Watching "The Boys in the Band" for the first time.

It's a period piece. But crucial to your education of gay culture. Surprised you waited so long to see it.

I'm surprised myself, R1. I can't think of any reasonable reason of why I waited so long.

Interesting film. One of the many significant things that stood out about the film for me was the Michael character. His college friend was visiting but once he found out that he wasn't coming he went to his closet and changed his sweater from what he was wearing to a purple one. Well, that wasn't subtle.

I also like the comfort that the Emory character had with Bernard, (the Black guy), and how he could drop the racial 'digs" and yet not come across offensive. A lot of small nuances in the film.

I hope you have the Special Anniversary dvd. It has a lot of great extras and discusses the historical significance.

Nope. Just YouTube and reading a bit more online about it. It's rather sad that 98% of the cast are dead and from...AIDS. I guess they suffered from the times. But, the comments in the linked thread were interesting to me. I didn't find the film offensive at all. I thought it was very sad in many ways. I guess there has been progress for we gay people, (it's certainly not in apartment living for anybody) since the film's introduction but I think it's still a relevant piece.

The movie comes off as an artifact of an age gone by. There is something nostalgic about the intensity of the relationships. There was an "us against the world" solidarity now mostly lost. And of course the poignancy of what lay around the corner -- HIV/AIDS -- an intrusion of reality. Surreal, unique.

It's a classic!

GOSSIP!

Cliff Gorman was a great guy - terrific, talented actor. The first time I met Cliff, I was blown away - how totally unlike Emory he is (Cliff was straight, FYI). But, forget the mincing voice, the mannerisms he did - with his head, his neck, are so spot-on, it's magical, and it's things like this which show you how good, and how much a REAL, TALENTED actor does to BECOME the character.

I never met Leonard Frey, but, someone I knew (and detested) was best friends with him, and said he was a real doll (in fact, the reason I'm here, right at this moment, is I'm watching an episode of The Mary Tyler Moore Show, with Leonard Frey (Ted Baxter's Famous Broadcaster's School. Hysterical), and I've not seen this (the film, not those documentary) in about 10 years, so, I wanted to take a look).

Here's a bit of gossip; when Frank Tarkington got divorced from his first wife (pre Kathy Lee), she sighted ONLY one reason; 'Robert La Torneaux.'

I'm not going to disparage Mr. Torneaux, but, aside from this film, his career in film was nil, whilst the way he actually earned his living was...more akin to his character, here - as the 'birthday present'

Anyone who's offended by this movie but watches [italic]Will & Grace[/italic] is a hypocrite.

[quote]There was an "us against the world" solidarity now mostly lost.

I agree with this. It's something that seemed as if it was becoming lost. But, with this Trump Administration and all that has been unleashed maybe that attitude will came back again.

To add to R7:

Although Cliff Gorman continued to work until his death, his performance in "Band" was so convincing that too many believed he couldn't possibly NOT be gay. Or even thought of because of that movie. So he lost a lot of work, including some A-list opportunities because Hollywood couldn't see him as a romantic leading man.

He's the greatest example of why so many great actors decided against taking gay roles, whether they themselves were gay or not.

For the original poster/posting. There are certain films that depict the life experiences of certain groups so well that they become timeless. BOYS IN THE BAND is timeless and does for gays, what A Raisin in the Sun does for Blacks. I'm older than you, and what surprised me was after recently seeing the film years after it first came out, I saw certain things in it that I didn't see when I first saw it. Of course, when I firest saw it I was still wrestling with my sexuality ...some things in the film went right over my head as I had no knowledge of what was being said like " Your lips are blue, you look like you've been rimming a snowman"...right over my head at the time...not a clue..LOL

But what resonated with me recently was the subtle message that gays were tired of the treatment and weren't going to take it anymore.Far from militant, but boldly frank lines such as "No, he's for Harold" implied a candor that was on the horizon. There were also scenes between the guests and the Washington visitor that implied that HE was in the wrong village and that they were circling him for a change.

I'm Black and found the relationship between Benard and Emory troublesome...not to mention Bernard's tendency to be relegated to stereotypical roles of serving wine and drinks throughout dinner AND being in charge of music and knowing about the dance they used to do...then the frequent use of the 'N' word and MIchael's obvious racist insinuations, "You now why Negroes have such big lips..." While Michael also displays his anti-Semitism towards Harold, it isn't as blatant as his remarks towards Benard. This may have been because the playwright, Mark Crowley, is a southerner and more accustomed to this language and behavior.

The Making of BITB is a great documentary on the film. It also sheds light on how tragically most of the cast died of AIDS and how surviving cast member Reuben Greene who played the Black character would not respond to efforts to contact him. There are cast photos and from my perspective, Reuben (Bernard) seems to be sitting slightly off or distant from the rest of the cast...seemed curious to me and again made me wonder if he felt uncomfortable in the part. The film, nonetheless, should be seen for its historical significance and the talent of all the actors. Some have said it is a gay Who's Afraid Of Virginia Wolf. ...Try the documentary...The Making of BITB.

[quote]Although Cliff Gorman continued to work until his death, his performance in "Band" was so convincing that too many believed he couldn't possibly NOT be gay. Or even thought of because of that movie. So he lost a lot of work, including some A-list opportunities because Hollywood couldn't see him as a romantic leading man.

His character in [italic]All That Jazz[/italic] called Joe Gideon a f@ggot in jest to prove he was the opposite of Emory.

His character in All That Jazz was based on Lenny Bruce, of course.

We met Mr LaTorneaux in LA when we were very very young and living ina a tiny studio in Santa Monica.... he was very nice to us, we trained at Gold's Gym together and also performed many un-natural 'acts' with each other!

And we were both entertaining 'generou$ gentlemen' at the same time!

Sadly, we lost touch with him and read that he perspired from drugs (aka "AID$)

[quote]I'm Black and found the relationship between Benard and Emory troublesome...not to mention Bernard's tendency to be relegated to stereotypical roles of serving wine and drinks throughout dinner AND being in charge of music and knowing about the dance they used to do...then the frequent use of the 'N' word and MIchael's obvious racist insinuations, "You now why Negroes have such big lips..." While Michael also displays his anti-Semitism towards Harold, it isn't as blatant as his remarks towards Benard. This may have been because the playwright, Mark Crowley, is a southerner and more accustomed to this language and behavior.

Michael was also a Southerner who grew up in Mississippi. One wonders if this is why Reuben Greene has tried to distance himself from it; my first guess was religious reasons. But they did get called out on it and someone accused Reuben of being an Uncle Tom for putting up with it.

The movie also downplayed Michael and Donald's names being parallel to Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, which the play acknowledged. I don't know whether Disney leaned on Cinema Center to take that out (yet the Mouseketeer hats could stay in [italic]The Rocky Horror Picture Show[/italic]?) or if they even shot it at all and just cut it for time and because America still wasn't ready for the mental image of a mouse and a duck getting busy.

[quote]I'm Black and found the relationship between Benard and Emory troublesome...not to mention Bernard's tendency to be relegated to stereotypical roles of serving wine and drinks throughout dinner...

HA! I missed that! I caught the music reference though and that made me go "hmm...". I thought that Bernard gave a plausible explanation of why he allowed Emory to speak to him as he did--and that made me personally say "hmm?", again. But, I took their relationship more as he never, or would ever, view Bernard in such a way and basically he was making a mockery of those times in Black history. Does that make sense?

