Luke Macfarlane Reacts to 'Bros' Disappointing Box Office Performance, Talks Lack of Diversity in the Movie « PREVIOUS

terrible make up on Bill in that screen shot⬆️⬆️⬆️he looks awful!

A classy response. He didn't trash the movie or the public. Watch and learn, Billy.

I didn’t realize how looks discordant they are until that photo. It’s like Prince Charming standing next to Shrek the ogre.

[quote] If it was a story about Billy Eichner dating a Black man or Latino man, I think he would not have been the guy to write that story, that’s all I can say. I think it would be very challenging for Billy to voice somebody that he doesn’t know,” he said.

Wow, so Luke just called out Billy as racist. He only deals with lily white. How could he possibly give voice to a white guy who, gasps, dates a Latino?!

"It might have had something to do with the fact Billy is really ugly," Macfarlane added, ."I mean, I had to stare at that mug for every scene we did together, but at least I was getting paid. Imagine having to spend two hours staring at that face if you were instead paying to see the movie... maybe it's no wonder it flopped."

[quote]Luke was also asked about the lack of diversity in the movie, which focuses on two cis-white gay men despite feature a main cast of all queer actors.

So the insinuation is that the movie failed because one of leads wasn’t a black transwoman?? Yeah, that’s not it.

It’s not like people are asking him to write Moonlight. But he can’t write as a white guy who interacts with minorities because it wouldn’t be authentic? Is that what Luke is saying? That’s a really bad look and makes me hate him more. Good job Luke.

[R4] Oh c'mon. Just because Billy hasn't been with a black man means he's a racist? It's true that if he hasn't had the experience then how is he supposed to truthfully write a story about it? You're being ridiculous.

So gays can’t write straight stories because they haven’t experienced it?

It's the same rationale every time. Lens Dunhman couldn't write about colored girls in GIRLS because that wasn't her experience so she couldn't be "true to it". The FRIENDS sitcom writers couldn't write about any colored friends because the didn't feel experienced enough to portray a central character authentically, etc. Bill Eichner can't tell a story about having a colored lover because it would be "too challenging" to try and voice an experience he's not familiar with... So I guess none of these people know enough people of color... in New York City... one of the most diverse major metropolitan areas in the country...

If any of those people did try to write a person of color though they probably be accused of co-opting some strong brave pocs lived experience to benefit their white privilege so they're really damned either way

But Billy wrote for two black trans women of color and a Bull dyke and he’s none of those things.

R11 has a good point, as does R10 - which is why I wish people would stop looking to the opinions of the random perpetually aggrieved people online about this stuff.

I'm just glad Brokeback Mountain which originally written by a straight women directed by straight man and featured 2 white cishet male were made long before this lunacy.

Today any gay... sorry "queer" film will need to checked every representation box and undergo a strict "authenticity" and "lived experience" test .

"Lack of diversity" is the biggest crock of shit in decades

[quote] It's true that if he hasn't had the experience then how is he supposed to truthfully write a story about it? You're being ridiculous.

So Ang Lee couldn’t possibly have made Brokeback Mountain because as an Asian how could he authentically know what it’s like to be two white guys in rural America?

"It’s a very big country, the United States."

Deep thoughts...

R17 right? 😄

The LGBTQIA+~<>[{}] museum committee scenes are ‘diverse’ to a point of parody.

Billy’s group of friends is diverse.

Billy’s pick ups are diverse, aren’t they? Wasn’t the Barbra butch bro black?

But the main romance is a Jew and a white man so must be commented on.

[quote]So I guess none of these people know enough people of color... in New York City... one of the most diverse major metropolitan areas in the country...

But NYC is rather segregated.

Also, FRIENDS took place in the West Village, which is 80% white.

Blacks are only 2%.

Hispanic/Latinos are 6%.

Asians are 8%.

Luke is such a stud!

[quote]Luke was also asked about the lack of diversity in the movie, which focuses on two cis-white gay men despite FEATURE a main cast of all queer actors.

Does no one use an editor/proofreader anymore? did they mean "FEATURING?"

Plus, how dare someone make movie about 2 white people even f the rest of the case is "diverse". The ultimate evil. WTF.

There's no winning. Whatever the configuration this would fail the diversity purity test because the alphabet soup is a fucked up mess of clashing agendas.

I didn’t mind the movie. It wasn’t the blockbuster Eichner seems to think it is. All I could think of, though, was how much Eichner was like Walter Matthau in Grumpy Old Men, and Luke was Ann Margret.

