MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Readers Start Their Own Discussion…

Not quite on this subject, but wanted to discuss it: regarding the story from Variety on Movie City News about “the first openly gay director to make superhero films”…
1. Is Bryan Singer out?
2. Is Joel Schumacher closeted?
3. This is happening after Superman, right? Seems like an odd career move.
Posted by: jeffmcm at May 6, 2005 05:37 PM
I see that Dave (or whoever) has fixed the front page…
I still didn’t think that Singer was out. He spoke at my college a few years back and had some female eye candy on his arm at that time.
Posted by: jeffmcm at May 6, 2005 05:46 PM
I don’t know about the female eye candy you saw him with, but I believe Singer has always been out. He’s even been scandalized and harassed because of it. Among the out events in his professional background, many of you may recall that several years ago he was named in a gay youth pornography scandal relating to the filming of “Apt Pupil.” He vigorously denied the charges, which I believe were later completely discredited, but I recall he was also very open and candid throughout the scandal about being gay.
Posted by: Chester at May 6, 2005 06:44 PM

Be Sociable, Share!

15 Responses to “Readers Start Their Own Discussion…”

  1. David Poland says:

    The “Apt Pupil” outting and defense were the work of the grand and glorious Mark Ebner, now of The National Enquirer (or is it The Star… can’t keep up).
    The kid’s charge was a bit trumped up, but Bryan’s behavior was pretty stupid on that show, though I never believed that he was having kids shower naked in a scene for some sort of perverse gratification.
    But all things considered, I’m much more uncomfortable with him fucking Marlon Brando’s memory than any living being.

  2. jeffmcm says:

    I can’t read the Variety story…what is cyber-Brando doing in the movie?

  3. David Poland says:

    As for “Superman Returns,” Singer, partway through the shoot, said that he has added another star name to the cast: the late actor Marlon Brando. Brando will once again play Superman’s father, Jor-El, thanks to vintage footage from the Richard Donner-directed 1978 pic. Singer said he has purchased all of that footage and plans to use it somehow in the new picture.
    Date in print: Fri., May 6, 2005, Los Angeles

  4. L&DB says:

    If Singer selected that Superman suit. I do believe,
    as my gay friend said; “That’s the gay man’s version
    of a Superman suit.” At least Joel Schumacher had
    the decency to put nipples on the suit. Since he’s
    all about putting it out there.

  5. jeffmcm says:

    Why keep Brando but have an otherwise all-new cast? I always thought Brando’s presence in the ’78 movie was unnecessary. In this movie it’ll be hugely distracting.
    And yeah, that suit looked lame.

  6. Matt McD says:

    When Ian McKellan was interviewed by Elvis Mitchell on his radio show, he stated very directly that Singer is gay. I doubt he would do that if Singer didn’t want it in the open (or if it wasn’t true).
    As for Brando, it’s not like Singer’s taking footage from ‘Last Tango’ and replacing the word “butter” with “kryptonite.” He’s using Brando’s performance from one Superman film in another. And since the film is supposed to fit in the continuity of Superman I/II, it’s not that big of a stretch to have Jor-El as the link.

  7. Dark says:

    ‘As for Brando, it’s not like Singer’s taking footage from ‘Last Tango’ and replacing the word “butter” with “kryptonite.”‘
    Oh my god that’s the too funny. Matt, you owe me a Diet Coke … and a new keyboard 🙂

  8. Don says:

    I wanna know what’s up with the Wachkowski Brothers (sp?). I thought one got a sex change or was pre-op or something. But then I saw their next project got announced and their still “brothers.” I’m not trying to be snide or rude here….I’m just curious if the one brother is still a brother and not a sister.

  9. Peggy Archer says:

    To the best of my knowledge there’s not been a sex change.. He’s ‘romantically attached’ to a former professional dominatrix who’s former husband was an FTM (female to male transexual).

  10. GdB says:

    I was always taken aback on how that whole Apt. Pupil episode has played out. The day that whole shower scene went down, a gay friend of mine who I was working with, was also closely with Singer at the time and was on set the day that scene took place. According to him, everything was true. At the last minute, Singer told the AD to have them strip for the scene but the AD told the extras that no nudity would be showed. Some of the extras freaked, and the was a suit.
    Needless to say I learned a valuable lesson when I read the Premiere article on the subject 7 months later when they buried the film. They spun the shit out of it to make the extras come across like money-grubbing hustlers, when according to my friend in Singer’s camp, it was all true.

  11. Angelus says:

    Why can’t directors be normal anymore? Sex changes, showering naked young men for your own jollies, Joel Schmumacher, the hits just keep on coming.

  12. Peggy Archer says:

    Okay, I checked with a friend of mine who’s a professional dominatrix who knows his dominatrix (she won’t tell me who her clients are, so don’t ask), and here’s the deal with the brother..
    He’s a crossdresser (he enjoys wearing women’s clothing), but no sex change in the works.

  13. bicycle bob says:

    after making the two matrix sequels, many guys would become cross dressers

  14. GdB says:

    The Dominatrix influence is all over that third film. Especially in the shootout scene in the club where the baddies take to the ceiling. Only decent scene in that movie.

  15. Terence D says:

    I hate to say it but the cross dressing stuff effected my viewing. All the leather. It was like his dream vision.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon