LGBT People Discuss The “Stonewall” Trailer
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 09. 2024
- To read more about the Stonewall riots: bit.ly/1epHJUK
Check out more awesome BuzzFeedYellow videos!
bit.ly/YTbuzzfe...
MUSIC
Eddi
Licensed via Warner Chappell Production Music Inc.
Made by BFMP www.buzzfeed.com/videoteam
+
Jen Richards
IG/Twitter/Tumblr: @smartassjen
GET MORE BUZZFEED
www.buzzfeed.com/videoteam
buzzfeedvideo
buzzfeedvideo
www.buzzfeed.com/video
/ buzzfeedvideo
/ buzzfeedyellow
/ buzzfeedblue
/ buzzfeedviolet
BUZZFEED YELLOW
More fun, inspiring, interesting videos from the BuzzFeed crew. New videos posted daily! Subscribe for more BuzzFeedYellow! bit.ly/YTbuzzfe...
Petition for Laverne Cox to play the lead.
First, she can act.
Second, she is a more accurate representation of Marsha.
Third, it's fucking Laverne Cox. Who doesn't love Laverne Cox??
Third she actually is a trans women of color
almsagrand That's what he/she meant by "more accurate representation of Marsha"... hehe
Otaku Edits Now that you mention it, I’m like hell yeah, why didn’t they do this in the first place? Isn’t shehigh profile enough now
OH MY GOD YES
Stonewall, as you know, was started by Abercrombie and Fitch models, instead of trans women of color
This comment is everything
***** *you're
THIS IS SO FUNNY
The Librarian From Oz nice homophobia
interrobangings ....wut
I have never heard of stonewall. They should really put some information in text books about gay rights and the history...
A school in San Francisco is gonna teach about it.
Omar Dajani This is good America is getting somewhere but we have a long way to go :D
Kawaii Shipper It happened around the same time as the civil rights movement.
Kawaii Shipper Really? I went to a Christian school but we still learned about it and had it in our text books. I guess it just depends.
The only problem with that is many won't want their kids learning about that. For example, I would love to learn about the history of gay rights but my parents wouldn't allow it.
i'm a bit irritated by the fact that i didn't know that the stonewall event even happened until i saw people talking about the "whitewashed trailer". it's incredibly degrading and covering up all the hard work those transwomen of color fought so hard for. it is making the event more known but they're not even telling the history correctly. like most of the history told in america
I never knew about the riots until the movie was starting to get boycotted....THIS is an important event in history, but hey! Lets erase LGBT/SAGA history because why not!
iamthewhalelord *Trans women. But, yeah, I agree. I also didn't know and it's something that we should be taught about. Especially because if this film isn't even accurate then so many people are just going to this that this whitewashed version is correct.
M. P-A I think that's why it is incredibly important to remember and maybe change the name of the Gay / Pride parades because in Germany and Austria we call them Christopher Street Day a.k.a. CSD, which reminds us all of the brave people who rioted in Christopher Street, NY at the Stonewall Inn. The name already intrigues to find out the history behind our pride parades!
DeathlyCrunch its called RESEARCH. Also, the idea that people aren't taught these kinds of subjects because they're not "important" is enough offense to the LGBT+ community
No I don't know what I'm talking about, that's the problem.
As I said above, I didn't know about this event until about 3? days ago when I saw the trailer on tumblr. It's a part of history, my history, so I'd like to learn about it.
Also, sorry if I wrote trans women wrong. I've seen it spelled both ways and we use 'transwomen' in the gender group I attend I meant no offense
The whitewashing in this film is disgusting, the first brick was thrown by a black trans woman, not an "Abercrombie and Fitch" model.
beck hartman nice homophobic comment
interrobangings Well for one I'm gay so no, and for two, how was this homophobic? I stated a fact, or did me comparing the actor to an A&F model make you mad?
Well I'm also white ,so again, no. You're obviously too illiterate to have a normal argument with. What do opinions have to do with anything? This movie has an inaccurate depiction of historical events, and that is all.
because it's really not. everyone is screaming that the whole movie is ruined when a grand total of ONE character was changed. she's still in the fucking movie bro
interrobangings You just don't get the point.
use! trans! actors! for! trans! roles! instead! of! replacing! them! with! cis! white! people!
^ for emphasis
Sage Thorneburg I'm guessing that you're on tumblr
M. P-A You can get why they're pissed off though. Namely with a movie that is centered about basically documenting and reenacting a historical event and to make it 'easy to relate to' they made everything up. They cast a white cis guy who looks like an All American straight boy, because god forbid they go get somebody who looks like the person the film is about....Who was black and transgender. it's like making a film about Martin Luther King Jr and getting a white guy for the role instead because it would be 'easier for people to understand'.
