Dallas Buyers Club

Charlie19

I found it to be a bit of an eye opener and that's why I probably liked it so much.

WayneScott

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Ah fair play to you. Good man. Well done.

ah fair play to you for explaining it as if i did not know it. well done

Baze

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I find it kind of odd that they didn't get a trans person to play the role too. I'm sure there were plenty of capable trans people who could have done it.

The likelihood of there being a transvestite with the acting abilities of Jared Leto would be slim and so why should they hire someone to play a role in such a big film, just because they have the same sexuality or traits that the character does.

Where would you stop? Get an actor with HIV to play Ron Woodroof? One with cerebral palsy to play Christy Brown?

Don't mean to sound facetious, but I don't see the relevancy.

Fysh

Baze wrote: »

The likelihood of there being a transvestite with the acting abilities of Jared Leto would be slim and so why should they hire someone to play a role in such a big film, just because they have the same sexuality or traits that the character does.

Where would you stop? Get an actor with HIV to play Ron Woodroof? One with cerebral palsy to play Christy Brown?

Don't mean to sound facetious, but I don't see the relevancy.

I imagine that the thinking is that getting members of a particular minority group to portray characters who are members of that minority in TV and film roles increases the likelihood of those depictions being authentic and avoiding stereotypes - which for anyone in that group will be an important part of trying to raise wider awareness of issues they face and promoting equal treatment for them.

I think it can be tricky, in that with good writing there's no reason that a great performance as a trans character can't be given by a cis actor; but equally I don't think you can dismiss it as saying "there couldn't be anyone trans who'd have been as good as Jared Leto", at least not without running through a list of trans actors who might have auditioned for the role (or been interested in doing so). DBC was also a project which sat in various stages of development hell and went through several casting choices for Woodroof, and ended up being filmed in less than a month - so there's a good possibility that the budget and deadline constraints made things more difficult as well.

AnonoBoy

WayneScott wrote: »

ah fair play to you for explaining it as if i did not know it. well done

Ah no bother. I'm here to help.

Da Shins Kelly

Baze wrote: »

The likelihood of there being a transvestite with the acting abilities of Jared Leto would be slim and so why should they hire someone to play a role in such a big film, just because they have the same sexuality or traits that the character does.

How could you possibly know that there isn't a trans person with the acting ability of Jared Leto without going through the possibilities? I mean, if there are members of the trans community who feel that Jared Leto lapsed into stereotype in his portrayal, how good could it actually have been? I have read more than one article that compared his performance to Hattie McDaniel's Mammy in Gone With The Wind.

As Fysh was saying, there's nothing to say that cis people can't play the role of a trans person, but obviously the trans community is one that faces difficulties with stereotyping and equality and can really be misunderstood, so stuff like this can be important. Of course, it's great to make the trans community more visible, but if you're going to hire an actor who is going to play a trans person based on his perceptions of that community, which may be based on stereotype, what's the point? I thought the performance was a weird one anyway. I thought he did fine, but definitely wasn't overly impressed by it.

Tipsy McSwagger

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

How could you possibly know that there isn't a trans person with the acting ability of Jared Leto without going through the possibilities? I mean, if there are members of the trans community who feel that Jared Leto lapsed into stereotype in his portrayal, how good could it actually have been? I have read more than one article that compared his performance to Hattie McDaniel's Mammy in Gone With The Wind.

As Fysh was saying, there's nothing to say that cis people can't play the role of a trans person, but obviously the trans community is one that faces difficulties with stereotyping and equality and can really be misunderstood, so stuff like this can be important. Of course, it's great to make the trans community more visible, but if you're going to hire an actor who is going to play a trans person based on his perceptions of that community, which may be based on stereotype, what's the point? I thought the performance was a weird one anyway. I thought he did fine, but definitely wasn't overly impressed by it.

Good enough to win an Oscar.

