Thinly-disguised Gay movie


This film is about men who hustle older women for money in exchange for sex and companionship.

Well, that of course happens with older women and younger men, but it happens much more frequently with older gay men and younger gay men.

Given that the original novel is written by a gay man, I'm sure this kind of thing was very familiar to Tennessee Williams. One poster another thread even said supposedly it's about Williams' own experiences in Italy.

There is even a sly wink to the presumed "gay-for-pay" hustlers: when the film first shifts locales to Italy, the narrator explains how the area where Mrs. Stone is about to visit is know for "assignation"; meanwhile, an older man is shown waiting around for someone - when a younger good-looking man shows up. They start talking - exactly when the narrator uses the word "assignation."

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

Oh! Now I get it! We are supposed to understand that that Vivian Leigh is just a stand-in for an older gay man and Warren Beatty is Tennessee William's alter ego. Thin disguise all right. It never fails to amaze how posters twist movies to fit their personal preconceptions.

I want you to hold it between your knees.

reply

No - more like Tennessee is "Mrs. Stone" and this is what he experienced with young gay hustlers who used him for money like he used them for sex. It REEKS of it! Even Lotte Lenya's part makes more sense if you look at them all as men procuring sex from other men.

Not to mention that the ending is very similar to the deadly fate that happens to numerous older gay men at the hands of a hustler. Silent screen star Ramon Navarro is an excellent example. He was as hot as they come - but then he got older and then old.

Brought some male hustlers home one night and that was the end of him.

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

Oh, I've always assumed this, and actually wrote a post ages ago saying what you did. (I just found my post, and your reply from last year, so we are on the same page!) It's so obvious, I'm sure it flies over many naive people's heads, but hot young gigolos sexxing up wealthy older women (while I suppose it might happen now and then) is ....well, a fantasy. And to make the movie palatable, after all, Warren Beatty couldn't be mooning around Dirk Bogarde or Laurence Harvey, could he?? Put Vivian Leigh in, and all is well. A fairy tale! A sordid, false fairy tale, but they are attractive actors and we will just assume their relationship is real!

reply

lnoft97 says > It's so obvious, I'm sure it flies over many naive people's heads
What's obvious is the movie exactly as it is presented; a middle-aged woman and her young gigolo lover. Some people, apparently, watched the movie and saw something entirely different. That's fine but it's their own interpretation. We all experience things through our own filters and see what we want to see.

Why then is there the need to convince us the movie is 'really' about something other than what it is? I enjoyed the movie I saw and it just so happens it's the one I wanted to see. It does not mean I'm naïve. Nothing flew over my head and I didn't miss a thing. The story you're describing is not one I would be interesting in. I would neither have wanted nor chosen to see it. As far as I'm concerned, whatever these messages are that are hidden, need to stay hidden.

hot young gigolos sexxing up wealthy older women (while I suppose it might happen now and then) is ....well, a fantasy.
Talk about naïve! Since you don't seem to know, let me enlighten you, any type of man-woman relationship that exists today, existed at the time the movie was made and even generations prior to that. The notable difference is in how much discretion the couple exercised in regards to their relationship. There was a lot more discretion then; much less now. I assure you, that hardly fantasy.

==

reply

[deleted]

The movie is based on a short novel that, although penned by a homosexual, involves a heterosexual situation. There's no doubt that the principals are straight. "Palatability" has nothing to do with a very sordid tale that's even uglier when read because Miss Leigh's Karen Stone is sympathetic, unlike Karen Stone as-written. If you don't believe me, it's available to read for free online.

reply

Wait . . . let me get this straight . . . you mean that the male-male narrated assignation in the beginning was a "thinly-disguised" [sic] . . . male-male assignation! I NEVER would have picked up on that. Thanks for clearing that up!

reply

[deleted]

bluesdoctor says > Movie is based on a Tennessee Williams "novel." Like all his work, this movie suffers from the usual Williams sexual neuroses. Virile heterosexual males, like Stanley Kowalski in Streetcar and Paolo here, are depicted as threatening, selfish, animal predators, while females, like Blanche in Streetcar and Mrs. Stone here, are depicted as vulnerable, dreamy, sensitive prey. Williams suffered from a queer, Oedipal fear and loathing of seed-bearing, heterosexual males (i.e., the father figure). He was a sick puppy; his view of the world was twisted. This is so obvious, how did he get away with it for so long, with so much praise?
I think you actually answered your own question. Tennessee Williams 'got away with it' for so long because he wrote interesting stories with complicated, troubled characters. They're not exactly the kind of people I'd want to hang out with but they make for interesting fiction for reading and viewing. The actors who portray them probably also get a kick out of playing those roles.

I love my life and believe I'm creative but I don't have such dramatic tales to draw upon from my own life. Someone like Williams who seemed to have a lot of issues himself would have plenty to draw from. As they say, writers should write about what they know.


Woman, man! That's the way it should be Tarzan. [Tarzan and his mate]

reply

I think you actually answered your own question. Tennessee Williams 'got away with it' for so long because he wrote interesting stories with complicated, troubled characters. They're not exactly the kind of people I'd want to hang out with but they make for interesting fiction for reading and viewing. The actors who portray them probably also get a kick out of playing those roles.

THANK YOU. Fully agree on all counts. In fact, a Bonanza episode springs to mind in which Dan Blocker and Michael Landon play evil look-alikes of Hoss and Little Joe. You can tell they're having the time of their lives breaking character to play creeps.

reply