 31, 2016 6:53 PM

[quote]Well, arguably, some of the characters in Bergers films never identify as or even, frankly, fully confirm a gay or even bi identity.

Because unlike Barry Jenkins, Marco Badger presents his Gay and Bisexual characters as human beings, not some romanticized but sterilize version of a gay man. He said it best when he came to our "Outfest" a few years ago ( paraphrasing) "If you can't tell I write about gay and bi men, you are not paying attention to the movie".

by Anonymousreply 193October 31, 2016 7:12 PM

Berger*

by Anonymousreply 194October 31, 2016 7:13 PM

Meh. No one wants to watch the dinge be romantic.

by Anonymousreply 195October 31, 2016 7:14 PM

This week's EW has an interview with Ashton, and also a mini-feature about potential Best Supporting Actor nominees, including Mahershala Ali.

by Anonymousreply 196October 31, 2016 7:57 PM

Armond White is, and always has been, a tiresome contrarian.

by Anonymousreply 197October 31, 2016 9:13 PM

[quote]Armond White is, and always has been, a tiresome contrarian.

"Being 17" is a film that's being highly praised everywhere and White totally agrees with the praise it's receiving. To dismiss his well argued and intelligent criticisms of "Moonlight" as mere contrarianism is patently false.

by Anonymousreply 198October 31, 2016 9:29 PM

Trevante's 6-pack deserves its own special Academy Award.

Andre Holland is magnificent in the final half hour of the movie,

It's amazing that Cambridge and Bristol Old Vic-trained Harris could so convincingly inhabit her role over a mere three days of shooting while on a PR tour of a Bond movie.

Last shot: obvious hommage to Truffaut and "The 400 Blows."

by Anonymousreply 199November 4, 2016 7:53 PM

You have to be kidding r198, Armond White is basically a troll, like that poster said he loves to be contrarian. He lives off dissing many popular movies and praising shit like Transformers 2 just to get the internet up in arms.

by Anonymousreply 200November 4, 2016 8:06 PM

r200 White has had a long and distinguished career and he's a highly respected film critic. Sometimes he agrees with the general praise a film is receiving (as in the case of BEING 17) and other times he disagrees with the hype of others (as in the case of his brilliantly written and highly perceptive review of MOONLIGHT or his objections to 12 YEARS A SLAVE). He thinks for himself and therefore he doesn't always go along with the crowd mentality of most film critics. Whether you agree with him or not, that doesn't make him a "troll". Sorry about that.

by Anonymousreply 201November 4, 2016 10:32 PM

White does think for himself, and he's fun and interesting to read. I often think he's being genuine, but I do sometimes think he delights in taking a "look at me" contrary position and doesn't believe what he wrote as strongly as he'd like us to believe. That said, he's entertaining and I enjoy his reviews. I agree with some of his points about Moonlight, but, unlike him, the things he pointed out didn't ruin it for me. I still thought it was a great movie.

by Anonymousreply 202November 5, 2016 12:09 AM

Just saw the film today. It's wonderful, but.... Due to the reviews, I went in expecting some transcendent, life-altering movie, but nope. It's an extremely fine film, wonderfully photographed, with a fantastic soundtrack and score, and a top-notch cast, with Mahershala Ali and Naomi Harris deserving Oscar nominations; all three actors playing the main character are terrific, and Jharrel Jerome is adorably cute as the teenage Kevin.

However, the final act is not nearly as satisfying as the first two, dragging considerably (the whole movie has a leisurely paced approach, which works in the first two sections, but brings the movie to a near-halt in the third). Plus, the movie makes the criminal mistake of not including a kiss at the climax; the movie is leading up to this moment, but wimps out; instead, we just see them embracing each other, which feels like such a cheat, especially since we saw the teenage Chiron and Kevin kiss passionately earlier in the film and thus we assume that they did kiss in their reunion lovemaking. It's like eagerly anticipating the death of a James Bond villain, but it happens off-screen and is only referred to.

