Corey Feldman Says “Call Me By Your Name” Glamorizes Pedophilia

Corey Feldman is worse than Hitler, Kevin Spacey, and James Levine.

Duplicate.

I always look to Corey Feldman for up-to-the-minute information on glamor.

Read the book. I think he missed the point

The book is irrelevant. The guy was supposed to be 24 in the book, which put them relatively close in age. Armie Hammer looks like he’s in his late 30’s. So whoever made the movie clearly wasn’t adhering strictly to the book, as often happens in Hollywood.

This won't get best picture just because of that.

I say Call Me By Your Name is a very meh film. NOT as great as God's Own Country or Moonlight.

R5 That's because Guadagnino cast(s) with his dick, sidestepping the audition process. The other producers should've told him to cut the shit and cast someone younger and shorter instead of Hammer. And perhaps someone older and taller than Chalamet as well so the optics would be nicer.

And yes, that'll probably kill its BP chances.

[quote]NOT as great as God's Own Country or Moonlight.

It simply HAS to be better than Moonlight.

LADY BIRD is so good that it makes this film irrelevant in awards races.

Pedophilia is defined as sexual interest in children under the age of 13. That doesn't apply here. And, for that matter on another subject, it doesn't apply to Roy Moore, either.

Well they need to change the definition cause Roy Moore is a pedophile. How the fuck are you a pedo for being sexually attracted to a 13 year old but not a 14 year old?

13, 14-Moore is a piece,of,shit, regarxless. Heard,his spokesperson J ean Porter on AC and was reminded of Moore's vileness re. gays.

People who hate on this film obviously do not understand what pedophilia is.

He's an ignorant, damaged, attention seeking fool.

Why does anyone pay attention to this burned-out freakazoid?

The messenger is irrelevant; the topic revolves around the message.

Three Golden Globe nominations. So much for Hollywood changing.

It's interesting to me that people are not more bothered by this film.

Does have a little gay Lolita vibe

The whole point of the film IS to bother people. Sheesh.

R19 Maybe because they've actually seen it? The Christian Science Monitor critic didn't have a problem with this aspect of the movie so neither should you.

Nothing like uninformed outrage on behalf of someone else. Seems like a national sport over there in America.

Why, r19, should anybody be? He's 17 in the movie, for fuck sake. Age of consent anywhere includes a 17-year-old, Penelope Prisspot.

Dear Lord in Heaven!

All the pedo accusations that fly around this place really piss me off. I've posted this before. I finally had sex at 17 with two different guys who were in their 30s, but I practically had to beg for them to have sex with me. I'm the one who cruised them. I had already graduated high school at 16, and was working a full-time job during the day, and another part-time job in the evening. I had my own car. My voice had already changed back when I was 14 (I'm a bass). I shaved every day. I was sheltered and naive, but I was a young man, not a kid. Both of the guys I slept with were very protective of me, and I'm grateful that I learned so much from them. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't let myself get involved with someone that young (I'm in my 50s).

All of those priss pots who are screaming paedophelia have not said a word about 16 year old Chiara who was nude sunbathing with Oliver.

Who? Who?

I say the whiney little attention whore bitch is probably correct.

It’s not quite as simple as that, but I do think the film has bad optics, yeah. There’s plenty of decent, younger actors who could have been cast instead of Hammer, who looks like the attractive middle age dad type you see at Home Depot on a Sunday morning.

A legal line was drawn at the age of 18. Most are sexually active before 18. Obviously not always with someone younger than 18. Me- I would stay away from someone that young because of the legal risk- not worth it. But I certainly understand it. God knows I would have loved to get my horny hands of a 20 something year old hunk when I was 17 and was I ever full of romantic fantasy- I had wait to 19 for some reason. Heck, 200 years ago most women married at 16-18. 17 years old is legal a child, physically more of an adult. The movie is very very good. If your puckered little mouth and tight pearls can't take it- too bad for you. Most Americans are clueless prudes posturing and preening and judging on sex and missing out on life's great mysteries and pleasures. It's great that that father gets it and comforts his beloved son- truly.