[quote]But what resonated with me recently was the subtle message that gays were tired of the treatment and weren't going to take it anymore.Far from militant,...

I didn't get that at all. I got that they pretty much accepted who they were--except Michael, but if all of them weren't gay that would be the preference.

[quote]Although Cliff Gorman continued to work until his death, his performance in "Band" was so convincing that too many believed he couldn't possibly NOT be gay. Or even thought of because of that movie. So he lost a lot of work...

That's sad. That was the time. Maybe that issue has gotten a "wee" better? A really small "wee"? Out gay actors and performers can get work. Or, maybe the few that I'm aware of doesn't mean that there has been a significant change?

Gorman won a Tony for his portrayal of Lenny Bruce. For the film version they chose Dustin Hoffman possibly because of the BITB stigma which was still clinging to Gorman.

Leonard Frey got plenty of work after this movie; he didn't become a star, but among other things he did [italic]Fiddler on the Roof[/italic] on screen, he did a [italic]Mary Tyler Moore Show[/italic] guest appearance, he did [italic]Best of the West[/italic], Joel Higgins' last show before becoming Ricky Schroder's dad on [italic]Silver Spoons[/italic], and even before he died he did a Disney Sunday Movie called [italic]Fuzzbucket[/italic]. It couldn't have hurt his career that badly.

[quote] Gorman won a Tony for his portrayal of Lenny Bruce. For the film version they chose Dustin Hoffman possibly because of the BITB stigma which was still clinging to Gorman.

Dustin Hoffman also had a huge string of critically acclaimed hits by 1974.

They also offered the part of Lenny to Neil Diamond. WTF?

[quote] They also offered the part of Lenny to Neil Diamond. WTF?

I HAAAAAAAAAFFFFFF NO SON-N-N-N-NNNN!!!!!!!

Any gay who is offended by the characters in the movie are in denial- every single one of them represents someone in the gay community- then, today and tomorrow....the ultra campy queen, the guilt ridden homo, the good looking one who cheats on his lover, the token black gentle queen, the sharp tongued ugly queen, the hustler, the intellectual, low key college educated man, ....did I leave anyone out?- There are stereotypes in every aspect of society. So deal with it. Oh yeah- i omitted Maude Adams.

[quote]For the film version they chose Dustin Hoffman possibly because of the BITB stigma which was still clinging to Gorman.

Or possibly because Hoffman was at the height of his popularity and movie stardom, and no one knew who Cliff Gorman was.

Since when was Neil Diamond a top box office draw?

What's worse, being stereotyped or being completely invisible?

R12 "His character in All That Jazz called Joe Gideon a f@ggot in jest to prove he was the opposite of Emory."

Not really. Gorman was playing a version of Lenny Bruce. Gorman played Bruce on Bway, but Dustin Hoffman was given the role when Fosse directed the movie. It's a very thinly veiled account of that in All That Jazz. So Gorman's character said that because it was the way Lenny Bruce spoke.

No, Gorman is playing the ACTOR playing Lenny Bruce in the movie. So he is not Lenny while sitting next to Joe Gideon in the hospital.

So he's playing Dustin Hoffman (the same year Hoffman ended up beating Roy Scheider for the Best Actor Oscar) as payback for Dustin Hoffman playing [italic]Lenny[/italic] on screen instead of him.

[quote]Here's a bit of gossip; when Frank Tarkington got divorced from his first wife (pre Kathy Lee), she sighted ONLY one reason; 'Robert La Torneaux.'

Oh, DEAR!

FRAN Tarkenton (not "Frank," not "Tarkington") was never married to KATHIE (not Kathy.) She was married to FRANK GIFFORD, hence HER LAST NAME.

Gorman and his wife took Robert La Tourneaux in when he was homeless and dying of AIDS. They cared for him for the rest of his life.

Or, had a threesome...

Trivia for you fans of Llanview - (and I know there are at least a few here).

Laurence Luckinbill, who played Kenneth, was one of the three straight actors cast. He was married to Robin Strasser when making Boys. He later divorced Strasser and married Lucie Arnaz. So how's that for DL faves degrees of separation!

More trivia...

Robert La Tourneaux had an affair with Christopher Walken who had an affair with Robert Wagner...

I know everyone already knew that. BUT, this is what I did not know... There was this series called "Died Too Young" and Natalie Wood was one of the features. Natalie Wood's biographer wrote that after marrying Robert Wagner the first time that sometime during their marriage that she walked into a room and found him in flagrante with another man. That's why she divorced him. When she decided to remarry him, her sister, (Lana Wood, who was in the program too), couldn't understand why she would remarry him and Natalie's response was; "It's better to deal with the devil that you know than the devil you don't know."

I never knew that it was confirmed that RJ was gay/bisexual or whatever...

I bought the DVD of Lenny some time ago. I found it unwatchable.

I remember all the fuss about it at the time when I was too young to see it.

I've always thought Hoffman was over-rated - but whether Gorman could have saved it - I doubt it.

[R16] Well, again, it took years later for me to see this "circling the Washington visitor" Just very subtle to me...

Yes, they accepted one another because the party was sort of a tribal meeting...but I noticed when the guy from DC apologizes for intruding, Hank's lover gets up and walks away...the body language was sort of "yeah, right"...then when the DC visitor helps himself to another drink finishes it and then gestures to leave Donald pours him another drink...the look Donald gives him is almost like the spider saying "come into my parlor said the spider to the fly" LOL I may be projecting...these incidents just seemed to pop out at me recently.

Yes, Emory seems to have affection for Benard beyond his racial remarks, when he corrects Benard when Benard is on the phone and he says "this is Francine's boy"' Emory corrects him by saying "son, Not boy.." But the blunt racial remarks toward Benard were over the top when you compare Michael's comment to Harold about "being a Jew" He does use the degrading, insulting "K" term like he uses the "N" word when addressing Bernard....just an observation

I meant to say that Michael DOESN'T use "K" word lie he uses the "N" word...sorry about that

r30s photo brings back memories....

[quote]Yes, they accepted one another because the party was sort of a tribal meeting...but I noticed when the guy from DC apologizes for intruding, Hank's lover gets up and walks away...

In my opinion, Larry was jealous. What I got from that relationship is that although Larry had cheated in the past, and could possibly cheat in the future, he really did not want or plan to. But, he did not like people telling him what to do and making decisions for him. Hank's accusing him of cheating always kept a safe wall for him and avoided him committing to Hank. Therefore, if ever he did make a mistake and cheat, and Hank would walk away, then Larry would just chalk it up as "It was expected and I warned him", and he would have no guilt. I look at it that he was afraid of being hurt. Hurting Hank and therefore hurting himself. So, when he sensed the Washington guy had some sort of attraction or magnetism toward Hank and that he could be Hank's type, he became jealous because the two were having problems and Hank could leave.

It is a FIFTY-year-old story.

I love the apartment set. It looks so cozy with lots of interesting spaces.

I first saw the film when I was 21 in '78 at The Silver Screen in Atlanta, a long gone theater that showed old Hollywood and foreign films and various cult films from the 60s and early 70s. A month or two later, I saw him in the Jill Clayburgh film "An Unmarried Woman," in which he played the macho artist she had an affair with after her divorce. I didn't even realize it was Cliff Gorman until the credits rolled; in fact, as the movie ended I was wondering how I had missed the guy that played Emory. He didn't even look that much like Emory because his hair was longer and he had a beard, and his affect and voice was entirely different. I was later telling a friend from college about this and she laughed her best drama major laugh and said, "Well, he's an actor, you know."

