The Boys in the Band to premiere on Netflix, Wed. 9/30- Page 5

[nealb1]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 7:03pm

Thanks for all your advice on Netflix.  Yes, my tv is an old one - a box tv, that I purchased in 2000 at Circuit City.   My cable provider is AT&T U-Verse and it would have to be added and my monthly bill would increase as my current internet speed is probably too slow.  Since my tv is old, the rep that I spoke to wasn't sure if it would work.  

I would love to get a flat panel tv, but would have no idea on how to install it and connect my dvr and dvd player.  No clue.  The remotes would have to be reprogrammed, as well.  I'm so electronically challenged to begin with.  Either AT&T would have to come and do the install, or Geek Squad, and that's probably $250 for them to do that.  And, $200 for a new tv.  At this point in time, it's not something I really need or want.  Perhaps one day I will.  

And to show how electronically challenged I am, I don't own a cell phone either.  Just don't need or want one.  Thanks for all the suggestions, and I didn't mean to hijack the thread.  :)  

Updated On: 10/2/20 at 07:03 PM

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 7:32pm

[joevitus]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 7:46pm

HogansHero said: "@joe of course you have that right; the key word, however, is "earned."

@carlos the first wouldcause a problem, the second we'll talk lol"

Little known fact: there's no such thing as "earning" the right to opine.

Updated On: 10/2/20 at 07:46 PM

[joevitus]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 7:49pm

ArtMan said: "Thanks for the info. I had read some years back that Harold and Michael possibly hada past relationship, which ended when Michael cheated on him. When Harold says "in affairs of the heart, there are no rules", then looks over at Michael, that could support this theory."

I like this idea--and had never considered it. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 9:59pm

BrodyFosse123, I am screaming laughing!

I fought off getting a cell phone until 2010 and I just got a smart phone in 2017. I had no choice in 2010.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/2/20 at 11:51pm

Nealb1, You could get a really good  40 "flat screen tv for under $200.  Just look out for the sales.  However, what you may find is that your dvd player is not compatible  with the new tv.  My dvd player would work but only show movies in black and white.  So I had to purchase two blu ray players, that play dvds.  It was a Sony and reasonably priced.  I also know nothing about installing and connecting.  That is what" know it all brothers" are for.  Just for Brody and Carrie Bradshaw, I also have no need for a cellphone.  I do have a tracphone which I was forced to get when my mother became ill.  It serves more as an emergency phone than a true cell phone.  I seldom use it so I don't even know my number.  Lastly, to make your eyes  really go boogilly woogilly, I have never texted once in my life.  Don't feel the need.

[StageLight]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 1:55am

I just found the original as such a downer. I hope there's something positive from this.

[SweetLips22]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 2:16am

I was fascinated, repulsed, had tears, furious, laughed[a little-think I needed an audience around me to encourage the mirth] and was entertained, to a point.

Never saw the original movie and don't remember anything about the Australian production which I know that I saw, so viewed this last night as a new adventure.

The whole set-up was painfully obvious but clever in its revelation. The characters appeared, left their mark then continued to hover till next called upon to participate.

I am of that generation but didn't relate to ANY of those men. Certainly met screeming queens, quiet intellectuals, studly studs and revolving closet dwellers, but they all passed by and didn't linger past a drink and a smart quip.

Maybe this is an American 'thing', this physiological outpouring of ones' feelings en masse. As a .backhanded compliment, the majority of American people are NEVER stuck for words, no matter what the situation.

I greatly admired the majority of the actors and even though I looooathed the Michael character I thought Jim Parsons was like a restless steam-roller, brilliant.

I think that I will watch it again in my own selected segments so that I can look at more besides where the camera wants me to focus.

The whole thing was exhausting and watching it alone, as I said above, I rarely laughed, and said out loud, 'please, not another phone call !'.

I hope this is a lesson to young gay men that this is NOT the way to behave, and certainly not at a Birthday Party.

'The Sound of Music' tonight.