The father understood and comforts his distressed son at the end- wonderful. Most on this thread are clueless- absolutely clueless probably missing or missed some of life's great experiences due to tight ass judgemental prudery.

R25 TY for sharing your history but seriously it has no bearing on the issue this movie raises. I'm sure you will find stories of 12 year olds pursuing a 30 year old for sex and loving the encounter does that make it ok?

It does glamorize paedophilia. Moore's a paedo too.

[QUOTE]Most are sexually active before 18.

What evidence do you have that most kids are sexually active before 18?

and please, for the women on-board--sexually active before 18 might just be a boy thing

First off 16 is the age of consent in Italy. There's a world of difference between Roy More's predatory behavior with under aged 13-16 year old girls, and a novel made into a movie about an informed 17 year old having a willing and consensual affair with a 24 year after they established a close friendship. If you have read the book or seen the film, this does not fit into any pedophilia narrative.

They don’t look 17 and 24 to me. Armie Hammer looks like he’s approaching 40 and the kid looks like he could be 15.

RE: Oscars

This is how I see it and many of you are ignoring this tiny but important factor.

The age of consent in California is 18. Most of the Academy members live in Southern California, where the age of consent is 18, it will be a tough sell to Academy members given what is taking place in Hollywood.

Should I remind you guys about the film Lolita in the 90s?

[quote] First off 16 is the age of consent in Italy.

14, actually.

In a still like the one at the top of the thread, Chalamet may look like he’s 15 because he’s so skinny. But in the film itself, he doesn’t come across as childish or like he’s too young to be having sex, not does Hammer seem like a predatory old man.

Oy.

Well, it does take place in a different country and culture under a different set of legal rules, so...whatever.

Just saying, if you see Timothee actually playing the role it’s more clear he’s 21 and the character he’s playing is 17. People are judging based on still pictures.

[quote]It's not interesting to me that people are bothered by this film.

Fixed, you prissy straight cunt.

R32, No, I find that really offensive. 12 is far too young, at least for a 30 year old. Not all 17 year olds are the same. As I indicated, I had graduated high school already, owned my own car, and had two jobs. I was trusted enough by my parents to work late evenings at a restaurant at that age.

[post redacted because independent.co.uk thinks that links to their ridiculous rag are a bad thing. Somebody might want to tell them how the internet works. Or not. We don't really care. They do suck though. Our advice is that you should not click on the link and whatever you do, don't read their truly terrible articles.]

[quote]R32 I'm sure you will find stories of 12 year olds pursuing a 30 year old for sex and loving the encounter, does that make it okay?

Um, maybe MADE-UP stories.... ! ! !

I wish the Pedo Troll would start using the sexualization spectrum terminology:

Infantophilia 0 to 5ish

Pedophilia 5ish to 10ish

Hebephilia 11ish to 14ish

Ephebophilia 15ish to 19ish

Most of what the Pedo Troll looses bowel control over is ephebophilia. Technically, the Pedo Troll should be called the Ephebo Troll.

[quote]Hebephilia 11ish to 14ish

Even when they're Jewish?

[quote]Most of what the Pedo Troll looses bowel control over is ephebophilia.

What you should "loose" is your inability to spell "lose."

I want to root for Corey, and I believe he had horrible things done to him — but he needs to step off his preachy pedestal because he’s far from a saint.

He is 100% still covering for Michael Jackson- for what reasons I don’t know. He wasn’t Jackson’s type but he was around enough that even if he wasn’t abused, he saw things he could look back on as an adult - things that would help support the others stories. He’s so high and mighty and disgusted with the “machine” but he’s one of the cogs.

He wasn’t hardly interested in Corey Haim anymore until there was money to be made and 15 minutes to try to reclaim. I strongly suspect a lot of the abuse he claims was Haim’s was really his and he’s doing one part denial, other part “look at me, I’m such a wonderful person to advocate for my friend.”