As somebody said upthread, Moonlight is even more chaste than Brokeback Mountain, and it feels like a step back.

by Anonymousreply 203November 6, 2016 1:15 AM

I saw this last night and HIGHLY recommend -- especially to those who don't just "go to gay movies to watch a gay sex scene and call it progress." -- SMH

SPOILERS

Obviously, when any movie, or piece of art, is opened to the public, there is going to be mixed reactions. But I'm so glad I saw this first, before reading through this thread. Although I'm not black, I felt akin to the lead character in many ways -- and I think many gay people, or anyone who feels or who has felt disenfranchised, or like an "odd duck/lone wolf" will relate as well. I grew up in a single parent home with no siblings, and was alone a lot of the time as well. I had to hide my feelings for guys and also try to suppress them so I could fit in with others, became hyper-aware of "masculinity" to avoid bullying and to make friends. I was on "the DL" for most of my 20s (am early 30s now) and hung around with/had many encounters with other closeted/down-low types, including many black dudes who reminded me of both Chiron and Kevin. I say all this to say, this movie encapsulated those feelings and that experience to a T.

Art is supposed to show you who you are -- to reflect what you are, what you feel, and what you could be, I believe. This is a story about a kid who, on paper, never had a chance. A crack-addicted mother, living in Liberty City (for which, any of you that have been or lived in Miami, know that calling Liberty City the ghetto is an understatement). And then being sensitive, kind, and awkward, on top of that -- and I don't use the word sensitive as code for gay like they did in the olden days. I actually think its more important that this was a sweet boy with no chance....not just gay or questioning his sexuality. In a way, this movie kind of transcends sexuality, at least that was my experience. It was more about the fact that Chiron had to become something he wasn't in order to survive in his neighborhood and around "his people." He wasn't banging girls, pretending to be straight, or anything like that. He was pretending to be 'hard, tough and street' - and although he was alive, he wasn't living. Of course, his father figure (brilliant performance by Ali btw - possible Oscar nom, and for sure Oscar nom for Naomie Harris for supporting actress, bank on it) was a 'drug dealer to survive,' and that was the best example that had been set for him up to that point. Anyway, getting too wordy here, but I just wanted to respectfully disagree with the posters that want to trash this because there are no explicit sex scenes (or there is the quick dream scene of his friend banging a chick, yada yada). I can attest, from personal experience, that his being caught in a 'rock and a hard place' of needing to be hard and tough and also desiring men would absolutely stunt his physical experiences with guys - and it would totally make sense that up to the third act, he was actually a virgin more or less. He opens up to Kevin, who correctly calls him out for being something he is not. Kevin also reminds Chiron that he knows exactly who he is....if it would have ended with a scene of them having explicit sex, it would not have been the same. This was about breaking down emotional barriers and becoming who you really are, or "coming back home" so to speak (hence the final shot being him as a child again - THATS who he really is, who we all are, is our original child-selves, until we turned our back on them and felt we had to become something else in order to survive in a harsh, cruel society). I got, from the final scenes, that Chiron was going to become himself moving forward, to live more openly, and more freely, and now that he had gotten through the muck, will begin to live his life.

Flawless film. And just wanted to add my 2 cents about the lack of sex scenes in detail. This was about a kid, who becomes a man, who was robbed of the physical intimacy most "straight or normal" people experience through adolescence, because he had to survive. It was perfectly plausible that he was practically celibate up to the end of the film

by Anonymousreply 204November 20, 2016 3:46 PM

Great review bro

by Anonymousreply 205November 20, 2016 4:41 PM

Sorry, r204, I grew up the same -- raised by a single mother in near-poverty, and this film was a disappointment. It's so incredibly "safe," which is why it's getting such a huge Oscar push.

by Anonymousreply 206November 20, 2016 10:41 PM

I prefer safe and a wide mainstream audience to radical with a tiny subculture niche audience

by Anonymousreply 207November 20, 2016 11:05 PM

r206 - yeah thats definitely why its getting Oscar push. Yeah....that's why.

by Anonymousreply 208November 20, 2016 11:30 PM

Just saw it this afternoon. Absolutely amazing. The 15ish people in my theater all just stared for a minute when the ending title card showed. It was...immaculate. Sublime.

by Anonymousreply 209November 21, 2016 2:25 AM

Just saw it this afternoon. Absolutely amazing. The 15ish people in my theater all just stared for a minute when the ending title card showed. It was...immaculate. Sublime.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 210November 21, 2016 4:34 AM

Best movie of the year 👍🏿

by Anonymousreply 211November 22, 2016 12:30 PM

I saw it today and loved it. The ending was great. I very much recommend it.

