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

Call Me By Your Name Reached 13 Threads Before It Actually Fucking Opened

Continue discussing the dongless queer masterpiece and sharing disturbing fan art.

by Anonymousreply 60012/05/2017

Twelve

by Anonymousreply 111/20/2017

It's been open for a while in Britain and Ireland.

by Anonymousreply 211/20/2017

Misleading thread title.

by Anonymousreply 311/20/2017

OP: there was a book published in, like, 2007 or so... Which we'd been discussing in those previous threads, and all.

by Anonymousreply 411/20/2017

R2, R3, R4 = cunts

by Anonymousreply 511/20/2017

damn people who read books...

by Anonymousreply 611/20/2017

Waiting for the Mexican cam version to drop.

by Anonymousreply 711/20/2017

Grotesque thread title and image.

by Anonymousreply 811/20/2017

R7, the dvd screeners have already gone out, it's just a matter of time before we'll be able to board the good ship Torrents...

by Anonymousreply 911/20/2017

STOP FEEDING THE MANIC TROLLS WHO TALK TO THEMSELVES IN CMBYN THREADS

THEY'RE INSANE CYBER-STALKERS, THERE'S NO CONVERSING WITH THEM

by Anonymousreply 1011/20/2017

Bringing this over from the last thread...r567 from over there gave a link to a Page Six story about the fact that James Ivory and Luca Guadagnino had been in arbitration with the Writer's Guild of America because James Ivory wanted LG's credit as co-writer of the film's screenplay removed. It has been resolved, and Ivory has now been given sole credit for the screenplay. I hadn't known there was any dispute about it. Interesting.

I remember when Anne Rice did the same thing years ago, and took Neil Jordan to the WGA to get his name taken off the script credit for Interview With a Vampire. She also won. Apparently in order for a director to share a co-writing credit, it has to be affirmed that they contributed at least 50% of the writing in a script (how this is determined, I have no idea). With the Interview With The Vampire case, Anne Rice had adapted her book and Neil Jordan was determined to have only changed a couple of things from her original script, which did not constitute enough of a percentage to warrant the co-writing credit he'd given himself. She still praises him to the heavens but I don't think he's spoken to her since. Luca and James are putting a better face on it, it seems...

by Anonymousreply 1111/20/2017

Asia Argento has already spoken about what a sneaky cunt Guadagnino is, so his actions here are no surprise.

by Anonymousreply 1211/21/2017

R11 Sony Pictures Classics probably told them to play nice until the Oscars are over. Or else.

The WGA recently went through the Justice League script and determined Whedon wrote at least 33% of the script so he also got that (only) credit.

R12 Quelle surprise! I swear all my alarms went off when he boasted that he doesn't "do" auditions but just looks at his own chemistry with the actors and then sublimates his sexual desire for them into his work. Creep.

by Anonymousreply 1311/21/2017

Completely unsurprising.

ANYTHING with a modicum of gay content, above-average looking, white heterosexual actors playing gay men is guaranteed to receive an insane amount of threads on DL.

by Anonymousreply 1411/21/2017

R14 You forgot the rich part. From black people living in the projects in Florida to the rich white family and filthy rich white actors who play them. Let's throw all the awards at them right this instant!

by Anonymousreply 1511/21/2017

Oh my...

by Anonymousreply 1611/21/2017
by Anonymousreply 1711/21/2017

R17 Why can't we have Barry Jenkins instead of this creeper? It's the Musk-Thiel situation all over again.

by Anonymousreply 1811/21/2017

R18 I have a major crush on Barry

by Anonymousreply 1911/21/2017

Why do some people need to piss all over something good.

by Anonymousreply 2011/21/2017

R19 He embodies the word "suave" and his voice is like caramel.

R20 Because we all have different tastes and opinions?

by Anonymousreply 2111/21/2017

I still wonder why Jenkins cut the last scene from the script, where the characters kiss and begin to explore each other's bodies (off-camera, the script said, but you could still hear them). Pity.

by Anonymousreply 2211/21/2017

Barry's reaction to people criticizing the lack of sex in his film (specifically Guy Lodge‏'s "Does Moonlight show gay cinema has to be sexless to succeed?" article) was pretty admirable. Unlike Luca who gets aggressively defensive whenever it's brought up about CMBYN

by Anonymousreply 2311/21/2017

R22 That was my first thought immediately after finishing the movie. However, not even a week later, I realized just how perfect that final shot really was and why he's the one making movies, not me.

by Anonymousreply 2411/21/2017

R23 Was it even a creative choice on Guadagnino's part? I thought Hammer just had a no-nudity condition coming into the project and that was that.

I'm miffed about camera going to an open window as the bedroom action starts but perhaps the lack of sex and full nudity charges other, more "innocent" parts of the movie with sensuality? So maybe, in the end, it's for the best.

by Anonymousreply 2511/21/2017

God's Own Country is the best gay movie of 2017 by far for me, and it has full-frontal nudity and graphic sex scenes

by Anonymousreply 2611/21/2017

I HATE THOSE GODDAMN TECHNICOLOR FILMS. LOVE CARY GRANT.

by Anonymousreply 2711/21/2017

Opens Thursday evening in New York and LA.

In New York at the Paris and Regal Union Square.

by Anonymousreply 2811/21/2017

10pm at the Paris is sold out according to the website

by Anonymousreply 2911/21/2017

Only pedophiles would be interesting in this movie. The fact that it's generated so many cult-like threads on this site is frightening in what it says about the users of said site.

by Anonymousreply 3011/21/2017

Not one of hundreds of reviews and reports from people who have ACTUALLY SEEN THE MOVIE even suggest a pedophile vibe, but keep telling yourself that, r30

by Anonymousreply 3111/21/2017

Don't feed the trolls r31.

by Anonymousreply 3211/21/2017

They're not trolls just because they happen to have a different opinion than yours. And judging by Twitter, the gays seem to be split on it, to say nothing of non-white gays.

Personally, I've come to accept the age difference by now, though I still think it will needlessly hurt its B.O. and awards chances. It's that fucking Hammer actor I can't stand. Have you seen the L.A. gays on Twitter fawning over that THR interview with this rich straight white guy who has lived a charmed life and is now pushing for awards for the courageous portrayal of a gay man? They're almost as disgusting as the Trump homoquislings.

And fuck that lecherous director for casting straight guys he's enamoured with instead of using this chance to give more visibility to gay actors. Who even needs enemies when gay guys will eat their own like that.

by Anonymousreply 3311/21/2017

Hammer is actually being mocked for that awful THR interview. See the Hammer thread.

by Anonymousreply 3411/21/2017

[quote]They're not trolls just because they happen to have a different opinion than yours.

Lol, right dear.

[quote]Only pedophiles would be interesting in this movie

Let's have a discussion about this intelligent perspective!

Try again.

by Anonymousreply 3511/21/2017

Whatever, you've already lost the argument by resorting to condescension with the "dear". Not to mention the "try again" and "lol".

by Anonymousreply 3611/21/2017

R35 Pedophiles hate being called out. Nervous?

by Anonymousreply 3711/21/2017

Where has Hammer even suggested that it's courageous of him to portray a gay character? It's his third one and he's never said such a thing. What he was intimidated by, and as a semi-professional (unfortunately) actor I can understand him, was the emotional load and the level of intimacy which you don't usually see in cinema nowadays.

Also, I don't get the comparison between CMBYN and Moonlight, could anyone please explain why? The only thing they have in common is that there's a love story between two men, but Moonlight isn't a romance movie and the storyline couldn't me more different. Why can't we love both? Jesus with the whining...

by Anonymousreply 3811/21/2017

Thanks r23, I had not seen that before.

by Anonymousreply 3911/21/2017

[quote]Where has Hammer even suggested that it's courageous of him to portray a gay character?

Yeah, both Hammer and Chalamet have gone out of their way to make sure they don't say anything like that. You can tell a publicist was like make sure you don't do this shit.

by Anonymousreply 4011/21/2017

R31 I’ve seen it and the age difference is incredibly creepy, I don’t understand why they didn’t cast someone closer to Oliver’s age. Straight people, particularly women, love it and think they’re progressive for it. The film adaptation of CMBYN was made for fan girls in the first place anyway.

by Anonymousreply 4111/21/2017

Yes, I'm sure Luca found and adapted the property just for the "fan girls."

by Anonymousreply 4211/21/2017

R38 Oh, my, the straight white male thespian who grew up in the Cayman Islands felt an"emotional load" while portraying a homosexual, you say? As a gay guy who grew up in the slums in a homophobic shithole and got gay-bashed on the regular, I'm going to now campaign hard for him to get all the awards he's nominated for.

Do tell me more about this Hammer guy's calvary, please.

by Anonymousreply 4311/21/2017

In a way he did r42, he has not hid the fact it was important to him that this film was very universal and could appeal to everyone. He very much had the straight female audience in mind.

by Anonymousreply 4411/21/2017

R42 Three quarters of Twitter chatter around this movie is frau-based so while he might not have been aware of this during the production, it's going to be its main audience now that it's out.

by Anonymousreply 4511/21/2017

MovieLines is calling “Call Me By Your Name” the greatest love story since “Gone With The Wind”, thats pretty unprecedented!

by Anonymousreply 4611/21/2017

R46 What's "MovieLines" and why can't I find their website?

by Anonymousreply 4711/21/2017

R43 oh god where have I said, and where has he said, that his reservations were gay-specific. I've no idea about his private life, whether he had caring parents or not, if he's emotional or reserved etc. I know his family is wealthy (why should that be a problem?) but that's about all I know about the guy. Most importantly, I DON'T CARE, it's the work he's done that I care about. I thought the movie was beautiful, highly touching, the acting's great, Sufjan's songs are perfect, and it's my favourite movie in 2017 so far.

Whiteness isn't such a big issue in Southern Europe and in the Mediterranean world (I'm Spanish, so I should know) as it is in the USA, btw. My social background is very different from that of the wealthy Italian family in CMBYN, but it's even more different from that of marginalized African-Americans in Miami. That doesn't diminish my enjoyment of those two movies, because it's their task to help me feel immersed and to make me relate to their characters.

CMBYN is just a love story. It's not political, it's not social justice, it ignores many/most/all problems outside the feeling of love itself, like many romantic stories do. So? If that's not your cup of tea, by all means go see other movie, you definitely won't like this one. That's fine.

by Anonymousreply 4811/21/2017

Nothing is ever "political" when it's stuffed with politics you agree with R48.

by Anonymousreply 4911/21/2017

R48 It's obviously political by the very fact that it's generating this discussion. You may pretend it's not and that's perfectly within your rights, but that won't make others magically shut up about their reservations.

by Anonymousreply 5011/21/2017

Which politics are those, R49 ?

by Anonymousreply 5111/21/2017

See R51 play the role of dumb bitch.

by Anonymousreply 5211/21/2017

R51 The next time Catholics screen this movie in my country as a proof of why I shouldn't be allowed to get married and adopt, I'll be sure to say "Oh, but it's not a political movie, it's just a love story!" Thanks for the suggestion.

Not all of us have the luxury of judging the work on its own as movies don't exist in a vacuum but in a certain societal context. And the current context is that we're being equated as predators in 76 countries that criminalize homosexuality.

by Anonymousreply 5311/21/2017

No, this discussion is political, the movie itself is not by necessity. You may argue that since it ignores the politics surrounding... Class issues (in Italy in the 80s it would be that, not race)? Then the movie is political by default because it supports the statu quo in that specific setting. Political by default. In that case okay, why not, it's a wealthy Jewish family having a good time in Italy, where most people would be non-wealthy and non-Jewish. A struggling car mechanic would have been a more representative character. You can even focus on the jewish identity as a factor for Elio's character development, which doesn't mean that it's a movie that seriously deals with being a Jew... It's a movie about a guy who falls in love. He's wealthy, he's snobbish, he's Jewish, he's a ton of other things but what's key here is that he loves. And what's more essential than that, because we're talking about art: it's told in a very effective way, crafted with care and for people who love cinema, it's a treat in every department.

by Anonymousreply 5411/21/2017

Anything with gay people will be seen as political by some. Stupid, but people are dumb. The fact that we exist is controversial.

by Anonymousreply 5511/21/2017

SJW du Cinéma, issue n. 233: the moral high ground, or why he want you to hate this particular movie.

by Anonymousreply 5611/21/2017

Right, r55.

by Anonymousreply 5711/21/2017

Nice Times article.

by Anonymousreply 5811/21/2017

R41 creepy Luca admits he has had Armie in mind for a role since 2010 (!) and cast him without considering anybody else

by Anonymousreply 5911/21/2017

[quote]Opens Thursday evening in New York and LA.

It is only playing in NY and LA stateside until nearly Christmas.

by Anonymousreply 6011/21/2017

Leaving the horrible awards campaign aside (why in the world SPC can't handle those campaigns properly EVER!), I wish people who already come out with pitchforks start hating AFTER watching the goddamn film?????? Really, this is the most harmless motion picture you could ever imagine. There is really nothing to hate about it and even people who did not enjoy the film find something positive about it.

I wish they just did not campaign at all, the film is perfect without any awards recognition.

by Anonymousreply 6111/21/2017

[quote]I wish they just did not campaign at all, the film is perfect without any awards recognition.

Doesn't work that way, awards nominations add money to the box office. It is all about the bottom line.

by Anonymousreply 6211/21/2017

The first awards nomination of the season that matter ISA are being announced now. You can watch live here

by Anonymousreply 6311/21/2017

Spirits were all over the place. Ivory and Stulbarg missed but the film did overall very well better than its competition, except for Get Out. So things are looking up.

by Anonymousreply 6411/21/2017

The Spirit Awards are a joke. Snubbing Three Billboard is major categories, and I Tonya.

by Anonymousreply 6511/21/2017

R65, salty? Too bad. CMBYN, actually leads the nomination count. And Stulbarg and Ivory will still get in at the Oscars. I am not worried. NBR and NYFC are tomorrow. So fingers crossed.

by Anonymousreply 6611/21/2017

[quote] Luca admits he has had Armie in mind for a role since 2010 (!) and cast him without considering anybody else

hmm, in 2010, armie would have been 24, exactly oliver's age.

by Anonymousreply 6711/21/2017

Q&A from yesterday.

by Anonymousreply 6811/21/2017

R67 Yeah, 2010 Armie actually looked the part. Too bad Luca refused to accept his fave aged.

by Anonymousreply 6911/21/2017

It seems we are finally running out of original things to say.

