SNL - Jake G. singing And I Am Telling You- Page 3

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:34pm

I'm having a delayed reaction to this clip... regarding the Brokeback Nellies in the audience.

If this is the way "America" perceives the Dreamgirls movie, it's a dead duck.

As funny as Jake was, that sure isn't going to drum up any new business for this movie. The "interested gays" have pretty much all seen it... and if the rest of the country thinks that it's an "interested gay" movie, you can kiss it goodbye.

[Jon]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:43pm

I think the Brokeback boys represented Jake fans, not Dreamgirls fans.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:45pm

That's what I was thinking, Jon.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:47pm

I think it's a case of protesting too much to worry about arguing the point that "musicals aren't gay" for two reasons: 1) yes they are; and 2) the people who don't want to see musicals because they're gay KNOW musicals are gay, so they're not likely to be tricked into seeing them.

The point of that monologue wasn't to drum up business for Dreamgirls. It was to be funny, which it was. As for the movie being a "dead duck," what's the worst that could happen? It's not like it suddenly will be unmade and vanish before our eyes.

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:53pm

Some people are taking this a little to seriously.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 2:57pm

I think they were supposed to be Jake fans, too.

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:07pm

"It's not like it suddenly will be unmade and vanish before our eyes."

Oh, thank GOD, Namo.

That's exactly what I was "worried" about.


QUESTION: (for those of you who saw the whole opening bit, and not just the Dreamgirls number)... Did they show the Brokeback Nellies at any other time during Jake's monologue fauning and carrying on over him?

Or was it just during Dreamgirls?

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:07 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:16pm

I just never understood the sort of box office/award show obsession. It seems as if people who aren't involved in the making of movies somehow come to believe that they have to have their positive opinions of a movie validated by big box office figures or statuettes.

I guess I (sort of) get the obsession when it's a show that will close if people don't buy tickets and go see it. But movies don't disappear. And "Dreamgirls" can not be considered a flop at this point, so what are you "worried" about? That because of a sketch on SNL, audience members who might have accidentally gone to see the movie before they realized how gay it is aren't going to go now because of Jake in a dress?

Really, I'm trying to understand. Why deny how gay that musical is? What's the shame in its gaiety?

ETA Yes, they did. You should probably see the whole monologue, since context is everything.

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:16 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:20pm

No shame whatsoever.

I would just like to see more "big musicals" made. And for a little while longer they will be (at least).

But if these big costly films don't make their money back, even the "good ones," then the well will dry up pretty fast. It really has nothing to do with this movie specifically. I'm talking about a general perception by wider audiences, and thinking ahead to the future of the genre, which is pretty wobbly.

Dreamgirls is what it is ALREADY. Take it or leave it.


EDIT: Namo, thanks for the answer... and context makes a BIG difference, yes!

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:20 PM

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:22pm

Not everyone who likes DREAMGIRLS is gay. And all it does it perpetuate a stereotype. Yes, it may be true, but it doesn't help the matter.

I thought it was funny. Gyllenhaal is a martyr - until his face is plastered on TIME magazine with the title, "And I Am Telling You...I'm Gay!"

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:23pm

But the economics of the situation is that the audience for movie musicals is gay men and the straight women who love them (along with the occasional spouse who goes along for the ride). The gayness is a perception that is never going to go away, because it's accurate.


ETA: "Not everyone who likes DREAMGIRLS is gay." I didn't say that. I said that the target audience is gay men and the women who love them and occasionally their spouses. Of course there are exceptions to the rule, as there are outlyers in ANY given sample of the population.

"And all it does it perpetuate a stereotype. Yes, it may be true, but it doesn't help the matter." What "matter" are you talking about. It's a stereotype because it's true. It's not a demeaning stereotype.

I'm not saying ALL gay men like musicals, I know some who would rather have bamboo shoots shoved under their nails than see somebody break out in song.

Denying the stereotype isn't going to suddenly make huge audiences flock to movie musical after move musical after movie musical.

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:23 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:31pm

I thought it was hilarious, BTW.

...which I said earlier.

It's the perpetuation of the myth that bugs me too, BSoBW2.

Namo doesn't think we should care about the myth, and that's great as long as you're not financially invested in movie musicals. And even if you're not financially invested, if you're hoping to see more of them on the big screen (created by those who ARE financially invested, and you want to see bigger creative risks taken than the "soft soaping" a hit '80s Broadway show by stripping out half its score so the characters aren't singing quite as much because it "bugs" too many people... Then, I'm afraid, it DOES matter.

Chicago worked because in the first five minutes you had a sexy girl stepping out of a car with blood on her hands, scantily clad male & female dancers bumping and grinding in a gritty nightclub, and during the climax of that big song, a girl is getting plowed in her bed while cheating on her husband.

Kander & Ebb meant nothing to them.

[mejusthavingfun]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:33pm

I wish he was gonna be in Sweeney. Wow....so impressed.