There were only a handful of people in my showing. It would be nice if gays and everyone else supported this film. It is worth your time and money.

by Anonymousreply 212November 27, 2016 3:32 AM

[quote]This looks like it has the potential to be brilliant.

Then it isn't any year's Brokeback Mountain.

by Anonymousreply 213November 27, 2016 3:45 AM

Greatv

by Anonymousreply 214November 27, 2016 4:05 PM

I've seen the film in theaters twice now. Not five minutes in on my second viewing and tears were already streaming out of my eyes. Beautifully crafted cyclical film. Chiron's life is defined by rides in cars -- Juan to his mom's, Kevin taking him back from the beach, him taking Kevin back to his place.

When Juan tells him not to sit with his back to the door so he can be aware of someone sneaking up on him and see everything -- this is mirrored at the end when Chiron has his back to Kevin's wall so he can see everything because Kevin is the one person who can shock him out of himself.

The pointed choice of the song playing in Chiron's car with the lyrics something like "I'm a classic man" speaks deeply to Chiron's efforts to project that image... living in Juan's identity all the while he's sitting side by side with the only man who ever touched him. A new kind of classic.

by Anonymousreply 215November 27, 2016 4:22 PM

The scenes with "Black/Chiron" and the young drug dealer are great.

by Anonymousreply 216November 27, 2016 6:47 PM

The cast is great the only problem I had with it with the actor who played the bully who looked 50.

The first 2 actors are perfect so when the 3rd shows up I'm taken out of the movie when he looks so much like 50 Cent not the character. It took until the restaurant scene for me to warm up to him.

SPOILERSPOILERSPOILERSPOILERSPOILER

I don't get the feeling of a great love between the two men after all he beats him up just because the bully tells him to. When they meet it is barely addressed Black says he thinks about it but doesn't seem angry at all.

Did I miss something? Did Black say he hadn't hav

by Anonymousreply 217November 28, 2016 12:34 PM

So when is this film going to exit the deep well of obscurity it has been languishing in all Fall?

by Anonymousreply 218November 28, 2016 12:43 PM

217 part 2

SPOILERSPOILERSpoiler

Did I miss something? Did Black say he hadn't had sex with anyone? The character was a dope dealer with a nice car and apartment and was played by a beautiful man with a killer body. Men and women would literally throw themselves at him. I'm sorry guess I'm in the minority but I found the ending to be false.

by Anonymousreply 219November 28, 2016 12:47 PM

I'm not sure it's languishing. All of A24's films seem purpose-made for a very specific market. And critics. They're never really aimed for what some might dismissively call the mass market, unfortunately.

by Anonymousreply 220November 28, 2016 12:51 PM

It has been playing 2 weeks where I live (surrounded by Trump voters).....

by Anonymousreply 221November 28, 2016 12:53 PM

Though he's barely mentioned in this long thread, it's ANDRE HOLLAND who's going to get the Oscar nom for Moonlight. As the remembered "lover" in Act III, he is indeed unforgettable and quite sexy without the benefit of a sex scene.

by Anonymousreply 222November 28, 2016 1:24 PM

There's no way the Academy's going to recognize two predominantly African American films, is there? Can this lovely little film really stand a chance at any of the major categories against FENCES with Denzel directing the film and recreating his Tony-winning performance in the beloved August Wilson play, co-starring awards darling Viola Davis? That seems unbeatable.

I'm predicting Moonlight winning several Independent Spirit Awards and garnering a few "it's just an honor to be nominated" nominations at the Oscars, if any at all.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 223November 28, 2016 9:57 PM

I finally saw this.

It's good.

by Anonymousreply 224November 30, 2016 6:54 AM

It racked up at the Gotham Awards

by Anonymousreply 225November 30, 2016 9:13 AM

r223, I think this year, after two years of the fake "Oscars So White" controversy, they won't have a problem with two or even three (if Hidden Figures makes an impact) Af-Am-themed films getting nominations.

I predict Moonlight nominations for: Best Picture, Director, Supporting Actor (Mahersala Ali), Supporting Actress (Naomie Harris), Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography, Film Editing.

