Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Bret Easton Ellis apologizes to Katherine Bigelow

Awwww, come on Ellis, don't wuss out.

Ellis is an internet troll [italic]par excellence.[/italic] He will find a little kernel - not even a kernel, a niblet - of truth in something, something that no one typically admits out loud - or will only admit anonymously on the internet - and he takes advantage of the vacuous nature of the blogosphere - the Warholian notion of something becoming important simply because a celebrity says it - to create a genuine media circus. It's like trolling as performance art. The stuff he says about Katherine Bigelow or Les Miserables or Matt Bomer or Glee isn't really out of line from the stuff I read on Datalounge, but when Ellis says it, it makes fifty online news and gossip sites.

There's something almost perversely admirable about Ellis's twitter. I admire its purity. A survivor. Unclouded by conscience, remorse, or delusions of morality.

No, wait, that's Ash's speech about the xenomorph...

by Anonymousreply 3212/20/2012

You can read *anything* on DL, it's full of trolls. Not being out of line with what you've read on DL isn't saying much. His "contrarian" anti-gay comments about Matt Bomer are unforgivable, like something the despicable Camille Paglia would say.

by Anonymousreply 112/17/2012

If you believe the rumors that the Bomer attacks were the result of a personal feud, then the ensuing brouhaha was more a reflection of the hypocrisy of the media regarding their coverage of gay issues and their buttressing of institutionalized forms of homophobia than it was Ellis's personal views. Ellis took a kernel of truth - that Bomer would not be cast in the movie because he is gay - gave it an ugly dressing, and let the media do the rest of the work.

As trolling goes, it was unsurpassed.

by Anonymousreply 212/17/2012

So you think he's playing 11 dimensional chess. Well that's an interesting theory, and it would make him better than a run-of-the-mill contrarian like Paglia who just says whatever she knows will piss people off for attention.

by Anonymousreply 312/17/2012

I just read New York Magazine's review and, indeed, it seems to be unduly influenced by the filmmaker being a woman, as if the message which would have easily been seen as "fascistic" - the review's word, not mine - is easier to take given it comes in a film by a woman with a female protagonist. Blatantly, Edelstein finds this movie it raises so many objections to more palatable because of its feminine helping and that of the mission it portrays.

I have a problem with that. The movie and any sensationalistic and untrue attribution of Bin Laden's downfall and torture should be evaluated objectively; not given a freer ride because Bigelow and her leading player are women.

by Anonymousreply 412/17/2012

^helming, not helping.

by Anonymousreply 512/17/2012

It wouldn't be the first time that an attractive woman who makes a fascistic film gets a free pass from the critics.

Again, the effectiveness of Ellis's trolling is that it's based on the truth.

by Anonymousreply 612/17/2012

Based on a sliver of truth. Ellis is one of the greatest trolls who ever lived.

11 dimensional chess?


He's not nearly smart enough for that.

by Anonymousreply 712/17/2012

Why apologize?


by Anonymousreply 812/18/2012

'trolling as performance art'? Closer to Yoko Ono's singing as performance art

by Anonymousreply 912/18/2012

I had to check the early morning bumps to see if BEE was posting them himself.

by Anonymousreply 1012/18/2012

I just read the whole apology, and I didn't realize that on page 4 he identified himself as a gay man. Is this the first time he's done this?

[quote]But they ultimately revealed a much more layered sexism that, I guess I thought as a gay man, I could get away with since my supposed vitriol about Bigelow was coming from another “oppressed” class.

by Anonymousreply 1112/18/2012

[quote]It wouldn't be the first time that an attractive woman who makes a fascistic film gets a free pass from the critics.

My understanding is they don't get info from the guy they're interrogating until they start treating him like a human being. This according to the NY Times review.

by Anonymousreply 1212/18/2012

He's tweeting himself right out of a career. He forgets that he lives in a town where Katherine Bigelow's dog would get a better table at Tower Bar than he ever could (And the dog is probably a better tipper and has better manners). For a guy who writes about the same dated situations over and over, he needs to focus on his own oeuvre and stop trying to make his name appear in the she context of real industry talents.

by Anonymousreply 1312/18/2012

How Torture Works

by Anonymousreply 1412/18/2012

[quote]Ellis took a kernel of truth - that Bomer would not be cast in the movie because he is gay - gave it an ugly dressing, and let the media do the rest of the work.

First of all, he never said that The Powers That Be would not cast Bomer because he's gay. He said that Matt Bomer The Actor was, as a person, [italic]too gay[/italic] to play the role. There's no "kernel of truth" in the idea that gay people can't play straight unless you're coming from a viewpoint of homophobia.

I'd also like to hear what you think the "kernel of truth" was in his comment that watching Glee was like stepping in puddle of HIV. Please, enlighten us.

That's not to say that he doesn't occasionally, tangentially sideswipe a good point, but to excuse it by implying that he's smart enough to be doing it intentionally as some sort of social experiment is, at best, misguided. And even if he is doing it intentionally, most decent people would be hard-pressed to justify the implicit acceptance and spread of homophobia that accompany his comments.

Having said all that, Bigelow is getting a pass for this movie, but I doubt it's because she's a woman. We live in a world where people think shows like 24 are the way things should be. Even if a man had made this movie, it would still be lauded. I am, however, very glad that BEE finally bit off more than he can chew.

by Anonymousreply 1512/18/2012

"It wouldn't be the first time that an attractive woman who makes a fascistic film gets a free pass from the critics"

why don't you list the many, many incidents of an "attractive woman" director getting a "free pass"?

by Anonymousreply 1612/18/2012

R16 asks an excellent question. There are so few female directors, certainly none at Bigelow's level of success in the US. I don't get that "oh they all get a free pass" slam. It makes no sense.