TheNamelessNarrator I do get why they're pissed. I'm pissed too. I'm also part of the LGBTQ+ community. I wasn't trying to say anything bad about them, it's just that I'm on tumblr a lot and see comments in that sort of format which made me guess that they were on tumblr because of the way that they commented with the exclamation points. I didn't mean it in a rude way and I wasn't trying to call them an SJW or anything, I was just making a comment. However, I do see why that could seem condescending because of how many people say it in a rude way, so I'm really sorry about that.
YES!! THANK YOU!!
I think the white male cis lead isn't just a problem for this movie, we need more diversity in Hollywood. This is rampant and the people want diversity!
Agreed! It's ridiculous.
Slade Wilson Completely agree, it's offensive and degrading to people of color and LGBT+ folks.
I agree the reason a white cis male was used because the studio believes it will make money!
Lindsey Luna I agree this role should be played by someone else (Laverne Cox!!!) but being that black people only make up 13% of the population they don't need to make up half of Hollywood. Also, personally, I don't care what race someone is as long as they're a good actor.
Lindsey Luna we have plenty of it already..
Marsha P. Johnson, say her name
Demolition Lovers Yes!
Who?
Epcot lp (dawnqwerty) Marsha P. Johnson was a black trans drag queen who threw the brick that started Stonewall
Demolition Lovers A butch lesbian was the one who started the riots
Catherine It was Marsha P. Johnson who started the riots
If only they would show the truth.
Agreed
PREACH 🙌🏾
I'm not going to see this in theatres.
But I may stream it illegally online...
That's exactly what I said lol
Too embarrassed
Luckily my parents pay for my cineworld card so I'm not paying too see it... They are... loophole
Emily Black Exactly my plan! I don't want to support it at all, but damn if I'm not curious.
exactly. they don't deserve my money but I want to see how bad it is
If a movie is going to claim "based on true events" it really should try harder to get actors who fit the actual people from said event.
i signed to boycott it tbh
WHERE CAN I DO THAT BECAUSE THIS IS FUCKIN DUMB
***** unite.gsanetwork.org/petitions/boycott-2015-stonewall-movie?state=welcome
But you boycott it by not seeing it...
Tayah Hops Me too. :)
Tayah Hops Same.
Boycott the movie simple
Will Broussard yes you dont know what you are talking about so i dont know why you added you useless comment lol
Will Broussard It's not about us getting exactly what we want, it's about us finally getting actual representation. A lot of the media representation of the LGBTQ+ community is already just white cis gay men as it is. Now, they're going to take this event in history that was an extremely diverse movement led by lesbians, people of color and trans people and show the leader as this white cis gay male. It seems as if they just kind of want to appeal to cishets and not to queer people which is kind of disappointing. And I know that you were just being sarcastic when you said, "What would I know?" but you actually have a point there. Your opinion matters, of course, but you don't know what's like to not have representation of people like you in the media because you do. That's something that you've always had. It's something that you'll never have to fight for. It's not like that for everyone. So, no, we're not being difficult just because we have standards. They need to stop white washing history. So, yes, I do want to see diversity in this movie, like the diversity which existed in the movement itself.
Think of it in a simpler way, the majority of people who oppose gays are white male and straight, this will show an opposing view for them through a relatable charactor.
JoshBox But why? Why this movie that's supposed to be about LGBTQ+ history? Why should this cater to white cis straight men?
M. P-A It may not be the truth, but it will help homophobic people understand the LGBTQ community better as they can identify themselfs with that charactor. pocohontos was 12 and died at 21 but disney didnt make the movie that way as it wouldnt be as watchable, same goes with this movie sorry to say. You cant blame the movie for trying to reach out to straight people to understand the history of the gay community.
My only hope is that it is a marketing ploy. That "sweet down home gay boy finds himself in the big city" is going to attract more viewers than "Marsha P Johnson, black trans activist is a badass" would. And then the actual movie shows Marsha being a badass. But maybe it's just bad :(
why WHY an LGBT movie and you STILL have a white male as the lead... sigh
Maybe because he's gay, you know, the G in the LGBT...
Senhor Ar mais
You dont get my point... Im definitely for gay white men being represented, however they make up the majority when it comes to LGBT representation, and white men get more lead roles in general than any other type of person. Queer POC & LBT need more representation, especially when they made up most of the key figures in this historical event.
