MovieChat Forums > Victor/Victoria (1982) Discussion > Just Seems Like Gay Propaganda

Just Seems Like Gay Propaganda

posted 18 years ago by junk-307
87 replies | jump to latest

Ok, first off, I have to say I LOVE the music for this show. Henry Mancini was a genius, in more ways than one. I didn't get to see the Broadway show, because I was too young when it came out.

Based simply on the original Broadway cast recording, (which has a lot of dialog,) this show seems to be nothing more than gay propaganda. It doesn't seriously deal with any gender issues, although it pretends to. Masked in bad comedy, is the message that ALL men might be gay, they just haven't discovered it yet.

For example, the idea of King's dilemma is a situation that gay men everywhere must be drooling over: The hottest stud, super ladies man, can't figure out if he's attracted to another man or not.
Gay men wish they could have strait guys all the time, and they most often they can't. It's just like when strait guys wish they could have a married woman, or one who isn't interested.

So they create a movie and show that's all about gender bending, where nobody can tell the difference anymore, and say, isn't that great? We're all just manwomen. No, not really.

Gender confusion as well as sexual identity confusion isn't fun for anybody. None of my gay friends say that discovering they were gay was a fun time in their life. This show making light of it does nothing for those who hate themselves. Maybe the idea that all men could be attracted to men or women, (essentially bisexual,) is appealing to some. But really it's nothing more than a gay fantasy.

Well, I'm not shocked. It's not exactly bawdy by broadway standards....

[–] belacane 18 years ago

And your point is...? Most movies are propaganda of one sort or another.

It's just entertainment! Relax.

[–] junk-307 18 years ago

Ok...you just said, most movies are propaganda, so they're not just entertainment. (You contradicted yourself.) Why should people not identify the messages they take away from a show? All film makers hope and intend for audiences to think about their work. If you want to be mindless, go right ahead, but I choose to think about the films I see.

And my point is very clear. Maybe you need to re-read it. Victor/Victoria is gay propaganda.

[–] belacane 18 years ago

What I meant was, so what if it's gay propaganda? Enjoy the movie! Nobody's asking you to turn gay.

[–] junk-307 18 years ago

So what if I want to discuss the hidden messages of the production?
That obviously isn't important to you, so why are you here?
I want to talk about them, you do not. Fine.

Like I said, I love many things about this show. I am not saying this show shouldn't be produced, seen, etc. The only person trying to shut the conversation down is you. Maybe you haven't thought about the film too much. Too bad, there's quite a bit there.

[–] belacane 18 years ago

You're right, I don't overanalyze movies. I just enjoy them, or not. This is one of my top 10.

Ah, the rapier wit of an armless D'Artagnan.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] belacane 17 years ago

That's a quote from Winchester on M*A*S*H talking about how Hawkeye's jokes are so very bad.

"Good night, Vienna, city of a million something-or-others..."

[–] PatrickArchangel 11 years ago

So? Just because you are lazy to analyze that doesn't mean other shouldn't. So what if this movie is in your top 10? What makes you think the OP gives a damn...?

[–] daniexj 18 years ago

Ah, see, if there really were as much 'gay propaganda' out there as people such as yourself believe there is, well, crap, the gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered would have taken over the world.

Get a life, you say you like the movie, so watch the movie, but don't tell me that it's anything more than a movie. Oy...

[–] zillion29 18 years ago

And what exactly was the original poster expecting from a film made in 1982? Isn't it enough that the movie dealt sympathetically with homosexuals?
When I was a kid when this came out, I just took the film at face value and accepted it as entertainment. As far as I can tell, I'm still straight so the supposed propaganda didn't effect me (Seeing Lesley Ann Warren's quasi-pornographic bend-overs was much more appealing anyway.)

[–] gtbarker 8 years ago

I remember 1982 and we weren't burning homosexuals at the stake. It always makes me laugh when we pretend we are so tolerant today, when in many ways we have gone backwards.

'Well I've got two words for you - STFU'

[–] iamvered 18 years ago

Do you mean the gays, lesbians, transgendered and bisexuals HAVEN'T taken over the world? This is news to me... I thought we ran everything.

Or to quote Mel Brooks in To Be Or Not To Be, "If it wasn't for Jews, fags, and gypsies, there would be no theater."

;-)

Vered

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Emiabambinacara 18 years ago

I actually saw this movie when I was quite little in maybe 85, and I have loved it since. Back then I didn't really know what gay was, I just loved the characters; Toddy, Victoria, etc. Because of this, and my upbringing, I still really don't have a problem with the gay aspect of it. I do however love the Irony of people being fooled by Victoria's and Toddy's whole scam. It's silly, and downright one of the single most hilarious films I have had the pleasure of watching all of these years. Never once did I think of it as propaganda, then and now. Do you really have such big issues with homosexuality?