If he ever really lays it all out - even the things that reflect poorly on him - I’ll be in his corner. Right now though, he’s not coming across as an advocate for anyone but himself.

For the record, in the book, Elio mentions that he has had sex with women, so he is no naif.

good post R50-and 100% on the money

The book and the movie are two different things, R51. If the book meant a lot to the director then he would’ve selected an actor who actually looks 24 rather than 34.

He's right. The movie is absolutely a pedo story. And R50, the fact that he's not a perfect person does not mean he's not right about this. He is. 100 percent.

R53 Exactly right.

It's so clear they wanted to use take the original story and twist it into an agenda. Just the difference in height and body muscularity...you have this big, muscular man looming over this slight, frail looking guy to make it look like a man with a boy. That was completely unnecessary. You could easily have cast two actors who were similar types, and looked the ages in the book. Easily.

Shia Lebouf (sp) was going to play Oliver.

Think about that.

Would you guys want Shia or Armie? It would have been a different movie with Shia, probably more intense. With Armie's statue, I think they did a good job in setting the tone so it doesn't look like this slight kid was being sexually taken advantage of by someone as tall as Armie. There was that peach scene where I winced a little when Oliver grabbed Elio's arm too tightly so that he could eat the peach, and Elio said, 'You're hurting me'. I think if Shia was in that role, perhaps he wouldn't have over powered him at that moment.

Different actors bring different things to the table, and at the end of the day, I'm glad Armie is Oliver.

It

Luca would’ve never cast Shia. That was the previous director who probably wanted someone closer to the character in the book so the relationship would be more youthful. Luca wanted an older, bigger man from the beginning.

[quote]Would you guys want Shia or Armie?

Armie

What a pointless thread this is, since the characters are 17 and 24 and the actual actors are 21 and 31.

As for r54, who sees pedophilia where it doesn't exist, the above are the facts. Sorry there's no one involved here that you can demonize.

I'd take Shia. He's sexy, muscular, and brooding and passionate. On the other hand, Armie has $200m

Armie is 31. was prob 29 when it filmed.

[Quote]R47 technically, the Pedo Troll should be called the Ephebo Troll.

but isn't that a character is WICKED ??

confusing...

I thought it was pederasty, not ephebophilia!

Timothée was 19 and Armie was 29 during filming.

It's almost impossible to think of someone else in a role once you've see the movie esp since Armie did a good enough job. I can see Shia Lebouf doing well or even someone like Zac Efron, Evan Peters, Darren Criss.

Elio and Oliver are both Hebephiles.

DL is filled with a bunch of Bryan Singer wannabes.

A young gay boy falling in first gay love and being hurt isn't subject matter of interest to most people awarding films.

[QUOTE]Timothée was 19 and Armie was 29 during filming.

They don’t look it.

r69 Oscar, get new people.

[QUOTE]DL is filled with a bunch of Bryan Singer wannabes.

It’s repulsive.

Is Feldman a homophobe? Just curious.

Merry Christmas, Corey at r72!

Call me by your name is my favorite gay film of the year. I love its utter lack of an antagonist and its overflowing sensuality, emotion and depictions of the simple joys of life. It's gonna go down as one of the greatest LGBT films ever made 20-40 years from now.

Considering how low the bar is for LGBT films, r75, that's not saying much. I found it vapid and kind of laughable.

It still works since Oliver is sexually repressed and has been obviously harboring those feelings for a long time and then meets someone who is at the height of his sexuality. However, that scene with the dad and Elio at the end is kind of creepy, since the father comes across as a weirdo and closet case himself.

CMBYN--the tweeest movie of the year.

Now I'm wondering if the timing of this film is bad...

I'm just amazed Corey Feldman isn't dead.

[quote]I thought it was pederasty, not ephebophilia!

Pederasty is a legal term. Ephebophilia is a clinical one.