It would be nice if it turned out better than the trailer, but I'm just so annoyed that they made up this fictional white dude to be the protagonist. :/
Most people noticed the cisgendered white character and think it's going to be bad. The thing I noticed most about this trailer is that Roland Emmerich is directing it. THAT'S how I know it's going to be bad!
Noelle Meier Thank you!
The asian girl in the red is probably the most chilliest LGBT person
"Oh cool, a white guy" 😂😂😂👌🏻
This is like making a movie about Martin Luther King and making him white, to all the people who don't understand why others are complaining. If you're going to make a movie based on real events make it accurate.
Before making accusations that it is historically inaccurate, you might want to do a little research into the Stonewall Uprising. There were not any particular people "leading" the riots, although it was primarily drag queens, homeless gay youth (who from the few photographs and video footage available of Stonewall, appear to be mostly white), and transgender people- people really at the margins of society.
The main character is a young gay man (who happens to white) who is forced to leave his home in Kansas, ventures to the one place where he thinks he might be accepted (New York), and is taken in by a bunch of other homeless young people. Seems pretty historically accurate to me.
The riots were a broad cross-section of LGBT people - white gay men, lesbians, and people of color, drag queens, and transgender people. To state it was just one group of people is just not historically accurate. From what little one can fathom from a 2 minute trailer, it appears that the cast is pretty diverse. If anything, it appears that white drag queens played a larger role in the riots than the film portrays but one cannot really tell until the movie is released.
I think the boycott is pretty misplaced. There are very few mainstream LGBT movies and to call for the boycott of a movie which portrays the events which led to the modern LGBT movement based upon a two-minute trailer and upon the fact that the main character is a fictionalized white gay male (based upon people who actually played a major role in the Stonewall riots - homeless gay kids) is just plain wrong.
It seems petty to focus on who threw the first brick. It is unlikely that we will ever know. It is clear that it was generally the most effeminate gay men ("nelly queens") who were the most active participants in the uprising (from my reading of David Carter's great book).
What is important is that gay bars (one of the few places that LGBT people could be themselves) in New York were being raided by the police constantly and this was one of the first times that people fought back against the harassment and against the police. And, of course, it immediately led to the first Pride March and formation of the first militant gay rights group - the Gay Liberation Front.
The definitive account of the Stonewall Uprising is "Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution" by David Carter www.amazon.com/Stonewal...
Also, there is really good documentary called Stone Uprising, which you can stream www.amazon.com/gp/produ...
P.S. African American drag queen and gay liberation activist Marsha P. Johnson was one of the first people to fight back in the Stonewall Riots and is portrayed in the movie. However, Sylvia Rivera, a Latina drag queen and transgender activist appears to have fabricated her involvement in the Stonewall riots, although she later co-founded (along with Marsha P. Johnson) the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR), a group dedicated to helping homeless young drag queens and trans women of color. (gaytoday.com/interview/...
Am I the only 1 that thinks the girl in red can be a voice actor in a kids cartoon or something
If you can't relate to the problem LGBT folks are having with Stonewall, think about how people complain about a black guy playing the Human Torch, or how the movie doesn't adhere to comic lore - and then imagine that outrage being about something that actually matters.
I didn't know a Ken doll started the movement!! 🤦🏽♂️
I have to be honest, I had to Google what the Stonewall riots actually were and I'm surprised it took this long for a movie to be made about it.
I'm going to boycott it, but I honestly feel guilty for doing so at the same time. Hollywood won't see it as people boycotting it because it's erasure and changing the history of what really happened, they'll just think "Oh, well, nobody wants to watch films about LGBT history then!!" which really sucks. But I'd just rather not give my money to a film that's rewriting history. :/
Krysta here sign this! unite.gsanetwork.org/petitions/boycott-2015-stonewall-movie?state=welcome
i'm boycotting too, whitewashing history and not crediting the actual main character of the event or portraying the event in a somewhat accurate way is ridiculous.
This movie had such potential to be amazing. And then they whitewashed it.
Unfortunately, making the protagonist white, male and cis, means that many people who otherwise wouldn't have will see this film. It is not right to misrepresent what happened and view it through the prism of the white man, however, in doing this the creators of the film have ensured that more people will see this film, and hopefully that will make people less ignorant and more tolerant and prevent this having to be done in the future. A necessary evil? Probably not. But getting this story out there into more popular culture is vital, the more people that understand the message of this film the more likely people are to discover the real truth, that Stonewall was a story of everyone, people of colour, trans people, probably a few white men too. But it wasn't about them, unfortunately most of the people who buy movie tickets are white and cis.
