BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Farmer1906 said:

---

Haven't heard of this movie until this thread.

Get on IMDb and find this lovely comment

Co-writer and star Billy Eichner has expressed that he does not want conservatives, especially those that voted for the 45th President of the United States and their associates, to see the film, even conservatives who identify as being part as the LGBTQ+ community as he views them as traitors.

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt9731598/trivia

Guess I'm not allowed to see it.

---

I flagged this. Since there is no actual quote or evidence that he said that.

---

On TexAgs or IMDB?

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Sense of humor was never your strong point.

There are straight people on this thread that said it was hilarious.

It's a great movie. Not going to get involved in all the hubbub.

---

That's neat.

Ryan the Temp said:

---

BallerStaf2003 said:

---

Sense of humor was never your strong point.

There are straight people on this thread that said it was hilarious.

It's a great movie. Not going to get involved in all the hubbub.

---

That's neat.

---

Shut it you humorless *******

This is clearly an emotional issue for a lot of people.

We should move past this and on to something less divisive like playing the flute

Who could have ever guessed this would go off the rails?

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

I would think that billy eichner made this movie FOR a certain demographic and if he feels that way it should be perfectly fine for others to feel that way as well. Additionally, according to Billy, straight people not seeing this movie are homophobic weirdos, so you might want to take it up with him if you think straight people not wanting to see it aren't bigoted or homophobic.

---

What?

---

If Billy made this for the gay demographic it should be perfectly ok to not want to see it because you aren't gay. If you can see it because it is gay and you were born that way it should be perfectly ok to not want to see it because you were born straight.

And you rightly say we are just practicing our personal preferences by not seeing it, but eichner himself says those straight people that don't want to see it are homophobic weirdos. Seems thst youbahould direct some ire at him since your personal philosophy and his dont match.


Eta i don't really care about this one way or another way. It is kind of funny to me and being called a homophobe is pretty stupid, but I will enjoy the rest of the **** show it will cause. My panties are not ruffled in the slightest.

David Wallace said:

---

Straight men are BORN THIS WAY to be disgusted by gay sex. We are wired from birth to be attracted to women and not attracted to men. Therefore, this movie is NOT for straight men. Simple.

---

This is a great point. I don't watch animated tv shows / movies because I'm not sexually attracted to cartoons.

Quote:

---

And you rightly say we are just practicing our personal preferences by not seeing it, but eichner himself says those straight people that don't want to see it are homophobic weirdos. Seems thst youbahould direct some ire at him since your personal philosophy and his dont match.

---

Or maybe how people who didn't think this was the funniest movie since Airplane must not have a sense of humor.

The Porkchop Express said:

---

David Wallace said:

---

Straight men are BORN THIS WAY to be disgusted by gay sex. We are wired from birth to be attracted to women and not attracted to men. Therefore, this movie is NOT for straight men. Simple.

---

The movie's not rated X. You can enjoy a movie despite it not being about something you're interested in. My wife and I are watching Dahmer despite being disgusted by murder.

---

That's fine, but don't get all offended if people don't want to pay to see it.

To bridge the two sides here and maybe get this back on track…
I tried watching Handmaid's tale. It was clearly written for women, and ep 1 just didn't appeal to me much. Because of the positive reviews I gave it another shot with ep 2. The whole of episode 2 women was in labor and women fawning over other women in labor, and it was just not for me. I could appreciate the value of it, I just didn't want to watch any more. Same with OITNB. None of that means I am anti woman or misogynistic, it just wasn't for me.
This movie will garner a widespread similar response. Which is why i said the success of this movie needs to start with the target demo. Straight america won't come in droves to see it, it's just the way it is. When Black Panther came out, black America came out to see it, and many of them said they were coming out specifically to support such an important film for their community, and insure it was a success that meant more movies in the future. Prominent AAs even bought out theaters and gave the tickets to kids. They were the largest driver on its profitability,and it worked. Something similar needs to happen here, and Billy needs to just stop talking.
Jmo.

This thread is gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay.

No

Nope, can't get past billy eichner's terribleness. All I can see is him screaming and overacting in Parks and Rec.

I, for one, am very shocked at how emotional you are reacting to someone having a differing opinion than you.

My knowledge of gay people comes from Texags.

BallerStaf2003
RyantheTemp
Bluefire579
TXAGFAN
GeorgiAg
aTmAg

and all tsip posters on rivalries

Billy blaming straight people for his movie's failure is reminiscent of Ellen blaming straight people for her sitcom being canceled.

I loved Ellen show before she started making every episode about being gay and it stopped being about comedy and became a soap box.

