The movie Philadelphia & Homosexuality
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The movie Philadelphia was something of a surprise hit when it opened in December 1993, since it broke many of the "rules" for commercial success. The subject matter was considered a "downer," being about a man dying of AIDS, a subject that had failed at the box-office before. The film took an appealing and well-liked leading man--Tom Hanks--and showed him deteriorating form the ravages of the disease. The film was also serious in a season usually geared more to Christmas comedies, thrillers, and science fiction. Yet, there were also elements in the mix of the film that are often appealing to the audience, such as the portrayal of an underdog fighting back at the system and winning. The film gives a clear indication of whom the audience is to root for, though this is tempered always with the reality that the main character will die. Critic John Simon, who did not like Philadelphia very much, comments on the way the film sanitizes homosexuality and hints at that way of life more than showing it: The film avoids any closer examination of homosexuality, or even AIDS, and hurries to become a courtroom drama, which everyone can have good, wholesome fun with. The film was criticized by many in the homosexual community because it was seen as too distant and too removed from real homosexual life: We winced at the sanitization of the main character's relationship; at the way the movie glibly divided humanity into those who were good, those who were bad, and those who were
. . .
if not against homosexuals themselves.
Indeed, much of the film is based on comparisons and contrasts of this sort--between Miller and Andrew, Miller's practice and the huge law firm, Miller's malleable homophobia and the unbending homophobia of Andrew's former law partners, between discrimination against blacks and discrimination against AIDS patients, and so on. Andrew Sullivan points out the nature of the black role in the film and in the marketing of the film:
. . . this movie about AIDS was directed at black America. From its black co star, Denzel Washington, to its hype in the black press, to a number of critical black on black scenes, it was an aggressively black, middle class film. . . It brazenly took a black, straight movie icon and made him grapple with a gay man. Denzel Washington's role for this reason took far more social bravery than Hanks's. Homosexuality is more stigmatized in black America than even in white America, which is why attempts at a coalition between gays and blacks have so far proved futile.
As noted, many gay activists and writers have decried the way the film has simplified the issues. Playwright and gay activist Larry Kramer has argued against the film:
In an article, "Why I Hated Philadel
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Andrew Sullivan, Simon Philadelphia, ACLU LAMBDA, , Andrew Beckett, Joe Miller, Andrew Miller, Hanks's Homosexuality, Denzel Washington, Hated Philadelphia, law firm, movie, discrimination aids patients, discrimination blacks discrimination, discrimination blacks, blacks discrimination, gay straight, discrimination aids, february 7, aids patients, february 7 1994, blacks discrimination aids, law partners, homosexual life,
Approximate Word count = 1526
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