Attractive female director? Ida Lupino. No free pass for her, that's for sure. Leni Riefenstahl? Umm... Nazi!

by Anonymousreply 1712/18/2012

I'd take him a lot more seriously if he'd ever written a truly important book. But his whole writing career has amounted to little more than pumping out second-rate Joan Didion knockoffs.

by Anonymousreply 1812/18/2012

You're wrong about the first part, R15. He did say that Matt came off "totally gay" on White Collar, and he did make fun of Matt's marriage and call him a trophy-husband (which to me supports the rumor that this was personal feud), but he never actually said that Matt was [italic]too gay[/italic] to play the role.

[quote]Okay I'll say it. Matt Bomer isn't right for Christian Grey because he is openly gay. He's great for other roles but this is too big a game.

[quote]If you think Universal is going to hire an openly gay actor to star in the adaptation of the biggest novel of all time: YOU are ignorant..."

[quote]I like Matt Bomer. I think Matt Bomer is sexy and a good actor. Do I think he'll be discriminated against regarding 50 Shades of Grey? Yes.

[quote]Final word: there is no way in hell that the makers of "Fifty Shades of Grey" will hire an openly gay actor to play Christian Grey. Period.

Yes, there was additional ugliness and mockery of Bomer, but with those tweets above, he essentially told the truth. And everybody in Hollywood knows it.

So where did you get the idea that he said Matt was too gay to play the role? Oh, that's right, that's how the mainstream press reported it.

HuffPo: [bold]Matt Bomer Is Too Gay For 'Fifty Shades Of Grey,' Says Bret Easton Ellis[/bold]

Daily Mail: [bold]Writer Bret Easton Ellis slams Matt Bomer for being too 'openly gay' to star in Fifty Shades of Grey[/bold]

Newsday: [bold]Bret Easton Ellis says Matt Bomer is too gay for 'Fifty Shades of Grey'[/bold]

and E!'s headline is a doozy. [bold]"Bret Easton Ellis Calls Casting Gay Matt Bomer "Ludicrous"[/bold].

They reduced him to "Gay Matt Bomer."

If Ellis was playing 11 dimensional chess, he couldn't have had a better accomplice.

by Anonymousreply 1912/18/2012

My post @ r6 was a direct reference to Riefenstahl... one would hope that was communicated easily enough.

by Anonymousreply 2012/18/2012

Barbra Streisand and Sofia Coppola are nothing if not gorgeous. And Jane Campion's face could launch 1000 ships!!!

by Anonymousreply 2112/18/2012

R21 = really, really missing the point.

by Anonymousreply 2212/18/2012

Penny Marshall has 20 Vogue covers to her name!!!

by Anonymousreply 2312/18/2012

And rather than re-examining his point, R21 continues on the same tangent.

by Anonymousreply 2412/18/2012

Bret Easton Ellis is a dick.

by Anonymousreply 2512/18/2012

So, r19, you think that his "social experiment", if it was that, justified the resulting homophobia?

Regarding the tweets you quoted, are you being deliberately dense or are you just stupid? I realize that it's pointless arguing with a BEE fanboy, but don't insult our intelligence. The first tweet you quoted does in fact imply that Bomer is "too gay". You also conveniently forgot to quote these tweets:

[quote]I am NOT discriminating Matt Bomer because of his sexuality. Fifty Shades of Grey demands an actor that is genuinely into women. Get it?!? August 8, 2012 8:45 am via web Reply Retweet Favorite

[quote]Bret Easton Ellis @BretEastonEllis Bret Easton Ellis I think Matt Bomer is incredibly handsome and a good actor but I think he comes off totally gay in White Collar. And that is why no to CG...

And I'm sure there are others that you left out as well, but I'm also sure that you don't care about facts. No one is saying that he doesn't now and then say something that is true, but does it count if the message gets lost? Does it count if no one notices because they're too busy applauding his homophobia?

Finally, I'm waiting with bated breath to hear where the truth lay in his "puddle of HIV" comments. Please, do answer. I can't wait to hear what you could possibly have to say that doesn't revolve around excusing homophobia. "Haha, anything stereotypically gay or eff*eminate will give you HIV!! Haha! Because the gays all have AIDS!! Get it? Hahaha!" Fuck off, homophobe.

by Anonymousreply 2612/18/2012

First of all, you stupid tool, I never said the homophobia was justified. Stop trying to adjust my argument to suit your agenda. And the inference that he was "too gay" for the role is something that was articulated by the mainstream press, and, frankly, people like you. Ellis only implied it, but he never actually said it. You (and the media) are accomplishing Ellis's goal (which was revenge, not a social experiment) by articulating his tweets into the idea that an actor could be "too gay" to play a part. There's no particular reason for Ellis's tweets to have any power unless you give them power. You are the perfect tool.

As far as the HIV comment, it was a nasty, flippant, bitchy comment simply for the sake of making a nasty, flippant, bitchy comment. Trolling. It doesn't bother me because I don't give it any credence. But you, for some reason, need a misanthropic author to validate your lifestyle, so I'll let you deal with that on your own.

by Anonymousreply 2712/18/2012

So, OP, when are you gonna apologize for misspelling her first name?

by Anonymousreply 2812/18/2012

Katherine Bigelow is hot. I cannot believe this woman is 61 years old.

by Anonymousreply 2912/19/2012

She's hot, but that isn't why she gets work or is a good director.

by Anonymousreply 3012/19/2012

[quote]She's hot, but that isn't why she gets work or is a good director.

You must be really naive to think that her being hot didn't help her in her career... in Hollywood of all places.

by Anonymousreply 3112/19/2012

The New Republic on Bret Easton Ellis and Twitter

by Anonymousreply 3212/20/2012
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

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