If I'm watching a comedy I want funny, not preaching no matter the subject.

Quote:

---

Just for the sake of debate, how was it formulaic? I've never seen a movie do so many family guy like cut scenes that actually made fun of the gay community. It was absolutely hilarious and I've never seen a romantic comedy do that. So how was that formulaic?

---

Let's be clear - I never said this was a bad movie.

The overall structure and flow of the film tracked with just about every other rom-com I've seen. There's nothing inherently wrong with that because it has obviously worked very well in Hollywood, but the predictability made it less interesting for me. I guess maybe I would have liked to have seen a deeper dive into those non-sexual aspects of gay relationships that are very different from straight relationship that could help straight people understand the complexities of our lives better.

For example, it would have been nice if the entire movie didn't take place in safe spaces - show the fact that it isn't always safe for gays to be affectionate with each other, even in simple ways, like getting called a ****** in the grocery store parking lot or something. Maybe how we have to take an inventory of every person within 200 feet of us before we decide if it's safe to hold hands or kiss. Perhaps that's too deep or too much of a downer in the context of this movie, but if you want to share how our relationships work, that's not a bad thing to show to help straight people understand some of what they get to take for granted. I think it can be done in funny ways without a lot of effort.

EDIT: When Aaron and Josh were making out in the alley, I thought this would be that moment when it gets scary. I was sure this would be that part of the movie where something bad happens, but it didn't, and I felt like part of our lived experience was sacrificed in that moment.

Quote:

---

You know what also wasn't formulaic? The unique challenges the gay community has in starting and maintaining a successful relationship. How was that anything like you've got Mail or the notebook?

---

See above. I don't think it went far enough. I think the movie does somewhat fall prey to the mentality Aaron has when he tells Bobby to tone it down and be less gay. I think the film probably was too toned down - too restrained - in this particular regard. The parallels between You've got Mail and guys chatting on Grindr was indeed ****ing hilarious, and I'd never thought of it that way before, but it totally makes sense.

Quote:

---

Even my most cynical, gay friends, found the movie, hilarious and well thought out. You may not like it, and you may not think it's funny, sure. That doesn't surprise me. But to say it's formulaic is absolutely wrong. It was nonstop jokes almost the entire time.

---

I have to disagree on this point, and there weren't a lot of laughs from the rest of the audience, small as it was. I think there probably were some jokes that got lost in the annoyance of hearing Bobby dive into non-stop diarrhea of the mouth for the first half of the film. Good comedy writing, to me, feels effortless, and the fact this was written by someone who worked on Bridesmaids makes it feel even more like a swing and a miss to me. Bridesmaids was nonstop laughter and I loved it. It was truly effortless. Bros I think had a lot of missed opportunities (i.e. where was the equivalent of "Well you're a little ****!" or a "SHUT UP Debra Messing!" as an homage to Jack McFarland's snap at Patti Lupone?).

I think there were too many jokes that were buried in commentary about dysfunction within the LGBTQ community and the laughs got lost in the validation of that dysfunction. I think the most success they had doing that was the marginalizing of the bi community and the "I see you, I respect you, and I'm holding space for you." We all know the people who "hold space" for others don't actually mean it, and it's funny because we ALL know that and we ALL pretend it isn't true when we're in public.

I do think there are many aspects of the film I can relate to and I appreciate the film for saying a lot of the things I sometimes wish I could say out loud, particularly about myself. It fostered some introspection for me and made me wonder if perhaps I had sacrificed too much of my own happiness over the years by trying to fit into the image people around me expected or demanded.

IDK man, while this is a very subtle, nuanced, and rational response, I just don't think you have a sense of humor.

It's the only explanation for this disagreement.

The Dirty Sock said:

---

Nope, can't get past billy eichner's terribleness. All I can see is him screaming and overacting in Parks and Rec.

---

I think a lot of people just find him annoying, see below

As a Black queer man, I can personally tell you why I didn't go see it in the box office: Because Billy Eichner is obnoxious (and corny) as hell.

The straights didn't go see Gigli either -- perhaps the movie wasn't giving. https://t.co/QBZiSNnnPu

— Ernest Owens (@MrErnestOwens) October 3, 2022

Ryan the Temp said:

---

Quote:

---

Just for the sake of debate, how was it formulaic? I've never seen a movie do so many family guy like cut scenes that actually made fun of the gay community. It was absolutely hilarious and I've never seen a romantic comedy do that. So how was that formulaic?

---

Let's be clear - I never said this was a bad movie.