Lets take a short break and start commenting again AFTER we've seen the movie...

by Anonymousreply 7011/21/2017

I have seen the movie r70, so you shut the fuck up

by Anonymousreply 7111/21/2017

Who F&Fd the thread? They didn't like the ridiculous drawing?

by Anonymousreply 7211/21/2017

R70 And why are you moderating the discussion? It's the 13th thread, it's obviously not the first time we're repeating ourselves and it's not going to stop now.

by Anonymousreply 7311/21/2017

Luca is a cunt!

by Anonymousreply 7411/21/2017

It just seems more unbearable now,since people who haven't seen the movie are continuing to make ridiculous claims

by Anonymousreply 7511/21/2017

Timmy and Armie are in love !

by Anonymousreply 7611/21/2017

In all seriousness, Timmy said Armie is one of his best friends now.

by Anonymousreply 7711/21/2017

It's not the first time he's said that, I've heard him before referring to Armie as a best friend. The boy seems to feel genuine affection and even admiration for Hammer.

Re. the Q&A, the waterfall punch anecdote was hilarious.

by Anonymousreply 7811/21/2017

A beautiful movie. They need to stop with this "everyone is in love with everyone" style of promotion. They don't need that kind of whoring. But then they want a sequel of which I'm not so sure there should be one but whatever. Every movie wants a sequel nowadays what's new.

by Anonymousreply 7911/21/2017

Slate review.

by Anonymousreply 8011/21/2017

A- by Entertainment Weekly.

by Anonymousreply 8111/21/2017

R53 where are you from?

by Anonymousreply 8211/21/2017

5/5 stars from Vox.

by Anonymousreply 8311/21/2017

It's clear that Timmy and Armie are legitimately close. He's hanging out with Armie's family at the beach as we speak, despite seeing him every day for the past 10 days or so doing Q&As.

by Anonymousreply 8411/21/2017

Timmy has stayed at the Hammers' several times over the past year so yes, definitely close.

by Anonymousreply 8511/21/2017

Lucky strike and a temporary respite for SPC interns dealing with all the pedo backlash on Twitter.

I hope Get Out destroys it. After Charlottesville, it would be obscene if anything else wins.

by Anonymousreply 8611/21/2017

Destroy what?

by Anonymousreply 8711/21/2017

R87 Destroys this movie at Spirit Awards and elsewhere. Lady Bird should do considerable damage as well.

by Anonymousreply 8811/21/2017

R86 is obviously anti-CMBYN, R87.

by Anonymousreply 8911/21/2017

Adorbs.

by Anonymousreply 9011/21/2017

don't feed the pedo trolls

by Anonymousreply 9111/21/2017

Ugh, I had to block the "Creepy Luca" Frau.

I am certainly rooting for CBYN and hopefully 120 beats per minute to do well. Too bad God's own country will likely not get an awards push. It already missed the Satellites and Indies. : ( Maybe, it can be rescued by the critic awards.

by Anonymousreply 9211/21/2017

R92 Not a frau, just prefer God's Own Country for proper representation. Thanks for the blocking suggestion, though. The thread and DL in general is much nicer without you.

by Anonymousreply 9311/21/2017

God's Own Country is dull as dishwater. The fact that it had full frontal nudity and managed to be less sexy than CMBYN says a lot.

by Anonymousreply 9411/21/2017

or that it couldn't show the two guys fucking.....

by Anonymousreply 9511/21/2017

Wait, God's Own Country has full frontal nudity but no fucking scenes?

by Anonymousreply 9611/21/2017

Wait what ? GOC doesn't show the sex act?? I feel taken after all the Brits claiming it was more courageous than CMBYN.

Blahhh

by Anonymousreply 9711/21/2017

There's a fucking scene in the movie but it's not between the two leads - there is a blowjob between the two leads but the one guy stops the other guy from fucking him. This is all while they're flopping around in shit mud, btw. But after that I weirdly can't remember what else there is sex-wise. Is there more? I have blanked it out. The two of them sit for awhile with their legs intertwined chatting with their cocks out, which is why I think the movie gets the attention for its "bravery"

by Anonymousreply 9811/21/2017

Yeah. And none of its sexy because the lead is ugly and nowhere near as engaging to watch as Chalamet. His chemistry with his co star borders on awkward, probably because they're two straight guys that don't want to be sitting together with their limp cocks out.

by Anonymousreply 9911/21/2017

Wait! The two leads are straight in GOC ?????

Fucking Brits getting on a high horse with their "Luca could've hired gay actors."

Blah Blah Blah! So I imagine the fuck scene must be between a woman and a man... ugh ugh ugh

by Anonymousreply 10011/21/2017

R84 I think they're adorable and it's clear they genuinely like each other but I don't know if I could become bff's with a guy 10 years younger than me after i spent two months making out naked with him. Especially when they're both supposedly straight. And they willingly spend so much time together and with Armie's family too. I would find it a bit awkward. But good for them. They're cute.

by Anonymousreply 10111/21/2017

R101 they've repeatedly claimed that they spent day and night (the waking part, at least) together while they were shooting, by their own choice outside work schedule and they rehearsed at Timmy's or Armie's apartment after having dinner and watching a movie. They must have grown perfectly comfortable around each other, I find it hard to relate but I suppose that since they're actors, their making out for work shouldn't make them feel awkward for long, especially if they know how to choreograph the scenes because they've taken their time discussing this stuff.

by Anonymousreply 10211/21/2017

I think also Timmy is mature for his age and Armie immature for his, so I don't think the age difference matters too much in terms of them being able to relate to each other.

by Anonymousreply 10311/21/2017

[quote]hmm, in 2010, armie would have been 24, exactly oliver's age.

I recently rewatched The Social Network for the first time in years, and I kept thinking to myself, THAT'S what Oliver should look like - still with an air of the collegiate, an adult who still has a certain amount of boyishness about him. Armie has aged a lot in the past seven years - all good in my opinion, he looks better than ever - but he has lost all boyishness and is verging into DILF territory now, even though he's only 31. If they had cast an actor who was actually Oliver's age and gave off that college boy vibe, the squawking about 'pedophilia' would be far less prevalent. Luca let his personal preoccupation with Armie affect the film.

by Anonymousreply 10411/21/2017

@R104 true

by Anonymousreply 10511/21/2017

@R84 Timo looks so glamorous in that photo. He's so classy, no wonder Armie likes being around him. I hope he stays that way

by Anonymousreply 10611/21/2017

@R100 "Fucking Brits getting on a high horse"

Don't you know that? The humourless Brits are permanently on their high horse about everything

by Anonymousreply 10711/21/2017

Of course, Oliver is no longer a college boy but has graduated…

by Anonymousreply 10811/22/2017

[quote]Luca let his personal preoccupation with Armie affect the film.

It's still affecting it.

by Anonymousreply 10911/22/2017

Ryan O'Neal was 29 when he played a 21/22 y.o. Harvard undergrad in "Love Story" accepting the role that had been turned down already by Beau Bridges (also 29) and John Voight (32!)

by Anonymousreply 11011/22/2017

Fab interview with Timmy. Best one yet.

by Anonymousreply 11111/22/2017

R110 36-year-old Robert Redford played a college student in THE WAY WE WERE.

by Anonymousreply 11211/22/2017

Times have changed

by Anonymousreply 11311/22/2017

R113 as recently as the 90210 reboot (2008-2013) there was Trevor Donovan, who was in his early thirties during his time on the show playing a high school student.

by Anonymousreply 11411/22/2017

who the fuck cares so much that he doesn't look 24 ffs, he's done a remarkable job playing Oliver a the man is hot as fuck, and that's all we needed.

by Anonymousreply 11511/22/2017

First-hand reports from the Paris and Union Square, please...

by Anonymousreply 11611/23/2017

I like that Armie's dislikes include his resume. I'm sure Armie would agree.

by Anonymousreply 11711/23/2017

Shame that it's not "Presenting [italic]Hole[/italic]: The Next Generation of Oscar Hunks".

("The Hella Tight One", indeed.)

by Anonymousreply 11811/23/2017

R118 lmao

by Anonymousreply 11911/23/2017

I wonder if Armie has a butthole?

by Anonymousreply 12011/23/2017

Are you suggesting that he's like a Ken doll, r120?

by Anonymousreply 12111/23/2017

"The Hella Tight One"?????????? LOL!!

It's so gay. Do they realise it? Is the innuendo intentional?

by Anonymousreply 12211/23/2017

And Armie is the Daddy one?! Oh no!!! LOL

by Anonymousreply 12311/23/2017

Please.. of course it's intentional.

by Anonymousreply 12411/23/2017

Wonder if Timmy still is tight.

by Anonymousreply 12511/23/2017

I'm meeting my cinema posse on Monday eve at the beautiful PARIS theatre on CPS to do this thing.

Jealous, bitches?

by Anonymousreply 12611/23/2017

Timmy must have the prettiest hole.

by Anonymousreply 12711/23/2017

I cannot help but think Timo will never be this beautiful again. He'd do well in getting all the pussy and the dick he can now because who knows what the future holds.

by Anonymousreply 12811/23/2017

[Quote]I cannot help but think Timo will never be this beautiful again.

When did he start?

by Anonymousreply 12911/23/2017

I don't think his beauty has peaked yet. He's a late bloomer actually.

by Anonymousreply 13011/23/2017

R129 Oh come on, he's already beautiful. How can anyone deny this?

by Anonymousreply 13111/24/2017

I see beautiful hair on a mouseface

by Anonymousreply 13211/24/2017

It's the eyes that do it. He's enigmatic, who knows what he's hiding behind that veneer of hipster/boho respectability

by Anonymousreply 13311/24/2017

R133 The eyes and the hair. Growing them out was a very good decision.

by Anonymousreply 13411/24/2017

Good hair to pull.

by Anonymousreply 13511/24/2017

R134 Agree. The long hair makes him even more gorgeous.

by Anonymousreply 13611/24/2017

He looks amazing with the longer hair. Oddly, it makes him look a bit less like a teenager but also more androgynous which I think really suits him.

by Anonymousreply 13711/24/2017

Technically, CMBYN is supposed to start today, but no luck showing in my hometown.

by Anonymousreply 13811/24/2017

R138, mine either!

by Anonymousreply 13911/24/2017

R139 it's only a limited run in the US, for now. Only two theaters in NY and two in LA. I don't know when it opens wide.

by Anonymousreply 14011/24/2017

From what I have read, it will definitely go wider before Christmas

by Anonymousreply 14111/24/2017

Release dates (USA)

by Anonymousreply 14211/24/2017

R142 thanks! So, it won't go nationwide until two months from now (Jan. 19). Good lord!

by Anonymousreply 14311/24/2017

I was waiting for Thanksgiving and now I have to wait until Christmas?!

by Anonymousreply 14411/24/2017

The longer they delay it, the more time it has to be impacted by the Bryan Singer scandal.

by Anonymousreply 14511/24/2017

Completely normal to have a staggered release for a small film like this, especially one from Sony Pictures Classics.

by Anonymousreply 14611/24/2017

[quote]The longer they delay it, the more time it has to be impacted by the Bryan Singer scandal.

Oh, I didn’t know that.

by Anonymousreply 14711/24/2017

Crap, I have to wait till after January? This sucks, why so late during award season?

by Anonymousreply 14811/24/2017

Many indies have platform releases like this, counting on a busload of Oscar nominations to propel them to late January box office.

I expect CMBYN to fizzle at the Oscars, so this will end up hurting the movie imo.

by Anonymousreply 14911/24/2017

Wouldn't even matter if it did, it's called award season for a reason, there's months of these things. Starting with the Gotham awards are on Monday where CMBYN is nominated for multiple. Sure, not all of these award shows are as buzzy as the Oscars but they keep the film's name out there so yes a staggered release makes complete sense.

Also the film is likely to have a high per theater average this weekend, being that it's only in 4 theaters. That will give it good publicity too, rather than a much lower PTA in 1,000 theaters or whatever;.

by Anonymousreply 15011/24/2017

Line tonight at Union SQ theatre in NYC.

by Anonymousreply 15111/24/2017

R151 is that for CALL ME BY YOUR NAME?

by Anonymousreply 15211/24/2017

R152 Yes.

by Anonymousreply 15311/24/2017

who's reporting from the paris on 58th?

by Anonymousreply 15411/24/2017

I saw it at the Paris this afternoon -- it was a packed house, and the line for the next showing was down the street when i got out

by Anonymousreply 15511/24/2017

Nice line.

The Union Square theater has all the charm of a bus depot

by Anonymousreply 15611/24/2017

Union Square really is gross, I find it strange that's one of the theaters they chose. I don't love the Paris either to be honest (the screen's too small and low) but at least it has a little old-school charm.

It could be worse - it could've been Angelika.

by Anonymousreply 15711/24/2017

Has anyone seen the Tom of Finland bio pic?

by Anonymousreply 15811/24/2017

Not yet, r158...but, I heard it was really good.

by Anonymousreply 15911/24/2017

It is good. Finland is submitting it in the best foreign film category. It has lots of graphic sex though not porn level. I just wondered if that would hurt it's chances of winning. I wonder how much that influences filmmakers. It will be interesting to see how well Tom does.

by Anonymousreply 16011/24/2017

The Paris just had a rehab, I wonder if they improved the screen.

by Anonymousreply 16111/24/2017

It's on three screens at Union Square, showing about a dozen times a day.

by Anonymousreply 16211/24/2017

[quote] Call Me By Your Name (SPC), 4 theaters / $125K Fri/3-day cume: $380k /PTA: $95k/ 5-day: $239k/ Wk 1

Great numbers as expected.

by Anonymousreply 16311/25/2017

R163

[quote] Sony Pictures Classics’ Independent Spirit Award six-time nominee Call Me By Your Name is posting an estimated $95K per theater, which as of right now, could beat Lady Bird for the top opening theater average of 2017 ($91K).

by Anonymousreply 16411/25/2017

Nice, happy to see the numbers and I can't wait for it to go elsewhere.

by Anonymousreply 16511/25/2017

Box Office Update": Call Me By Your Name (SPC), 4 theaters / $161K Fri/3-day cume: $446k /PTA: $111,5k/ 5-day: $239k/ Wk 1 Deadline Hollywood Saturday am update. WOW, yes!!!!!

by Anonymousreply 16611/25/2017

I'm bored and was just looking at the past winners of the Spirit Awards, and I noticed that the past four winners for Best Film have gone on to win the Oscar for Best Picture: MOONLIGHT, SPOTLIGHT, BIRDMAN, 12 YEARS A SLAVE. Will tradition continue, or is a statistic about to be broken? Do CMBYN, GET OUT, or LADY BIRD have a good chance to actually win Best Picture? Or does this leaves the door open for THE POST or DUNKIRK to win now?

by Anonymousreply 16711/25/2017

Get Out! Is soooo overrated! Yes, it was a fun movie, but not an Oscar movie…honestly!

by Anonymousreply 16811/25/2017

I don’t think CMBYN or Get Out will get Best Picture noms. Lady Bird is more a traditional Oscar nominee.

by Anonymousreply 16911/25/2017

Eh, no. CMBYN is probably the most traditional of the three (Brokeback Mountain, Moonlight). The only comparison I can think of for Lady Bird is Juno. I still think it will get a nomination but it's not traditional Oscar bait at all.

by Anonymousreply 17011/25/2017

Yes, a movie with nearly unanimous critical acclaim, good box office and an early front runner in the lead up to the Oscars is hardly traditional at all.

by Anonymousreply 17111/25/2017

CBMYN has no CONFLICT. It is not like BBM or Moonlight at all. It’s a nice European mood piece, but it won’t hook in Academy voters like those previous two did.

by Anonymousreply 17211/25/2017

haven't seen the movie yet but have read the book twice and found plenty of conflict (which exists in forms other than getting the shit beat out of you or offed with a tire iron).

by Anonymousreply 17311/25/2017

R171 Those things can also be said for CMBYN and Get Out.

R172 Moonlight won and BBM came very close to winning. CMBYN can get into a pool of 8/9 nominees, even if the conflict isn't as obvious as being black, gay and poor.

by Anonymousreply 17411/25/2017

the conflict and tension of CMBYN the novel comes from it being told in past tense with plenty of hyperbole from a potentially unreliable narrator. This is lost in the film adaptation.

by Anonymousreply 17511/25/2017

plenty of best picture nominees with little to no conflict. lady bird itself barely has any.

by Anonymousreply 17611/25/2017

Let's not forget La La Land got 14 nominations last year. The conflict in that film was: should I focus on fucking Ryan Gosling or becoming famous?

by Anonymousreply 17711/25/2017

and the bitch made the wrong one

by Anonymousreply 17811/25/2017

So disturbing!

by Anonymousreply 17911/25/2017

Mchael Stuhlbarg deserves the Oscar for his one big scene in this movie. It’s stunning, and it made me cry.

by Anonymousreply 18011/25/2017

Beautiful boys

by Anonymousreply 18111/25/2017

CMBYN is a perfect example of that rare instance when the film can easily appeal to rather very broad demo of awards voters. It a very simple uncomplicated human story told in an old-fashioned style with world class script, plenty of heart and soul which the older voters can appreciate and anyone regardless of gender, orientation or social class can personally relate to. But it is also essentially a major piece of art, impeccably crafted and acted, and feels very modern which could also easily appeal to young voters. It also helps that the film is beautiful to look at and there is plenty of technical achievement as well which could draw the non-acting branches. Of course there is Kevin Spacey cloud , but we do not know how much that's going to affect its chances. I say it is a guaranteed BP nom but the politics will stop it short of winning.

by Anonymousreply 18211/25/2017

[quote]Let's not forget La La Land got 14 nominations last year. The conflict in that film was: should I focus on fucking Ryan Gosling or becoming famous?

—Anonymous

reply 17712 hours ago and the bitch made the wrong one

well maybe she recognized he'd get tired of fucking her scrawny ass rather soon, so cut her losses

by Anonymousreply 18311/25/2017

[quote] The Union Square theater has all the charm of a bus depot

Yes, but at least you don't have to queue up outside in the cold like you do at the Paris.

Odd that it's not playing at Regal on 42nd Street

by Anonymousreply 18411/26/2017

[quote]Many indies have platform releases like this, counting on a busload of Oscar nominations to propel them to late January box office.

Exactly. The thought process is many theater goers in normal places might pass on a gay love story, but once it has many oscar nominations people will be more inclined to go check out that movie.

Oscar nominations do lead to a noticeable box office bump, and they are trying to play to that.

by Anonymousreply 18511/26/2017

"#CallMebyYourName made an estimated $404K at 4 theaters, $101K per, the highest per-theater-average of the year."

by Anonymousreply 18611/26/2017

[quote]Crap, I have to wait till after January? This sucks, why so late during award season?

Oscar screeners leak in mid to late December. So quality version will be online then.

by Anonymousreply 18711/26/2017

When did SJWs become so insufferable? They're now no different than the far right-wingers. I guess it's true that the political spectrum is a circle, not a line, because the farther left or right you go, you wind up in the same spot.

by Anonymousreply 18811/26/2017

Sorry, that was meant for the Armie Hammer thread. I got confused.

by Anonymousreply 18911/26/2017

Admittedly, I don't know many gay people in real life (such is life in a small town), but I came across this post by a gay man on another forum:

[quote]I will preface by saying I have zero interest in watching this film ever since I saw the trailer with its awful digital cinematography where the skins are yellow and the sky is green and the zero sex appeal of both stars, however I have noticed the absolute fetishizing of the subject matter by everyone involved, and how cutesy and lovey dovey the stars act in public as a way to pander to the sick fans of this movie and it is very troubling. These people are not gay, they don't suffer the consequences of being gay so their fetishizing of it is just another form of black face or minstrel showing, it's quite pathetic.

Are some gays really equating this movie with blackface and minstrel shows?

by Anonymousreply 19011/26/2017

There have been plenty of comments about this being a "gay zoo" movie for fangurls on this board as well.

by Anonymousreply 19111/26/2017

Um yes we have been suggesting that in each of the thirteen threads.

by Anonymousreply 19211/26/2017

[quote]These people are not gay, they don't suffer the consequences of being gay

exactly, and who even needs a tire iron when there are gangs of hungry italian street urchins to do the job

by Anonymousreply 19311/26/2017

The fact that women latch on, because the guys are hot and the story is romantic and cute, shouldn't prevent us from enjoying the film as gay men. I don't get the grumpiness, it's obviously not the ONLY film with gay content this year so it's good that they're not all the same.

I happen to like that it's not more explicit, same as I may like others being fully graphic. I also relish that it doesn't explore the hardships of being gay in the 80s... 120 Battements did that job well this year, but there are plenty of films for that. Films which, by the way, straight people find extremely comforting because they love to feel empathy and compassion and all the bs; this doesn't make them lesser works.

Different narratives yield different results and that keeps things interesting.

by Anonymousreply 19411/26/2017

I loved the book and can’t wait to read it again. Despite the lack of dong, which is almost unforgivable in an adaptation of such a sexually charged novel, I’m very much looking forward to seeing the film.

by Anonymousreply 19511/26/2017

Part of the complaint is these movies always star straight actors r194.

What do Brokeback Mountain, Milk, Moonlight, Call Me By Your Name and God's Own Country have in common?

Zero openly gay/bisexual actors.

by Anonymousreply 19611/26/2017

Isn't that what 'acting' is all about?

For some reason, I'm reminded of when black fans of FAMILY GUY were pissed to discover that 'Cleveland' was voiced by a white actor.

by Anonymousreply 19711/26/2017

actors should never be allowed to play roles that do not align with their own sexuality

by Anonymousreply 19811/26/2017

Yes, gay stories should never be told by gay actors. We should always let straight actors do it!

Man, gay people never stand up for themselves. Black people long stopped white people from representing them, and now latinos and asians do the same, but gay people never seem to care.

No one said straight actors can't ever play gay, but I would love to see gay talent involved in these stories. I remember Jack Falahee got interviewed recently about his character arc and he was forced to admit as a straight guy he can only really say so much about it.

by Anonymousreply 19911/26/2017

R199, Jack Falahee is not straight. His hole is like the Holland Tunnel.

by Anonymousreply 20011/26/2017

straight stories should be told by straight actors?

definitely one way to rid hollywood of gay actors since in a typical year there are <10 gay roles worth competing for.

by Anonymousreply 20111/26/2017

R190 here. Just wanted to point out that I'm gay myself lest there be any confusion. I apologize for sounding dumb, but I haven't had many opportunities to meet other gay people, so I can be a bit clueless about gay culture and the community, except for what I read online.

by Anonymousreply 20211/26/2017

you didn't sound dumb at all. it is a legitimate topic for conversation, it's good to ask these questions

by Anonymousreply 20311/26/2017

There's so few openly gay or bisexual actors in the first place that being able to find ones that are then suitable for the part narrows the scope down a lot, especially if you want a 'name'. I'm actually far more willing to excuse Call Me for this than I am something like God's Own Country because the latter did not employ a name for either part so they really could have found openly gay men. With Call Me, I would not want anyone other than Timmy playing Elio as simply no one could have done it better and Armie was their relatively famous person to make the project a bit more Hollywood-friendly.

by Anonymousreply 20411/26/2017

and we can't point it out on DL, but the author created bisexual characters. Oliver spends the next 20 years is a hetero relationship and it's suggested that Elio goes both ways. hardly the "gay" icons the fangurls and denizens of DL pine for

by Anonymousreply 20511/26/2017

They're still in love with one another 20 years after that summer. If that's not a love story between two men, I don't know what is.

by Anonymousreply 20611/26/2017

ah, yes.....your point being......?

by Anonymousreply 20711/26/2017

I also doubt that when Luca met with Timmy when he was 17 to discuss the role with him that he questioned him on his sexuality to make sure he was casting a straight actor.

by Anonymousreply 20811/26/2017

It's kind of unbelievable to me that Luca doesn't audition his actors. I guess it makes more sense with the known actors he works with because he will have seen their other work but I bet he couldn't believe his luck when he got on set and saw Timothée act the part for the first time.

by Anonymousreply 20911/26/2017

Yeah, I know Luca is a bit of a creep but I agree with what he's said about not asking his actors about their sexuality. Like, everyone assumes Armie is straight because he has a wife and kids. But, literally, who the hell knows? Only him. Same with Timothee, and any other actor. Luca met Timothee when he was just 17. He's only 21 now. I was still confused as hell at that age. I don't know... I would love for more openly gay, bi, trans etc. actors and actresses to get more roles but I do agree that people tend to assume some actors are straight when in reality we don't know for sure and there must be TONS of actors either refusing to come out or not comfortable enough to do it publicly. And picking ONLY openly gay actors would certainly mean you have A LOT less options to choose from.

by Anonymousreply 21011/26/2017

Why don't they talk about the fact the director and writer are both gay? I think that's far more important than the actor's sexuality.

by Anonymousreply 21111/26/2017

R211 because they only have fun when they're being negative.

by Anonymousreply 21211/26/2017

it wouldn't fit their narrative, so don't confuse them with facts

by Anonymousreply 21311/26/2017

Ew, I just realised how bad the movie could have been if it had been realised by a straight director and writer. R211 Thankful for that at least.

by Anonymousreply 21411/26/2017

Wasn’t Timothée already attached to the project irregardless of Luca? The producer is Timothée’s agent’s husband

by Anonymousreply 21511/26/2017

At the time Luca was attached as a co-producer, I think.

by Anonymousreply 21611/26/2017

Well as the director Luca still would have had to approve, hence why they had the meeting when he was 17.

And yes, the director, writer and producers are all gay which is pretty historical for a gay film as mainstream as this but no one cares I guess.

by Anonymousreply 21711/26/2017

@R215 "irregardless of Luca"

Oh, dear

by Anonymousreply 21811/26/2017

Incidentally, I never understood some people's usage of 'irregardless' instead of 'regardless.' The latter has fewer syllables; don't people normally try to simplify things? Thus, you'd think 'regardless' would be more popular. But too often I hear/see 'irregardless.' Maybe it sounds more 'posh' to certain people? I don't know.

by Anonymousreply 21911/26/2017

R219 it seems to me that you would use the suffix -less to denote the opposite of something, such as charmless, pointless, needless.

So why add a prefix such as ir- that would play the same role as '-less' in irrelevant, irreligious, irregular, irresponsible at the same time?

'irregardless'??? It doesn't make sense, not that the English language is logical anyway but sometimes you can find rhyme and reason.

by Anonymousreply 22011/26/2017

Busy Phillips is stanning. She is an Academy voter, joined last year.

by Anonymousreply 22111/26/2017

Her BFF is Michelle Williams, also an Academy member and nominee.

by Anonymousreply 22211/26/2017

@R221 she liked it then. Another vote for the boys

by Anonymousreply 22311/26/2017

After 3 days I am still absolutely floored by this film. There is so much to digest and savour in it. So many little moments that make this such a powerful piece of filmmaking. So subtle yet so loud. I cried and cried and cried.

Timothee is GOD!!!!

by Anonymousreply 22411/26/2017

[quote]Oscar screeners leak in mid to late December. So quality version will be online then.

Or before ...someone on Reddit posted a photo of the batch of screeners they'd just received a couple of weeks ago, and the film was among them - see photo at link.

[quote]and we can't point it out on DL, but the author created bisexual characters. Oliver spends the next 20 years is a hetero relationship and it's suggested that Elio goes both ways.

I can sort of see why some block out or brush off their bisexuality - because honestly, from what we are shown in the story, Andre Aciman has depicted them as lousy with women, and I'm not even sure he realizes it. Elio treats Marzia like shit, using her body, leaving her waiting and has a certain detachment towards her, like she's a science experiment, though she clearly really likes him. It's unclear how truly interested Oliver is in Chiara, but once again, she gets treated pretty cavalierly too. Neither girl is depicted as being anywhere near the intellectual equals of the two males. There is a feeling with Elio and Oliver that their love is all the nobler because it is a love between two men - sort of the ancient Greek attitude. Their relationships with women feel baser.

And Oliver's wife, whoever she is, is his dupe - he's in love with Elio when he marries her, and remains that way throughout their life together. Indeed, because Aciman tells us so little of what their relationship is like, it's hard to see it as much beyond him escaping into the heterosexual ideal. Their marriage is long and produces children who are loved by their father, but how honest is it?