I'm not sure playing the part of Emory hurt his career that much. I thought it was more that he was seen much more as a theater actor than a film actor, which at that time meant if you were in films, your parts tended to be small rather than starring roles.

There are long sections of the movie that are hard to watch but it doesn't stop me dipping in from time to time on YouTube where it is available. There's still something wonderful about it.

Harold's entrance line is still one of the best entrances in film.

I 'm the one who wrote the reply about Gorman not being able to have as successful a career. There was an extensive article written about him after his death, (New York Magazine, maybe?). A lot of people were interviewed including his wife. And it was either her and/or some other close friend that discussed Gorman's frustration regarding his career and that specific role. He believed it held him back.

Remember, Gorman had already played the role on stage for a couple years before they made the movie. He was highly identified in NY and LA with that role.

As has already been stated Frey got Motel in the big film roadshow Fiddler on the Roof. The world at large would know him as Motel. They probably figured 99% of the movie audience had never seen BITB.

I saw the movie Fiddler as a boy so many years later when I saw Band it was hard to believe it was the same actor.

The same for Gorman who I first saw in Lenny. One of the greats of the era and for some reason I don't believe it was Band that held him back.

[R43] Yes, what injustice about Gorman' career! A tremendous actor. I read somewhere when there is an extreme character such as Emory, a really talented actor will play the extreme, but also portray the not so extreme. Emory/Gorman was campy and sharp-tongued, but he was also sadly serious when exposing his crush/love for the dentist AND his tearful recollection of how everyone "laughed at his funny secret"; the scene was heart-wrenching, there was nothing campy about the scene. [R37] Larry! Yes! thanks for reminding of the character's name, and how handsome the actor was...I agree that Larry was uncharacteristically jealous of the connection Hank and the Washington visitor (can't remember the character's name) had. And perhaps it was more about that than giving him the air and walking off.

One nit-picky question I've always had about the film: it appears to be summertime-- Emory is wearing shorts and Donald is wearing a short sleeved shirt and sweating.

Yet Michael is wearing a cashmere sweater and a scarf.

Why isn't he overheated?

The apartment in the film was actress Tammy Grimes; she lent it to friend Mart Crowley for the filmong.

Dominick Dunne was in love with Frederick Combs (Donald), he of the scrumptuos ass in the beginning.

Saw this in the Castro Theatre (SF) a few years back; big screen lets you see a few details that are missed in the DVD, like Michael's last name on the (Paul Stewart) receipt. (It's Connolly).

Author Edmund White tricked with Mart Crowley and said he one of the biggest dicks ever. (And consedering the hundreds of men White has slept with, that is saying something.)

Also saw the premiere of "The Men From The Boys" a few years ago. It's the sequel to Boys in the Band, and it fills us in on what happened to the characters since (Larry is dead, Bernard is married to a woman, Michael is in AA, Harold is HIV+)

[quote]Why isn't he overheated?

It was VICUNA!!!

"... and the same type of men exist."

Just join a gay men's choir.

Robby, Emory, Emory, Robby...

"Here's a bit of gossip; when Frank Tarkington got divorced from his first wife (pre Kathy Lee), she sighted ONLY one reason; 'Robert La Torneaux.'"

Are you talking about Frank GIFFORD?!

Yes, Gifford

What I remember most about Boys In The Band is the dialogue. I've seen Casablanca, Sunset Boulevard and All About Eve, and this film tops them all for witty writing. People could post for days in this thread with the catty comments made in BITB.

I believe #51...Gifford heavily cruised me once- he was walking with a pretty blonde woman but he shot me an interested glare- I was very flattered- he was very tall and handsome as fuck.

"Mary, takes a fairy to make something pretty..." R45 is right. Gorman's take on the Delbert Botts DDS story was so beautiful and a a really nice surprise after an hour of high camp swishing before it. He breaks your heart.

"Alan" was the D.C. chum, by the way. The never seen Justin Stewart was the third leg of that roommate triangle from college.

"Alan McCarthy and hold the mayo..."

Holy fuck, r30... that's Robert LaTourneaux? that was one nice hot whore.

I'd still like to see an all-male "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?". George and Martin?

Any truth to the rumors Robert LaT. had affairs with other sports stars, like Kareem Ahmed Jabbar, causing tension with his Cosby Show actress wife Phylicia?

Robert La T used to openly advertise his escort services in either The Advocate or Frontiers back in the 80s.

If I remember correctly, Robert Loggia was supposed to play Emory in the off-Broadway play. However, either he couldn't give the performance that the director wanted or he just decided to quit.]

Mart Crowley started in show business as Natalie Wood's personal assistant. He also was the executive producer for Wagner's series, HART TO HART

R51, see R28

[quote]the token black gentle queen

I didn't see him as a queen at all. He was one of the few likable characters in the movie and the actor gave a rather subtle and dignified performance.

[quote]Sadly, we lost touch with him and read that he perspired from drugs (aka "AID$)

Erna, when will you learn? To die is to EXPIRE. "Perspire" refers to sweating, which I'm sure is not what you meant

[quote]The apartment in the film was actress Tammy Grimes; she lent it to friend Mart Crowley for the filmong.

Yes and no. The scenes on the terrace were shot at Grimes apartment. But the interiors were mostly shot on a soundstage set. Grimes' apartment was too small to accommodate the actors, the cameras and the crew and provide Friedkin with the camera movement and angles he wanted. But since the cast is often seen going back and forth between the interior and the terrace, the soundstage set was largely a replica of Grimes apartment to provide continuity.

I'm 54 years old and gay as a goose, and I find the film as well as the play unwatchable. Dreck, and not the fun kind.

[quote]A month or two later, I saw him in the Jill Clayburgh film "An Unmarried Woman," in which he played the macho artist she had an affair with after her divorce. I didn't even realize it was Cliff Gorman until the credits rolled; in fact, as the movie ended I was wondering how I had missed the guy that played Emory. He didn't even look that much like Emory because his hair was longer and he had a beard, and his affect and voice was entirely different.

I never noticed his beard in An Unmarried Woman.

I cannot emphasize enough how much I detest The Boys In The Band, how traumatizing it was for me as a young gay man to watch it (that's what I am??????). I will hate, hate, hate it until the day I die.

About the boys

I t doesn't sound like he was even a high class whore

One thing I noticed the last time I watched it - someone corrects someone's grammar - at a totally inappropriate moment.

I thought of DL & then wondered if it is in fact what a certain sort of gay does do IN REAL LIFE.

So many people speak and write incorrectly R71, including myself, I wonder if anyone even notices and appreciates such corrections.

DLers don't do it NEARLY as much as they used to.

Grammar trolls were like the DL SS when I first came here.

Saw this in the Castro Theatre (SF) a few years back; big screen lets you see a few details that are missed in the DVD, like Michael's last name on the (Paul Stewart) receipt. (It's Connolly).

oh dear, the details couldn't have been that clear

It's a clear day today

There was a new production here in the UK which I saw in London a few months ago. It was fantastic - great set with all those movie star posters and super cast. Mark Gatiss as Harold, his real-life husband Ian Hallard as Michael, dishy Daniel Boys as Donald and a very sexy cowboy - Jack Derges. Its a very demanding play to stage, with lots of 'business' - the cast have to eat lasange and salad and drink a lot of whatever is in all those bottles. I then had to go back to the original dvd to see how they staged it, and its basically the same. Fascinating to read that 5 of the guys died of Aids related illnesses, the dvd had interviews (from 2008) with two of the survivors - Luckinbill and the straight guy. The black guy indeed seems to have vanished off the scene.