Call Me Jimmy

Links234 wrote: »

It's true, some trans people are quite annoyed about his performance and are pretty vocal about it, and that's for two reasons. First being that a lot of people felt that the character was just a complete stereotype, and not having seen the movie myself yet (been itching to, but haven't been able to afford the cinema lately), so I can't comment about that. The other reason being that an actual trans person wasn't cast in the role.

The thing you have to understand is, in both of these criticisms, it's not about Jared Leto.

These are general criticisms that always come up whenever someone who isn't trans gets cast as a trans character. It was the same when Chloe Sevigny was cast in the show Hit & Miss, I actually know trans women who auditioned for that role, so it wasn't that they couldn't find anyone. I actually think Chloe Sevigny is fantastic in that show, even if some of it is a bit stereotypical and there's some downright surreal moments, it was great. But there are some really terrific trans people acting today, Harmony Santana or Laverne Cox just for example... the problem an awful lot of people have is that trans actors don't get cast in regular roles, and when trans roles come up, don't get cast in those either. Think about it, how often do you see a trans person playing a trans character in movies or TV? Orange is the new Black is one of the very, very few examples.

So you have to understand, this isn't anything new, or really anything specifically about Jared Leto. This is an old argument that's been going on for ages, it just seems like Leto's the focus of it because this is the latest example, and the popularity of the film if giving the criticism more exposure than before. But it's just a general criticism.

Hope that helps you understand why some trans people are miffed!

Without attributing what you described to you, would these people say that gay actors shouldn't be cast in straight roles, and vice versa? I understand there is the point of representation, and a definite need for more trans awareness in general but I don't think these opinions would hold up in any kind of argument.

Links234

Another thing to think about is that an actor probably isn't going to have much leeway with how a character is written, so if the character is a bad stereotype then that's what and actor or actress has to work with. But you know, I don't think general audiences can appreciate bad trans stereotypes when they see them, because that's mostly what gets shown in movies and TV and can't tell otherwise. One example of this, Transamerica, a movie that got loads of praise, loads of people seemed to love it, Felicity Huffman got nominated for an oscar for this... but to me? It was a horrible, horrible, cringeworthy mess of stereotypes that I absolutely loathe.

Links234

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Without attributing what you described to you, would these people say that gay actors shouldn't be cast in straight roles, and vice versa? I understand there is the point of representation, and a definite need for more trans awareness in general but I don't think these opinions would hold up in any kind of argument.

No I don't think any reasonable person would say that gay actors shouldn't be cast in straight roles or vice versa, and nobody is really saying that only trans people should be cast in trans roles, that's kinda missing the point. Try and think of it this way, imagine that gay actors couldn't land any general roles in movies or on TV, but when it came around to gay characters, they couldn't land those roles either?

The criticism isn't "only trans people should play trans characters" it's more like "how come trans people almost never get to play trans roles, and all there is is very stereotypical characters?" if you follow?

WayneScott

AnonoBoy wrote: »

Ah no bother. I'm here to help.

even when its not needed

Baze

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

How could you possibly know that there isn't a trans person with the acting ability of Jared Leto without going through the possibilities? I mean, if there are members of the trans community who feel that Jared Leto lapsed into stereotype in his portrayal, how good could it actually have been? I have read more than one article that compared his performance to Hattie McDaniel's Mammy in Gone With The Wind.

Simple: I would be aware of them. There are no transvestite actors that could meet that kind of criteria that would need to have been met, in order for them to have been approved by producers to play this part. They had enough issues getting this film made and distributed and quite frankly, had a transvestite played Rayon, the film would never have been made, let alone seen the light of day.

What is so special about transvestites anyway, that when they are being portrayed in films, only transvestite actors should play them. What cobblers. Talk about people being full of their own self importance. Those that have complained about this film and Leto's performance (and they have done, no matter what people have said on this thread) have done more disservice to the transvestite community with their unfounded, paranoid, narcissistic outcries, than anything in a film ever could have.

