James Franco shames Shame for shaming

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 12:34pm

Personally I didn't find it as homophobic as, say, Irreversible, but interesting nonetheless:

“And that scene where he’s at his lowest point and wants to **** and goes into a gay club, and it’s depicted like the seventh level of hell… I mean, it goes back to the horrible representations of gays in the 70s, where the gay club is meant to signify everything dark and depraved,” he added. “Then the guy gets a minor blowjob, from, Oh no,a man! The horror!”

Read more at ONTD: http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/83291165.html

Updated On: 11/13/13 at 12:34 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 1:17pm

That's exactly how I felt about that scene. However, I disagree with Franco that the character wasn't much of an addict. He was clearly driven and consumed. Franco's mistake there is that sex addiction is not about how often one has sex but about how unmanageable and destructive the quest for sex is. It was clear in Shame that the character's life has become unruly because of his sexual addiction. Ironically, the clarity of that and the positioning of the gay sex club scene in the narrative is exactly what reinforces Franco's view and mine that it was presented as if it were the addict's (ok, all together now - no pun intended - obviously as the character didn't bottom) bottom.

[Kad]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 1:20pm

So brave of James Franco to speak out on that 2011 blockbuster NC-17 film.

[Wynbish]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 1:58pm

It was clear in Shame that the character's life has become unruly because of his sexual addiction.

I always wondered if that was the reason why he had no qualms about arguing with his sister while she was naked before him. The naked body of a person was nothing but a pipe or bong that provided the drug.

Updated On: 11/13/13 at 01:58 PM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:14pm

Totally agree with Franco on this -- SHAME is a pretty silly movie all round, a batch of Addict Trajectory cliches, really. Only Carey Mulligan's performance of "New York, New York" made it worth the time.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:14pm

Franco is just mad that he didn't get a callback after he auditioned for the role and they determined that his part was too small.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:17pm

The character and his sister had no boundaries-him and his sister's history is never explained.

Some gay bars are seedy and clearly he knew where to find what he was looking for. I wasn't offended. It's the difference between going to Therapy or The Cock. Very different vibes. I was into the character's descent and was more horrified by what he was doing than critiquing the bar.

Some gay bars are seedy and scary. Mc Queen is a very compassionate AND realistic director.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:19pm

'Only Carey Mulligan's performance of "New York, New York" made it worth the time.'

SERIOUSLY??? That moment made me want to dig up the corpse of Fred Ebb and slap him right across the face. I disliked SHAME intensely. Your use of the word 'silly' is right on target. But I would say her New York, New York was the nadir.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:29pm

I thought exactly the same thing. In fact, as I have written here previously, with different music on the soundtrack instead of the morose dirges indicating Exactly How You Should Feel, SHAME could have been a fantasy weekend most straight men dream about.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 2:55pm

'SERIOUSLY???'

Yeah, I thought it was terrific, the only interesting thing in an otherwise drab and unconvincing movie.

Why would you want to punish Fred Ebb?

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 3:02pm

For writing the song that created such a sh*tshow moment, of course!



I will concede that it was the most interesting moment in the film...but only because I've never seen such a bizarrely indulgent moment on film that all came to naught.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 3:44pm

"Some gay bars are seedy and clearly he knew where to find what he was looking for. I wasn't offended. It's the difference between going to Therapy or The Cock. Very different vibes. I was into the character's descent and was more horrified by what he was doing than critiquing the bar."

Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. We are meant to be horrified by what he is doing, and meant to understand just how low he's gon: that he'll even turn to gay sex. It would be different if this scene happened at a different part of the narrative, much earlier on, just another acting out - but no, it signals a level of descent that he is having sex not with women but with men. In the arc of the story he has gone to a baser level. I agree with Franco that this scene seems lifted from an earlier cultural moment - not because there aren't seedy gay - or for that matter - straight sex clubs, but because the message here is that he has reached a new low of decadence and self-destruction by being with a guy - maybe that wasn't McQueen's conscious intent, but he'd have to be an idiot to not realize the implications. He's not an idiot. He knows far too much about history, movies and sex for this to be accidental, or, at the very least, in conscious disregard of the perception of a very ugly and obsolete sensibility.


Updated On: 11/13/13 at 03:44 PM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:13pm

"We are meant to be horrified by what he is doing, and meant to understand just how low he's gone: that he'll even turn to gay sex."

Exactly. If he'd been shown to be sexually active with men throughout the entire film, as well as with women, that would be one thing. But no -- McQueen saves the same-sex experience to demonstrate the character's degradation, and an ugly moment it was.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:23pm

Add me to the pile of people who hated this utterly reactionary film.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:27pm

I didn't hate it so much as I just found it boring and cliched. There's even the scene when he has his Catharsis In The Rain, for heaven's sake -- even the skies are weeping for him!!

Did anyone notice the scene in the subway when his train departs Fulton Street, and then, after he does some cruising with a female passenger, the train pulls into the next station which also happens to be Fulton Street.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:28pm

The thing that I hated most about it was that they seemed to think they were saying something profound. It was empty and pointless.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 4:30pm

And McQueen is getting all kinds of hype for this movie about slavery, and after the tedious batch of ADDICTION IS SAD! cliches he trotted out for SHAME, I'm afraid to see the tedious batch of SLAVERY IS BAD! cliches he trots out for 12 YEARS A SLAVE.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 6:10pm

The review itself is just all over the place. Name-dropping and way more interested in how many times he can reference This is The End in the 'review'.

But back to Shame, I thought the performances sold it but the script was helpless. The only way the movie works for me as something other than a very naive, sex-negative film is basing the subtext on the Brendan and Sissy relationship on the fact they likely shared an encounter at least once in their life, and not necessarily on their own will. To me their no boundaries interactions, his distance, her neediness, and the 'we're not bad people, we just came from a bad place' line comes from an unspeakable past. I think whatever 'SHAME' in the film is shared.

And I swear, 12 Years A Slave has a lot more going for it than SHAME.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 6:50pm

Oh it definitely does. I suppose its many strengths grow out of the fact that the source material is so rich, and so little-known. It's like an archeologist exposing the world to a remarkable treasure he has unearthed, and showing it in its best light.

It is light years away from the stacked deck of SHAME.

[WiCkEDrOcKS]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 7:58pm

I really liked SHAME. If it didn't have Fassbender, though, I can't say what I would've thought about it. He should've gotten an Oscar nod.

But I do agree, 12 YEARS is in a different league entirely.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 8:18pm

SHAME is a brilliant character study in my opinion, but I love ambiguous films and theatre. It was spare and unflinching in its depiction of sex addiction.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 8:44pm

I guess because I believe that approaching his activities as an "addiction" leads only the conclusion that is the movie's title, what I longed for was some real ambiguity. Because people's lives are complicated and sex is really complicated.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 8:44pm

"Some gay bars are seedy and scary. Mc Queen is a very compassionate AND realistic director. "

Well, yes. I think the point though is that in such an explicit film, the gay moment has the camera turn away instead of depicting it -- that's where it seems strange and I kinda agree with Franco's as usual overwritten piece. (Odd too when Steve McQueen is known for some well known homoerotic art shorts.) I liked the movie overall, but I found it problematic and would agree that it seemed to think it was more profound than it was. (Not sure I would describe McQUeen's style in the movie as director as realistic...) I was more satisfied by McQueen's first feature, Hunger (I haven't seen 12 Years a Slave yet.)

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 11/13/13 at 8:59pm

And not not mince words, that gay club in the movie looked incredible and I would go to there at the drop of my pants.