[quote]I think it would be very challenging for Billy to voice somebody that he doesn’t know,” he said.

Pretty funny that Luke is saying Billy doesn't know any people of color, so how could he possibly write in their voices?

Luke wouldn't have been cast if it had been a romance about Billy & Dennis Rodman.

[R16] Ang Lee didn't write Brokeback. It was written and he directed it.

Eichner looks like he has facial wasting in that pic.

How very dare white cisgender men create entertainment about experiences they've lived rather than centering the narrative on the struggle of brave transgender women/nonbinaries of color! Don't they know they're supposed to secure funding and do the lion's share of the creative work on the project, but fade back into the shadows so said transgender women/nonbinaries of color can pose in the spotlight and get accolades for existing!

R29 is my hero

Billy Eichner, seems and.looks like an asshole. He has no charm at all.

DLers -- don't miss me in "A Magical Christmas Village" on Hallmark tonight, alongside DOOL's Ali Sweeney and That Girl Marlo Thomas. I have to keep my TV career afloat.

As soon as that's finished you can switch over to Hallmark's sister channel Hallmark Mysteries and More to catch him as a widowed single dad country singer in "Christmas in My Heart" opposite Heather Hemmens.

I saw another airing last week. The movie is really more about good parenting, inspirational teachers, and having the self-confidence to follow your dreams; the romance is perfunctory and tacked-on at the end. It also gave me my first unflattering opinion of a Luke performance: his attempt at singing didn't impress me much.

A Canadian with a smegmatized dick discussing a lack of diversity in a moderately bad movie. Yawn.

So if a GAY (which is diversity by any standard) couple isn't biracial and/or "queer-NB", it cannot be the focus of a movie?

The two leads were (a) an actor whose main credits have been as the second lead in Hallmark movies and (b) a performer that is mostly known for a web series and a hardly-seen streaming show.

Was someone under the impression that these two would bring in billions of viewers?

Luke Macfarlane has been reduced to playing a magical elf in Hallmark movies. Can you spot him on the poster in R32?

I bet Luke looks great in a jockstrap.

Luke and Billy are two bottoms. You know what two bottoms can do together? NOT A GODDAMNED THING

R39 ain't that the goddamn truth. I get so f****** annoyed when some bottom b**** hits me up on my grinder something and it's like we can find stuff to enjoy and I'm like shut the f****** you f****** moron leave me the f*** alone but they like keep doing it.

[quote]A Canadian with a smegmatized dick discussing a lack of diversity in a moderately bad movie. Yawn.

proof of his foreskin and smegma? that makes him hotter

A recent Nick Stoller interview from Europe revealed that they originally shot a scene for the "becoming a couple" montage wherein Aaron was in the mood while Bobby was working, and the former came up from behind and laid his dick on the latter's shoulder. It was deleted because it didn't fit the tone of the montage, but we almost got to see for ourselves!

WE WERE ROBBED!!!

Re: OP’s quote, I am just now realizing Judd Apatow is not Seth Rogen.

I never see movies like theirs, and since their names were both on the early project Knocked Up I just somehow assumed Rogen was Apatow whenever I read the name.

Anyway, they can both die for all I care. So in that sense they’re interchangeable.

If any of you have Peacock, within the last few days it added a Hallmark channel. Some of Luke's frau fare is available. I just added "Taking a Shot at Love" (Luke's an injured hockey player) to my watchlist for the purpose of torturing my wife.

"You know what two bottoms can do together?"

Bump pussies!!!!

I like the lesbian term “slam clams.”

“We cannot address every single issue. There’s not enough time in the movie.”

Tell Gen Z’s aqua-haired princesses this 100x ^^^^^

I really couldn't care less what Luke thinks.

Or for that much, the rest of the Mcfarlanes: Seth, Todd and Natalie.

100% agree, R29, but transgender "women" are men and predominantly white men.

I watched it last night (just because I saw a link to watch it free on a site I was visiting).

What everyone else said proved accurate. Billy Eichner should never have cast himself. He is very unlikeable. And, no, someone who looks like Luke would not see Billy across a crowded bar and instantly think "I must have him!"

We watched this last night streaming. Not as bad as the word of mouth suggested, but Billy Eichner's character is so damn unlikeable.

Replacing McFarlane with a "Transman" would have shown true diiversity and surely would have saved the movie!