Gorman had a longer career, playing Lenny on stage, but of course Hoffman got the film. Do actors like him feel guilty taking roles from the actor who created it on stage? Gorman was also a swishy gay (who came to a sticky end) in the 1969 film Justine - a hollywood disaster, though Anouk Aimee, young Michael York and Dirk Bogarde are easy on the eye,

The revived UK cast.

[quote]The revived UK cast.

I think I'll pass.

Just the thought of all those fake American accents and failed attempts at gay American dry wit.

Its finished now dear, so you happily ignore it. But I was in the front row, and it was almost like being on stage with them.

Odd to think so many of the original cast died but Mart Crowley still here in his 80s ....

Is there any hidden meaning to the lasange? It seems to have some type of focus.

Curious, did they do it as a period piece? Or try and update the references?

I do recall there was a sequel of sorts but I think it's considered somewhat unfortunate.

Ha ha. lasagne of course ! They must have had a fresh lot for each performance, probably microwaved,

They must have got sick of it by the end of the run, plus all the fake booze.

[quote]They must have got sick of it by the end of the run

The lasagna or the show?

Imagine going through all that emotion every single night for months on end.

& then they took it to London and shit.

[quote]Imagine going through all that emotion every single night for months on end.

Uhm... that's their job? And. there would be thousands more than willing to take their place?

I like the fashion show segment.

R32 That's a great story. I had heard it a few times, (here and other places), but everything I read never revealed the identity of the person with Wagner when Natalie Wood walked in. It also wasn't specified whether it was a man or a woman. Only that Lana knew the truth and planned to tell it or write it in a book someday, and also that Wagner had been giving Lana hush money for many years.

Is it fairly certain it was La Tourneaux?

I was watching it with some gay ex-roommates who insisted I turned it off after 45 minutes. They couldn't deal with this, but they subjected me to that Showtime show with an anti-gay slur in its name that does everything it can to make gay sex look sleazy and loveless, which I couldn't stand then or now. If gays should be offended by anything, it's TV insisting we settle for less from ourselves and give into a consumer-driven, hook-up-driven, top-down-dictated view of gay life rather than a grassroots, community-driven, relationship-driven view of gay life.

R84, that's just called being a professional.

Preach it, r88.

Thanks, OP. I'm 63, saw the film when it came out and recognized the stereotypes and issues among the older gay men around me. I was "nurtured" by a much older group, which means I was abused while thinking I was grown up. The hustler thing, the "fresh meat" talk, the Catholic guilt, the mother stuff, the bitchiness, the hopelessness of the homely and prissy and pissy, the alcoholism, the cultural references, the occasional wit, the underlying brotherhood and sisterhood, the decency, the decor. It all was rather true. Truish.

Now tell me how much has changed.

Alter the cultural references. Push the desperation back behind facades of money, activity and external success. Pose with "we're legal and accepted" complacency. Drop in the hydrogen bomb of AIDS and the "no big deal" attitude of post-AIDS people who don't know or care what we've lost. Add younger gay people who are maturing in a cynical, consumer/marketing-driven society where lack of education and lack of connection to the larger culture beyond brand names result in entitled dullards and fearful permanent children. Mix with at least 30 latter-day drugs and here we are.

Oh, except depth of friendships, because in a virtual, social-media world everything is transactional and boredom is a risk after 15 seconds.

Pour me a drink, Michael, and tell me all about it.

God, the booze, the drugs. The more things change . . .

[quote]Is it fairly certain it was La Tourneaux?

The first time couldn't have been La Tourneaux, R87. He was a mere child. But, according to Natalie's biographer, who stated quite bluntly, it was a man. She never revealed, (at least in that program), who the man was. La Tourneaux, (according to him) dated Christopher Walken. The rumor has always been that, on the night of her death, Natalie walked in on Christoper Walken and RJ together.

Lana Wood never directly said that RJ was with another man on that program. However, her spiel appeared directly after the biographer's revelation.

But, according to Natalie's biographer and a close friend who also appeared in that program, Natalie was definitely not a nun herself. She had participated in orgies and whatever else. So, it's reasonable that she could have been acceptable of RJ's proclivities, (for lack of a better word), and loved him for who he really is. My surprise was that it was the very first time that I had heard/read confirmation that Robert Wagner is indeed bisexual/gay.

We often hear the closet kills. Can this be extended to spouses of the closeted?

Some queen on Home Theater Forum condemned it and claimed it kept him closeted for years. Yet he trashed [italic]The Wizard of Oz[/italic] and defended Eminem. I think it's the film's critics who have self-loathing issues.

Well stated, R91.

It's a god-damn laugh riot!

[quote] It's a god-damn laugh riot!

I know; it's funny but it doesn't have the sitcom-style "everybody's happy and forgiven at the end" resolution. And it makes you wonder why so many subsequent gay films seem so joyless. At least here the tonal shift towards the end is dramatically justified by the situation. And the end is a call to let go of the self-hatred and shame that made Michael a rageaholic fucked up by Catholicism, with the glamour of Hollywood as his only solace growing up in a racist homophobic small Mississippi town.

R30, this photo triggered a long-ago memory: as a young NYC gayling in the early '70s, I was part of a group of gainfully unemployed friends who, on summer weekdays, occasionally made the long trek by subway and bus to the then-gay beach at Riis Park in Queens - affectionately known, in the parlance of the time, as Screech Beach. On one such day, I found myself a mere beach blanket away from Bob La Tourneaux, who was every bit as lucsious as his photo. No bingo, alas, though he was lovely to look at.

[quote]If gays should be offended by anything, it's TV insisting we settle for less from ourselves and give into a consumer-driven, hook-up-driven, top-down-dictated view of gay life rather than a grassroots, community-driven, relationship-driven view of gay life.

We have a long way to go. We're so quick and in such a need to label somebody or something. Why isn't it possible to just acknowledge that certain people come together for whatever reasons? Is it an irrational possibility to think that a man who is heterosexual could fall in love with a particular man, and have a relationship, and yet have/had no interest in other male? I believe that someone who is gay could indeed fall in love with a particular woman and have a healthy sexual relationship, but have not a mustard seed of interest in any other woman. Or, you're simply attracted to and like your same sex.

That's what gets me about the Aaron Hernandez story. It makes sense to me that he had a male lover. He was young, A LOT of problems and stress,etc! So, becoming involved with someone that could empathize with him, be there for him, etc does not necessarily make him bisexual or gay. He just found a soul mate.

In my opinion, Michael hated himself because he was gay. He hated Alan, (The Washington DC visitor), because he was all that he wanted to be and never would be. Imagine the tough life that Emory faced because of his effeminacy--even from the gay community? Bernard being Black and gay--unless you are Black you have no idea of how a very hard situation is harder. On and on... For those critics who say the play is dated and no longer relevant I simply don't understand their criticisms.

Between that movie and Larry Kramer's "F*ggots," I was truly scared and depressed about being gay and turning into one of those people.

The beginning - most of them seem to be having fun lives.

"I was in the front row, and it was almost like being on stage with them. " Funny how that works.

[R91] Great commentary! [R100] I think you are right on many levels, but what our species needs for security sake is to have 'tribes' to cling to in desperate times...being a member of the human family is just too hard for some to embrace, probably because being human is so flawed and filled with contradictions. Just look at our current political climate...Trump has led the way with respect to reclaiming our pre-scientific past and tribes. Even the current PM of Britain said something to the effect that,"if you are a citizen of the world, you are nowhere."