I predict Fences nominations for: Best Picture, Director, Actor (Denzel Washington), Supporting Actress (Viola Davis), Adapted Screenplay.

by Anonymousreply 226November 30, 2016 12:51 PM

In the original production Mary Alice won a Tony as Best Featured Actress, but in the revival Viola Davis won Best Actress...

by Anonymousreply 227November 30, 2016 2:59 PM

"Moonlight is more than just a film, or piece of entertainment; it’s lasting therapy for broken hearts and depressed minds, packaged brilliantly in green and blue. It’s a warm message presented in the form of a singular life that the viewer appreciates through the lens of his or her own experiences of love. Thus, it can’t be reviewed as a standard piece of art, but can only be analyzed through the subjective emotions with which the viewer is willing to unearth during the screening."

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 228November 30, 2016 8:06 PM

Moonlight is a remarkable, brilliant and harrowing film. A coming of age story, a love story, a story of redemption. You do not want to miss it. A terrific script and film making wrapped around some amazing performances. GO!!

by Anonymousreply 229November 30, 2016 9:17 PM

[quote]"Thus, it can’t be reviewed as a standard piece of art, but can only be analyzed through the subjective emotions with which the viewer is willing to unearth during the screening."

Oh, come on! Does this person actually get paid to write reviews?! That's unbelievable.

by Anonymousreply 230November 30, 2016 9:32 PM

Gotham Award: Best Feature

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 231December 2, 2016 5:09 PM

Moonlight, the insightful and empathetic character drama from director Barry Jenkins about a young black boy who grows up feeling isolated for his perceived homosexuality, took three NYFCC prizes, for Best Director (Jenkins), Best Supporting Actor (Mahershala Ali), and Best Cinematography (James Laxton). Manchester also won three prizes, for actors Casey Affleck and Michelle Williams, as well as writer/director Kenneth Lonergan for his screenplay.

by Anonymousreply 232December 2, 2016 5:16 PM

Haven't seen Moonlight yet. Am planning to go but my niece (she's 14) told me she wants to see it and needs to go with an adult so I thought I might take her. Any graphic sex stuff? That would be, er, uncomfortable in her company.

by Anonymousreply 233December 2, 2016 5:36 PM

I have seen the movie and glad that I wasn't with a 14 year old relative as the graphic sex scene (one) would have made the car ride home awkward. But I'm kind of a prude.

Maybe your family is different. It's just sex.

It may be worth it just to learn what a teen girl (hetero?) thinks of this profound film.

by Anonymousreply 234December 2, 2016 5:50 PM

Thanks R234. I once took her to a boyband concert. I was the only man in the audience and expected to get arrested at any minute. I think I'll see Moonlight by myself then. She's very pro-gay but she's also very young and graphic sex straight or gay is not something I want to watch with her.

by Anonymousreply 235December 2, 2016 6:12 PM

I would not take a 14 year old to see it.

by Anonymousreply 236December 2, 2016 6:14 PM

[quote]I would not take a 14 year old to see it.

I would.

by Anonymousreply 237December 2, 2016 6:15 PM

This movie is the exact thing I'd want to see as a 14 year old

by Anonymousreply 238December 2, 2016 6:59 PM

Aren't there two explicit sex scenes? I thought there was a straight sex scene and a gay mutual masturbation scene?

by Anonymousreply 239December 2, 2016 7:43 PM

Yeah

by Anonymousreply 240December 2, 2016 8:07 PM

I just saw it. Brilliant, unnerving, and just a truly outstanding work of art.

by Anonymousreply 241December 2, 2016 8:38 PM

Indeed

by Anonymousreply 242December 3, 2016 4:25 AM

"Unnerving"?? Don't see Elle if you think Moonlight is "unnerving."

by Anonymousreply 243December 3, 2016 4:39 AM

I didn't consider the gay "sex" scene to be explicit though I guess some might.

by Anonymousreply 244December 3, 2016 6:26 AM

Some of you expect gay movies to have plenty of sex and nudity.

by Anonymousreply 245December 5, 2016 2:02 AM

It's not really a "gay movie." It has same-sex sexuality, but not really a gay focus or sensibility

by Anonymousreply 246December 5, 2016 2:07 AM

r245 Not really, but it's hardly unreasonable to expect a film whose major theme is aversion to homosexuality to have some acknowledgment of that, you know, sexuality.

by Anonymousreply 247December 5, 2016 11:05 AM

I just saw it. Rolling Stone called it a masterpiece. I can't disagree. It was hypnotic. STUNNING!

