MovieChat Forums > Valley of the Dolls (1967) Discussion > Homophobic

Homophobic

posted 9 years ago by ricknelson53
26 replies | jump to latest

Does anyone find it odd that this film is so beloved by gay men ( of which I am one ) ? It is full of homophobic slurs and even Sharon Tate's character - the supposed sweetest of the three girls - casually refers to *beep* ". It seems to indicate gay men are not only not men but the lowest low a man could be. I am fairly sure this reflected Jacqueline Susann's novel and, apparently, her own opinions. I remember she had an ongoing feud with Truman Capote who referred to her as looking like " a truck driver in drag " and her response was calling him a fag.

[–] eqxander 9 years ago

"Beloved?" Not by this gay man! I rarely have seen a more DISGUSTING movie. The acting was atrocious. The songs were screechworthy, especially every time Patty Duke opened her mouth. The theme that everyone remembers so well was not so bad, though. But the script, the plot, the lines, just about everything about this movie wants me to take a bath in anti-bacterial soap just to wash off the filth.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] EliotTempleton 9 years ago

Im a gay man who loooooooooves this awful movie. It's right up there w/ the classics Mommie Dearest and Showgirls!

The sub-subculture in the gay community that worships these movies baffles me, and at the same time illustrates that stereotypes don't come from nowhere. They're very similar to the Bette Davis queens who roll their eyes and shriek "Isn't she fabulous!" after seeing her worst campy performances. These people make me cringe, and make me embarrassed to be in the same subculture that they are; they give us all a bad name by association, which is why I've always disliked the character of "Jack" on Will and Grace.

[–] shutupandanz 8 years ago

From one gay man to another......lighten up Mary!

[–] punxgurrl 7 years ago

Omg Showgirls is ah-mazing!

[–] libby2130 8 years ago

someone else did the singing for Patty duke...so, that is not her fault!

[–] InherentlyYours 8 years ago

'someone else did the singing for Patty duke...so, that is not her fault!'
------------------------------------
But there is no fault since the dubbing for Duke sounded great, and why they didn't use Duke's own voice. The OP is being melodramatic.

[–] mec_os 9 years ago

some gay men just love bad movies for being bad.

[–] Harold_Robbins 9 years ago

Susann had gay friends, and was part of an industry in which she came into frequent contact with gays and lesbians, but supposedly the word "fag" was part of her regular vocabulary.

"Forget it, Jake. It's the internet."

[–] smjensen312-158-669840 9 years ago

Considering the number of "girlfriends" Jacqueline Susann had (including Ethel Merman, whom she used as the model for Helen Lawson) she had a lot of chutzpah calling anyone a "fag", when she was, ahem, a tad butch herself. But then lesbianism is always better tolerated in Anglo Saxon and Nordic cultures than male homosexuality.

[–] Harold_Robbins 9 years ago

Remember when Truman Capote said on a TV show that Susann looked like " truck-driver in drag? Susann demanded an apology, so Capote apologized to truck-drivers.

"Forget it, Jake. It's the internet."

[–] smjensen312-158-669840 9 years ago

According to Capote, she very wisely dropped the suit when her attorney pointed out that he would only have to dress a few truck drivers in drag to prove it wasn't libelous.

[–] huweyjenkins 9 years ago

I agree. The movie is execrable. I don't think it can be even enjoyed as "camp" but maybe I need to rewatch it as I had a filthy case of flu when I saw it and not in the mood to enjoy anything!

[–] HighwayRoad 8 years ago

I love the campy Mommie Dearest, but never could appreciate Valley of the Dolls.

[–] cookiela2001 8 years ago

"valley of the Dolls" feels like it's about 5 hours (too) long.

I think a big problem is Barbara Parkins, who not only has a sappy character to play that's the center of the film, but is also a fairly deadbeat actress.

.

[–] Jes' Sayin' (5953) 5 years ago

Parkins is okay; Duke chews up the scenery a great deal though.

[–] stevebob 8 years ago

Valley of the Dolls isn't my favorite movie by any stretch, but I do appreciate it as an example of 'so bad it's good'. I too cringe at the occasional homophobic slur, but it's necessary to consider the context of the era in Hollywood. Gay people didn't just leapfrog from being unmentionable to being treated fairly and honestly; there was a transitional time when we could be mentioned but apparently only in derogatory terms. Another example from the same period that comes to mind as marred by the same kind of language (if memory serves correctly) is the similarly bad-but-good The Legend of Lylah Clare, starring Kim Novak.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] !!!deleted!!! (49761343) 8 years ago

I too cringe at the occasional homophobic slur

There is nothing occasional about that slur. It's said repeatedly to the point of being comedic.

---
Emojis=💩 Emoticons=

[–] RobbieCalifornia 8 years ago

It's campy enough for one watch.

[–] LiteraryLane 8 years ago

The show business crowd isn't as always as open-minded and liberal as people think.

"It is rare for people to be asked the question which puts them squarely in front of themselves."

[–] InherentlyYours 8 years ago

About the F+G word said excessively, you'd think this film would had received an --under 18 rating, though the MPAA didn't start that until 1969, I think. Yet Who's Afraid Of Virginia Wolf got a special --under 18 rating in 1966, which is odd. There was more profanity in VOTD than WAOVW

Are we sure that gay men don't feel that they "own" the film? Meaning, it's not just a film only liked by gay men as the majority.