[R100] Have you seen BIG EDEN an interesting gay-themed film...very good with a unique, but revealing a very intense relationship between a gay man and a heterosexual man.I recommend it.

For all the postings, I can see how BITB could be overwhelming and discourage some from coming out, but there is also a camaraderie among the men, in spite of ripping one another apart...they part or end the evening knowing they are family/friends..before Harold leaves, he tells Michael, "Call you tomorrow." It also presents a candid look at vulnerability, self-loathing and the violence that occurs within groups ie black-on-black crime which Mayor Giuliani declared was a flawed racial trait...all groups will turn on one another if they see no hope...it's a misplaced emotion. How anyone could watch Michael disintegrate as a human being and not make a personal commitment to never contribute to another human's disintegration is beyond me. BTW, in Michael's collapse..."If only we didn't hate ourselves so..." Believe it or not, I had the very same words said to me by a childhood friend in a moment of desperation, only she was talking about being Black...and she was brought up in privilege, with European boarding schools. It always amazes me how people dismiss someone's pain or self-loathing with 'get over yourself.' while you always want to encourage people to move forward, dismissing their pain is too callous

Of course Wagner was bisexual - thats how he got on in Hollywood, being close to Spencer Tracy and Clifton Webb and others. His biography while not going into details, has it all there in the subtext -his friendships as a golf caddy with the likes of Cooper, Astaire, Gable etc.and he was well placed to know them all, as well as going to school with Norma Shearer' son, and dating Gloria Swanson's daughter, and then there was Barbara Stanwyck .... he and Natalie were pals with Mart Crowley for years, and Mart was later given production credits on Wagner's tv shows, which he must have worked hard at. Jill St John obviously knew the score, as did Natalie, when she hooked up with RJ. His recent book on all the great female stars he knew is actually a good read on the golden years of Hollywood, but it seems he knew a lot of the male stars as well .....

It was, and is, a slice of realism. I think this is what troubles many gay men even now. We have come a long way in acceptance from straight people but how do we really feel about ourselves? What the movie does so well is focusing on the inner fears and anxieties of gay men. I don't think these fears have gone away either. The projection of our insecurities onto one another still happens. These days gay men don't want to focus on these realities, we like to present a happy, adjusted and fluffy image....even when it's not really the case.

R91 you are spot on the money I agree with you totally. It's so refreshing to hear some honesty in this fucked up consumer society we now live in. Unfortunatelyou gay men are the biggest suckered for media culture and mindnunbind consumerism. It fills a void I guess.

In the documentary William Friedkin says the actor who played Bernard disappeared and no one ever heard from him again. A simple search on the references cited on his Wikipedia shows he's very much alive and is an acting teacher.

So that makes three surviving cast members.

[quote]In the documentary William Friedkin says the actor who played Bernard disappeared and no one ever heard from him again. A simple search on the references cited on his Wikipedia shows he's very much alive and is an acting teacher.

Yes and look further and you'll find interviews and things. NOT gay.

[quote] I don't think these fears have gone away either.

Decades of persecution doesn't go away overnight. Just ask Black people.

Does anyone else remember when it was chic to have the "gay" friend. Some dinner parties were more like the zoo. "Come to dinner to meet and see the gay!" It's the same with gay marriage. We're hit from all sides. You have the heterosexual community who are more welcoming of gay couples and families but you still have that zoo mentality. Then you have the gay community itself who many feel that a monogamous (or attempts at it) long lasting relationship is an impossibility. We still have a LONG ways to go before there is full acceptance. When seeing a happily married gay couple no longer causes a snicker within the community or when a man says my husband and no one flinches or pause even a millisecond.

[quote]Unfortunatelyou gay men are the biggest suckered for media culture and mindnunbind consumerism. It fills a void I guess.

Until very recently what more were we allowed to have?

[quote]For all the postings, I can see how BITB could be overwhelming and discourage some from coming out, but there is also a camaraderie among the men, in spite of ripping one another apart...they part or end the evening knowing they are family/friends.

We really only have each other...

[quote]Then you have the gay community itself who many feel that a monogamous (or attempts at it) long lasting relationship is an impossibility.

That was the problem of Larry. Or, was it fear?

[quote]For all the postings, I can see how BITB could be overwhelming and discourage some from coming out

It really shouldn't. Do you know how fucked up heterosexuals are?

La Tourneux's life sounds tragic. Becoming a broke hustler. He claimed than one of his married bi conquests was Christopher Walken. Do we believe him?z

[quote]Bernard is an African-American, who still pines for the wealthy white boy in the house where his mother worked as a maid.

I forgot this issue. Someone even posed this question on my FB early this morning; "Why are black gay men so concerned with why racist white gays won't date them?"

I should point out that we don't know if Bernard's interest was racist or that Bernard was even seeking some sort of validation if he became involved with a White man--although he's the ONLY Black (and serving, as noted by someone earlier at the party)

Reuben Greene, today...

[quote]La Tourneux's life sounds tragic. Becoming a broke hustler. He claimed than one of his married bi conquests was Christopher Walken. Do we believe him?

Why shouldn't we believe him? Rock Hudson was married. Anthony Perkins was married and had children too. Both men were as gay as the sky is blue.

People marry for all sorts of reasons and it doesn't have to mean that love and devotion did not exist. We have no idea of how Perkins kids were conceived. People can be pretty inventive. Besides, whoever said that gay men were incapable of having sex with women?

R88 is my future husband

The one thing that I think would be different now is that Alan wouldn't have pretended to be hetero. I'm now convinced that Crowley meant him to be deeply closeted--Alan's choices (to stick around and have another drink) and the structure of the play only make sense if Alan's closeted--and peeking out.

After all, it's not *The Boys in the Band and Audience Member." They're all in the band--including the one pretending not to be--it's right there in the title.

You look like you've been rimming a snowman.

Wow r114 that's news!

[R114] Are you sure that's Greene? If so he's aged very well...I sort of got the impression he died. He was supposedly a model with no real acting experience.

I'm not that concerned about white guys not wanting to date me. But gay culture isn't that different from white heterosexual culture as far as concepts for what is desirable or beautiful...European...wells up again. Yes, validation could be an issue...Madison Ave's Marlboro Man strikes again...the epitome of male beauty...and don't forget Rock Hudson...the flip side was the obsession with the size of the black penis...what a nuisance white guys were with their gleeful flirtations based on that rumor.

As I've said before I was young and dumb and avoided black gay men because I thought somewhere in my idiocy that they'd go to my hometown and blow the whistle on me...I deeply regret that now...and I'm certain I've missed an opportunity to be with a smart black gay man...Now I think black men and the diversity of their looks and beauty is wonderful

One last BITB question who thinks that Washingtonian, Alan McCarthy, was actually gay? Mart said that he told the actor that it was his responsibility to make half the audience think he was gay the other half, heterosexual...I'm going with gay. I wonder what Jackie O thought, she was seen in the audience in the NYC theater.

You know Edward Albee didn't like the play...thought it was degrading...wouldn't invest. He retracted his opinions later.

I think Freidkin was the right choice as Director. He had a sense of visceral realism that is perfect. He is an interesting guy ...even if his facts are often dubious.

Great to read you [R91].