Can't wait to see it again.

by Anonymousreply 248December 7, 2016 7:44 AM

Are the child actors getting award nominations?

by Anonymousreply 249December 7, 2016 1:27 PM

The best they can hope for is a SAG Best Ensemble nomination.

by Anonymousreply 250December 7, 2016 1:34 PM

Best movie I have seen this year

by Anonymousreply 251December 9, 2016 5:19 PM

I'm a bad OP. Still haven't seen it yet.

by Anonymousreply 252December 9, 2016 5:23 PM

I've seen better films this year. If the last 3rd were as good as the first 2/3rds, it would be a masterpiece; but that last section is so dull, so badly acted (especially by André Holland), and such a wimp-out at the end, that it totally misses.

by Anonymousreply 253December 9, 2016 5:41 PM

Why does this film have gay shit in it? Is it some weird fantasy. Everyone knows the brothers are not homosexuals. It doesn't exist in our race. That shit is for whites and asians.

by Anonymousreply 254December 9, 2016 6:27 PM

-a true masterpiece

by Anonymousreply 255December 9, 2016 6:36 PM

'Moonlight' makes the prude 'Brokeback Mountain' look like 'Dawson's 50 Load Weekend'.

by Anonymousreply 256December 9, 2016 6:45 PM

R256, what you want to see has virtually no market. Keep watching your porn dude

by Anonymousreply 257December 9, 2016 7:00 PM

R254 made me LMAO.

by Anonymousreply 258December 9, 2016 7:07 PM

I completely disagree with R253. I found the last section extremely moving, a great emotional payoff to the first two sections, and had no issue with the performances of the two actors.

But in a couple reviews I read that liked it but weren't raves, the critics felt the same as R253, so it's not for everybody.

by Anonymousreply 259December 9, 2016 7:11 PM

[quote]Why does this film have gay shit in it?

Apparently, it doesn't.

by Anonymousreply 260December 9, 2016 9:25 PM

Moonlight would have been a great film back in the early 00's. But post-Brokeback you gotta show more intimacy in such a raw portrayal of a gay man coming to terms with his sexuality.

Plus doesn't Moonlight take place in Florida who is one of the states that cost Hillary the election?? lol The Academy is not going to reward a film that takes place in red country when there is a viable film that is pretty much a love letter to the West Coast.

by Anonymousreply 261December 9, 2016 9:40 PM

Second largest number of noms at the Globes

by Anonymousreply 262December 12, 2016 5:25 PM

[quote]If the last 3rd were as good as the first 2/3rds, it would be a masterpiece; but that last section is so dull, so badly acted (especially by André Holland), and such a wimp-out at the end, that it totally misses.

The best scene was with Naomie, she was great. And I have to agree about Andre Holland.

by Anonymousreply 263December 12, 2016 5:45 PM

I loved the final third segment of the film. It was so tense, I was on the edge of my seat wondering what would happen next. The acting was very subtle and naturalistic. And of course, it led to the big payoff.

It seems to me that some critics want this movie to be something that it isn't.

by Anonymousreply 264December 12, 2016 6:55 PM

"It seems to me that some critics want this movie to be something that it isn't."

Yes, we want it to be good.

by Anonymousreply 265December 12, 2016 7:13 PM

I grew up in Miami and I recognized some of the places in that movie.

by Anonymousreply 266December 13, 2016 1:37 PM

Masterful film- had me in tears driving back home from the theater. I don't recall a film that resonated so well with me.

by Anonymousreply 267December 13, 2016 11:22 PM

Powerful and soul-stirring

by Anonymousreply 268December 13, 2016 11:56 PM

r254, Go away. The Smiths are big LGB advocates. Even if they are closeted bisexual, sex addicts, etc that is their business.

by Anonymousreply 269January 2, 2017 9:04 PM

It's not going to win best picture, even though it's excellent. The academy isn't progressive.

by Anonymousreply 270January 2, 2017 9:12 PM

r270, no way is the black community gonna allow the first black pest picture, black director, majority cast and all, to go to a film like this.

by Anonymousreply 271January 2, 2017 9:30 PM

[quote]the first black pest picture

The WHAT???

by Anonymousreply 272January 2, 2017 10:09 PM

best*, omg are you really that obtuse. Its a fkin typo.

by Anonymousreply 273January 2, 2017 10:10 PM

[quote]Is Barry Jenkins' MOONLIGHT this year's Brokeback Mountain?

