MovieChat Forums > Blind Faith (1998) Discussion > It was good... until the ending...

It was good... until the ending...

posted 17 years ago by furienna
28 replies | jump to latest

I actually liked this movie, until the last minute or two, when the movie suddenly jumps several decades, showing the uncle supporting gay pride parades and *beep* like that. And showing Martin Luther King just before seemed stupid too. Yes, Martin Luther King fought for the black people, which also was important in this movie, but would he really support the gay pride parades shown just seconds after they show his "I have a dream "speech? I have a very strong feeling he wouldn't. But what had been a very touching drama for 120 minutes suddenly turned into liberal gay propganda for the last one or two minutes.

Yes, it's true! IMDB has reached Sweden!

[–] chuck_803 17 years ago

Because the dad didnt want to believe his son was gay. He was so disgusted when the uncle said his son was gay. A very good film.

YOU'RE MAKING ME CRAZY!!!!!

www.myspace.com/3839450

[–] bertrambunter 16 years ago

I too felt that way - I was 100% with the family right up until the end, and then we have to have the usual PC c*ap shoved down our throats - now I couldn't care less.

[–] shantiquax 16 years ago

Your responses would be heartbreaking to the film's creators. Justice is not PC. The fact that you could actually watch this movie from beginning to end and not see that it was about fighting reactions like yours makes it seem like we haven't managed to get the 2 steps forward before having to take that one step back. Coretta Scott King was 100% in favor of equal rights, and it seems unlikely that a man as brilliant and visionary as MLK, Jr. would consider equal rights for all as some kind of PC trope. You either have equality, or you don't.

[–] RedSoxEatIt 16 years ago

AMEN! Shantiquax, I couldn't agree more!

I just got done watching it, and I'm in tears, that was a GREAT movie!

Peace and Blessings to you :)

[–] knaayo 15 years ago

I'm so glad you said it.

[–] sales-881 15 years ago

Great movie. The end is what it is, a message.

I enjoyed the movie. I'm glad that I caught it on showtime.

[–] GaelicLass 13 years ago

Yes it was a message and I think the OP has issues of his own based on his question. I doubt he could see that on his own and deny when presented to him.

[–] Law-N-Order 13 years ago

This movie was GREAT..and the messages in the end were GREAT, too !

REALLY..I mean..REALLY ?!..

[–] furienna 14 years ago

It seems unlikely that a man as brilliant and visionary as MLK, Jr. would consider equal rights for all as some kind of PC trope. You either have equality, or you don't.

But do you really think, that MLK Jr would support "gay rights"?

Yes, it's true! IMDB has reached Sweden!

[–] bigmarkiestyle 13 years ago

Yes, I think he would have. MLK worked very closely with Civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, who was gay. Look at the movie "Boycott" with the great Jeffrey Wright playing MLK and Erik Todd Dellums playing Rustin. It gives some insight into it. Now, admittedly, King was advised to keep his distance from Rustin later but not because of his own personal beliefs so much as many thought his association with a black gay man during that time would deter focus from the movement. That's more about politics than King's beliefs, and, from my reading, he respected Rustin a great deal.

[–] furienna 13 years ago

Yes, I think he would have. MLK worked very closely with Civil rights activist Bayard Rustin, who was gay. Look at the movie "Boycott" with the great Jeffrey Wright playing MLK and Erik Todd Dellums playing Rustin. It gives some insight into it. Now, admittedly, King was advised to keep his distance from Rustin later but not because of his own personal beliefs so much as many thought his association with a black gay man during that time would deter focus from the movement. That's more about politics than King's beliefs, and, from my reading, he respected Rustin a great deal.

But even if MLK respected a man, who happened to be gay, it still doesn't mean, that he would support "gay rights". Of course, he was murdered in 1968, and we can't be sure about what issues he would worked with, if he only had lived longer. But I doubt a pastor born in 1929 would have been a "gay rights" advocate.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] srklondie 14 years ago

Stick to action and special-effects flicks Zippy. They're more your speed.

[–] furienna 14 years ago

Stick to action and special-effects flicks Zippy. They're more your speed.

What are you on about? I'm not into action flicks at all. And I said this movie was a touching drama. But I didn't like the last few minutes.

Yes, it's true! IMDB has reached Sweden!

[–] arobicpro 13 years ago

Apparently you are not well versed in the civil rights movement. It wasn't just to help "black people." It was for equality for all. In fact, several marches were specifically called "poor people's marches." MLK also organized marches and boycotts for sanitation workers. So it is very possible, despite his strong religious beliefs, MLK would have been a gay rights advocate as well. Truly, how could you fight for the civil rights of some and not others? That would make one a hypocrite, would it not?