There was a story that Marlene Dietrich went to see the Broadway play and for a while "adopted" the cast and started turning up backstage with advice, soup, etc. Once she realized they weren't the tortured, unhappy people they portrayed on stage and didn't need to be taken care of she lost interest.

Wow, thank you DL

Had seen this about 8 years ago when I was figuring out I was gay, it completely messed with my head because everyone seemed so unhappy and miserable and stuck with complete outsider status.

Rewatched it on YT after seeing this thread and had a completely different reaction.

Really well done and poignant, makes most of its points without being overly heavy handed. Bittersweet in that none of them seemed the least bit happy, but in many ways they are more together than lots of guys I know in 2017.

Seems clear that "Queer As Folk" was more than a bit inspired by this (that show wound up being a soap opera in the U.S. version, but some themes are the same and degrees of masc/femme, etc.

Amazingly Emory aside, the guys are more representative of the masc/femme spectrum than most of what's on TV in 2017.

Finally, I think Allen from DC wasn't sure himself R120. I think he was bi-- he'd had a fling with a guy he had a major crush on in college, as per Michael, but had repressed that side of himself. Seeing Hank threw him for a loop, because Hank was a straight acting guy who had a male lover. When he beat up Emory, he was trying to beat that side of himself out, and it was clear that he associated homosexuality with femme fey men like Emory.

Yeah, I was an English major.

I was the same. I saw it when I was about 18 and felt very depressed by it. Didn't get the humor at all.

Saw it more recently and laughed so much.

Thanks for that R125

I was 20, but same reaction, like "shit, am I going to be one of these guys, I don't want to be any of them!"

Now I know better.

It's a great period piece and, at the very least, taught me as a gayling what kind of gay guy to avoid. I still mutter "Beware the hostile fag..." to myself from time to time when I run into one of "them".

Thank God I met plenty of the Other along the way too.

When BITB the play opened in New York in 1968, it took the city by storm. There had NEVER been a play about gay men and gay life before. It was a huge hit, and I've always been grateful that the movie was made with the original cast, which I saw in 1970.

At the time I thought it was searing and honest, however many unattractive elements, particularly the alcohol. I still believe this. This is not an easy play to watch.

Since then, I played Michael in a threadbare but sincere production Off Off Broadway in NYC. (Michael is a thankless role who holds the play together. Act your ass off; the audience still hates you. LOL)

Because of unavailable actors, during the 4-week performance schedule, we had a different actor playing Donald each week. The most challenging one was a guy who had done it in a production at Brooklyn College, who told me that one night, as part of their "rehearsal process," the cast rehearsed the play at the apartment of the man playing Michael, where he said they actually consumed the same amounts of alcohol as in the script! Yikes!

I used to know NY actor Ed Zang, who understudied Harold in the original production. He said that Michael was the author Mart Crowley and Harold was based on an ex, a choreographer named Howard Jeffrey, who choreographed the flop musical, "Georgy." Ed saw them seated together at the opening cast party, at the Oak Bar at the Plaza. Propped above them was a photograph of the two of them in a silver frame, with the inscription, "Can you find it in your heart to forgive me?"

Ed explained this was the inscription on the framed photo Michael gives Harold in the play. (In the play, the inscription is mentioned but never explained. When Crowley got drunk and hurt others, which happened frequently, he would send telegrams with this plea the next day.)

I met someone in L.A. years ago, who said Crowley used to live in the same apartment complex, and who said that Crowley constantly carried a notebook, in which he wrote down all the funny lines he heard.

(Sad, that none of Crowley's later plays were ever as good. I saw "The Men From the Boys" in L.A. years ago, and it really was a mess. Larry's funeral is over, Michael is now sober in AA, and there's a subplot with a younger hustler. There had been a previous production in San Francisco, seen by a friend of mine, where Larry's ghost wandered around.)

New York has changed tremendously since BITB was filmed. I feel sad seeing the old Doubleday on Fifth Avenue, now long gone. In fact, New York is no longer a particularly gay city. There just aren't that many of us left there. Which makes BITB all the more heartrending.

Thanks, R128, that's great, especially about the inscription.

We could go through all the DL threads and construct a pretty funny "Boys..."esque play if you ask me. The cunty stuff is there too if we need it. But also some heart -- just like the original had or it would've been unbearable.

[quote] I feel sad seeing the old Doubleday on Fifth Avenue, now long gone.

I loved that place too. It was somewhere I'd always go when I first got to NYC. Remember there was another one few blocks down for some reason

[quote] In fact, New York is no longer a particularly gay city. There just aren't that many of us left there.

Gurl, I don't think so. Gays keep being born remember. It's as gay as ever.

Gurl, I was just there for a week.

There used to be so many gay men there, it seemed I locked eyes with lots of them whenever I walked in a sidewalk.

And I am a lot older, but I didn't see any man looking at other men. Everyone's engrossed in their phones. Everywhere.

R127 -

That is one of my favorite lines in the whole movie!!

"Beware the hostile fag. When he's sober, he's dangerous. When he drinks, he's lethal."

#2: "Who IS she? Who WAS she? Who does she hope to be?"

#3: Emory's catch phrase - "Oh Mary, don't ask."

[R124] Thanks! I thought he was gay (or closeted). I thought that a heterosexual man, even a friend of the character, Michael, would not have stayed after picking up on the 'gay' aspect of the party. A heterosexual man would not have let Michael bully him into staying regardless of 'in this inclement weather you'll never get a cab'. Yeah, you're right about his attraction to Hank...almost elated to find another guy like him...almost giving him permission to be gay. I guess the actor did as Crowley asked of him...he made half the audience think he was gay the other half otherwise.... Mart Crowley, in an interview (I think it was Theater Talk- try googling it ... a PBS show) admits that he was a heavy drinker and had Michael's sharp tongue...

[R127] You're probably right! "beware the hostile fag' thing" it didn't occur to me that maybe BITB may have influenced me...I always avoided that type, I's smile but stayed clear or I handled them with kid gloves, as the saying goes...

[R128] I think it's it's called 'gay-friendly' now...neighborhoods that were distinctly Gay in DC are now 'gay-friendly ' as are many of the formerly mostly gay bars...I think it's a sort of gentrification or reclamation' comparable to what black neighborhoods are going through throughout the country. Interesting! About the birthday if Michael gave Harold...I thought it was a framed mirror, so Harold could take a good look at himself...a double edge nasty message from Michael.

Sorry about all the typos!..I meant 'birthday gift'

There were (and still are) always those bitchy queens who eyed everyone with contempt and prided themselves on being cunts, especially to those they perceived as weaker (but NEVER to the straight guys who actually made their lives rough earlier). We were apparently supposed to admire them as "survivors" or whatever the fuck but I would immediately excuse myself and get as far away as possible and I refuse to believe I missed anything.

I swear, it was the BITB "hostile fag" line/mentality. Even as a young man, I knew I had no interest in any nasty variety gay guy. Still don't.

(P.S. Probably not Harold nor Emery but I'd like to think Hank, Allen and certainly Bernard all got away from vicious Michael at some point. Donald probably stuck around by default. The one I hated the most though was Larry. Dear God, I met a lot of greasy nasty Larrys in my early days too. Ugh).

I love birthdays

TBH, R135, there are a fuckload of DLers who were Michaels and Harolds back in the day and have just gotten older and more bitter. The Emory's add some humor of the Mary/campy variety (e.g. Erna), the Donalds know which Plantagenet monarch was which and start threads about the Ottoman empire, the Hanks post about "masc" guys and join in on the sports threads, the Larrys are always complaining that everyone is sex negative and needs to go on Prep, and the Bernards are angry about white guys not wanting to talk to them on Grindr and calling out the casual racism on DL.