ConSolo29 Of course, but everyone goes "Hmm, that's a character that I can relate to as I am similar to them, I'd like to see what happens to this character, who I now care about" and in doing that, they will realise that in fact, they should be relating to all LGBT people, not just the ones that look like them. Because well, they're people. I'd rather someone see this film than not see it is all.
ConSolo29 I completely get you and you're right, all it is, is pragmatism vs idealism. Though I agree with you, I just think that this issue is so deeply ingrained in our culture (still) that we have to take small steps. Tolerance doesn't appear overnight.
Jamie Murphy if its a film about a historical event it should be portrayed accurately. If a film about say, the founding fathers, and it was played by black women there would be outcry because its just not true. They could potentially of had the main character as white cis male and still shown marsha p johnsson throwing the first brick. However this also encourages he hijacking of the LGBTA movement by cis white males - hence the umbrella term gay such as gay marriage, gay rights etc. Using a white cis male as the centre of a film like this is offensive as it suggests that events such as stonewall affected only cis white gay men when not only is stonewall integral to the history of the entire LGBTQA movement, but it was initiated by poc trans women.
Mia Fenton This isn't just a historical drama intending to educate, it's also a political film that preaches tolerance and acceptance and that message is arguably more important than accuracy. As long as the audience understand and are affected by that message, that's all that counts. I'm not attempting to say this is right, I've repeatedly said it's not, however I can see why it's been done, and will have advantages and could make this film a more potent weapon against intolerance, as counter productive as that may seem.
Jamie Murphy But in order to make people more tolerant we need to stop catering to the majority. I see what you're saying, but honestly I think that they did it just to make money. If we want people to be more tolerant we should start with actual representation in the media, not showing people a whitewashed version of our history.
It would have been interesting to include heterosexual people's thoughts too. And I say this as an asexual.
Emma J their opinion wouldn't be relevant tho. It's not their story that is being told.
***** dear lord people do you even know what your saying? Heterosexuality is way more accepted, and has been "history" much longer then homosexuality. Its basic stuff people, it makes me cringe when people talk about heterosexual rights, you have all the rights you need.
Emma J Interesting heterosexual thoughts? That's an oxymoron, honey.
Emma J ...lol...why?
Sage Benenati i think they were being sarcastic
Another great comment was made by Gino Costa on Towleroad:
"I just finished watching the PBS American Masters documentary Stonewall Uprising. There are plenty of men and women who participated in the riots still alive. And the largest demographic is gay white men -- many of them, at the time, kids in their late teens/early twenties who had run away from home or been kicked out by unaccepting families, finding a new home on the streets of Greenwich Village and in Stonewall. Based on the trailer, this is precisely the story that is being told in the new film.
All queer people own the Stonewall story; to see this battle emerging, this seemingly seething bigotry against the gay white men who fought on the streets back in June 1969, who helped get us from Stonewall to openly serving in the military and marriage equality, is frustrating and offensive. We all should know better."
what if a school decides to let a history class go on a field trip to see this? like others are saying, kids will get the wrong idea unless their teacher properly educates them about what really happened. i have to disagree with curly on this and say there should be a boycott. even as a white cis female, this warped history is very frustrating.
As a person who doesn't know a lot about the history of gay activism I'm kinda sad that this movie won't be showing it accurately.
First guy looks like a damn pineapple.
couldn't agree with their views more
Yup
Instead of watching this non attempt of shining a light on LGBT history, support "Happy Birthday Marsha!" which is a film about one of the actual heads of the Stonewall Riots Marsha P. Johnson a transgender artist and activist. And it stars actual trans actors. www.happybirthdaymarsha.com/
The movie needs alot of drag queens and butch lesbians 'cause they were the first fighters if Stonewall. But Hollywood...
If anyone's interested you can read about the leading ladies of the riot and their contributions to the riots (who were women of color) at the lgbtq-history tumblr!
BOYCOTT THE MOVIE
Stone wall: straight outta Compton gay edition
Why are all these straight people complaining about a video for the LGBT community?? Not everything is about straight cisgender people.
I honestly believe that a lot of people are blaming the main actor in this film, when in actual fact everyone should be blaming the writer/s, disrespecting Marsha's memory like that is truly disgraceful.
jc I'm tired of people putting the CIS white males into the role of not having the right to stand behind an activist position like feminism or homosexuality. It's happening all over tumblr and come on. I do agree that they should add a lot more people of color into the movie and generally film industries but I'm really tired of that argument.
They're not mad just because it's a white cis man, they're mad because it's historically wrong. A black, trans woman threw the first stone and there were lots of other black trans women, too. If you wanna make a movie about a historically event, you should get these facts right.