The heterosexual side of their bisexuality doesn't make them look good, frankly.

by Anonymousreply 22511/26/2017

Well, Elio's costume in the very final scene pretty much wiped any doubts I may have had about his future. That shirt and that haircut and that makeup was gayer than any of the Ru Paul's fashion choices. But I also thought it was very nice touch by the director to tell us about the character development. It was a great callback to the earlier scene when Elio was refusing to wear the "shirt that Sunny and Cher brought him from Miami" because he thought he would look ridiculous. It showed how much he changed.

by Anonymousreply 22611/27/2017

R226 good point. Yes, I thought his attire was gayer than Christmas in that final scene. But in all honesty I doubt Luca would dare turn Elio 100% straight in a sequel, he knows his fan base will drop exponentially.

by Anonymousreply 22711/27/2017

[Quote]There is so much to digest and savour in it.

Yet no actual nudity or gay sex.

by Anonymousreply 22811/27/2017

R227 and it would make no sense because his love and attraction for Oliver is the magnetic center of the story, so how straight can you write him? Not much.

Regarding Oliver's bisexuality, he implies to Elio that he and Chiara actually never got anywhere because he wasn't interested in her that way (despite everyone else being interested in that girl, apparently) and I found it blatant (particularly in the film) that, when he was with Chiara, he was putting a show for Elio's benefit. He tells Elio that his father would have sent him to a correctional facility if he had found out that he was in a relationship with another man, then he announces he's getting married... It's the typical case of a forcefully closeted man trying to live a heterosexual life after having experienced real love and desire. He never forgets Elio and doesn't even try to, because he hangs that picture on the wall where he works. He knows that his wife will never be THAT for him, although I've no doubt that he's fond of her.

by Anonymousreply 22911/27/2017

R228, there was more than enough nudity and gay sex for me. The amount they included served the story on the screen perfectly. If I wanted porn, I'd have visited the usual places.

by Anonymousreply 23011/27/2017

Some cute stuff.

by Anonymousreply 23111/27/2017

R231 Timmy pronounced his full first name as 'Timothy.' I thought it was 'Tee-mo-tay" or something?

by Anonymousreply 23211/27/2017

I'm pretty sure that screener image is bullshit r225. According to gold derby, these are the screeners that have gone out so far.

by Anonymousreply 23311/27/2017

Are they really going to nominate Judi Dench for reprising her Queen Victoria role? Frankly, I'm sick of all these British queen biopics and TV series.

by Anonymousreply 23411/27/2017

R232 You normally pronounce it "Tee-mo-tay" but after spending his entire life in the US, he's using a more americanized version, must be more convenient that way.

by Anonymousreply 23511/27/2017

No reason for him to come off as needlessly pretentious.

by Anonymousreply 23611/27/2017

R236 If pronouncing your name how it's meant to be prounounced is being needlessly pretentious, then yeah, sure.

by Anonymousreply 23711/27/2017

Vanity Fair does a nice fluff piece saying the movie is doing well

by Anonymousreply 23811/27/2017

Vanity Fair has been sucking this movie's cock forever

by Anonymousreply 23911/27/2017

and a fine one it is to suck, where's the line?

by Anonymousreply 24011/27/2017

Gotham awards will start being announced at 7:30 EST.

by Anonymousreply 24111/27/2017

[Quote]There was more than enough nudity and gay sex for me. The amount they included served the story on the screen perfectly. If I wanted porn, I'd have visited the usual places.

Spoken like a true frau. Studios will continue to make neutered gay movies because people like you think it's totally fine.

by Anonymousreply 24211/27/2017

R242 a gay movie is only good or representative of the community if it includes graphic sex/nudity? No wonder people think we're just sexual deviants.

by Anonymousreply 24311/27/2017

The screener has definitely gone out, David Ehrlich tweeted a photo of the disc. Timmy has said people are free to pronounce it however they want, but I'd imagine he'd feel uncomfortable using the French pronunciation when the vast majority of people around him use the American version.

by Anonymousreply 24411/27/2017

When I was a kid, we had family friends with the surname Benoit. They pronounced it 'beh-noyt.' It wasn't until years later, in young adulthood, that I learned the French pronunciation is something like 'beh-nwah.'

by Anonymousreply 24511/27/2017

R244 isn't his father French, actually from France? I wonder how he says it?

by Anonymousreply 24611/27/2017

How did the crowds at Union Square and the Paris react to the movie? Any first hand reports...?

by Anonymousreply 24711/27/2017

Gotham Awards starts in few minutes:

by Anonymousreply 24811/27/2017

[quote] Timmy has said people are free to pronounce it however they want, but I'd imagine he'd feel uncomfortable using the French pronunciation when the vast majority of people around him use the American version.

Burn him!

by Anonymousreply 24911/27/2017

R249 LOL! I wouldn't be surprised

by Anonymousreply 25011/27/2017

I'm part french with a french as fuck last name and I never use the correct pronunciation because it makes me feel self conscious. I assume people are gonna think I'm being pretentious by sounding unnecessarily french in a non-french speaking country

by Anonymousreply 25111/27/2017

Timmy is looking good at Gotham red carpet. No sign of Armie yet.

by Anonymousreply 25211/27/2017

He might not turn up after the twitter-buzzfeed fiasco

by Anonymousreply 25311/27/2017

But he's presenting.

by Anonymousreply 25411/27/2017

It's official, E Alex Jung is the Luca is a cunt poster.

by Anonymousreply 25511/27/2017

R255 what was the point of that article?

by Anonymousreply 25611/27/2017

The author feels that leaving out Oliver eating the peach means Luca ruined the scene and doesn't fully grasp the book

[quote]Why does this seemingly small divergence from the text matter? Because the peach is a metaphor, but it’s also a literal bridge between Oliver and Elio — a way for the two to be joined together. The book’s title, Call Me by Your Name, is something Oliver implores Elio to do after the two have had sex, and comes from a desire to blur boundaries between the self and other. There’s something particularly gay male about this constant mirroring: Elio wants to be Oliver, and in many ways sees him as a better version of himself. (The hellish modern Instagram iteration of this is “boyfriend twins.”) There’s certainly an entire thesis to be written about modern gay male narcissism, but I’m going to table that for now and simply say that there’s a way in which a younger man can look up to an older one and see an aspirational self. His desire is rooted both in the fact that he wants to be him as much as he wants to be with him.

by Anonymousreply 25711/27/2017

But he seems to be implying that it was Armie's fault somehow. That last sentence.

by Anonymousreply 25811/27/2017

The last sentence?

[quote]Perhaps it was enough for Guadagnino to have Armie Hammer venture a lick, but as an avid purveyor of stone fruits, I can tell you: Get yourself a man who will eat the whole peach.

It doesn't lay the blame at Armie.

by Anonymousreply 25911/27/2017

I am happy he didn't eat it. He did licked and swallowed some cum off it though and he liked it. LOL. But I wish they kept the “Whatever happens between us, Elio, I just want you to know. Don’t ever say you didn’t know.” But they did create a different version of that line in the final phone call scene. So I am OK.

by Anonymousreply 26011/27/2017

I sort of agree with that article, but it doesn't ruin the scene or the movie for me at all, it's just different. Maybe a little worse, but more palatable for most people I suppose (even many gay men who find those scenes in the novel "too much").

by Anonymousreply 26111/27/2017

R259 doesn't it come off as "Get yourself an actor who will actually do the scene"?

by Anonymousreply 26211/27/2017

Why would Hammer refuse to eat a peach, that doesn't make any sense.

by Anonymousreply 26311/27/2017

[quote]“Whatever happens between us, Elio, I just want you to know. Don’t ever say you didn’t know.”

My favorite line from the book, it is such a powerful moment after he eats the peach.

by Anonymousreply 26411/27/2017

It's getting bulldozed at the Gothams tonight

Timothee won Breakthrough award but against weak competition, like the little girl from The Florida Project

by Anonymousreply 26511/27/2017

I spoke too soon, it won Best Feature

by Anonymousreply 26611/27/2017

Well deserved, I'm very glad.

by Anonymousreply 26711/27/2017

[quote]Why would Hammer refuse to eat a peach, that doesn't make any sense.

Not just a peach...a peach that is supposed to be full of semen. Have you not seen the movie/read the book?

by Anonymousreply 26811/27/2017

[quote]You normally pronounce it "Tee-mo-tay" but after spending his entire life in the US, he's using a more americanized version, must be more convenient that way.

There's a red carpet interview, I believe at NYFF and the interviewer asked if it's pronounced Timothy or Tim-o-tay and Timothee doesn't mind either way because he knows it's a bit "much" to ask someone to pronounce it the French way. Zoe Kazan pronounced it "Timo-thay" at the Gotham Awards.

by Anonymousreply 26911/27/2017

I hate cold semen.

Even cum on the face or belly is a bit repellent.

Straight from the spigot for me...

by Anonymousreply 27011/27/2017

I'm pretty sure that poster was just saying that from Armie's perspective it just eating a peach, obviously there is no actual semen on it. He just did what his director wanted.

by Anonymousreply 27111/27/2017

R268 it's supposed to be filled with semen but it's not. His character sucks dick in a couple of scenes and wipes semen off his chest in another. I don't see why he would object to eat a peach that is supposed to contain semen.

by Anonymousreply 27211/27/2017

The whole family

by Anonymousreply 27311/27/2017

Congrats to CMBYN! The last four films to win Best Feature have all gone on to win Best Picture at the Oscars: 12 Years a Slave, Birdman, Spotlight, Moonlight.

by Anonymousreply 27411/28/2017

Sorry, it's just three: Moonlight, Spotlight, Birdman. (I was thinking of the Spirit Awards.)

by Anonymousreply 27511/28/2017

[quote]THIS IS THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM! NOTICE ALL THE TOP MAGS WHO GAVE THIS STELLAR REVIEWS ALSO HAPPENED 2 UNANIMOUSLY CALL MY @TODAYshow PERFORMANCE " WEIRD", "BIZARRE" & "TWISTED" FUNNY THATS MY REVIEW ON THEIR TAKE ON THIS FILM! #PRESERVEINNOCENCE

by Anonymousreply 27611/28/2017

Wow even Rex Reed loved it.

by Anonymousreply 27711/28/2017

'The Big Sick is rooting for Call Me By Your Name all the way. This is an official press release.'

by Anonymousreply 27811/28/2017

With RPatz.

by Anonymousreply 27911/28/2017

Love.

by Anonymousreply 28011/28/2017

R279 Armie Hammer is hammered.

by Anonymousreply 28111/28/2017

Timmy wins NBR Breakthrough Actor. Don't expect the film to get much here, they're usually very traditional.

by Anonymousreply 28211/28/2017

Also gets listed in their Top 10 films.

by Anonymousreply 28311/28/2017

From The New Yorker Review:

"The film's release could not be more propitious. So assailed are we by the reports of harmful pleasures, and of the coercive male will being imposed through lust, that it comes as a relief to be reminded, in such style, on consensual joy. 'I don't want either of us to pay for this,' Oliver says. By falling for each other, he an Elio tumble not into error, still less into sin but into a sort of delirious concord...."

Take that pedo trolls, fuck off and die.

by Anonymousreply 28411/28/2017

Is that Richard Brody? I want to slap him.

by Anonymousreply 28511/28/2017

No, it's Anthony Lane. Richard Brody panned it unsurprisingly as he also hated I Am Love.

by Anonymousreply 28611/28/2017

The article at R280 must say, haven't read all of it only the beginning, however, it seems to get one thing wrong: he claims there's no shame. Not true. There's shame experienced by Elio's character a few times in the film: when he wakes up the morning after having had sex with Oliver and you see it reflected on his face; when his family receives the visit of 'Sonny and Cher' and his reluctance (behind the scenes, that is) to wear a gift from them because he saw it as gay; there is also shame in the 'peach scene' when Oliver tries to swallow peach, his semen and all with it, which drives Elio to burst into tears

by Anonymousreply 28711/28/2017

R277, Rex also mentions The Post, Lady Bird and Movie Stars (?) Don't Die in Liverpool as being among the best of the year.

by Anonymousreply 28811/28/2017

Damn Richard Brody!

SLAY BISH SLAY!

by Anonymousreply 28911/28/2017

Much prefer this review from the New Yorker.

by Anonymousreply 29011/28/2017

is it common for TNYer to have dueling reviews? Lane's is in my print copy.

by Anonymousreply 29111/28/2017

Maybe Brody is the "Luca The Cunt" troll here on DL, really does seem to hate him

by Anonymousreply 29211/28/2017

Richard Brody's review raises several fair points honestly, it is worth a read, not just getting upset because he isn't fawning over it.

by Anonymousreply 29311/28/2017

Bahahaha Mrs. H looks like Timmy’s mother in r279.

by Anonymousreply 29411/28/2017

Lane's is the one to go on Metacritic (with a 100).

by Anonymousreply 29511/28/2017

R294 She did caption it 'modern family'.

by Anonymousreply 29611/28/2017

So will Brody's review only be online on website?

by Anonymousreply 29711/28/2017

R297 It will probably go on RT, but it wont go on Metacritic as they only allow one review from each publication.

by Anonymousreply 29811/28/2017

r296

The family that lays together, stays together.

by Anonymousreply 29911/28/2017

[quote]Bahahaha Mrs. H looks like Timmy’s mother in [R279].