[quote] “I understand that completely. I think that Billy wrote a story that was personal to him. If it was a story about Billy Eichner dating a Black man or Latino man, I think he would not have been the guy to write that story, that’s all I can say. I think it would be very challenging for Billy to voice somebody that he doesn’t know,” he said

Luke McFarlane doesn’t think much of Billy’s writing 💅🏽

[quote]proof of his foreskin and smegma? that makes him hotter

Scottish generally means uncut.

It wasn't advertised much and we were still coming out of the pandemic. It should have gone directly to streaming.

People are going to all of us strangers so they're not all opposed to gayness in movies. Bros sucked though

[quote] Luke was also asked about the lack of diversity in the movie, which focuses on two cis-white gay men despite feature a main cast of all queer actors.

Jesus Christ. As if the wider mainstream audience would even give shit about that. That's crap that only those within the whole LGBTQIA+ "community" care about.

I swear, every time we hear from anyone involved in this movie, they just continuously show how utterly clueless they are as to why it didn't work.

Straight bros aren’t going to see some fugly Robin Williams as a gay guy lust over another gay guy who wouldn’t give him the time of a day in real life.

[quote]I understand that completely. I think that Billy wrote a story that was personal to him. If it was a story about Billy Eichner dating a Black man or Latino man, I think he would not have been the guy to write that story, that’s all I can say.

I don’t think he’s slamming anyone here. He wouldn’t be able to write it either. He only dates the white huntin’ and fishin’ gays.

[quote] It wasn't advertised much and we were still coming out of the pandemic. It should have gone directly to streaming.

It could have been a fun summer movie during Pride month.

Romcoms are a dated movie genre that won't ever turn out big numbers in theaters ever again.

I don't understand the positive reviews. I found it unbearably cringy and far from mainstream. I even went a second time (maybe my first impression was skewed somehow?) with my best straight gal pal and she agreed it was a misfire.

[quote] Re: OP’s quote, I am just now realizing Judd Apatow is not Seth Rogen.

And [italic]I'm[/italic] just now realizing Judd Apatow is not Diana Ross!

It was almost impossible for it to succeed, because Billy Eichner made it all about him and his personality and his experiences.

I know so many gay men like Billy Eichner. They're loud, they're obnoxious, they're incredibly aggressive, their personality is ostensibly supposed to be "the funny guy," they're very angry because they have deep insecurity issues about their lack of physical attractiveness, and they frequently work in the entertainment industry trying to make it as performers. They usually live in LA or the NYC area. They often come from Long Island or New Jersey. They are convinced they have to be gigantic stars some day or the universe is somehow being deeply unfair to them because they are so talented.

They almost never actually make it big in entertainment, unless they give up and go into behind-the-scenes entertainment work (producing, talent agencies, PR, etc.) where their hyperaggressiveness will be useful.

It thought it was clever by making a bunch of “in-jokes” about gay men that most gay men didn’t identify with and weren’t funny.

Also, this was a movie that thought we not only wanted to hear Billy Eichner sing but also wanted to see his naked ass. Oh, and also thought Deb Messing was a movie star. No on all three counts, thanks.

I didn' see it. I've always found Billy Eichner annoying, which is the point of his street videos. Hard to get from that to seeing him as a romantic lead. Luke MacFarlane never looked more unattractive than in the OP's photo.

I don't think he has to explain his lack of success to anyone. If he were Nikki Haley, he'd pretend it did incredibly well, all things considered.

[quote] I don't understand the positive reviews. I found it unbearably cringy and far from mainstream.

The reviewers live in a bubble and have no clue that they’re in the minority. Hollywood has a real problem figuring this out. They’re completely out of touch.

There's a video on youtube which attempts to explain why Bros is truly terrible. I did find the whale in the Museum of Natural History joke funny. I didn't see it but the lead seems obnoxious and unwatchable. The guy on the right in OP's photo. Watching him for2 minutes seems impossible.

I have never in my life heard a straight rom com be criticised because the male and female lead are white.

It’s kind of fucked up, but they’re both ugly to me. Billy is truly ugly and Luke is just not hot. He’s blond and in shape, so DL goes crazy for him for some reason.but he has a horse shaped head and it’s not very pretty. If this film had pretty twinks with big eyes and/or thick lips, I MIGHT have checked it out. Great films like Maurice were full of beautiful people for a reason. Oh well, I wish him the best with his shtick that R64 described perfectly.