"Oh cool, white guy"
This, this is exactly what I felt watching that trailor
As someone that has only heard the basics of Stonewall I bought this film on DVD to watch and found it very interesting. What it has made me wanting is to know more about the true events and therefore ordered the DVD Stonewall Uprising documentary. Unfortunately as with all films they are going to change some of the history to make it more appealing BUT what I find strange is that a few people have said there are no people of other ethnicity or even the butch lesbians yet when I watched the film again I saw people of both of these demographics.
There already is a movie about Stonewall called 'Stonewall'. It was released in 1995 and starred Guillermo Díaz, who is currently playing Huck on Scandal. It is not a great film, but probably more honest than anything Roland Emmerich will ever produce.
Are they comparing the gay movement to the civil rights movement? Female Rights movement? Obama's inauguration? Selma? Please, please don't compare your gay movement to those movements. Or maybe am I getting it wrong?
Erkhes Batjargal Gay people are equal to straight women and men and black people.
Stop making this the oppression Olympics.
Jonathan Egholm I don't get it.. I'm straight and I'm not gay.
Erkhes Batjargal No, nobody is trying to compare any movement to the other, as they are all different. This is simply showing a movie about the LGBTQIA+ movement - the roots of the PRIDE parades all over the world (sometimes also called CSD - Christopher street day, as the riots was on Christer street at the Stonewall Inn) as we know them today started with a riot at Stonewall, which this movie is trying to show the story of, but getting it completely wrong as it was mostly PoC transgender, dragqueens and non-binary people as also lesbians who were in the center of the riots and started it all, not a white, gay guy.
This upsets a lot of people because the LGBTQIA+ community has a history of discredeting the people who truly made an impact for the community and whitewashed it making it look like it was just all white, gay, cis men.
+Erkhes Batjargal which says it all
THE PERSON WHO THREW THE FIRST BRICK WAS ACTUALLY MARSHA P. JOHNSON, A BLACK TRANSGENDER WOMAN.
Powerful stuff. Sad to know there has to be racism even in films like this..
Welcome to America!
The place where we do NOT stand for anything because we don't want anyone to be offended!
Sounds like it's going to be as misleading as Mel Gibson's version of William Wallace's life... (Braveheart).
but can we just take a moment to comment on Curlys' hair?
flawless.
Under 301...
Now that it doesn't matter..... *sigh*
No worries!!
She stopped the video and basically called it bs when the white dude threw a brick 👏👏
i didnt know that this trailer existed. Thanks ***** I'm going to go look it up now!
"The white man was not the hero of stonewall" she said it all right there
Just like in the hunger games movies, Katniss has actually olive skin in the books... But oh well, obviously a dark skinned person can't be the hero. (Nothing against JLaw)
Dilan Shakur olive sin is white Mediterranean
I don't think getting a character from a YA book wrong and getting a clear fact in history wrong and whitewashing an entire movie about trans POC are the same thing...
1983 is calling They're not white washing go check the pictures
Catherine you clearly don't know the history of the Stonewall movement. Please go educate yourself.
Catherine oh, I see now. You're a nine year old child. Yes, that would explain your incredibly stupid comment and your horrendous spelling. And I just love how you assume I'm a straight female or a gay male. Beautiful. You're just further proving my point. Again, educate yourself before starting an argument.
As an active member in the LGBT community I feel embarrassed not knowing what Stonewall is, most of my knowledge comes from the internet and movies, not from school or books, I was actually hoping to watch this movie and learn about it, but then I heard a lot of people were mad at it and I was confused, til I actually read why. IDK i just feel awkward and weird not knowing this stuff
+Brandon Rodriguez It's not just you, many LGBT people are not entirely familiar with their history. Movies like this would be a great step in educating people of all kinds, regardless of sexuality, in important past events such as Stonewall, if they were portrayed accurately. You shouldn't feel bad that you don't know much about it, what's important is that you are willing to learn more ^_^
Tumblrtards: The movie
I understand this is not a documentary, is a Hollywood movie ... BUT GIMME A FUCKING BREAK! Next you are going to tell me Jeebus really was blonde and blue eyed, even though he supposedly was a jewish guy from the middle east.
Don't judge a book by it's a cover? It's a trailer, the want you to judge it.
The film is merely "inspired by real events" and not "based on a true story". That means it is MOSTLY FICTIONAL including the protagonists.
Those who are campaigning against this film must get a life. If you don't like the movie then don't watch it. Don't dictate to other people what they should be watching and what they should not.
omg i hate people why does everyone get so offended nowadays. Jesus
Cholo Mw So what do you think would happen if George Washington in a movie was portrayed by a black guy or a Asian guy?