Depends. Did one of the main characters get murdered, precluding Happily Ever After?

by Anonymousreply 274January 2, 2017 10:11 PM

Learn to say "Thank you," r273.

by Anonymousreply 275January 2, 2017 10:11 PM

[quote]no way is the black community gonna allow the first black pest picture, black director, majority cast and all, to go to a film like this.

Huh? I assume you are trying to say this would be the first film with a black cast to win best picture?! Twelves Year a Slave just won in 2014!

by Anonymousreply 276January 2, 2017 10:19 PM

r276, historical pictures don't count and that film was equally white. It's not a "black" film. Fences, Moonlight, Precious, Best Man are black films.

by Anonymousreply 277January 2, 2017 11:50 PM

On the other hand, r274, Brokeback Mountain was more explicit in showing the affection between two men. Moonlight wimps out on that.

by Anonymousreply 278January 3, 2017 12:05 PM

I loved it!

by Anonymousreply 279January 3, 2017 4:59 PM

It's a shame that the people who need to see this movie are watching Star Wars or this week's superhero movie. Oh well.

by Anonymousreply 280January 3, 2017 6:04 PM

I know the nominations haven't come out yet but I feel the film is losing Oscar momentum. I just don't hear about it as much as I did a few months ago.

by Anonymousreply 281January 4, 2017 2:32 AM

Bump for the assholes who needlessly start new threads about this movie

by Anonymousreply 282January 8, 2017 10:29 PM

I am shocked that Mahershala Ali lost out to Aaron Taylor Johnson at the Golden Globes. I thought he was a lock for supporting actor.

by Anonymousreply 283January 9, 2017 1:18 AM

A moving masterpiece

by Anonymousreply 284January 9, 2017 4:07 AM

Glad it won for best movie at the Golden Globes. It was well deserved and is being slept on at the awards circuit.

by Anonymousreply 285January 9, 2017 4:52 AM

Only because the real Oscar winner is in the musical-comedy category. Think it will get Oscar nominations but no wins. I'm okay with that because its a gay love story made for hetros......

by Anonymousreply 286January 9, 2017 5:37 AM

Mahershala Ali will win Best Supporting Actor and Barry Jenkins will win Best Adapted Screenplay (unless Fences takes it).

by Anonymousreply 287January 9, 2017 5:41 AM

Yes and like Brokeback Mountain - it will lose to an LA-centered movie. La La Land

by Anonymousreply 288January 9, 2017 5:55 AM

Pooh on you R286 and R288.

Do you root for gays to fail? Does that make you feel good? Why?

by Anonymousreply 289January 9, 2017 6:14 AM

If I put aside Moonlight was directed by straight director for straights I still have major problems with the 3rd actor playing same role. Everyone else was cast perfectly except him...

by Anonymousreply 290January 9, 2017 8:01 AM

R290 I had issues with that at first, then remembered the nephew of a friend who at 16 went to a juvenile hall, committed more crimes, and was in a federal prison until his release 8 years later. He went in a skinny-little blatino with lots of attitude, said he did nothing but work out at the prison gym every day, and emerged at age 25 looking like, well, that guy at the end of Moonlight. So it is plausible.

by Anonymousreply 291January 9, 2017 8:08 AM

Have YOU seen it yet? Hmmm?

by Anonymousreply 292January 13, 2017 3:54 AM

OOps. I thought it was Andre Holland getting all the award attention not Mahershala Ali .Really the whole cast is great. Even though I thought Trevante Rhodes was miscast he was great in the restaurant scene. The problem I had is that Black had only sex that one time with Kevin if I understand correctly . He is very good-looking with a killer bod drove a sexy car and sold drugs. He would be fighting men and women off with a stick. Just didn't ring true for me..

Does it ever say that Juan's Little's father? When the 2nd act starts Juan is gone. I assume he died does it ever say what happened to him?