[–] furienna 13 years ago

Just because of his strong religious beliefs, I very much doubt, that MLK would have supported the "gay rights" movement. And it's also possible to fight for some issues, but not for others.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] arobicpro 13 years ago

As I said the possibility exists. But, we'll never know, will we?

[–] Iceman-15 12 years ago

Just because of his strong religious beliefs, I very much doubt, that MLK would have supported the "gay rights" movement

What you're considering, is that MLK would've been a hypocrite, and a phoney. I think not.

I graduated from the college of the streets, I gotta Phd in how to make ends meet.

[–] BelleCBelle 11 years ago

The church I belong to embraces all people, no matter who they love or how they love. While my church is rooted in The Lutheran tradition, we embrace all faiths, and incorporate other forms of worship in each weekly service. We believe in love, peace, tolerance, humanity, and embracing the good in all people.

I am not sure what you mean by "strongly religious," but I try to live each moment as if I were in church on Sunday, and I support human rights. In my opinion, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, MLK Jr. would have loved gay people too, because he embraced human rights and the end of human suffering. Well, that's what I think, anyway.

[–] bjphysics 13 years ago

I’d be upset if I was doubtful of my own heterosexuality; the dissatisfaction you express with the final turn of events in this movie is common among those that are sexually confused and/or in denial.

[–] furienna 13 years ago

I’d be upset if I was doubtful of my own heterosexuality; the dissatisfaction you express with the final turn of events in this movie is common among those that are sexually confused and/or in denial.

Yep, that's it. I'm confused and in denial.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] UGLYINTHAMORNING 12 years ago

Ur corrupt mindset is very disturbing. I pity people like you.

[–] furienna 12 years ago

Eh... Do you even know what "corrupt" means? And do you know what's disturbing? How "liberals" can talk all warmly about people's rights, but won't let their opponents express their opinion.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] exhausted_intellect 12 years ago

the entire movie was awesome. i was glued the entire time. i would hope the kid would have gotten better representation than that, though! sorry. lawyer couldve done a much better job than he did. i loved this movie though. glad i found it.

"Is your car up a pole again?"

[–] furienna 12 years ago

Yeah, it was a good movie, except for the last few minutes, which rubbed me the wrong way.

I believe the message of the movie was, that the uncle had done his job as a lawyer properly, but back in the 50s, there was no way a black boy killing a white boy could get acquitted.

Intelligence and purity.

[–] stuffic 12 years ago

I disagree that that was the message of the movie, but I agree that it was the reality of the times.

I thought the message of the movie was that as times change, so do people - and so should people. Isn't it unfortunate that thousands have had to (and continue to) die and rot in jail because of our own narrow-mindedness.

So my response to the OP is that, in 1957, no, I don't think King would have supported gay rights, but he may have done so as time passed. We're products of our past, but we also shape the future. I'd like to think King would have been one of those individuals who helped shape the future for the better, even in his 70s and 80s.

I'd rather have a free bottle in front of me than a pre-frontal lobotomy.

[–] senorjuez 11 years ago

This film was as much about his family as it was about the murder trial so the last minute or two is John's narration of what became of them. John supported the gay rights movement to honor his nephew because he knew that Charlie Jr. felt that death was better than living in a world that wouldn't accept him.

As for the question of whether Martin Luther King would have supported gay rights, it's hard to say. During his lifetime, it wasn't the hot button issue that it is today. Most homosexuals did not attempt to openly identify as such because of the possible repercussions. If King hadn't been killed, he might have become a supporter because he believed in freedom, not because he agreed with the lifestyle.

[–] Arimas01 10 years ago

I can understand why they showed both because the movie was about both. Maybe Martin Luther King wouldn't have supported homosexuality but he did fight for racial equality, which did play a part in Charlie's death. Had Charlie not been black, he probably wouldn't have gotten the unfair treatment that he received from the white community, the press and ultimately the court system. The "Gay Pride" parade was about being proud of your sexuality. If not for his father's shame and embarrassment for having a gay son and if he actually had pride in himself for being a black man, he could have passed that pride on to Charlie and the both of them would have tried harder and sooner to save his life. Even if he wasn't able to actually succeed in saving Charlie, at least there wouldn't have been the double tragedy of a father not standing up for and protecting his son and ultimately destroying his family.

You may be entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to mine

Arimas, Samira

[–] conway3000 10 years ago

This was a fabulous movie!