R137, What about the Alans? I watched BITB again last night and, at one point, Friedkin films Alan and Hank in the mirror together--Hank and Alan are mirror images of one another--only Hank calls Larry and Alan calls his wife. If you add up the comments the other characters make about being closeted, you can pretty much suss out Alan's history--the "God was I drunk last night" hook-ups with Justin Stuart that Alan pretends to forget. The fact that he sticks around--Michael points out that he doesn't want to go.

Alan's all the closet cases who are bi enough to keep a marriage going. I think part of the reason he asks Hank to leave with him is that he identifies with Hank and seeing someone who can function in the straight world choosing to be in a gay one scares Alan.

R128, Thank you for the inside scoop. Michael's a bitch, but I don't hate him at the end of the film--he's in such pain and so unable to accept being loved. There's something really powerful about how the men behave badly, but care for one another. The only one who really walks out is Alan (no lunch)--who's also the emotionally dishonest one and a selfish bastard. (let's face it, he destroyed that birthday party.)

And, yeah, a truly straight guy would never have stayed.

[R137] Just curious, where are all these angry Black guys who are passed over by White guys? If there are that many, then Black Gay men are in a heap of trouble. Waiting for and whining over the preference of White men is a waste of time and indicative of those who unfortunately are still mired in the campaign for white acceptance.

I don't think the Alan's ever make it to Datalounge R138. At least not enough times to comment. And yes, Alan clearly sees himself in Hank and is shocked that Hank is athletic, has a wife and kids and yet chooses a male lover. Alan expects all gays to be like Emory and if Hank leaves with him, it's as if he's removing himself from the possibility of being gay.

Few things feel more like time travel to me than watching BITB. What is it about that film?

According to Crowley, they were doing location shots for the film when they first heard about Stonewall. Little did they know it was the end of one era and the start of another. (Filming in 1969, premiere in 1970).

Interesting about the inscription; in the film it's a framed picture of Michael - the inscription is mentioned but not read.

Inspired by the movie, I once gave a set of monogrammed knee pads to a friend, just like Bernard gives Harold.

A whle back there was a fun thread about someone wantung to host a "BITB" party. People chimed in with ideas (a silver platter piled with cigarettes, etc.) My favorite was a suggestion the hot to pass out cards reading "A real card carrying c*nt".

When Emory is carrying the lasagna to the party he is given the side eye by a fat lady - who in reality was the owner of famed '70's hot spot "Elaine's".

I do think "Boys..." gets an unfair rap in terms of the negativity, probably because it was the first and only for so long. But it's like saying "Virginia Woolf" represents all of the straight community and marriages. Both are excellent plays with some ugly behavior that take place over one night in one location and conflict is obviously part of dramaturgy. I'm sure Michael and his friends have had many uneventful parties and get-togethers along the way but this was not one of them. Which is why we are watching it.

Thanks to this thread, though, for making me watch it again on DVD last night. Friedkin really did some great work directing, little moments like the way Donald's eyes seem to click as the final phone call is being dialed, etc. And if there is a continuity error anywhere to be found, I don't see it. Those actors had it locked down while still managing not to look over-rehearsed or stale.

I honestly think this is a better film than either [italic]The Exorcist[/italic] or [italic]Cruising[/italic].

I was reading Friedkin's autobiog recently.

He said the scene between Larry & his teacher BF - there was much talk and indecision about whether they should film them kissing in the scene when they go up to the bedroom and that they decided against it - even though I THINK he said they actually filmed it and then decided not to use it.

Point is Friedkin thinks in retrospect they they should have kept the kiss in the film.

They were worried at the time that 'the kiss' would draw attention away from the actual film - that the whole film would become about THE KISS, considering the time period in which the film was released.

I guess every generation has their own gay related iconic moments. This was a seminal Boomer film. The first film to celebrate being openly gay. I'll give the Boomers their due.

But BITB wasn't a positive, gay affirming experience for 16 year old, gayling me. It was rather somber and took itself too seriously. There were a group of gay men, all friends, but they seemed miserable and self loathing to be gay, to varying degrees.

I realize that BITB came out in 1970, and this is the main reason I don't totally dismiss it as irrelevant. While the film didn't work for me personally, with a positive message that I as a teen could take forward, BITB earned an iconoclastic place in gaydom by being the first of it's kind.

They may be right about that kiss, R145. Years later when things were much better socially, the male to male kiss in "Deathtrap" was made a big deal (and ruined the movie for many since it was a plot point). I remember seeing "Making Love" -- which was pretty clearly about a gay relationship -- in a Westwood theatre, not some hick town, and the two men moved in for their (rather chaste) kiss. And the audience gasped as if in a horror movie and even hooted. And that was in 1981 or so.

Now you see male kisses on daytime soaps. We've come a long way in that respect.

[quote]There were a group of gay men, all friends, but they seemed miserable and self loathing to be gay, to varying degrees.

You'd be miserable, too, if you grew up in a world where being gay was for all intents and purposes illegal and you were expected to hide your homosexuality from the world. But that apartment was the one place where gay men could be openly unapologetically gay and brutally honest about their fears, hatreds, loves, shortcomings, and be human without having to pander to women or heterosexuals.

Harold telling Michael that he will always be gay no matter what is basically telling him the truth that he didn't want to hear but needed to, and that's the only way he'll ever get over his self-loathing. And grass apparently helps towards that end. People often forget that this film actively promoted cannabis use right around the time the so-called War on Drugs began. But I digress; where Michael was concerned it was not his homosexuality making him miserable but his internalized homophobia. And the end of the film, he starts to realize that.

Nicely put, and a great point you make R148.

I always felt like a lost generation gayling. I was 6 or 7 when BITB was released. 16 when I viewed it on cable in 1980. About the same time Cruising hit theaters.

Cruising was a scary proposition for a Catholic schooled teeny bopper. Fear and/or loathing at every turn at that time is how I felt. AIDS was just emerging as my number one shock bomb, that kept me in the self denying/loathing closet for another decade.

Making Love was a sad, little flick, but the handsome unapologetically gay characters gave me a glimmer of hope. I was 18 when I saw M.L. Michael Ontkean's sensitive portrayal and gorgeous looks, melted the icy, fearful facade that I'd erected as a protective shield. The Reagan 80's were a scary time to be a teen and 20 something gay man.

Yeah, I was 22 and freshly arrived in L.A. and both scared and fascinated. I wanted Michael Ontkean's character badly but knew my odds were better for meeting Harry Hamlin's (and God knows I became more like Hamlin as I got older).

Kate Jackson was laughable and the whole thing was too clean -- the doctor, the ABC exec, the best-selling author, everyone dressed nice and crisp -- but I still love the movie. And Ontkean was adorable. Too bad he had a reputation off-screen of being kind of a dick who liked to pee on directors' shoes while they were talking to him. Or maybe that makes me love him more these days.

R148 Midnight Cowboy came before and was highly acclaimed.

[quote]There were a group of gay men, all friends, but they seemed miserable and self loathing to be gay, to varying degrees.

Weren't you miserable too? How many bars could you go to and not be afraid? How many places could you find to really meet men rather than some isolated bathroom somewhere--although that was fun... What about your job opportunities? Do you feel that you have lived to your potential?

Actually, nowadays people act that way when they reach their late 50s. But it's the same thing.