I want Moonlight to get the SAG for Best Cast but I want LaLa Land to get Best Picture Oscar....

by Anonymousreply 293January 13, 2017 7:05 AM

Considering that Juan and Little's mom are meeting for the first time, it is unlikely that Juan is Little's father.

Also, I think we are meant to assume the the funeral that Teresa and Chiron refer to is Juan's.

by Anonymousreply 294January 14, 2017 5:49 AM

MOST. OVERRATED. FILM. EVER.

by Anonymousreply 295January 14, 2017 7:06 AM

I must have missed the scene with Juan meeting the kids mother the first time.

by Anonymousreply 296January 14, 2017 4:20 PM

R296, I am not sure how you could have missed it. Juan finds Chiron and takes him to his girlfriend Teresa's apartment. (How some idiots imagine that Juan is his father when he stumbles on he kid by chance and does not know his name is beyond me.)

The scene when Juan meets Paula occurs the next day when Juan takes Little home. Paula appears and is upset that a stranger has inserted himself into her child's life.

It is a key scene, so if you missed it, you probably had trouble following a lot of the films action.

by Anonymousreply 297January 15, 2017 3:54 AM

Well, excuse the fuck out of me. I have had serious problems for the last three years causing not to get a good night's sleep. ften if the movie isn't great fall asleep not in the case of Moonlight I might have been half asleep. wondered why an complete stranger would be interested in the little boy guess Juan felt sorry for him being bullied (don't know many drug deals with a heart of gold) or maybe he was grooming him to become dope dealer. Then the girl friend was also interested in the boy who acted like a stepma . The boy's mother was a drug user and Juan was a dope dealer they have an argument that I got the impression they had an history..

Not everything in Moonlight is explained I admit I could be wrong so that's why I'm asking questions. Did the kid go to jail for beating the crap out of a bully who terrorized him for years?

by Anonymousreply 298January 15, 2017 6:34 AM

Some people should stick to super heroes and Star Wars.

by Anonymousreply 299January 15, 2017 6:44 AM

r298, there was a lot "unseen" and only vaguely referred to in Moonlight. Chiron beating up the bully is the beginning of his spiral into criminality, resulting in jail, etc.

by Anonymousreply 300January 15, 2017 12:13 PM

Sweet

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 301January 18, 2017 3:35 AM

I hope this movie gets some more attention throughout award season.

by Anonymousreply 302January 18, 2017 3:01 PM

R298 I can understand how being sleep deprived can make it hard to follow a book or television show. Maybe you should see it again when you are rested and it might resolve some of the issues you are talking about.

The non-stereotyped depiction of characters (the drug dealer who cares about the child) is part of what makes the film feel so true to life. (And yes, there are many drug dealers who love children and puppies. People are complex that way. Juan reminded me a lot of the big cocaine dealer in my neighborhood where I grew up. His girlfriend's apartment was a popular hang-out spot for latchkey kids.) Throughout, all the characters are so much like people you have known in your life, rather than made up contrivances or personified abstractions. You rarely see that in a film.

The script refers to Chiron having been in prison, but when you see that he becomes a muscled drug dealer, you kind of figure that out. (Have you ever seen one go through that sort of change without prison?)

by Anonymousreply 303January 19, 2017 1:42 PM

I meant to say: " I can understand how being sleep deprived can make it hard to follow a movie or television show. "

by Anonymousreply 304January 19, 2017 2:10 PM

Just saw it -- wow!

by Anonymousreply 305January 20, 2017 7:52 AM

It's pretty tamed. It's definitely a gay film for straight men to watch comfortably.

by Anonymousreply 306January 20, 2017 8:03 AM

It's a powerful movie

by Anonymousreply 307January 21, 2017 12:53 AM

I want to see it again

by Anonymousreply 308January 21, 2017 2:58 AM

Saw it this weekend in Brooklyn and the straight girl that I went with felt it was too grim and wasn't sure that there was even a happy ending. But I loved it and can't wait to see it again

by Anonymousreply 309January 31, 2017 6:49 PM

Just saw it also. Loved the first two parts, thought the third one dragged. Whatever.

by Anonymousreply 310January 31, 2017 7:03 PM

Spoiler:

When he blurted out in the third act that Kevin was the only man that had ever touched him I thought my heart would break

by Anonymousreply 311January 31, 2017 7:47 PM

In finally saw it this weekend and really enjoyed it; thought it was great. Beautiful to look at and a very measured pace, which I loved. The long pauses and silence were used very well.