You are the reason people hate cis hetero white males. Please never reproduce.
1983 is calling you saying cis hetero white male is the reason why babies are dying stop please
Cholo Mw that's not what I said at all? I said you should never reproduce because of your terribly ignorant and downright stupid comment. You have the intelligence of a squirrel.
Cholo Mw 1983 never said that... They were saying you're fucking stupid and shouldn't reproduce because your children would be just as idiotic, if not even more. Though I am getting a bit annoyed with everyone hating cis hetero white males because they're fine with how they were born...
People need to grow up. It's a Hollywood movie, not a documentary.
PhilyC3RD You really don't get it, do you?
PhilyC3RD its fucking HISTORY. not just a documentary making up stories. it need's to be somewhat accurate, and placing a cis white male as the main character it's not accurate at all.
PhilyC3RD So if a movie about JFK was made and they made JFK Indian, people wouldn't freak out, due to it's historical inaccuracy?
It's a biographical tale about the stonewall riots, the story doesn't have to be 100% accurate, but if you're gonna depict people, it has to be somewhat accurate. Because the LGBT community isn't just white people, as the media always portrays it.
I signed to boycott it. It's disrespectful and degrading.
Yeah, I'm boycotting. I'm not going to pay to watch our history be spat on.
Can I just ask - what is ciss? They keep on saying it, but I'm not sure exactly what it means
If you were born a guy, you identify with being a guy and you are happy being a guy.
When you're born a girl/boy
Oh, okay! Thanks ^
I'm pretty sure it means people who are not trans
That's probably the simplest way of putting it, yeah
Hollywood NEEDS to stop whitewashing. It's absolutely insane. Was anyone aware that Alicia Nash from the award winning movie "A Beautiful Mind" is actually Hispanic. She is from El Salvador. Yet she was played by a white actress. As a Salvadoran women interested in science, she would've made a marvelous model for thousands of hispanic youth (including me) and could've been the role of a lifetime to an equally talented hispanic actor. Scarlett Johansson is set to play a JAPANESE main character in the manga turned movie, "Ghost in the Shell". Why??? There are plenty of talented Asian actors. And now this. Erasing the accomplishments of black, transgender Marsha P. Johnson, and giving all the credit to a white man. People who have never heard of the riots will take in all this misinformation and view it as facts. Completely degrading and ridiculous.
It's not a documentary people.
beanme100 But it's a film based off of true events that actually happened in history. If they're going to make a somewhat historical fiction movie based on the Stonewall event, they should try to make it as accurate as possible to what was going on.
But the director also needs to appeal to a large enough audience to make money back.
beanme100 If that's all he's worried about, then he shouldn't be put in charge of this movie. The LGBT community is large enough, as well as its supporters.
beanme100 Then they should've done what people wanted because apparently its being boycotted
still its about a historical event and it deserves to be show and produced correctly so that people will know the truth and how things really happened. No point making a flim about a historical event with out any historical proof. It is kind of an obvious thing to do.
Why does it matter if a white guy or a black woman started the riot? The point of this whole thing is so that there ISNT a difference. If it's important to you who started the riots and who they were sexually attracted to then you're being a little hypocritical. Idfc about how accurate the history was represented, I care about the message it's trying to give.
it matters because ignorant people who do not know about stonewall will think the hero is a white gay male which is a lie!
The problem is , is that white people always try to make it seem as if they were the better person. If race wasn't problem then why couldn't they just be more historically acurate
By asking for only LGBT thoughts its basically like asking for only light skinned people's thoughts. DONT CLASSIFY PEOPLE, hear everyones thoughts!
Nothing down here, just your average guy begging for subs and likes on this comment so people can see some epic basketball trick shots.
Boo fucking hoo
***** I dont mean to be rude but I'm pretty sure they used LGBT thoughts because they whitewashed a black transgender woman to be a white cisgender man. And there are promised to be no butch lesbians (like the many that were ACTUALLY in the stonewall riot).
***** He is simply stating his thoughts. There is no need to use foul language to go against his statement. I wouldn't be commenting if you didn't use such an inappropriate language and 'sarcasm'. I do agree with Bredan in teh sense that I would have love to see straight persons sharing their thoughts of the trailer. I would have loved to see if would they have known the real story behind Stonewall, like the LGBTs did and would they have been ok with it.
***** I just rolled my eyes so hard I almost went blind. The LGBT community were greatly affected by this riot. It makes sense that they went to these people first to hear their opinion.
You think it's that important to have non lgbt peoples' thoughts on a movie that's not about them?