Sort of the same way all of us who had any kind of sexual contact that was not a penis inside a vagina were guilty of sodomy (legal term) even if we were performing anal sex, fellatio, cunnilingus, annilingus, or digital penetration (clinical terms).

He's right, even if he acts like a douche towards women.

Bump

It glamorizes mediocre gay-themed films and unattractive twinky gays (played by straights).

And Oscar snubbed three gay movies with age-appropriate relationships.

But look what else DIDN'T get snubbed:

It’s a better film than the vile God’s Own Country, which was fucking unintelligible.

Anyone who calls this film pedophilia, just plain doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. The Elio character was past the age of majority, was sexually active with the opposite sex. If you don't like the film, fine, but to label it pedophilia is a disgrace to those who are actual victims of pedophilia.

Like Anthony Rapp and Corey Feldman, R89?

R88, get a hearing aid.

What is really needed right now is some better quality thinking, and nuance, about these sexual situations we find troubling.

For instance, CMBYK isn't pedophilic. I'm not even going to call it hebephilic. What's troubling is that the Boomer generation cannot allow itself to age gracefully. It rejects its peers because it can't accept itself as an older person. They only get with much younger people; they demand it.

The consequences of this aren't necessarily pedophilia, but commodified couplings based on narcissism and domination/intimidation games (Boomers cannot tolerate equality and sharing in their relationships - it's their way or nothing). This sorta looks like pedophilia, but it's with age of majority yet still young partners.

What I've seen in the past 15 years or so is the absolute impossibility of finding somebody who's really willing to create a true relationship. Older people are dead-set against it. They want young flesh but treat their partners with contempt. Millennials and Zs have figured out what the Boomers want, and on apps and in personals they flaunt themselves as sex toys for daddy's use. This of course leads to blatant hustling. Most guys under 40 in my region are for rent as masseurs, or they state outright they're looking for "gen."

It has killed intimacy. Corey F. needs to update his thinking a bit. He needs to talk more about the dynamic and why it's toxic, rather than shrieking about pedo bogeymen, while in bizarre clothes and grooming.

In the real world do 25 yo men really get together with 17year olds? Would any parent really allow/encourage such a thing? Maybe I live in a different world but nobody that I know would be okay with such a relationship and I live in a fairly liberal part of US

But you do live in a different world.. This was not your typical US family in 1983. The mother was European, the father an academic, they summered (and Hanukkah’d) in Italy. They were the product of a different culture, a different world view. The father’s monologue at the end kind of made that kind of clear to me.

I have no idea. I didn't hear anything about it.

its coming from a known asshole liar creep failure....

duh....

There is nothing glamorous in the movie or about the movie. Regular middle class people with an old country house. Could of been in south Georgia. Architectural Digest?I think not. No jets fancy cars or big boats. Really a very depressing movie that made me want to slash my wrists. It would have gotten more steam if the boy killed himself in the end. That ending would have probably gotten a nomination. Not sniveling in the fireplace.

Thanks for spoiling the ending, R96.

[quote] Corey F. needs to update his thinking a bit. He needs to talk more about the dynamic and why it's toxic, rather than shrieking about pedo bogeymen, while in bizarre clothes and grooming.

What would Feldman know about toxic gay relationships, enough to speak on them from a first-hand perspective?

And more importantly, as an out & proud gay person....would you really want him to?

R92, R93: My parents taught me repeatedly as I was growing up to stay away from older men offering candy. (My dad preferred to get blown by men his own age.)

In most Western cultures, there's a large developmental and cultural gap between 17 and 25 year olds. The 17 year old is still with parents and in high school. A 25 year old is in college, or has completed college and/or is working on a career. They're not that far apart in age, but the worldviews are pretty divergent.

It's not impossible that a 17- and a 25-year old would meet and have an affair, depending on circumstances. The whole "They're European" thing is just a trope to get the audience to suspend disbelief enough to let the story unfold. If I'd had a chance to get with a 25-year old when I was 17, I'm pretty sure I would have.