Thats was back in the days when sisters consumed tons of leche and hardly any drugs.

Today it is the other way around.

I was a kid in the 1980s so I didn't even know what homosexuality was or that it was possible for two men to love each other. But I knew what AIDS was and it made me fearful of any kind of sexual contact. When I saw the movie for the first time at age 13 (I rented it along with [italic]Ruthless People[/italic]; back in the days when video stores were my second home, I would often rent dissonant titles together, pairing [italic]Booty Call[/italic] with [italic]Priest[/italic] and [italic]Child's Play 3[/italic] with [italic]Bedknobs and Broomsticks[/italic]), the one thing that made me the most uncomfortable was seeing men act in ways that were contrary to how men were traditionally expected to act; I hesitate to call it "effeminate" because real women don't act like Emory does, but you wouldn't hear, say, Robert Mitchum talking about "Connie Casserole," if you catch my drift. It wasn't a bad movie by any means, but something about it was unsettling. And let's face it; Michael is not the easiest man to live with. But when I rewatched the film years after coming out, my perspective on it changed for the better once I had lived more and met people who actually had those character traits, and keep in mind that all of them were actually the creation of a gay man. And it showed that even though gay men have being gay in common with each other, we're all still individuals and we're all different from each other in some way.

[quote] I hesitate to call it "effeminate" because real women don't act like Emory does, but you wouldn't hear, say, Robert Mitchum talking about "Connie Casserole,"

I guess you never watched "Golden Girls" and observed the Blanche character

[quote]I guess you never watched "Golden Girls" and observed the Blanche character

Are you kidding? That sort of defiance of jenn-durr defiance is more of a Dorothy sort of thing.

[quote]I guess you never watched "Golden Girls" and observed the Blanche character

Are you kidding? That sort of jenn-durr defiance is more of a Dorothy sort of thing.

[quote]Gurl, I was just there for a week. There used to be so many gay men there, it seemed I locked eyes with lots of them whenever I walked in a sidewalk. And I am a lot older, but I didn't see any man looking at other men. Everyone's engrossed in their phones. Everywhere.

They're still here but things have changed. There just doesn't seem to be many gay-centric things anymore. No specific stores. No specific restaurant--I miss the "Food Bar". And really, no specific bars. I suppose I'm at fault for this too. I can't recall the last time I visited the Leslie-Lohman Museum of Gay & Lesbian Art.

I've gone as far as to proactively looking for gay oriented plays or films on crowdfunding sites to support. There are none. There really isn't much off-off-off Broadway stuff to support and see.

I guess we've overcome?

Younger gays don't have as much disposable income. Remember there have been two economic crashes since the 1990s.

"It's the geriatric Rockettes"

"I hate when the operator calls me Ma'am"

Alan to Emory: "Why don't you blow me?" Emory: "Why, does your wife have lockjaw?"

Be on the look out...

bump

[R159] Careful about feeling 'we've overcome' ...it could also be the quiet before the storms called 'repeals' and 'rollback'. As the brilliant black Civil Rights attorney, Charles H. Houston warned Black constituents in the 1950s, "Don't shout too soon". We may very well be shouting "Gay Lives Matter " before long ...Chechnya may be the harbinger...

Oh, I agree R164. But, I think it's the younger generation of gays who have that "we've overcome" attitude, or they have never put any thought into it because they have no idea of what we gays were put through. Many of them feel that gay marriage was the "Holy Grail" so to speak, and now all is peachy-keen. Many, under 30, have no idea that in many States gays cannot adopt children or be foster parents, etc. Nor, does it cross their minds that you could be ever be denied employment (or lose employment), because you're gay.

I think that many of them are unaware, (or think that it's an impossibility), that civil rights can be rolled back. A lot of them probably don't have any inkling of the legislation that certain legislators are trying to pass right at this moment that would definitely impact gays negatively. And, this is the Republicans' latest strategy. They've learned this from their battles with abortion. They don't get rid of the law. They just gut it! Take Texas for an example; You can still get an abortion but I think there are only like 18-20 clinics in that WHOLE entire State where the procedure can be done. This is the "TRAP" ( Targeted Restrictions on Abortion Providers) that Republican legislators push through. They did not get rid of the law. They have just made it extremely difficult to enact it.

RFRA laws are the same thing. I'm really embellishing here but what if gay couple could only obtain marriage licences, (for whatever reason they make up), in Dallas or Houston? The State wouldn't have made same-sex marriage illegal. It just made it harder.

[R165] I agree with your take on Republican strategy! As for younger Gays and their nonchalance, I think back to an old film starring Michael York and Angela Lansbury, Something for Everyone. She plays a somewhat impoverished Countess who laments the 'new days' and points to her kids when she explains how they will accept the new trends, "they'll accept it ...children have no past" a simple phrase..but interesting....and something that applies to all of until we get old enough to understand 'hindsight'.

"Why don't you have a piece of watermelon and shut up!"

"Another queen! The queen of spades"

"A drum beat and their eyes sparkle like Cartiers"

Some funny lines... in context.

Got a heavy date in Lafayette Park?

[quote]That's what gets me about the Aaron Hernandez story. It makes sense to me that he had a male lover. He was young, A LOT of problems and stress,etc! So, becoming involved with someone that could empathize with him, be there for him, etc does not necessarily make him bisexual or gay. He just found a soul mate.

No, r100. What it means is he was gay (or bi).

R101, it was John Rechy's books that terrified me. Especially the one that takes place in Griffith Park.

[quote]No, [R100]. What it means is he was gay (or bi).

He could have been, but...

Why wasn't this movie not much more of a hit? Some EXCELLENT performances especially by Eric Roberts and Lee Grant.

The Box office was onlyt$622,503

Many of the same characters that you see in "Boys In The Band"

Tom Berenger played the love of Kathy Glass' life on One Life to Live

I watched BITB today and I followed it with the Making the Boys documentary.

Even though I've seen the movie numerous times (owned the VHS, now the DVD), there's always some little thing I discover or a new thought pops into my head.

I enjoy rewatching the doc as it's really like a long interview with Crowley. You get a real feel for what he had to overcome to get the play going and then the movie.

Watched it again myself the other night. Still love it -- but still think it's a dramaturgy mistake early in the film when Michael tells Donald his college friend is coming over. "He's straight!", he says, all worried, "What will he think of this freak show I have booked for dinner?" Later, with a few drinks under his belt, he yells at Alan the college chum, tells him he knows he was with their other friend. Accuses him of being gay. So... wouldn't that knowledge change that earlier discussion with Donald? Why would he tell Donald that when he has that other information?

Has always bugged me but that's about the only thing. It's a great period piece.

The doc shows the gays protesting the movie due to its stereotypes that should have been erased by Stonewall.

I can understand this, but I think they should have given it more of an examination in the study of its historic value.

OP, you should check out "The Gay Deceivers." It will blow you away.

Are you streaming this or is it on DVD?

Watched it over the weekend. Mid 20s here. My first time viewing and I'm actually glad I saw it at this age versus if I was a teenager or even a 21 year old. With the group of gay men I'm friends with, I was taken aback by how similar my circle was to the friends in the movie. I can pinpoint a friend of mine who is basically like each character, personality-wise. I have a friend who is a teacher who is definitely a queen but presents himself as more "masc" in public, I know the mincing theater queen, our lowkey bookish friend who also happens to be black, the bitchy intellectual with a God complex...it was very weird to watch and relate with.