What if some random person gave you feedback on your own wedding video?
Why are people expecting Hollywood to portray history accurately? When I wanted to learn about Stonewall, I went and did my research. I don't expect a history lesson from Hollywood, just entertainment. If I want historical facts, I search through reputable sources.
It's called acting, shouldn't matter who plays the role
MegaRadomstuff I would agree
No...?
Yeah,in a way you can be right. It wouldn't matter for me if they didn't said in that casting paper thingy that you need to be Caucasian and etc to play the role. But when they are purposely whitewashing the story it becomes a bit problematic. Not trying to cause a stereotypical CZcams argument just giving my opinion :)
But it's not fiction, it's a historical movie. If they're gonna tell this story, they have to tell it all, the right way, otherwise it basically cancels out the point. They're lying about what actually happened and discrediting people who fought for this. It'll give thousands of kids and adults, possibly lgbtq , about how they got their rights today.
Well I thought this was a historical movie, and if that person from history was white. THey can't change history
The first and only time I heard about Stonewall was in my college History of Sex class. Sad how just like POC history, LGBTQIQA history isn't in ANY textbook without a White context.
We need more people of color and more female's in the leading role enough Hollywood of the same old typical cliche white guy save the day it's getting get some more ideas Hollywood i hope your listening to what im say
"Porgy, you're a white man, you've got to help us!" ... That's a line from Firesign Theater's "High School Madness" a surreal satire from the 70s mocking racist portrayals in films ... I guess some things never change.
Of corse there were also white people in Stonewall, but I think that since latin, black, asian,... people had the leadership in this fight because they were also oppresed because of their race, it's just not fair that the main character is shown as the first to throw a brick to stonewall. If they wanted to have a white cis gay man as the main character, at least they could also have given other main roles to racialized trans / lesbians / bisexuals and not make it seem like it was a white guy that started everything when it's not true.
Nobody mentioned that this movie is directed by Robert Emmerich, who also directed 2012, 10,000 B.C. and The Day After Tomorrow. Do not expect quality, accuracy or great film making from this person.
A lot of us value the truth so much that we've made it a saying that the truth will set us free. However, movies usually conform to what they think will make hits. I just hope that this movie is justified.
If your gonna support the LGBTQ community please support all of it you can't pick and choose what you wanna support.
The details that are missing, aren't missing to poorly inform. The overall "white washing" that's taking place in this movie, is just a good platform to leap from and continue to outdo this and get better. Should we disregard this and initiate the self-loathing protocol that makes the importance of this movie making it mainstream, thereby forcing anyone to say negative things about it to fit in and be on trend? I'm going to see it and support it, that way when they remake it in 10 years, they'll have changed all the important details to the ones we all discussed here. I want to see things done right too, but I don't want to kill it before it gets a chance to be done correctly. ... Blah blah blah ... Rome wasn't built in a day.. Blah blah blah.... At the very least, two remote cowboys, a man named Milk, and a club in Texas portrayed some things that made this community look hurt, weak, afraid, and killed. Let's see some full on fight back.
Stonewall does have a few flaws in the facts (I have not reaserched into it but I have heard on a few websites) but I do know that it may help cisgender straight people to understand what our people had to go through. And for that I think having a cisgender white male in the lead role may be good to attract more people. We know our history, the straight and cis people may not, it will at least give them an idea of what our people went through and the main events that happened.
I've managed to get to two discussions about stonewall in my life, and with that very little information I feel like I knew more than the writers. I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised.
I just don't understand why they had to insert a fictional white guy into the story to begin with. It's an awesome story! Why not just go with what actually happened?
Has anyone from Buzzfeed or anyone here for that matter seen the film "Stonewall" from 1995 by Nigel Finch..? I thought that was excellent. No it was not a 'historical' documentary, they actually say so in the movie, that it was simply one person's 'version' of what happened. As for "people of colour" in Stonewall, the 90's film was all about people of colour, two of the main characters in it were Black and the other was Latino/ Puerto Rican.....and although, yes, it was very 'Hollywood', I felt like it was a very beautifully done film that received awards in 1995 and 1996( London Film Festival, SF International L and G Film Fest., and Outfest)... It had a few inaccuracies in it historically, no doubt, but that was not the point of the film....It was inspired by the memoirs of the Gay historian Martin Duberman, and purposely intended to be a fictional account told from the perspective of one person, but still beautifully done with some profound lessons and on top of that great scenes with wonderful music.... What does this one have to offer in comparison to that one, which by the way uses the same exact title (which is confusing to some of us who saw and loved the original one from the 90's). Please tell me I am not the only one who saw that because watching this review, it seems like everyone completely forgot about the original Stonewall film by Nigel Finch and overshadowed by this 2015 film which to me is proving to be far more inferior...... sigh.