The overall structure and flow of the film tracked with just about every other rom-com I've seen. There's nothing inherently wrong with that because it has obviously worked very well in Hollywood, but the predictability made it less interesting for me. I guess maybe I would have liked to have seen a deeper dive into those non-sexual aspects of gay relationships that are very different from straight relationship that could help straight people understand the complexities of our lives better.

For example, it would have been nice if the entire movie didn't take place in safe spaces - show the fact that it isn't always safe for gays to be affectionate with each other, even in simple ways, like getting called a ****** in the grocery store parking lot or something. Maybe how we have to take an inventory of every person within 200 feet of us before we decide if it's safe to hold hands or kiss. Perhaps that's too deep or too much of a downer in the context of this movie, but if you want to share how our relationships work, that's not a bad thing to show to help straight people understand some of what they get to take for granted. I think it can be done in funny ways without a lot of effort.

EDIT: When Aaron and Josh were making out in the alley, I thought this would be that moment when it gets scary. I was sure this would be that part of the movie where something bad happens, but it didn't, and I felt like part of our lived experience was sacrificed in that moment.

Quote:

---

You know what also wasn't formulaic? The unique challenges the gay community has in starting and maintaining a successful relationship. How was that anything like you've got Mail or the notebook?

---

See above. I don't think it went far enough. I think the movie does somewhat fall prey to the mentality Aaron has when he tells Bobby to tone it down and be less gay. I think the film probably was too toned down - too restrained - in this particular regard. The parallels between You've got Mail and guys chatting on Grindr was indeed ****ing hilarious, and I'd never thought of it that way before, but it totally makes sense.

Quote:

---

Even my most cynical, gay friends, found the movie, hilarious and well thought out. You may not like it, and you may not think it's funny, sure. That doesn't surprise me. But to say it's formulaic is absolutely wrong. It was nonstop jokes almost the entire time.

---

I have to disagree on this point, and there weren't a lot of laughs from the rest of the audience, small as it was. I think there probably were some jokes that got lost in the annoyance of hearing Bobby dive into non-stop diarrhea of the mouth for the first half of the film. Good comedy writing, to me, feels effortless, and the fact this was written by someone who worked on Bridesmaids makes it feel even more like a swing and a miss to me. Bridesmaids was nonstop laughter and I loved it. It was truly effortless. Bros I think had a lot of missed opportunities (i.e. where was the equivalent of "Well you're a little ****!" or a "SHUT UP Debra Messing!" as an homage to Jack McFarland's snap at Patti Lupone?).

I think there were too many jokes that were buried in commentary about dysfunction within the LGBTQ community and the laughs got lost in the validation of that dysfunction. I think the most success they had doing that was the marginalizing of the bi community and the "I see you, I respect you, and I'm holding space for you." We all know the people who "hold space" for others don't actually mean it, and it's funny because we ALL know that and we ALL pretend it isn't true when we're in public.

I do think there are many aspects of the film I can relate to and I appreciate the film for saying a lot of the things I sometimes wish I could say out loud, particularly about myself. It fostered some introspection for me and made me wonder if perhaps I had sacrificed too much of my own happiness over the years by trying to fit into the image people around me expected or demanded.

---

I appreciate your feedback. I think a huge emphasis in the movie was to evolve past homophobia, shame, and evolve into a new world where we are accepted and how to process that a lot of the fight is over. To be called a ****** may be realistic where you live, but never in New York City. The entire point of the movie was to go beyond every other gay movie, which is sad and woe is me based on the past. They even joke about it when they go to see a broke back mountain knock off. So in this case, perhaps you are clinging onto the trauma we've all faced. It was the first time a gay movie wasn't drowning in stereotypes, or focused on the extreme challenges faced.

And isn't that what most conservative posters say we need to do, stop playing victim and just go live your life? That's what this movie is doing.

As far as the jokes, my theater was full and probably half straight and people were laughing so hard throughout the movie that I couldn't even hear the next joke. It was nonstop laughter except for the introspective moments. Perhaps everyone fed off each other isn't he theater and it's a shame you didn't experience that, given seven people were in the theater as you said.

I'm glad though it did give you some validation about our shared past and how we have tried to blend into a society that doesn't necessarily want you to exist. Even that is a win. For me, it made me feel seen and not exploited as a cheap way to get inclusive.

Eichner was pleading with people to go see it last week on Conan's podcast. Felt desperate...basically shouting "go see it!" as they signed off.

SJEAg said:

---

Eichner was pleading with people to go see it last week on Conan's podcast. Felt desperate...basically shouting "go see it!" as they signed off.

---

That's when I first heard about this movie. When he showed up to the podcast I was like, "great...this annoying ***k". Then they plugged his movie and immediately I put it on my Not Gonna watch list.