Both of Bruce's lovers died from it… I could see him not getting it from one but two of them not giving it to him?? Also, I found him a very unlikable character. Ned was such a good friend to him and he was so cruel to him the way he fired him from the board.
shareHe does get it, and dies from it. The last thing you see is Tommy pulling his rolodex card which means he'd died. Bruce was based on Paul Popham who died from the disease too.
shareOhhh. So was it implied that he gave it to his 2 lovers and just was late on showing symptoms?
shareActually 3, there was one who died before the movie started mentioned by Emma when they bring in Craig when he's dying, and later Bruce mentions it's the 'third guy I've been with' who had it.
I think it is supposed to be a possibility that he gave it to them but obviously they and we can't know for sure. In Mantello's monologue he mentions that maybe people who are monogamous relationships like him and Bruce and getting more exposures from the same infected source are more at risk than those who go to the baths. I don't know if that line was in the original play but it would be kind of prophetic if it was--at a time when I don't think they knew about the largely variable period between infection and AIDS symptoms. And how it is quite possible that Bruce, while showing no symptoms, gave the disease to all three of his boyfriends. And actually it could have been written before real life Bruce was showing any AIDS symptoms since he died in 87. Weird.
I think the Bruce character was definitely supposed to be unlikeable. When Kramer wrote it he was probably really mad at him still for kicking him out of the GMHC. I think his writing this play was largely a reaction to that happening.
Edit: actually I think they did suspect the variable length of no symptoms, nevermind.
That is one implication. Also, there were three guys, not two.
There is possibly that the first guy (not Craig, but Reinhard? The Doctor mentions him when Bruce brings Craig in in the beginning) was the one who infected Bruce and he passed it on to the other two. Or maybe Craig passed it to Bruce, and Reinhard was infected by someone else?
The point is, there's no way to be sure, and the film doesn't really dwell much on who gave it to who, outside of the one moment where Felix, in the heat of an argument, claims that none of his past lovers were sick - a shaky claim, considering as you recognize, symptoms can be a while in showing. If you read the play, there is much more reference to the fact that Bruce is afraid he's the one of the ones passing it. But the awful thing about this disease and the way things were back then was that there was no test, no way of knowing until the obvious symptoms came. And by then, it was too late.
And, keep in mind, the point was not who gave it to who - at least not at this point in the history of AIDS - none of these characters were deliberately passing it on to others.
There is no way to tell for certain who gave Bruce or any of them HIV. However, the journalist Randy Shilts postulated that the real inspiration for the Bruce Niles character, Paul Popham, got it from his boyfriend, Jack Nau, who had once had a one-night-stand with a very promiscuous French-Canadian airline steward named Gaetan Dugas.
Shilts put this theory forward in his book And the Band Played On, where he also theorized that Dugas was a (or the) "Patient Zero," but many scientists have since taken issue with the importance that that Shilts placed on Dugas's role in the first HIV transmissions (many critics argue that Dugas works better as a book villain than as an actual scientific, epidemiological explanation for the spread of the virus).
This article was excepted from And the Band Played On around the time it was published: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-11-01/features/8703230167_1_ly mph-nodes-gay-bar-gay-men
And here is an article attempting to explain the ways that some of the "Patient Zero" myth was misleading or altogether fabricated:http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/05/06/aids_the_truth_about_ patient_zero.html
I don't remember Bruce Dying in the movie- when did he die? i don't remember it being shown or referenced.
briarswt describes a scene in which Tommy takes his name from the rolodex- but wasn't that Felix not Bruce's name?
Both Felix and Bruce got their name removed from the rolodex.
shareIf you watch all the way through the credits you'll see Tommy taking Bruce's card out of the Rolodex and adding it to yet another pile in his drawer, signifying the death of Bruce and the fact that those numbers keep growing.
shareit's literally the LAST thing before the credits role - check it out
shareShilts put this theory forward in his book And the Band Played On, where he also theorized that Dugas was a (or the) "Patient Zero," but many scientists have since taken issue with the importance that that Shilts placed on Dugas's role in the first HIV transmissions (many critics argue that Dugas works better as a book villain than as an actual scientific, epidemiological explanation for the spread of the virus).
Also, the card before Bruce's in the credits is Bella. If that character name doesn't ring a bell--it's said only briefly once, I think--you'll recognize him: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4276728/?ref_=rvi_nm
[deleted]
At least one thread had a list of all characters inspired by actual people, but I read it before memorizing the characters, so I don't know if Bella was mentioned, and I can't recall in which thread this was.