Don't look at the comments... Don't look at the comments... Damn it.
While I definitely understand the problem stated in the video, it reminded me of how the internet is trying to convince me that it's racist of me to be white.
Tifa Lockhart How exactly is this trying to tell you that you are racist? This is simply saying that Hollywood likes to whitewash.
inasexymood No, I wasn't saying that, I said I understood the meaning of the video, it just set me off remembering things I've come across in other places. I knew I'd be misunderstood don't worry, I explained it badly. I really think whitewashing is pathetic, you go and say you're not racist yet you go and hire a white man to play a character who is plainly not white. If it was a fictional character, fair enough. Changing their race to black or white is the same thing technically. When a person of a certain race has absolutely nothing to do with an event, then it's just pointless and incorrect.
Tifa Lockhart I didn't misunderstand anything. This video should not remind you of those ignorant people at all, since everything that is said in this video makes sense. If the transgender woman in the video wasn't white and they were actually trying to claim that all white people racist, then you'd have a point. Hollywood has been whitewashing and ridiculing poc's from the jump, so I'm not surprised at this Stonewall film. Fred Astaire, Al Jolson, Bing Crosby, Micky Rooney, Shirley Temple, Judy Garland, Marlon Brando, John Wayne and Katharine Hepburn and many more have taped their eyes or painted their face black and their mouth area white to portray Asian and black characters.
Let us just hope and beg and plead that they only showed a cis white male as the main focus to get more people to be willing to see the film and that the actual movie is more accurate to history.
If it ends up portraying the opposite message of the LGBTQ community that we wanted it to, let's just make it the most hated movie of the year.
Until then, we can wait until the movie comes out and give it a chance.
I love the trans female, she's so amazing and sounds so strong which gives me hope in life xxxx
The one thing I found offensive is this idea, but into words at the end, that Stonewall was where Pride began. So not true. The current gay rights movement can be traced back to 1945 (then split into different periods). But people were fighting for gay rights all over the world even before then.
I would watch it if it was an accurate portrayal of what happened and I am all up for people learning about gay rights and struggles but I'm going to boycott the film I don't think it is right for people who probably knew nothing about the riots in the first place, for the first thing they see about the riots to be a cis white male. The movement was started by trans women of colour and that should've been respected and reenacted if they were going to make a film out of it in the first place.
I feel like it's a stepping stone, and if we don't take the first step, we'll never get to the other side.
Seriously? You could do an awesome job showing the real story of REAL people who fought for their own rights and show people around the world how was tough to get where we are today and why we are not going to give up for our rights! We don't have representation in most of the media (at least here in Brazil) and then you make a movie about a LGBT historical event where the protagonist is a white straight cis guy, when actually who first threw the brick (and starred the revolution) was a black transgender woman? People try to erase our story everyday, and now Hollywood is trying to erase our participation and leadership in our own historical revolutions! This movie is insulting!
The director is Roland Emmerich ( a white cis gay man). A dude whose history and fact checking is so bad he actually though the Tudor Rose was a real flower. I'm not holding my breath for this movie. He should stick to demolishing historical landmarks and not try to ruin actual history.
When the girl in the blue shirt pauses the video was like "Okay hold on..." I was like "YAS GURLL! TAKE 'EM DOWN!!"
She's my hero right now.
i can't and won't support a movie that basically tells a lie about the stonewall history. on top of that, not a single lgbtq actor is in this movie WTF...a movie about gay movement but not a single lgbtq actor in it....
I don't think the producers hired him because he's a white cis male, I think they hired him based on his ability to tell a story and to touch people. the lgbtq community (myself included) should be greatful we're getting this kind of exposure. give the man a chance. in the end it's all just a movie anyways.
Could you make a video of what people think of string instruments before hearing modern string and after?
Purely curious, how many people think this movie should be banned from theaters?
Why are so many non LGBT people saying that saying his/her in sentences and writing is just because of trans people? Like no, if the gender of the person/people you are writing about is unknown then saying his/her and s/he is just grammatically correct…
Pretty inaccurate movie.
The one who throw the first brick was Marsha P. Johnson, and when the real fight begin was when a lesbian resisted and begined yell to the people around.
There were white boys yes .. but they were nothing like that straight actor .. masculine and good looking.
They were feminine and sassy white boys.
I get centering it around a white man. but you could have him be inspired by people throwing bricks and him joining. common ppl why u gotta rewrite it so much