Edit: Maybe the movie is gay propaganda, because as of 2011, I am out of the closet as a lesbian. Apparently, I was the one with homosexual issues; I totally and mindf#€kingly repressed them. So, THANK YOU! Victor/Victoria! Your beacon of gayness shined the light on me!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tkech 7 years ago

@Emiabambinacara what a delightful post. Thanks for coming back to this thread to share. :-)

[–] ChristmasStan 11 years ago

AMEN TO THAT

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] forchatting 18 years ago

I'm just really confused by the original post, for many reasons. But, what struck me most was whether or not junk307 has even SEEN the movie. He keeps referring to the "show" and the cast recording. -- Huh?! For those of us who have seen and love the MOVIE, junk's comments are irrelevant to what is a good and entertaining romp (oops-maybe I shouldn't use such an effeminate term; clearly I've been subjected to the subconscious mind-control of this film!)
As a side note, junk, the Broadway show (which you apparently have never even seen either) was in many ways different from the MOVIE you make grand accusations of. Why don't you watch the MOVIE, have a few chuckles like the rest of us, and get on with your (clearly demented) life.

[–] vampirezombiegirl 18 years ago

A "gay fantasy". Right.

You do know that some people believe in universal bisexuality, yes? Kinsey scale, anyone?

Just because you don't like it doesn't make the show automatically propaganda.

[–] werecow2003 8 years ago

You do know that some people believe in universal bisexuality, yes? Kinsey scale, anyone?

This I think is more than a little silly, and it smacks of false continuum to me. While there may be a whole range of degrees of bisexuality, the extreme ends will also be part of that range. Kinsey recognizes this, btw, and his scale includes exclusively heterosexual and homosexual people. So postulating universal bisexuality is untenable unless you change the meaning of the term completely.
I personally have zero sexual or romantic attraction to any man I have ever met. It's not that I want to be uninterested in men - in some ways it might be kind of neat to be attracted to both sexes, given that I live in a rather liberal society, and my profession is one in which I don't meet a lot of women - it's just that I am uninterested. In what sense am I a bisexual?

[–] matineeidyll 18 years ago

"Gay propaganda" is the catchphrase of 2006 - straight people are applying it to every single gay movie, regardless of content.

Victor/Victoria is a fun, harmless lark that should not be subjected to this 'gay propaganda' rubbish. Just take it for what it is.

---------
I brought him in last week - drunk and disorderly. But when I sobered up, he'd gone. Sorry.

[–] daniexj 18 years ago

Ugh, tell me you're kidding. If I have to listen to all the politcos talk about 'Gay Propaganda' all year I may have to shoot myself in the foot.

As for using the word show, the stage show is also on DVD (though not as good IMHO, except for the dance between Victor and Norma, oh, to have seen Julie Andrews and Leslie Ann Warren do that....), so, getting the two confused maybe??

[–] Katz5 18 years ago

This is one of my favorite movies. I'm a straight male and first saw it in 1982 at the theater--and loved it even at age 14.

Blake Edwards is a master at farce. Just see the ORIGINAL Pink Panther movies, "10" or "S.O.B." This movie is a farce, that happens to be a musical, that happens to have a sympathetic gay character. Robert Preston's Toddy is the only main gay character in the movie.

Watch it again before you make a blanket statement like that.

[–] dwr246 18 years ago

Okay, first question, did you actually WATCH this movie? I have no idea what movie you're describing, but it doesn't sound like the Victor/Victoria I know and love.

Second question, where do you get the idea that this movie doesn't deal with gender issues? She's a woman pretending to be a man. She's very clear that she is treated differently as a man than she was as a woman. She's also very clear that while it has its advantages, it also has its disadvantages.

Third question, on what do you base your assertions made on behalf of the gay community? A random sampling of your "gay" friends (congratulations of having them, although I wonder why)? Your own opinion? You can hardly claim to speak for a group as a whole with any kind of validity. At least have the decency to identify your opinions as your own rather than claiming to speak for a group which you clearly know little about.

Fourth question, what makes you think this movie makes light of anything? It's dealing with serious issues in a comic way (even if you don't get the jokes), but its points are deadly serious. Or did you miss the part where Robert Preston laments not being able to cry because he's a man and men aren't allowed to cry?

Gay fantasy? Maybe only in that the characters in this movie care too much about each other to really care who prefers to sleep with which gender. It's who they are to each other that matters, not the gender of who they want to sleep with. King and Squash continue as friends because they care about each other. If they didn't, their friendship would have ended when Squash came out. Is that your idea of a fantasy friendship? If so, I pity those who count you as a friend.

Your overanalysis of this movie sounds very self righteous. Maybe you ought to lighten up a little and live and let live

[–] ijones-9 18 years ago

I would love some clarification on your post because it's a little confusing. First of all, I'm not sure if you're talking about the 1982 film or the Broadway musical that followed because there are differences between the two and should be discussed separately. Second, I'm not sure what you mean by gay propoganda.

[–] smileitsonlylife 18 years ago

This movie was made in 1982 not 2002 - the issue it is promoting is the role of women in a man's world - not gay rights.

"The art of flying is throwing yourself at the ground and missing" - Douglas Adams

[–] turtleheart 18 years ago

The hottest stud, super ladies man, can't figure out if he's attracted to another man or not.

And he isn't, Twelfth Night style! It's actually somewhat conservative, fool.

Why am I posting here?