[deleted]
I had a little trouble following your link to the Lawrence Mass article ("Sorry, the page you were looking for does not exist"). But with a litte futzing, I was then able to find it on the GMHC blog. Here's the URL I finally ended up on:
http://gmhc-online.blogspot.com/2012_01_01_archive.html
Sincere thanks for posting these links, Thomasina -- I'd been wondering about "Mickey" in particular, and Mass's article provides a fascinating perspective.
Thank you Thomasina and weaselprince71 for this excellent link. It was so informative.
shareI actually liked the Bruce character. He struck me as very conflicted. Which he basically says when he says he can't be gay 24/7 because he has too much to lose. If he had been fully out the whole movie, maybe he'd have been more peaceful. Having to hide a large part of your life isn't easy on the soul.
shareGreat point!
Along the way didn't we learn that Bruce was a Green Beret and still in the reserves? Military command had some really nasty folks back then that loved to go after lesbian and gays who were in service of our country. Imagine the pressure on those guys that served in silence. Had to take a toll.
If still in the reserves, I expect he would receive a dishonorable discharge, which is what they did back then when out-ed. We might consider the challenge of finding a job with that on your record, and so have some empathy for Bruce.
I liked Bruce too. Clearly he took on the fight. He cared a lot.
As a former special forces soldier he was probably tougher than an ordinary man and had a stronger immunity system to fight the virus, I guess...
sharein the 80s when HIV was called GRID it, meaning the virus, acted differently than it does today. reasons unknown the HIV spread fast and hard and broke down the immune system really really fast. today, you can be infected with HIV and not even know it. you could even go years without even a sign or symptom that you are HIV+ being a damn soldier had nothing to do with his immune system or being strong are you fn kidding me?
for arguments sake for the movie, since its based on some real and some not real people, Bruce could have been the "top" and didn't get infected until he was a bottom. so he could have gotten infected after his 3 previous lovers had died
unprotected sex puts a persons risk to nearly 100%
today, with the very good meds out there a low viral load or undetectable, lessens a risk, but its still a damn risk and it does not discriminate. male, female, straight, gay.. use a damn rubber always. And if you are sexually active, no matter who or what you are, you should be GETTING tested reguLARLY! Knowing your status is very important for your health as well as knowing so you DO NOT pass it on to others.
it's 2014 people. not 1984.
in the 80s, the only drug they did have when it finally got the funding and research, was AZT and it was several high doses, that killed more patients than helped.
Today, HIV is manageable. It is now listed as a chronic illness.
the movie depicted what was happening in the 1980s. from what i hear from friends, its exactly how it was in 80s.
today we live very normal lives.
The statistic shown is very much real. 6,000 people are diagnosed with HIV every day.
This should not be happening anymore.
WEAR A FN RUBBER Lets put an end to HIV/AIDS please.
I've been HIV+ since 1989.
in the 80s when HIV was called GRID it, meaning the virus, acted differently than it does today. reasons unknown the HIV spread fast and hard and broke down the immune system really really fast. today, you can be infected with HIV and not even know it.
During the movie I wondered whether Bruce carried the virus and his partners were getting it from him. We can't know for sure, the timing of infection for any of them. In the end, when his roll-dex-card was banded together with those that passed, we know that Bruce eventually fell to the disease.
Why was Bruce cruel towards Ned? Bruce was a closet case and closet cases do things that seem cruel. In their own eyes, they are protecting themselves. One can have empathy for Bruce, because in his world it did seem to him he must stay in the closet, and for good reasons. Being gay back then really sucked, at least a lot more than now. One can still be fired for being gay, but at least today in many places, views have changed a lot.
Anyone still closeted infuriated Ned. Ned wanted the world to re-think and re-focus what was important, and staying in the closet no longer made any sense at all, because too many were dying.
One point of the movie and a point that Ned made was how closeted gays were a huge factor in how the epidemic exploded, e.g. Mayor Koch, and on a lesser scale, Bruce Niles. Also, the movie made it clear how Ned had been in therapy and had quite a temper, so while his temper and anti-social behavior helped drive his activism, it alienated many around him.
Disagree completely. Ned's stunt at trying to out Bruce without telling him was not something a friend does.
Ned was such a narcissistic character, he thought he was the only one who cared about the dying and this was rightly offensive to the others in the group.
They finally had enough of his counterproductive behavior and bluntly told him to leave. It was not cruel if you think about how they felt it was the best way to get help in the AIDS crisis.