I couldn’t get over how retrograde the whole thing felt. The marketing campaign really went chips all on the idea that straight people are freaked out but pruriently fascinated with all the athletic casual sex gay men can have - true I have found among “bro-ey” Gen Xers but way less so other cohorts - and the movie itself was mostly just Eichner getting told how fascinating, complicated and desirable he was by a masc goyishe hunk. All it needed was Billy stroking his neck in soft focus to show off his nails and it would have gone full Streisand at her most self-indulgent.

[quote]Luke is just not hot. He’s blond and in shape, so DL goes crazy for him for some reason.but he has a horse shaped head and it’s not very pretty. If this film had pretty twinks with big eyes and/or thick lips, I MIGHT have checked it out. Great films like Maurice were full of beautiful people for a reason

Luke is hotter than any of the male actors in Maurice. He’s an actual man. The guys in Maurice were wimps. There’s a reason why he’s been in all of those Hallmark movies.

I didn't consider seeing "Bros" for a moment. American gay-themed films are usually shit.

I ate Luke’s ass once at the Eagle.

MARY!

R50 and R73 have summarized the entire thread.

Billy Eichner may have some talents but he provokes a gut response in me that makes me want to avoid anything to do with him. I suspect many moviegoers — potential or actual — have a similar reaction.

And in this country we don’t seem capable of producing gay-themed films with any texture or nuance. The sophistication of movies like Bros and Fire Island makes Superbad seem like Shakespeare.

FWIW: Last night I had a dream that I fucked Billy Eichner. Oddly enough, it was far hotter than I ever thought it could be.

[quote]I don’t think he’s slamming anyone here. He wouldn’t be able to write it either. He only dates the white huntin’ and fishin’ gays.

I must have missed all the huntin' and fishin' TR Knight did between Grey's Anatomy and his theatre career.

[quote]I must have missed all the huntin' and fishin' TR Knight did between Grey's Anatomy and his theatre career.

And Wentworth Miller's a sensitive biracial nerd who sang with the Princeton Tigertones.

[quote]terrible make up on Bill in that screen shot⬆️⬆️⬆️he looks awful!

I’m sorry, I was licking his face and removed some of the makeup. Mea culpa.

I find Billy Eichner good-looking and incredibly sexy.

Quick, someone call 911! R81 is having a medical emergency!

[quote] I find Billy Eichner good-looking and incredibly sexy.

Hi, Billy!!

[quote]I must have missed all the huntin' and fishin' TR Knight did between Grey's Anatomy and his theatre career.

Maybe he’s different now that he’s come out and has more options.

After the filming, do you think the two of them fucked?

We know a turd when we see one.

It’s absurd people haze authors for not reflecting the rainbow. That’s not how art works. So sick of liberals shaming everyone.

“which focuses on two cis-white gay men”

aka MEN.

Luke McFarlane is one of the best-looking actors working today. The idea his character would be attracted to someone as repellent as Billy is the stuff of fairy tales. MacFarlane is muscular and hot, Eichner is hollow-chested and fugly.

I watched the movie solely for MacFarlane and all the time wished Eichner had had the balls to cast anyone else as him.

I'm sure Billy thought something like, "If Katherine Heigl can play opposite Seth Rogan in 'Knocked Up' and Emma Stone can play Jonah Hill's romantic interest in 'Super Bad,' people will buy Luke Mcfarlane could be madly in love with my character."

The problem is that he forgot that the audience for those other films were young male nerds who would consider it wish fulfillment, while the audience for "Bros" would be adult gay men who wouldn't buy his scenario for a second.

This Gen Z Canadian brought his straight friend to Bros, and the straight guy was particularly adamant that Macfarlane was way out of Eichner’s league.

Billy should have cast someone else to play his role, I don’t know who, Zachary Quinto or somebody.

What I thought was stupid about the movie was that Macfarlane’s character chucked it all in to become a chocolate maker. Huh? Look at him! Like a dessert has passed his lips since the turn of the millennium. Also, Hallmark much? More realistic would be him to invest in a handmade chocolate business as a side hustle.

The movie started with the premise of Eichner writing it and playing the main character, so him stepping aside to let another actor play lead was never in the cards.

I just think they completely dropped the ball on making the character so unpleasant that it wasn't believable someone like Luke's character would fall for him. For every tender, real moment between them there were about five where he was ranting obnoxiously and starting arguments for no good reason.

Him interrupting the opening of the intersectional Pride museum with a song about his own love life was a choice.