The Fox Dreamgirls thing was much funnier, but this was shocking because of the singing. It was definitly bad done very well. Who knew?
Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:33 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:36pm

I'm not looking to deny the "gayness" of musicals.

I just would like to figure out a way to include more people in their appreciation without it turning into a "minstrel show" in the audience of SNL.


EDIT: For now, it seems to be the most "user friendly" approach.

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:36 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:39pm

Do you mean the Chicago movie "worked" because Harvey Weinstein through sheer force of will MADE that thing a box office success or do you mean artistically as a film? I'd agree with the former, and not the latter.

In fact, I would say the fact that all the Chicago musical numbers took place in the imagination of one character actually undermined the very language of the traditional musical of which you would like to see more. It was a big concession to the resistant audience that might have well said, "Don't worry, people won't start singing for no reason, we think that's gay too!"

What I think people need to realize is that the musical, as we know it, is becoming more arcane by the year. There will always be the artform, there will always be an audience that has developed a taste for the conventions, but Rosie O'Donnell notwithstanding, there will never be an exponentially expanding audience for what is, basically, a refined taste for something that is essentially an artifact from another era.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:40pm

I think Rocky Horror and Grease are the most heterofriendly musicals. Honestly.

Besides, wrestling is the gayest thing on television since "Golden Girls."

ETA: Namo, CHICAGO is very vaudevillian. I think the revival shows that. It isn't a show where people break out in singing. It's a show that has small vaudevillian numbers between dialogue.

And vaudeville can't be gay. Our grandfathers loved vaudeville.
Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:40 PM

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:45pm

"Did they show the Brokeback Nellies at any other time during Jake's monologue fauning and carrying on over him? "

Yes they showed the Brokeback guys before he went into song. He said he would host if there were no Brokeback Mountain Jokes. Then the camera pans over to them.
Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:45 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:46pm

You're not getting my point.

People should enjoy what they enjoy, they should be happy that what gets made gets made. But this particularly American obsession with worrying about whether or not there will be more, that everything has to be a success to insure that there will be more product forthcoming, is something of a treadmill that gets you nowhere.

That thought that the mincing cowboys freaking out over "And I am telling you..." could render Dreamgirls "dead in the water" is exactly what I'm talking about. Should there be a moratorium on admitting that there is usually a very significant contingent of gay men in the audience for musicals so that people who haven't realized that fact might somehow go see a musical and find out they like them? Perhaps members of the gay press shouldn't cover musicals at all, lest the feed into stereotypes just by doing so, and giving "the mainstream audience" the "wrong" (by which I mean "right") idea?

[Kringas]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:48pm

Should there be a moratorium on admitting that there is usually a very significant contingent of gay men in the audience for musicals so that people who haven't realized that fact might somehow go see a musical and find out they like them?

This thread below (and the dozens like it before and the inevitable dozens that will come after) might make that argument.



Will Broadway always be

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:48 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:52pm

I actually never clicked on that link because I couldn't willingly march in there knowing that there was a good chance that some of my gay brothers would be denying how gay the theatre is as well as nervous straight guys calling that a "stereotype."

I will say I didn't expect the Homosexual Panic caused by the SNL monologue, it just all of a sudden was in the threads.

[BSoBW2]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:56pm

I agree that people should enjoy what they enjoy...and I'm not commenting on making a product forthcoming. I think someone, somewhere will always be making movie musicals.

I think it has to do with perpetuating stereotypes. I have a few straight friends who "admitted" to liking musicals. I have one who, as a joke, sang DON'T RAIN ON MY PARADE. And everyone was laughing with them. But then someone says, "oh, yeah. I like FUNNY GIRL" they suddenly become gay.

I guess I don't see the relationship between liking penis and liking musicals. Well, I take that back. I understand why these generalizations got started. I just wish the media wouldn't perpetuate them (I'm not referring to SNL so much).

Two of my best friends used to joke about musicals and how stupid they are/ Then SPAMALOT was announced and they couldn't wait to see it. I said, "You know it's a musical, right?" "Yeah, so? It's Monty Python."

The only thing I could deduct from that is musicals or either gay or straight.

SPAMALOT, DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS, and THE ROCKY HORROR SHOW are examples of straight musicals.

GYPSY, FUNNY GIRL, and PAL JOEY are some gay musicals.

A CHORUS LINE is was straight, though at the "coming out" age.

CATS, LES MISERABLES, MISS SAIGON, and THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA are straight up to a certain age at which they become gay, unless accompanied by a girl.

Updated On: 1/14/07 at 03:56 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 3:59pm

VERY funny clip.

As a costumer, I enjoyed the break-a-way.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 4:00pm

A Chorus Line is STRAIGHT?

Boy, do WE have different definitions of that word.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 4:01pm

I didn't know musicals had their own sexual orientations.

[Kringas]

Posted: 1/14/07 at 4:02pm

Rocky Horror's inclusion confounds me as well.