I don't think so. His mother is shorter and plumper and very white by comparison.

by Anonymousreply 30011/28/2017

Armie's canines and Timmy looking like a beautiful overexposed girl backstage at the Ellen show

by Anonymousreply 30111/28/2017

Never mind! I misunderstood.

by Anonymousreply 30211/28/2017

Adorable guys.

by Anonymousreply 30311/28/2017

So much more relaxed than on Fallon, he should always have Armie accompany him.

by Anonymousreply 30411/28/2017

They are honestly adorable when they're together. I love how gentle Timmy is touching Armie's beard.

by Anonymousreply 30511/28/2017

From Timo's insta story. Is that Luca's boyfriend (husband?)?

by Anonymousreply 30611/29/2017

Yes, r306.

by Anonymousreply 30711/29/2017

yes, that's Luca's partner. He's tall, blond and a bit lanky, just like Armie.

by Anonymousreply 30811/29/2017

He's cute.

by Anonymousreply 30911/29/2017

I just bought tickets in San Francisco for Call Me By Your Name. They are only on Dec. 14 at 5 showings and are going fast.

by Anonymousreply 31011/29/2017

Well, it's San Francisco.

by Anonymousreply 31111/29/2017

Great think piece on Film Experience discussing some criticism about the lack of graphic gay sex in the film.

by Anonymousreply 31211/29/2017

Don't you think if there WAS graphic sex/nudity, that people would be more up in arms about the age difference?

by Anonymousreply 31311/29/2017

Corey Feldman trying to eke out another 15 minutes by calling out CMBYN

by Anonymousreply 31411/29/2017

Feldman is mentally unwell. Leave him to it.

by Anonymousreply 31511/29/2017

Armie and Timmy on Ellen.

by Anonymousreply 31611/29/2017

Rave from The Atlantic

by Anonymousreply 31711/29/2017

Entertainment Weekly

by Anonymousreply 31811/29/2017

Esquire

by Anonymousreply 31911/29/2017

R319 That's a beautiful article.

by Anonymousreply 32011/29/2017

Slate giving the thinkpieces a rest to actually say something nice about this film on their podcast.

by Anonymousreply 32111/29/2017

R321 Direct link.

by Anonymousreply 32211/29/2017

Touchy touchy.

by Anonymousreply 32311/29/2017

Watching Timmy in those interviews I can't help but notice how much different he is from his character in CMBYN both physically and personality. A complete transformation without an inch of make up or other tricks. What an actor!!!!!

by Anonymousreply 32411/29/2017

R324 Absolutely, it's not just the personality but even in the way he speaks, walks, holds himself. Incredible acting.

by Anonymousreply 32511/29/2017

Armie is on James Corden tonight, Timmy will be on James Corden tomorrow night.

by Anonymousreply 32611/29/2017

Hopefully Timmy will be more comfortable on Corden than he was on Fallon.

by Anonymousreply 32711/29/2017

What happened on Fallon?

by Anonymousreply 32811/29/2017

R328 He was just very nervous, probably because he was on his own and Fallon didn't let him get a word in.

by Anonymousreply 32911/29/2017

R329 is that cringey-awkward? I get second-hand embarrassment really bad.

by Anonymousreply 33011/29/2017

R330 Not really, it's more endearing than cringey.

by Anonymousreply 33111/29/2017

Armie is on Corden now.

by Anonymousreply 33211/29/2017

I prefer Timmy's unpolished interviews to Armie's stale ones to be honest. They're fun when they're together though.

by Anonymousreply 33311/29/2017

[quote]yes, that's Luca's partner. He's tall, blond and a bit lanky, just like Armie.

I think Armie is probably Luca's physical ideal, given Luca's admission that he became obsessed with Armie after seeing him in The Social Network. He would throw over his partner in a minute if Armie would agree to be the Helmut Berger to his Visconti.

by Anonymousreply 33411/29/2017

Armie is most people's physical ideal to be fair.

by Anonymousreply 33511/29/2017

Luca's balding head is probably just happy to be spending so much time with three attractive men with full heads of hair.

by Anonymousreply 33611/29/2017

R335 not true

by Anonymousreply 33711/29/2017

You're right, most people are repulsed by 6'5" slim men with conventionally attractive features.

by Anonymousreply 33811/29/2017

Armie and Timmy actually represent the two very different sides of the male ideal.

by Anonymousreply 33911/29/2017

Tim O'Tay is my perfect ideal of man.

by Anonymousreply 34011/29/2017

R340 There is something about him.

by Anonymousreply 34111/29/2017

Armie dancing on Corden.

by Anonymousreply 34211/30/2017

R338 I think you should be framing it as WHITE male ideal. I am sick of the white supremacists (I'm looking at you R338, R339 and R340) trying to impose on everyone around the world their own idea of beauty. Beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder, beauty is culturally and socially conditioned. That is why perfectly gorgeous blacks and Asians go unnoticed, or classed as not meeting the 'ideal'

by Anonymousreply 34311/30/2017

More.

by Anonymousreply 34411/30/2017

Calm down, no one mentioned his race as a reason why he's attractive.

by Anonymousreply 34511/30/2017

R344 what world do we live in, how we have plummeted in the intellectual stakes that in order to promote his film a grown man in his thirties talks about breaking his toe. This is the rubbish the elites feed us with

by Anonymousreply 34611/30/2017

R345 you do not need to. The word 'attractiveness' automatically conjures up a white dude.

by Anonymousreply 34711/30/2017

R347 That's on you.

by Anonymousreply 34811/30/2017

Another.

by Anonymousreply 34911/30/2017

Armie is ridiculously tall.

by Anonymousreply 35011/30/2017

Sometimes I think he's taller than 6'5".

by Anonymousreply 35111/30/2017

I just cant wrap my head around Timmy's height in comparison.

by Anonymousreply 35211/30/2017

Love Armie, but he’s way too tall for my taste.

by Anonymousreply 35311/30/2017

R351 he's 6'5" in his stockinged feet; slightly more with shoes on.

by Anonymousreply 35411/30/2017

R352 isn't he like 6'? He looks like such a shrimp standing next to Armie, though.

by Anonymousreply 35511/30/2017

Timothee has won Best Actor at NYFCC making an Oscar nomination very likely

He will be the youngest BA nominated since Mickey Rooney in the 40s

by Anonymousreply 35611/30/2017

He's the youngest to ever win that category at NYFCC by about five years.

by Anonymousreply 35711/30/2017

Jason Adams from My New Plaid Pants blog has seen the film at least 7 times. He posted this pic of Robert Pattinson with the gang. I'm sure it's been posted here earlier but I'm too lazy to go through the thread.

BTW, he apparently has a couple of (gay?) friends who pretty much hated the movie.

by Anonymousreply 35811/30/2017

Which one of you bitches wrote this "review"? Fuck You!

by Anonymousreply 35911/30/2017

You don't know Armond White r359? He is notorious.

by Anonymousreply 36011/30/2017

R359 does have a point, though.....

"The film’s screenplay by veteran filmmaker James Ivory (director of the stuffy A Room with a View, Maurice, Howards End) is cloaked in an aura of taboo which makes no sense for a millennial film—except that it appeals to hidden guilt"

by Anonymousreply 36111/30/2017

No, it has an aura of taboo because it takes place in 1983. Elio and Oliver aren't millennials, they are babyboomers.

by Anonymousreply 36211/30/2017

I don't think Elio is a baby boomer. Didn't that end in 1965 at the latest? If Elio was 17 in 1983, that means he was born in 1966 and barely missed being a boomer.

by Anonymousreply 36311/30/2017

[quote]No, it has an aura of taboo because it takes place in 1983.

This! Is that reviewer a moron?

by Anonymousreply 36411/30/2017

Armie is like an all American white wonder bread. Bland but likeable in an uninteresting harmless way. Btw does anyone feel he talks a bit weird like his jaw is loose or something?

by Anonymousreply 36511/30/2017

[quote]This! Is that reviewer a moron?

Armond White lives to be contrarian, many just consider him a troll and performance artist. He was kicked out of the New York Film Critics.

by Anonymousreply 36611/30/2017

R365 behave. Stop being nasty, there's no need for that....

by Anonymousreply 36711/30/2017

Someone give R343 a Xanax before he registers for another gender and race class.

by Anonymousreply 36811/30/2017

Tim is on James Cordon tonight at 12:37am EST

by Anonymousreply 36911/30/2017

Could you be more specific, R369?

by Anonymousreply 37011/30/2017

The late, late show on CBS, which comes in after the Late show with Stephen Colbert...

by Anonymousreply 37111/30/2017

He's on right this second

by Anonymousreply 37211/30/2017

[quote]Jason Adams from My New Plaid Pants blog has seen the film at least 7 times.

I like Jason, and his early enthusiasm for the movie was fun for a while, but he's beginning to embarrass himself a bit with his stanning now. He's reached the point where anyone who doesn't see everything about it as he does is somehow the enemy.

[quote]No, it has an aura of taboo because it takes place in 1983.

Exactly. There is a somewhat troubling and inaccurate narrative springing up in the coverage of the film, that unlike Brokeback Mountain et al, this movie is free of the tragedy and homophobia of past gay-themed films, simply because Elio's parents are accepting and nobody dies violently. But why aren't Elio and Oliver, the soulmates, together in the end? Why does Elio pull away from Oliver after their first night together? Why can't Oliver kiss Elio in public, in the daytime? Why is their relationship a secret at all? Elio has some self-loathing to work through for sleeping with a man and Oliver, in the end, chooses hetero respectability over the love of his life. Homophobia's effects are very pertinent to the whole thing, despite people's desire to gloss it over. 1983 wasn't 2017.

by Anonymousreply 37311/30/2017

We've talked about the recent arbitration with the WGA over the movie's screenwriting credits, with James Ivory succeeding in getting Luca's co-writing credit removed. Luca blew it off, saying everybody is still friends and it was no big deal. So James Ivory's quote from this recent interview is interesting:

[quote]I never went on the set of the film. I stayed in New York. I had planned to go but it seemed they would be happier if I didn’t come.

by Anonymousreply 37411/30/2017

[quote]I never went on the set of the film. I stayed in New York. I had planned to go but it seemed they would be happier if I didn’t come.

Writers are rarely welcomed on set. They're the red-headed stepchild.

And for better for worse the WGA more often than not side with the scribe who isn't a producer or director on the project. The attitude is that in the past too many producers and directors have received or lobbied heavily for vanity credits for adding a line here or there so the WGA/ anonymous members who examine the scripts, err on the side of the writer who isn't working on the film in another capacity.

by Anonymousreply 37511/30/2017

R373 hits the nail on the head

by Anonymousreply 37611/30/2017

[quote]Exactly. There is a somewhat troubling and inaccurate narrative springing up in the coverage of the film, that unlike Brokeback Mountain et al, this movie is free of the tragedy and homophobia of past gay-themed films

Because Armie Hammer loves saying this, he has said it over and over during the press tour. I've always disagreed with that and have posted that before, your post says it well.

by Anonymousreply 37712/01/2017

[quote]Exactly. There is a somewhat troubling and inaccurate narrative springing up in the coverage of the film, that unlike Brokeback Mountain et al, this movie is free of the tragedy and homophobia of past gay-themed films, simply because Elio's parents are accepting and nobody dies violently. But why aren't Elio and Oliver, the soulmates, together in the end? Why does Elio pull away from Oliver after their first night together? Why can't Oliver kiss Elio in public, in the daytime? Why is their relationship a secret at all? Elio has some self-loathing to work through for sleeping with a man and Oliver, in the end, chooses hetero respectability over the love of his life. Homophobia's effects are very pertinent to the whole thing, despite people's desire to gloss it over. 1983 wasn't 2017.

I don't really disagree with your post but what happens in the end is not just because of homophobia. I've yet to see the film but I've read the novel. As I understood it Elio most certainly was not the love of Oliver's life. Oliver seemed to be like Kinsey 2 or 3, and it was quite obvious he'd go with a woman in the end. Elio was a summer fling to him but sure a meaningful one.

What happened in the novel could very easily be happening practically everywhere today. Especially since we're talking about a truly bisexual man, Oliver, and Elio who sounds like a Kinsey 5. BTW, this is not really a comment to you but to those who think that in 2017 bi men wouldn't go with women and would only choose a man to be with. Bisexuality is a real thing and Oliver truly seems to prefer women.

I'm a Kinsey 5 myself, and a straight chaser on top of that, altough the hets I find delicious are usually Kinsey 1's, so I've met the real life Olivers. Then again maybe I got it all wrong since apparently you can read the novel in various ways.

by Anonymousreply 37812/01/2017

[quote] As I understood it Elio most certainly was not the love of Oliver's life.

Oliver told him he was!

[quote]“Whatever happens between us, Elio, I just want you to know. Don’t ever say you didn’t know.”

And the whole point of the flash forward when Elio visits Oliver, he sees the location of their first kiss hanging above his desk in his office. Oliver never got over Elio either.

by Anonymousreply 37912/01/2017

you must be new to DL (r378). unlike in the real world, bisexuality does not exist here. anyone who's ever touched a dick not his own, is gay

in the novel, which created the characters, we know nothing about Oliver that does not come from Elio's narrative. We only see him as Elio sees him.

by Anonymousreply 38012/01/2017

We know Oliver talked about how lucky Elio was, and that his parents would have sent him to a conversion camp if they knew.

by Anonymousreply 38112/01/2017

[quote] Jason Adams from My New Plaid Pants blog has seen the film at least 7 times.... I like Jason, and his early enthusiasm for the movie was fun for a while, but he's beginning to embarrass himself a bit with his stanning now. He's reached the point where anyone who doesn't see everything about it as he does is somehow the enemy.

Agreed with this r373, MNPP's coverage has gotten way OTT but like you said at least it seems to have sprung from a genuine place, an attachment to the movie and the story itself, unlike a lot of Oscar Pundits who only talk about things in relation to prizes and box office. JA's post on seeing CMBYN his first time was very moving and personal

by Anonymousreply 38212/01/2017

In this case I go with Oliver's actions, not just by his words. He's a bi man who loved Elio but not enough to spend the rest of his life with him. Sure he lived in a world filled with homophobia, especially around the that time when AIDS appeared, so obviously that played a part in everything.

BTW, in the 90s when Linus Roache's Priest came out I saw the film in a same little theater 6 times in a few weeks. I can totally understand why Jason Adams is doing this.

by Anonymousreply 38312/01/2017

[quote]And the whole point of the flash forward when Elio visits Oliver, he sees the location of their first kiss hanging above his desk in his office. Oliver never got over Elio either.

Yes, and not just the postcard of where they first kissed, which Oliver has put in place so he can look at it EVERY DAY, but what Oliver wrote on the back, intending someday to have it returned to Elio so he could read it: '[italic]Cor cordium[/italic], heart of hearts, I've never said anything truer in my life to anyone.' The whole point of 'cor cordium' is the story of how Mary Shelley kept Percy Bysshe Shelley's heart with her (his physical heart, snatched from his body as it was being cremated) after he died until the end of her life. Is that what you write to a mere summer fling, even one you loved? The love being depicted in the story is a lot bigger than that. You can argue that Elio himself did not know that he was dealing with the love of his life at that time - that is something that he learns along the road of life and has arrived at by the time he and Oliver meet again much later. But as you say, r378, Oliver had figured it out: 'Whatever happens between us, Elio, I just want you to know. Don’t ever say you didn’t know.'