As Fysh was saying, there's nothing to say that cis people can't play the role of a trans person, but obviously the trans community is one that faces difficulties with stereotyping and equality and can really be misunderstood, so stuff like this can be important. Of course, it's great to make the trans community more visible, but if you're going to hire an actor who is going to play a trans person based on his perceptions of that community, which may be based on stereotype, what's the point? I thought the performance was a weird one anyway. I thought he did fine, but definitely wasn't overly impressed by it.

I know, and have known, transvestites and to me it was quite simply a stunning performance. Maybe there are just aspects of it which are far to close to the bone for some to take on board and the real issue here is one of projection. Just as an example, the scene in which Rayon goes and sees his father was written beautifully and played equally so. It clearly showed respect to the gay and transvestite community, what they have gone through and also continue to go through. Why are they not focusing on that, rather that some nonexistent flaws in Leto's performance?

Jared Leto came under fire from a heckler Tuesday, who said the Dallas Buyers Club actor didn't deserve to be honored for his work in the film.

"Trans-misogyny does not deserve an award," said the unidentified woman, who attended the Santa Barbara International Film Festival's Virtuosos Award tribute honoring Leto and three others who gave breakthrough performances in 2013.

"What do you mean by that?" Leto asked, to which the heckler said:

"You don't deserve an award for portraying a trans-woman, because you're a man."

At 0m55s Jared responds to the above:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfCzA9WiVwc

Links234

Baze, nobody is talking about 'Transvestites'

AnonoBoy

WayneScott wrote: »

even when its not needed

I'm not the help you need, I'm the help you deserve.

Da Shins Kelly

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Good enough to win an Oscar.

Yeah, cos the Oscars are the best indication of quality. :rolleyes:

Members of the Academy openly admitted to voting for 12 Years a Slave for Best Picture even though they hadn't even seen it. The Oscars are bullsh*t. I'm sure they're really patting themselves on the back for being so "open-minded" though.

Da Shins Kelly

Baze wrote: »

Simple: I would be aware of them. There are no transvestite actors that could meet that kind of criteria that would need to have been met, in order for them to have been approved by producers to play this part. They had enough issues getting this film made and distributed and quite frankly, had a transvestite played Rayon, the film would never have been made, let alone seen the light of day.

What is so special about transvestites anyway, that when they are being portrayed in films, only transvestite actors should play them. What cobblers. Talk about people being full of their own self importance. Those that have complained about this film and Leto's performance (and they have done, no matter what people have said on this thread) have done more disservice to the transvestite community with their unfounded, paranoid, narcissistic outcries, than anything in a film ever could have.



I know, and have known, transvestites and to me it was quite simply a stunning performance. Maybe there are just aspects of it which are far to close to the bone for some to take on board and the real issue here is one of projection. Just as an example, the scene in which Rayon goes and sees his father was written beautifully and played equally so. It clearly showed respect to the gay and transvestite community, what they have gone through and also continue to go through. Why are they not focusing on that, rather that some nonexistent flaws in Leto's performance?

Who's talking about transvestites?

How could you possibly be aware of every trans actor who could have played that role? There very well could be someone out there who could have played that role very well and was just never given the chance (Laverne Cox is a great actress, for a start, and a big advocate of transgender rights). And yes, maybe the film would have had more trouble being made if a trans person had the role, but that's part of the problem. Are we supposed to just suck that up or something?

I think some of the arguments about it are totally valid. First of all, it's about equal opportunities, and secondly, honest representations of misunderstood minorities are important. I mean, if there are members of the trans community who think that the miserable, drug-addled, flirtatious trans person is a bit of a stereotype, I can kind of see how that comes off.

MagicMarker

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I mean, if there are members of the trans community who think that the miserable, drug-addled, flirtatious trans person is a bit of a stereotype, I can kind of see how that comes off.

If a trans person played the part then no doubt that person would be criticized for promoting such a stereotype. At the end of the day there would be people up in arms about something regardless.

Leto is an actor, he was hired to play a character that someone else created. He did it magnificently imo.

Da Shins Kelly

MagicMarker wrote: »

If a trans person played the part then no doubt that person would be criticized for promoting such a stereotype. At the end of the day there would be people up in arms about something regardless.