The two younger Chirons really are brilliant portrayals of pent up, hurting kids. I felt like crying just looking at then. Great facial acting. Ali's Juan is great, but surprised how small the part is overall - but he did a lot with it.

The lack of explicit sex didn't bother me, but there could have been something more.

So,older Kevin has a kid but is not with the mother. I took the whole older Kevin as a guy who was essentially on the DL? He's not really "out" but isn't in denial that he likes guys or would have sex with guys? I didn't get a good read of what was going on with him.

Did they have sex at the end, or was he just physically comforting Chiron. Or are we really not supposed to know, and are left ponder whether they did or whether they would after they held each other.

In terms of Oscars, I can see it winning adapted screenplay and maybe Ali for supporting and possibly editing, cinematography Best picture, I'm doubtful; director, still doubtful, but less so. The actors who played the two younger Chirons REALLY deserved nominations, if not wins. Don't get me wrong, Harris was great, and yes her speech to her son at the end is a tearjerker. But, I didn't think her drug-addicted mom was over-the-top brilliant as many have claimed .

by Anonymousreply 312January 31, 2017 9:46 PM

"When he blurted out in the third act that Kevin was the only man that had ever touched him I thought my heart would break."

Didn't he say, "you're the only man who ever touched me" and then "I haven't been touched since" - which could mean he's so repressed/hurt/guarded that he hasn't had sex at all - probably unlikely. "touch" also seemed to suggest more than sex, essentially no positive touching (sex or otherwise) in his life except for hugging his mom. Thus, the shot of his head resting on Kevin.

by Anonymousreply 313February 1, 2017 1:59 AM

That's exactly what he was saying r313. At first he says Kevin is the only man who ever touched him, then he admits that NO ONE has touched him since, he has been celibate since things went so terribly with Kevin.

by Anonymousreply 314February 1, 2017 2:01 AM

I interpreted Kevin as being bi. I also think they have sex immediately after the movie ends.

by Anonymousreply 315February 1, 2017 2:22 AM

One more kiss would not have been out of place, but overall I was very pleased with the movie and it's implied happy ending

by Anonymousreply 316February 2, 2017 9:08 PM

Yeah that is why I don't get why some refer to "Moonlight" as a depressing movie, I would consider it to have a happy ending.

by Anonymousreply 317February 2, 2017 9:15 PM

Congratulations!

by Anonymousreply 318February 27, 2017 12:24 PM

I grew up in Miami, and my mom taught at Northwestern High, where Jenkins went to HS. This film got so much right about Liberty City and the black DL experience. Beautiful, moving, well deserved Oscar.

by Anonymousreply 319February 27, 2017 3:30 PM

I want to hear from R270 and R286 today.

by Anonymousreply 320February 27, 2017 7:04 PM

Proved to be a much better movie. And holds up better.

by Anonymousreply 321March 15, 2018 5:56 PM

I still watch it.

by Anonymousreply 322March 16, 2018 3:22 AM

I held off Moonlight after it won the Oscar mainly because of posters on DL who kept calling it overrated and finally got round to watching it last night. I was STUNNED! Moonlight is beautiful, cinematic poetry that could be one of the best films I've seen in the last ten years. A true masterpiece. So glad I got to watch it quietly after the hullabaloo from its winning Best Picture had died down. Confirmation that most DLers are either trash with horrific tastes or just deplorables who dismissed the movie purely because it has an all-black cast.

Barry Jenkins is a genius, to make the film of the decade on such a tiny budget. Better than Brokeback, and certainly, far better than Call Me By Your Name.

by Anonymousreply 323March 16, 2018 2:15 PM

[quote]or just deplorables who dismissed the movie purely because it has an all-black cast

Yes.

by Anonymousreply 324March 16, 2018 2:35 PM

It really is a beautiful movie. And it's no fluke because Jenkins first movie 'Medicine for Melancholy' is also beautiful.

by Anonymousreply 325March 18, 2018 4:19 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!