The 'Ghost Spots' section of the book is for us to see that though the relationship itself was brief, the love has not dissipated decades later. People can debate whether that's good or bad, but still, it's what we're being shown.

[quote] Bisexuality is a real thing and Oliver truly seems to prefer women.

I'm not disputing the existence of bisexuality, or even Oliver's bisexuality. But it doesn't change the fact that the novel presents these two as not being over each other, even 20 years later. And they are two men. Does Oliver have a postcard of the first place he kissed his wife on his office wall, with Latin quotes referencing one person's undying love for another?

by Anonymousreply 38412/01/2017

Sorry, I meant r379 above, not r378.

by Anonymousreply 38512/01/2017

Sigh

Oliver does not really love Elio

Oliver has genuine affection for Elio, but the affair is really more a function of his narcissism while Elio is genuinely obsessed with him

This is the point of the novel

That is why the title is what it is

"Call me by your name" = I want to call out MY name during lovemaking

by Anonymousreply 38612/01/2017

r386= E Alex Jung

by Anonymousreply 38712/01/2017

I don't doubt that Oliver loved Elio but the reality is the novel didn't really go that deep into his psyche. We were left wondering what really happened. In that sense I do get why some people view Elio as an unreliable narrator. I totally read Oliver as a bi guy who's more into women but then again anything is possible.

by Anonymousreply 38812/01/2017

Aaron Taylor Johnson is a fan

by Anonymousreply 38912/01/2017

R389 a fan of what?

by Anonymousreply 39012/01/2017

Script:

by Anonymousreply 39112/01/2017

Browsed through the script. It's quite different to what ended up in the film, a lot of stuff from the book that didn't end up there. No narration in the film either, which is a good thing.

by Anonymousreply 39212/01/2017

[quote]A gay movie is only good or representative of the community if it includes graphic sex/nudity? No wonder people think we're just sexual deviants.

When was the last time a lesbian movie omitted sex scenes? Exactly, it never happens, it only happens when the two main characters are two guys.

by Anonymousreply 39312/02/2017

Well lesbian movies often go too far the other way and just become porn directed by and made for straight men.

by Anonymousreply 39412/02/2017

CMBYN does NOT omit sex scenes. There are two blowjobs in it where you hear Armie's lips smacking on Timmy's cock. Just because there isn't a close-up of a cock cramming into Armie's ass y'all are gonna riot in the streets

by Anonymousreply 39512/02/2017

LOL!

by Anonymousreply 39612/02/2017

How big is Timmy’s cock, by the way? What is DL’s best guesstimate?

by Anonymousreply 39712/02/2017

They're love scenes, not sex scenes, which is even better

by Anonymousreply 39812/02/2017

R393 you seem annoyed, more than anything, that you won't get to see Armie or Timmy's dicks.

BTW: Women's genitals are inside her, so you can show vulva and boobs without much consequence.

by Anonymousreply 39912/02/2017

.....................

by Anonymousreply 40012/03/2017

Ugh, can we get Aaron Taylor Johnson to play a gay role with some hot sex scenes? I need that in my life.

by Anonymousreply 40112/03/2017

Almost 1 Million in just 4 theaters.

by Anonymousreply 40212/03/2017

With a budget of just 3-4 million, it will be highly profitable if it continues to play like this when it opens wide next month. Also, good box office often means Oscar potential.

by Anonymousreply 40312/03/2017

"Moonlight" made 27.8 mil domestic, a a nice measure of success will be if "Call Me By Your Name" surpasses that.

by Anonymousreply 40412/03/2017

Timothée has won LAFCA. One more (NSFC) and he will sweep the big three critics associations

That does not guarantee an Oscar nomination however as Sally Hawkins for Happy Go Lucky and others In sure have swept the Big 3 without getting Oscar noms

by Anonymousreply 40512/03/2017

R405, Timmy also technically won both NBR and Gotham. And he is already the youngest ever to accomplish that fit. So he is sailing through to the Oscars.

by Anonymousreply 40612/03/2017

If Chalamet gets a lot of momentum, which supporting actor would he pull along for a coattail nod? Stulhbarg or Hammer? I'm gonna go with Hammer, not because he's better, but because I think most people won't be able to see Elio without Oliver. Kind of how Rita Moreno's formidable performance in WEST SIDE STORY helped George Chakiris get a nod and eventual win, because they came as a package, but really Russ Tamblyn was the better performance and had more to do.

by Anonymousreply 40712/03/2017

R407, with Stulbarg absent in critics mentions so far, it looks like it's Hammer.

by Anonymousreply 40812/03/2017

Best supporting actor is looking pretty open outside of Dafoe and Rockwell who are the only two sure bets.

It won't be hard for one or even both to get a nomination.

by Anonymousreply 40912/03/2017

The last year two actors from the same film were nominated for Best Supporting Actor was in 1991, when Harvey Keitel and Ben Kingsley both got nods for JFK.

by Anonymousreply 41012/03/2017

I hope Armie gets it, with all the negativity and pounding he's been getting, he deserves it.

by Anonymousreply 41112/03/2017

Sorry. Keitel and Kinglsey were nominated for BUGSY. It was Tommy Lee Jones who was nominated the same year for JFK. Thank you.

by Anonymousreply 41212/03/2017

R408 by this do you mean that in most of the reviews, the critics mainly focus on Oliver and Elio and not Elio and his dad?

by Anonymousreply 41312/03/2017

Luca has tied with Guillermo del Toro for LAFCA director

by Anonymousreply 41412/03/2017

OH WOW!!! This is a surprise. #LAFCA Best Director: Luca Guadagnino, CALL ME BY YOUR NAME + Guillermo Del Toro, THE SHAPE OF WATER tie!!!!

by Anonymousreply 41512/03/2017

Has that happened before? a tie?

by Anonymousreply 41612/03/2017

R416, at LAFCA, it's common occurrence.

by Anonymousreply 41712/03/2017

LAFCA frequently ties in many categories

by Anonymousreply 41812/03/2017

I know this comment belongs on the Oscars thread, but I think that this is Sam Rockwell's year. He's been around a long time, and Billboards is his best work ever

by Anonymousreply 41912/03/2017

It won Best Picture

by Anonymousreply 42012/03/2017

YES!!!!! BITCHES! #LAFCA Best Picture: CALL ME BY YOUR NAME!!!!!!! Runner-up: THE FLORIDA PROJECT

by Anonymousreply 42112/03/2017

If everything else were the same - same performances, etc - but the actors were openly gay, would this film have received the same level of attention and acclaim?

by Anonymousreply 42212/03/2017

R422, Oh, please don't you even start! Not everything is about your some kind of hidden agenda. The book was acclaimed and popular way before this film ever existed. So just, fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 42312/03/2017

It was a simple question, R423, interesting it generated such an over-the-top reaction from you.

by Anonymousreply 42412/03/2017

[quote]but the actors were openly gay, would this film have received the same level of attention and acclaim?

Nope.

by Anonymousreply 42512/03/2017

R423, R422 is right

by Anonymousreply 42612/03/2017

Someone is still trying, I see.

by Anonymousreply 42712/03/2017

It should have starred Matt Bomer and Neil Patrick Harris, wished no one ever

by Anonymousreply 42812/03/2017

Really odd how OTT reactions are to the idea of gay actors playing these roles.

by Anonymousreply 42912/03/2017

Question (only for those who have actually read the book); what openly gay actors should have played Elio and Oliver?

by Anonymousreply 43012/03/2017

They could have found unknown ones.

by Anonymousreply 43112/03/2017

In which case it would never have been picked up by Sony and gone straight to streaming on Netflix

by Anonymousreply 43212/03/2017

It's not the fault of the people who made CMBYN that so few actors are out - you can't expect them to cast from the extremely limited pool of out gay actors.

by Anonymousreply 43312/03/2017

R432 Basically.

The thing is, I think, if Elio and Oliver were played by gay/bi actors the movie would be getting the same recognition but not the actors simply because the academy and the regular not-already-a-fan movie goer loves to think "playing gay" requires some extra work and/or talent from a straight person. It's why I think even if Timothee or even Armie actually were into men they would never say anything about it until all awards and promo are done.

by Anonymousreply 43412/03/2017

R432 As opposed to the huge draw names of Armie Hammer and Timothee Chalamet?

by Anonymousreply 43512/03/2017

No one has yet identified two openly gay actors who should/could have been cast

by Anonymousreply 43612/03/2017

Ben Whishaw. He should be cast in everything.

[QUOTE]academy and the regular not-already-a-fan movie goer loves to think "playing gay" requires some extra work

They see playing gay the same as playing mentally disabled, let's just be frank about it. So playing gay, as playing mentally disabled, is seen as Oscar bait.

by Anonymousreply 43712/03/2017

Whishaw is decades too old to play Elio, and the completely wrong type to play Oliver.

by Anonymousreply 43812/03/2017

Ezra Miller is 25 and would have been more appropriate for Oliver, if they changed the character a bit.

by Anonymousreply 43912/03/2017

R437 Which is why in 1997 Greg Kinnear (AS GOOD AS IT GETS) got the Oscar nod instead of Rupert Everett (MY BEST FRIEND'S WEDDING). Both were in two of the top ten grossers of the year. Both also got kudos from critics. I recall some people wondering which gay performance the Academy would recognize. As it turned out...

by Anonymousreply 44012/03/2017

So cast unknowns. I love this idea some of you seem to have that Hammer and Chalamet are huge names and them being attached to the project is what brought it success.

The fact that Luca has said he'd love to work with James Woods just makes me think he's a self-hating gay man and so avoided even thinking about casting gay actors.

by Anonymousreply 44112/03/2017

Troye Sivan as Elio? maybe? He recently worked with Xavier Dolan. Who could also could work for Oliver. Maybe? It's so weird to re-cast them after seeing Timo and Armie as Elio and Oliver. I have trouble imagining them as different people.

by Anonymousreply 44212/03/2017

R430, well if you read the book, then you should know that the characters definite sexuality is open-ended. They read as bi. So there you have it.

Now before seeing the film, I was thinking: Elio- Antoine Olivier Pilon (straight) or Dylan Minnette (straight) Oliver- Nicholas Hoult (straight) or Joe Alwyn (straight) Those actors are closer to the age of the characters in the book. I can't think of a single openly gay actors I am aware of who would be my dream casting, even before I saw the film. After seeing it, even more so. If they HAD TO be gay only actors, they would have been total unknown for me.

by Anonymousreply 44312/03/2017

[quote] Troye Sivan as Elio?

That's actually a really good idea.

I wonder if Troye is jealous of Timothee, btw, for relegating him to second best in the skinny Jewish twink game.

by Anonymousreply 44412/03/2017

Troye Sivan as Elio?

That has to be a joke, right? Or someone has not read the book

by Anonymousreply 44512/03/2017

I can see Troye Sivan as Elio visually, but I'm not sure he's a good enough actor to do the role justice like Timothee did

by Anonymousreply 44612/03/2017

LMFAO at Troy Sivan casting.

by Anonymousreply 44712/03/2017

I'd like to see Sivan to pull of that last long close-up take. In his dreams.

by Anonymousreply 44812/03/2017

Thanks god Chalamet plays Elio.

by Anonymousreply 44912/03/2017

R446 Yeah. Agree. I was just thinking skinny jewish delicate boy mostly because now I can only see Timothee as Elio so I was going for someone with a similar look.

by Anonymousreply 45012/03/2017

Whom are we kidding. While I think Elio casting was on spot (can't say the same about Oliver) openly gay actors playing would never garner so much attention & adulation. Why even Ellen De Generes on her show said that she was impressed with Timothy since he is straight in real life. She said it not once but two also made it a point to mention Armie Hammer's wife several times. C'mon we are not that progressed as yet for sexuality of actor not to be an issue.

by Anonymousreply 45112/03/2017

R451, nobody says it's not an issue. We are discussing the casting. Who would you suggest to play the parts? Seems like very limited choice.

by Anonymousreply 45212/03/2017

It's only limited, R452, because people are insisting it needs to be two name actors, and that unknowns would sink the project, because apparently Armie Hammer is such a huge star

by Anonymousreply 45312/03/2017

CMBYN is SO GOOD as is, I can't imagine wanting anyone else to play these parts

by Anonymousreply 45412/03/2017

so what two "unknown" openly gay actors should have been cast?

by Anonymousreply 45512/03/2017

R453, but neither Chalamet or Hammer are unknowns. So can you name anybody?

by Anonymousreply 45612/03/2017

exactly, until someone who has read the book can name two openly gay actors who could play these roles, then stfu

by Anonymousreply 45712/03/2017

Chalamet was unknown, and Hammer's career was at a low point. Neither were the kind of names that would ensure a film would be picked up.

You and the other fraus who only care about fictional gay men on this thread can keep going "who should play them then?" all you want. All it does is expose the fact that you all know Luca's excuses are bullshit, and you desperately want to change the topic. We aren't casting directors, and you only want people to name names so you can say "he could never play the role" without even giving a reason why.

by Anonymousreply 45812/03/2017

R458, well, the film did get picked up right away by SONY even before anyone ever saw it at Sundance. So there you have it. Now YOU can try and change the topic as much as you want.

And you name somebody and then we'll talk about reasons. Until then, bye, Felicia.

by Anonymousreply 45912/03/2017

So you're claiming then that it was Hammer and Chalamet that led to Sony buying it? Really? Love to see a source on that.

by Anonymousreply 46012/03/2017

R460, I don't need to make any claims. You are the one insinuating here various theories and accusations. I am not the one who wants GAY ONLY actors in it. Or accuse the director of anything. The film is a success as it is. Period. It's up to you really.

by Anonymousreply 46112/03/2017

Except you just did make a claim.