Leto is an actor, he was hired to play a character that someone else created. He did it magnificently imo.

I agree, Leto was fine, most of the problems seem to lie with the writing of the character, which might have been different had there been a trans person there to say 'hey, actually, I don't think that line/action is totally accurate' and stop it lapsing into stereotype.

Tipsy McSwagger

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Yeah, cos the Oscars are the best indication of quality. :rolleyes:

Members of the Academy openly admitted to voting for 12 Years a Slave for Best Picture even though they hadn't even seen it. The Oscars are bullsh*t. I'm sure they're really patting themselves on the back for being so "open-minded" though.

I agree about the whole Oscars are bulls**t debate. Personally I thought Fassbender should have won, but was content with Leto winning after a good performance and then his acceptance speech which was the highlight of the Oscars for me.

Red Crow

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

I find it kind of odd that they didn't get a trans person to play the role too. I'm sure there were plenty of capable trans people who could have done it.

What an utterly preposterous statement to make. Maybe they should of hired slaves from Congo to play the parts in 12 Years a Slave too...

Da Shins Kelly

Red Crow wrote: »

What an utterly preposterous statement to make. Maybe they should of hired slaves from Congo to play the parts in 12 Years a Slave too...

Why don't you take a read back on what has already been said about this. You're completely missing the point.

It's about equal opportunities and accurate representations. The 12 Years a Slave comparison is irrelevant since that film is informed by a historical document, an autobiographical account of a slave and it doesn't at any point lean on stereotypes revolving around the black community to communicate a message. As such, it doesn't have any of the same issues with its representation of a minority because it is from the horse's mouth so to speak. It is because of this faithfulness to Solomon's account that we get a glimpse into the slave experience that we haven't seen before on film, one that doesn't trivialise or downplay that experience (and I highly recommend Solomon Northup's narrative to anyone who enjoys history or even just reading). It's simply a depiction of a particular man's life in slavery, based on real life, documented experience. The Rayon character in Dallas Buyers Club didn't even exist, she was created presumably for dramatic purposes. The trans community is generally not very visible in mainstream cinema or television like the black community has come to be, so when the opportunity arises to offer such depictions onscreen, the writing of such characters is important so that honest portrayals of that community can be brought into the mainstream consciousness.

Evan DietrichSmith

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Why don't you take a read back on what has already been said about this. You're completely missing the point.

It's about equal opportunities and accurate representations. The 12 Years a Slave comparison is irrelevant since that film is informed by a historical document, an autobiographical account of a slave and it doesn't at any point lean on stereotypes revolving around the black community to communicate a message. As such, it doesn't have any of the same issues with its representation of a minority because it is from the horse's mouth so to speak. It is because of this faithfulness to Solomon's account that we get a glimpse into the slave experience that we haven't seen before on film, one that doesn't trivialise or downplay that experience (and I highly recommend Solomon Northup's narrative to anyone who enjoys history or even just reading). It's simply a depiction of a particular man's life in slavery, based on real life, documented experience. The Rayon character in Dallas Buyers Club didn't even exist, she was created presumably for dramatic purposes. The trans community is generally not very visible in mainstream cinema or television like the black community has come to be, so when the opportunity arises to offer such depictions onscreen, the writing of such characters is important so that honest portrayals of that community can be brought into the mainstream consciousness.

Film actors are what they are... Actors.

It's acting mate,not real life.

Get down off your high horse please.

Honestly I find all the criticism of the cast to be ridiculous. At the end of the day the performance was damn good and Leto was convincing and a character which could have been little more than a walking cliched worked thanks in large part to the performance. It would be nice to see a transgender actor in the role but honestly this whole debate reminds me of the recent out cry over the casting of the new Ironside.

The disabled community were up in arms over it and repeatedly criticised the makers of the show for not casting an actual wheelchair user. The fact that the show would rely heavily on scenes set before the accident where Ironside would be required to walk and run was over looked by the people campaigning to get the role recast.