And yes it's a success. My original question is would it have been the same level of success with gay actors playing the roles? And as I've said before, it's very interesting how people like you have responded with such stupid arguments to what is a very simple question.

by Anonymousreply 46212/03/2017

I'm not a casting director but I'm sure there are plenty of up & coming gay actors. The guy from 13 reasons why could've played Elio & as for Oliver they should've gone with someone who was around 24 or atleast looked 24. While I think Chalamet made a perfect Elio, I do think we as a society are not ready to celebrate gay actors in gay roles.

by Anonymousreply 46312/03/2017

[QUOTE]I do think we as a society are not ready to celebrate gay actors in any roles

FTFY

by Anonymousreply 46412/03/2017

R462, It DOES NOT fucking matter what sexuality is openly proclaimed by the cast. The film is written by a legendary openly gay screenwriter. The film is directed by an acclaimed openly gay director. It has two lead actors who are officially straight. It is adapted from an acclaimed novel written by an openly bi writer. And it happens to be a success. Would it have been less success if it had different actors? I still believe that source material, the technical skills and direction overall creates the success here and it would still be acclaimed with any actors. For me the film hinges on a unique performance by Chalamet. He makes it work.

by Anonymousreply 46512/03/2017

[QUOTE]It DOES NOT fucking matter what sexuality is openly proclaimed by the cast

The vast majority of the audience don't give a shit about writers or directors, so all that was just blather. But you think the industry and audience treats gay actors the same as straight actors then?

by Anonymousreply 46612/03/2017

Also odd how in R452 you say

[QUOTE]nobody says it's not an issue

and now you're saying it isn't an issue. Are you nobody?

by Anonymousreply 46712/03/2017

R466, I don't give a fuck about gay actors and they supposed mistreatment. OK? Nor I give a shit about audiences. I did not go to see CMBYN expecting gay only casting. I was there for the creative talent behind it regardless of their sexual orientation. CMBYN is also not be the best SJW crusade case for poor mistreated gay actors, as the source material does not demand gay-biased casting. There are much more appreciate cases to make whatever the fuck argument you trying to make. But it is certainly not this one. As for the audience success, so far it has been out in 4 theatres, let's just wait till it goes wide before making that judgement call.

by Anonymousreply 46812/03/2017

[QUOTE]as the source material does not demand gay-biased casting

No, it doesn't demand it, but it's ideal for it. Gay actors routinely don't get cast in leading roles because studios worry about their marketability. Well, a gay themed film shouldn't have that same worry should it? If anyone has a problem with gay actors, one would think they wouldn't go to see a gay themed film. So this is one of the few projects around where gay actors could safely take the lead roles - and instead straight men are cast.

by Anonymousreply 46912/03/2017

R469, again nobody gives a shit about your crusade. Yes, there was no "gays only please" adverts in Advocate and Backastage, and both actors did not even audition. That's what the filmmakers decided before any studio even heard of this film. So there is no big studio conspiracy. Producers/Directors liked these two, and that was it. Case closed. I understand if there was some controversy surrounding the casting process. But there was none to being with.

by Anonymousreply 47012/03/2017

Nice attempt at a strawman, R470, but I didn't say there was any controversy, did I? And if you're so uninterested in this issue, it raises the question - why did you reply to it then? And why do you continue to? Why not just ignore it and wait for a topic you are interested in to be mentioned, like a normal person does? Why instead do you come up with stupid arguments, strawmen and contradict yourself?

by Anonymousreply 47112/03/2017

Because I happen to have plenty of time to waste on fucking trolls like you. More questions? I am open for business tonight.

by Anonymousreply 47212/03/2017

Sure, you're the one talking about a subject you "don't care" about, and yet I'm the troll.

by Anonymousreply 47312/03/2017

Seems like it wouldn’t get nearly the amount of accolades it’s been getting without Chalamet’s performance. Can you really imagine any of those MTV/CW caliber actors who are out, pulling off what Chalamet did?

by Anonymousreply 47412/03/2017

R474, I am outraged George Takei was not reached out. How evil of corporate Hollywood!

by Anonymousreply 47512/03/2017

R473, I care to care for the rolls like you. more questions? I am here all night long.

by Anonymousreply 47612/03/2017

Colton Haynes is seething because he could have finally gotten his Oscar!

by Anonymousreply 47712/03/2017

R477, Colton Haynes as Oliver?

by Anonymousreply 47812/03/2017

so all this bullshit and no one can name two openly gay actors who could have played the roles.

by Anonymousreply 47912/03/2017

I did, Ezra Miller.

by Anonymousreply 48012/03/2017

It takes two

by Anonymousreply 48112/03/2017

Ezra Miller could pull off Oliver. But that would have been a different movie. Also, Ezra isn't openly gay?

by Anonymousreply 48212/03/2017

R474 I can't. Chalamet as Elio is the casting of the decade.

by Anonymousreply 48312/03/2017

EM is 25, so presumably the character of Oliver, with whom he has nothing in common and anyone who's read the book would know he would not be a fit.

by Anonymousreply 48412/03/2017

R475 yes, George would've made a mighty fine Oliver

by Anonymousreply 48512/03/2017

R484 how do you mean?

by Anonymousreply 48612/03/2017

obviously (r486) you have not read the book

by Anonymousreply 48712/03/2017

Ezra is openly queer.

For those saying, “he’s not like the character described in the book”, well Elio isn’t supposed to be American but they changed that to accommodate Chalamet. So they could change some things to accommodate Miller.

by Anonymousreply 48812/03/2017

Aww, R487 is that the best you can do? Go on, expand on your comments, tell R486 why Ezra would be wrong. Don't just rely on that lazy answer.

by Anonymousreply 48912/03/2017

Are we gay casting Call Me By Your Name?

Brandon Flynn and Evan Todd.

Ezra Miller and Brian Jacob Smith.

Froy Gutierrez and Dino Fetscher

Noah Galvin and Jonathan Groff

Miles Heizer and Russel Tovey

by Anonymousreply 49012/03/2017

Don't tell me you can't see it!

And I was impressed with both of them in "13 Reasons Why" and "Fourth Man Out" respectively.

by Anonymousreply 49112/03/2017

Isn't Oliver supposed to be drop dead gorgeous? A dreamboat? Like, an unattainable god?

by Anonymousreply 49212/03/2017

He’s very dreamy!

by Anonymousreply 49312/03/2017

No r492, he is supposed to be good-looking guy, but I'm not sure where you are getting this unattainable god thing from.

by Anonymousreply 49412/03/2017

That's how they describe Oliver/Armie in the reviews.

by Anonymousreply 49512/03/2017

Is your implication that Evan Todd is not hot r492?

by Anonymousreply 49612/03/2017

Sì! He is no Armie

by Anonymousreply 49712/03/2017

yes oliver is supposed to be a "golden boy"

by Anonymousreply 49812/03/2017

tovey is 36, oliver is 24

by Anonymousreply 49912/03/2017

Armie is 31. It's film.

by Anonymousreply 50012/03/2017

Tovey and Hammer look the same age. That is a weak excuse.

by Anonymousreply 50112/03/2017

Tovey is cute in an awkward British way, not in a tanned, blond, Greek statue come to life way.

Plus, like I said above, he is literally a CW-caliber actor.

by Anonymousreply 50212/03/2017

Oh and Armie is a great actor? Again, the guy who needed to be told everything to do with his character.

by Anonymousreply 50312/03/2017

He's not exactly Tatum O'Neal, whose performance had to be painstakingly coaxed out, and assembled from many bits and pieces.

And she still won an Oscar...!

by Anonymousreply 50412/03/2017

And that's the magic of movies

by Anonymousreply 50512/03/2017

Just because he had trouble with one role doesn't mean he has trouble with all of them. I'm sure every actor experiences that instance when they can't quite connect with their character. and they seek out ways to find it. Some seek the assistance of the director, as did Hammer. Some have their own rituals and routines and people they consult.

by Anonymousreply 50612/03/2017

Colton Haynes is a fan.

@ColtonLHaynes If y'all want to cry happy & sad tears, be mesmerized by cinematography, & see insanely good heartbreaking acting...go see "Call Me By Your Name". @realchalamet & Armie Hammer are so good & the love story basically left me feeling like I was kicked in the stomach but so good.

by Anonymousreply 50712/03/2017

Interesting article from Variety and Owen Gleiberman, of all people - about the role the closet plays in the story. Nice to see this acknowledgment since, as we talked about a bit earlier in the thread, there has been a tendency in discussion surrounding the film to deny this aspect of things.

[quote]Yet the slight murkiness of Oliver’s motivations becomes part of the film’s power. He remains a spiritual stranger — to us, to Elio, and to himself. “Call Me by Your Name,” in presenting a “well-adjusted” gay character who projects no self-loathing yet is unwilling to fully be himself, creates an expressionist vision of what the closet is: not simply a prison, but a precise and complex state of being that, for a long time, defined the way that a lot of people lived — and still does. The movie doesn’t attack the closet; it humanizes the closet. The critique, though, is implicit. For who, in the end, wants to live that way?

by Anonymousreply 50812/03/2017

Noah Galvin as Elio? Thank God that never happened, LMFAO.

by Anonymousreply 50912/03/2017

It's an insult to Chalamet to compare him to those actors, LMFAO.

by Anonymousreply 51012/03/2017

Millennials have taken over this thread. Digusting

by Anonymousreply 51112/04/2017

Millenials have always been a large part of this thread r511. It has always been dominated by a cabal of young Timothee fans.

by Anonymousreply 51212/04/2017

[quote]It's an insult to Chalamet to compare him to those actors

Because Chalamet has given one good performance? Ezra Miller has given several fantastic performances, I'd say it is an insult to pretend he is "no Timmy"

You can pretend that only Chalamet can play Elio, but you never know the talent out there and wait they are capable of. Lucas Hedges came out of nowhere to get nominated for an oscar for Manchester by the Sea.

by Anonymousreply 51312/04/2017

[quote]It has always been dominated by a cabal of young Timothee fans.

The Tumblrinas have been on these threads since early on, but in the past few days have been getting out of control.

by Anonymousreply 51412/04/2017

R513, Lucas Hodges could have pulled off Elio and he is age appropriate. Also both Timmy and Lucas usually go for the same parts. Chalamet was almost cast in Manchester by the Sea and Timmy was originally considered for Lucas' part in Lady Bird. Although Lucas is not officially gay and we are discussing openly gay alternatives.

I don't think Ezra could have played Elio because of age. But younger version of Ezra could have done it.

by Anonymousreply 51512/04/2017

Wanting to discuss a social issue does not make one a casting director. Why should we name specific actors for the roles? There are plenty of up & coming gay actor that we might know nothing about as talented as Chalamet or as vapid as Hammer. One name springs to mind is Jonathan Groff. I'm not saying a gay movie should have gay actors but it's cool to discuss the consequences if it did have. Would the movie be this well received. Would it make people uncomfortable since we wouldn't have cute wives & kids to bring into the conversation as they seem to do with Armie Hammer in every interview. Would the actors be able to openly talk about their making out sessions? Something to think about after you get your panties out of the twist.

by Anonymousreply 51612/04/2017

[quote]There are plenty of up & coming gay actor that we might know nothing about as talented as Chalamet or as vapid as Hammer.

I love you so much.

by Anonymousreply 51712/04/2017

Now that the film has achieved some success and tons of praise, are people turning on it now? Because it doesn't star two openly gay actors?

by Anonymousreply 51812/04/2017

Jonathan Groff is a great actor, LOVE HIM. but it is big NO for me. Sorry just can't imagine him playing Oliver. And I hope people are not trying to cast him as 17y.o Elio.

by Anonymousreply 51912/04/2017

To the point made earlier, Evan Todd is sexier to me than Armie Hammer

by Anonymousreply 52012/04/2017

Sony Classics’ Call Me By Your Name, which opened last weekend with the year’s highest per theater average, held very well in four locations, grossing more than $281K. It remained in four theatres, dipping 31% from its torrid start last weekend to average $70,320. Its cume stands at $908,175.

by Anonymousreply 52112/04/2017

[QUOTE]Would it make people uncomfortable since we wouldn't have cute wives & kids to bring into the conversation as they seem to do with Armie Hammer in every interview. Would the actors be able to openly talk about their making out sessions?

Ding ding ding, we have a winner.

[QUOTE]Now that the film has achieved some success and tons of praise, are people turning on it now? Because it doesn't star two openly gay actors?

This is what I absolutely hate about fangirls. You can't even have a discussion about something unless it's 100% positive. No, no-one's turning on it, we're simply asking the question - and it's an obvious question to ask - about whether films like this are changing Hollywood's attitude towards gay people in actuality, or whether everything is still the same.

If you think that anything other than absolute praise is "turning on" something, I think you'd be happier in the echo chamber that is Tumblr.

by Anonymousreply 52212/04/2017

People have been talking about it starring straight actors since the film was announced r518, it is not a new talking point, of course that is a subject of discussion.

Though r522 is correct that your whole premise annoys me, as if we should do nothing except praise it to the high heavens and not have any discussion more critical than that.

by Anonymousreply 52312/04/2017

R522 AND R523, these cunts should go back to ONTD where you belong! fuck off.

by Anonymousreply 52412/04/2017

ONTD is against Armie now.

by Anonymousreply 52512/04/2017

[quote]People have been talking about it starring straight actors since the film was announced [R518], it is not a new talking point,

True. But it quieted down after a while, when many assumed CMBYN would be an ignored indie. Now that the film has been successful, getting raves, and Oscar buzz, the discussion has restarted and there are some posters who seem upset/resentful that it is two straight actors getting the praise.

by Anonymousreply 52612/04/2017

I can't remember the last time I read a book AFTER seeing the movie it was based on, but I enjoyed the CMBYN movie so much that I decided to read the book. It was hard to get the film actors out of my head, but I have to say that the film is pretty much a perfect adaptation. The book is better, allowing the reader to see much more of Elio's obsession with Oliver. And the final scenes in the book (not shown in the movie) are quite moving.

If I had to guess, I would say that Elio in the book stays gay after Oliver leaves Italy. And Oliver goes into the closet to have a wife and kids.

by Anonymousreply 52712/04/2017

R526 So you're shocked that a popular film gets more attention than an ignored one?

by Anonymousreply 52812/04/2017

It is interesting subject r526, as we watch them do press the fact that they are straight is often brought up, so naturally the though is what it would be like if that wasn't the case.

by Anonymousreply 52912/04/2017

R529 Plus the rather embarrassing way they keep talking about the gay stuff like making out, as if it's a funny little gimmick. Reminds me of how Jared Leto kept telling the "I had to wax my whole body" story for Dallas Buyers Club. Not to mention Sony's brief attempt to seemingly try and pass the film off as a straight love story.

by Anonymousreply 53012/04/2017

R528 I don't understand your question. Where did I say I was shocked?

by Anonymousreply 53112/04/2017

Some people just live to be constantly offended

by Anonymousreply 53212/04/2017

Because those cute stories about the straight guys playing gay makes it more palatable and relatable, less of a "that gay movie", it is not their fault, just the reality.

by Anonymousreply 53312/04/2017

R531 Well what was the point of your post at R526 then? Just to point out that more people are interested in a film that does well than one which doesn't?

by Anonymousreply 53412/04/2017

R533 I didn't say it was their fault, it's the fault of the studio marketing team, who've already proven themselves to be awful.

by Anonymousreply 53512/04/2017

Stop being ignorant. Chalamet may not be the best actor of all time, or maybe not even the best actor of his generation. It's hard to say considering the few roles we've been able to see him in. So far he's been very good in Lady Bird, great in Miss Stevens and transcendent in Call Me. But the idea that anyone could have played this role better than him is ridiculous. No, they couldn't. Male actors his age do not get the accolades this guy is receiving for this role. Go look up the actors that have won both NYFCC + LAFCA. They're pretty much all legends of acting. The fact that this 21-year-old is doing it is a testament to how good the performance is and no they shouldn't have ignored him to cast an openly gay actor. That's just bad filmmaking. So far, his performance has been the most rewarded part of a film that is acclaimed in all aspects.

by Anonymousreply 53612/04/2017

*YOUNG male actors his age do not get the accolades this guy is receiving for this role.

by Anonymousreply 53712/04/2017

"Look how good this young guy is at playing a fag! He deserves awards for his bravery."

by Anonymousreply 53812/04/2017

R538 Right, because Ashton Sanders received so many awards for his role in Moonlight last year? Or Trevante Rhodes? Nope, the guy playing the straight guy in the film won them all.

Chalamet is perfect in the part. Get over it.

by Anonymousreply 53912/04/2017

R536 The fact you have to create such a strawman says it all

You'll note that my original question specifically stated "if the performances were the same". But no, you need to try and twist that into "they're saying Timothee is a bad actor" because you don't like the only obvious answer to the question - that if Hammer and Chalamet were openly gay, they would not be getting the same kind of praise, and the film would not be getting the same kind of recognition.

by Anonymousreply 54012/04/2017

You were never going to win an Oscar, David Burtka!

by Anonymousreply 54112/04/2017

R540 I wasn't responding to one specific comment, I was responding to the idea in general that someone could have played this role better than he did with people throwing names around of those that have yet to give a truly great performance.

by Anonymousreply 54212/04/2017

Anyway, this is all spilled milk now, but I would like see an openly gay actor involved with the sequel if it actually gets made. It is easy to give Elio a love interest played by an openly gay actor.

I swear, Luca better not actually put both of them in relationships with women for the sequel like he has been hinting. I don't get why, just from a basic storytelling perspective it is better to create contrast between the narratives of Oliver and Elio.

by Anonymousreply 54312/04/2017

R534 my point is, the film's success is why the discussion about casting straight actors was brought up again and why some here suddenly seem resentful of Chalamet/Hammer. They think that if two gay actors had been cast, THEY would be getting the accolades and it pisses them off! (though there is no guarantee that the outcome would have been the same)

by Anonymousreply 54412/04/2017

There are quite a few reasons why this movie irks more than a few DLers. It definitely doesn't have the broad support the Brokeback Mountain had when it came out.

by Anonymousreply 54512/04/2017

R536 You seem to not understand the BASIC point of discussion here. Nobody is doubting the talent of you dear Chalamet. We're discussing the basic issue of casting straight actors vs gay actors in gay roles or if Chalamet or Armie were openly gay. As a society we're definitely not evolved enough to treat the two equally. It's a topic worthy of discussion. What's so hard to understand?

by Anonymousreply 54612/04/2017

Brokeback Mountain made it seem like Hollywood was changing, felt like a tipping point (god, remember everyone thinking its surprise success would lead to an explosion of gay cinema and gay characters?).

by Anonymousreply 54712/04/2017

Armie Hammer is so proud of this film, today he announced he was starring in a play called Straight White Men.

by Anonymousreply 54812/04/2017

The story doesn't need a sequel. Who needs a movie of Elio exploring and being comfortable with his sexuality with all the smut cleaned with bleach for the general audience?

by Anonymousreply 54912/04/2017

Luca is serious about the sequel(s). If the movie is a financial success, and early indicators are positive, it will happen. Armie and Chalamet have made it clear they are down.

by Anonymousreply 55012/04/2017

R547 Exactly, and instead it's the exact same thing happening all over again.

by Anonymousreply 55112/04/2017

The play Straight White Men is an evisceration of straight white male privilege from a female Korean-American playwright. You should think through your "witticisms" so they actually make some sense, r548

by Anonymousreply 55212/04/2017

I laugh at the idea that Chalamet's acting would be less acclaimed by the critics if he were openly gay. I guess you think he's just "acting gay" throughout the movie.

by Anonymousreply 55312/04/2017

But isn't he?

by Anonymousreply 55412/04/2017

Yes, the part where he eats Marzia out it particularly gay.

by Anonymousreply 55512/04/2017

You shouldn't "laugh" r553. No openly gay actor has won an oscar. Tom Hanks, Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Seann Penn have all won one for playing gay men.

Its a topic worth talking about.

by Anonymousreply 55612/04/2017

R553 We are merely contemplating. No one said his acting wouldn't be as praised if he were gay but the fact of the matter is his being straight is brought up should tell you that it adds an element of "oh he played gay inspite of being straight? omg that's amazing" should tell you that sexuality is not a moot point. You may choose to be blind to this fact but that doesn't change that it exists.

by Anonymousreply 55712/04/2017

There is actors on actors between Chalamet and Kaluuya. A nice conversation, but one thing I noticed is he can be a bit thoughtless when it comes to this. He has a line around 20:30 where he says Hammer and his relationship mimicked the movie "...save for all the crazy stuff (laughs)".

Yeah, maybe it is not smartest thing to refer to characters love and sex life as funny crazy shit, don't think he would make that same joke if it were hetero love story.

by Anonymousreply 55812/04/2017

He was just talking confidences with his bro cool dude. Timo is a bit like Justin Bieber, he's a whigger and so when he sees a black guy, he drops his pants and tries to emulate that sort of 'masculinity'.

by Anonymousreply 55912/04/2017

I'm hoping that's just still part of his childish phase that he's growing out of.

by Anonymousreply 56012/04/2017

Honestly I did detect a little bit of that r559.

It is even sorta insulting to Daniel, he makes it clear he loved the film and was genuinely praising Chalamet and Hammer's chemistry but Timothee feels the need to add in the "totes not gay man!" joke, that Daniel stays completely stone-faced at.

by Anonymousreply 56112/04/2017

I'm glad someone mentioned that. It made me feel weird. On one hand I feel like that part of the conversation was the most genuine he's sounded while discussing his on screen relationship with Armie but then he dropped that "minus the crazy stuff" and I was like, how does this kid go from thoughtful and mature to no-homo. He's still young, I guess. I really hope he was just being dumb rather than what R559 is saying, because he had no trouble talking to a different audience about "getting into" the make-out rehearsal and things "getting steamy".

by Anonymousreply 56212/04/2017

[QUOTE]but then he dropped that "minus the crazy stuff" and I was like, how does this kid go from thoughtful and mature to no-homo

Hasn't that been what most of the press tour has been about? Telling their anecdotes about making out and whatnot.

by Anonymousreply 56312/04/2017

From what I've seen their anecdotes don't normally come with referring to same-sex love as that crazy stuff.

by Anonymousreply 56412/04/2017

But it has the same effect, no? When they're talking about it as if it's a novelty.

by Anonymousreply 56512/04/2017

[quote]how does this kid go from thoughtful and mature to no-homo.

A very wise Datalounger once put it this way

“THIS...

....is why we hate THEM.”

by Anonymousreply 56612/04/2017

I might be wrong but I get the sense the rehearsal anecdote has more to do with Luca being Luca rather than two men kissing. I think it's about how they didn't do a chemistry test before or any other sort of rehersal apparently, and Luca just wanted to make sure they looked good while kissing and when he got what he wanted he walked away... which i think would also be an anecdote if the movie was about a straight couple.

by Anonymousreply 56712/04/2017

Pretty sure the crazy stuff comment was referring to things like the peach scene

by Anonymousreply 56812/04/2017

No, R568. He mentioned it specifically within the context of his relationship with Armie.

by Anonymousreply 56912/04/2017

[quote]If you think that anything other than absolute praise is "turning on" something, I think you'd be happier in the echo chamber that is Tumblr.

Preach, r522. In the last few days the invective for daring to question anything about the film, and even the tone it's done in seems to be getting louder around here, and it has the distinct scent of Tumblr about it. One can admire the film very much and still raise questions about this or that aspect, especially ones that are particularly relevant to the GAY denizens of DL. Fangurls who demand absolute unquestioning lockstep need to fuck off.

[quote]I swear, Luca better not actually put both of them in relationships with women for the sequel like he has been hinting. I don't get why, just from a basic storytelling perspective it is better to create contrast between the narratives of Oliver and Elio.

I think the relationships with women are a foregone conclusion for the sequel, simply because of the casting info. Luca has asked one of his pet actors, Dakota Johnson, to be in it (playing ?, probably Oliver's wife) and he has said that Elio will be involved with Marzia - Luca is a friend of Esther Garrel's family, so he plans to give these two favored actresses roles, and it is for sure they won't be bit parts because of that. But really, I don't see how you make a movie in which both men are involved with women at the same time and not have it turn into Brokeback Mountain, with two women involved with men who are secretly longing for each other, and their relationships with these women suffering as a result. I mean, I guess either or both men could also be involved with other men in the movie too, but that gets even more tangled if the women are also involved. But who knows.

by Anonymousreply 57012/04/2017

In Luca Guadagnino style for CMBYN: "‘If I desire my actors and I love my actors, they will love each other too.'"

Luca the creep Guadagnino

by Anonymousreply 57112/04/2017

Luca the cunt Guadagnino

by Anonymousreply 57212/05/2017

Luca (rude words) guadinino bought you CMBYN without which you wouldn't have had a topic this riveting to thrive off of. Let's be real, we're all here because of this man.

by Anonymousreply 57312/05/2017

Technically no

by Anonymousreply 57412/05/2017

'I handed over my characters when the rights of the book were sold'

by Anonymousreply 57512/05/2017

'I have been watching these actors for years and waited until I had appropriate roles for them'

by Anonymousreply 57612/05/2017

Hence we wouldn't have Timmy and Armie together if not for him

by Anonymousreply 57712/05/2017

People stop feeding the self-proclaimed gay SJW crusaders invading this thread. Ignore and they will go back to their cesspool called ONTD.

by Anonymousreply 57812/05/2017

ONTD has turned against the film now.

by Anonymousreply 57912/05/2017

Timmy's thread is dead rn, do I travel for 4 hours tomorrow to watch it or do I wait for wide release in a couple weeks? Like how good is it/am I going to want to watch it again straight away/will I be too distraught to catch a train afterwards?

by Anonymousreply 58012/05/2017

[quote]will I be too distraught to catch a train afterwards?

MARY!

by Anonymousreply 58112/05/2017

R579 in short, because it's successful and stars two straight men. That's really it. Everything else is just noise.

by Anonymousreply 58212/05/2017

R581 ...mary?

by Anonymousreply 58312/05/2017

No they turned against it when they turned against Armie.

by Anonymousreply 58412/05/2017

I guess you're not a long-time DLer, r583? It's the obligatory response to any melodramatic statement here.

by Anonymousreply 58512/05/2017

What r585 said. So much of the Timothee fanclub is of course new DLers.

Anyway, no one can tell you whether it will be worth it for you to travel 4 hours to go see a movie. I wouldn't do it, I'd just wait, but that is me.

by Anonymousreply 58612/05/2017

[QUOTE]People stop feeding the self-proclaimed gay SJW crusaders invading this thread

The really stupid thing about that comment is you're the only one calling us SJWs. So hardly self-proclaimed. Also, the fact that you link talking about fair treatment of gay people as being something only SJWs do really exposes the fact that you're a frau.

[QUOTE]No they turned against it when they turned against Armie.

Not entirely, it was Timothee doing the Woody Allen film that really turned them against him, and he was the last person involved in CMBYN that they were supportive of.

by Anonymousreply 58712/05/2017

Jesus! I never realized ONTD was so unstable. Never been on it, but I knew of it in passing, just hadn't heard one way or another about it. They seem intent on hating. Whatever it is. There's always something/someone new to hate, it seems.

by Anonymousreply 58812/05/2017

Oh, the irony of DLers calling ONTDers "unstable".

by Anonymousreply 58912/05/2017

No need to respond to that person who thinks any serious discussion is just "SJW cunts who should go back to ONTD" r587.

As as person that has been on this board for so many years now, I just rolled my eyes and moved on.

by Anonymousreply 59012/05/2017

[QUOTE]They seem intent on hating

Oh that's true, they hate everything with white people in it. Seriously, you'll see endless posts about "so bored with white people" "more mayo bullshit" and so on. Which is really odd, because if they were bored, you'd think they'd just skip those articles, yet no, they still feel the need to click and comment on them. They'll even post hateful comments about non-white people who date white people, etc.

R590 You're right, of course, I just couldn't resist pointing out that little bullshit about the "self-proclaimed" bit.

by Anonymousreply 59112/05/2017

[quote]I just couldn't resist pointing out that little bullshit about the "self-proclaimed" bit.

True. They don't know what self-proclaimed means.

by Anonymousreply 59212/05/2017

Isn't it self-explanatory?

by Anonymousreply 59312/05/2017

You'd think so.

by Anonymousreply 59412/05/2017

Ugh, we need a new thread. I'll start.

by Anonymousreply 59512/05/2017

Time for thread number 14 boys

by Anonymousreply 59612/05/2017

Part 14

by Anonymousreply 59712/05/2017

Impatient hoes are already posting to the new thread before closing this one out.

by Anonymousreply 59812/05/2017

Adieu, mes amis...

by Anonymousreply 59912/05/2017

Until we meet again...!

by Anonymousreply 60012/05/2017
Loading
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!