The whole debate over Leto's casting is really a nonstarter. He delivered a performance that most agree was damn good. To say that he should not have been cast is akin to saying that a gay man can't play straight.

Baze

Links234 wrote: »

Baze, nobody is talking about 'Transvestites'

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Who's talking about transvestites?

You are both more than well aware of the point I was making, it was and is, quite clear and so please don't try and suggest that the word I used from under the transgender umbrella, to refer to Leto's character, somehow negated my point, it didn't. I had just read an interview with Leto on JustJared.com and that was the term used in reference to Rayon within it. Nothing more, nothing less.

My point of course, which is: You don't need a one legged monkey, to play a one legged monkey.

How could you possibly be aware of every trans actor who could have played that role? There very well could be someone out there who could have played that role very well and was just never given the chance (Laverne Cox is a great actress, for a start, and a big advocate of transgender rights). And yes, maybe the film would have had more trouble being made if a trans person had the role, but that's part of the problem. Are we supposed to just suck that up or something?

You're not listening.

I never said I was aware of every trans actor out there. I said, if there was one that met the criteria, that was needed to be met, in order to have got this film made.. that I would know about them. We ALL would know about them. I suggest you go and research this film and how difficult it was to get made and then come back and tell us that you feel that they could have got it made with an unknown playing Rayon. It. never. would. have. happened.

For clarity: I am not saying there is no trans actor as good as Leto, or that couldn't have played the role better.

I think some of the arguments about it are totally valid. First of all, it's about equal opportunities, and secondly, honest representations of misunderstood minorities are important. I mean, if there are members of the trans community who think that the miserable, drug-addled, flirtatious trans person is a bit of a stereotype, I can kind of see how that comes off.

If people were complaining about DiCaprio's portrayal of an autistic teen in What's Eating Gilbert Grape, and suggesting that an autistic person should really have played the role, I would be saying the very same thing (a role I feel he did deserve an Oscar for, incidentally).

Tipsy McSwagger

There's another McConaughey film called Tiptoes where Gary Oldman plays a midget. Now there's an argument for ridiculous casting.

kunst nugget

Just watched this tonight. Matthew McConaughey and Leto acquitted themselves well but the film was a big pile of poo imo.

ShowMeTheCash

I am a little late on this one but I just watched the Movie last night.

Looking back I had saw all the other movies before the Oscars so I was not really rooting for McConaghey and Leto.

But in retrospect I think they go it spot on, Wolf of Wall street was a great movie for me Leo never really disappoints. 12 years a slave again a very powerful movie but perhaps a little over powering at times, American Hustle was for me good but not great!
I think a performance needs to be both strong but also subtle which is something that is very difficult to achieve McConaghey and Leto I think nailed it.

El Duda

Watched this in a double bill with The Blind Side...


Dallas Buyers Club - 8/10

Another 'inspired by true events' flick but with much more impressive performances across the board and a far tougher subject matter (than The Blind Side).

Set in 1985, the story follows the rebellious AIDS sufferer Ron Woodroof (McConaughey) as he bypasses the healthcare system to help treat himself and fellow AIDS patients.

McConaughey puts in a performance that I very much doubt he will ever manage to better. Its a fantastically well written role, with a captivating arc and it really demands everything MM has to offer, including a fair few pounds in weight. He has great chemistry with Leto who also puts in a deserved Oscar winning performance. I generally don't like seeing the word 'brave' used when describing Hollywood acting but Leto deserves a lot of credit.

Considering the subject matter and the solid manner in which the story is told and directed, I was surprised to find my self lacking a little in terms of emotional investment. Usually this is sort of story that would put a lump in my throat but I found it to be more shocking than tear jerking.

A difficult film pulled off almost flawlessly. A real solid awards contender.

2smiggy

El Duda wrote: »

A real solid awards contender.

:pac::pac::pac:

El Duda

2smiggy wrote: »

:pac::pac::pac:

You know what I mean.


As far as awardsy films go... this is a good one. Not pretentious Oscar Bait tripe like The Danish Girl .

Prob shouldn't have used the word 'contender'