 

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 3:59am

File those curious ones, here are highlights from the 1970 film adaptation of THE BOYS IN THE BAND, featuring the entire original 1968 Off-Broadway cast:

 

[carnzee]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 7:09am

HogansHero said: "many of our most beloved actors have personas that leak into their portrayals. When we like the actor, that's a good thing; when we don't, it's bad. It's not sad. it's normal. I love Rylance, I hate Lane, but they are both two of the leakiest actors I can think of. It is beyond silly to pretend otherwise."

Indeed. We should all be lucky enough to have star personas that we could parlay into million dollar careers. That's why so many love Streisand, Eddie Murphy, Dolly Parton, Carrie Grant, Katharine Hepburn, to name a few.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 8:32am

Now, Carrie Grant was on a whole league of her own. Such a shame the Academy never recognized her iconic work. Streep couldn’t have the career she has today without the work Carrie Grant left behind. She was the Laurette Taylor of cinema.

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 11:22am

joevitus said: "Little known fact: there's no such thing as"earning" the right to opine."

Ah, entitlement rearing its ugly head again here. 

Maybe you will get it if I say you don't have "standing." Kinda like my relative who has never traveled anywhere but is filled with opinions on what's wrong with people in other countries. 

@Brody, thanks for the youtube link. It makes me realize how time affects resonance. I also enjoyed seeing the staging differences and a few of the missing lines. 

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 11:38am

HogansHero said: "many of our most beloved actors have personas that leak into their portrayals. When we like the actor, that's a good thing; when we don't, it's bad. It's not sad. it's normal. I love Rylance, I hate Lane, but they are both two of the leakiest actors I can think of. It is beyond silly to pretend otherwise."

"Leakiest" meaning signature in their styles? 

[Owen22]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 11:44am

henrikegerman said: "HogansHero said: "many of our most beloved actors have personas that leak into their portrayals. When we like the actor, that's a good thing; when we don't, it's bad. It's not sad. it's normal. I love Rylance, I hate Lane, but they are both two of the leakiest actors I can think of. It is beyond silly to pretend otherwise."

"Leakiest" meaning signature in their styles?"

I think Hogan means these actors' actual personalities or personas leaks into their portrayals.

 

[carnzee]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 11:45am

BrodyFosse123 said: "Now, Carrie Grant was on a whole league of her own. Such a shame the Academy never recognized her iconic work. Streep couldn’t have the career she has today without the work Carrie Grant left behind. She was the Laurette Taylor of cinema."

I was so busy trying to make sure I spelled Hepburn's name right (with an a) that I messed up Grant's! I blame you and your Carrie Bradshaw gif. 

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 12:28pm

Owen22 said: "henrikegerman said: "Leakiest" meaning signature in their styles?"

I think Hogan means these actors'actual personalities or personas leaks into their portrayals."

"Leak" was introduced in this thread by BrodyFosse123, and my "leakiest" keyed off that. I think "persona" generally arises from nature but in the case of actors it sometimes has a good bit of a manufactured persona mixed in, often to the point that it merges full time. Either way, I think it is a "signature." 

[GottaHaveAGimmick]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 1:53pm

ArtMan said: "I have not seen the Netflix film, but have seen the original film many times. Can someone detail the friction between Donald and Harold that is now being presented. Unless I have missed something watching the original film, I never saw any indication of this. In fact, Donald comes across very sympathetic towards Harold when Michael throws his barbs. Someone also posted earlier, that Harold is "overall hostile". I don't see this at all in any of Harold's interactions with anyone else. He is of course, hostile to Michael, but only after Michael comes for him first."

It seems that Donald is the only person who did not bring a gift for Herold.

Speaking of gifts, anyone have thoughts about the inscription on the photo given to Herold by Michael? 

 

[ArtMan]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 2:33pm

GottaHaveAGimmick said: "ArtMan said: "I have not seen the Netflix film, but have seen the original film many times. Can someone detail the friction between Donald and Harold that is now being presented. Unless I have missed something watching the original film, I never saw any indication of this. In fact, Donald comes across very sympathetic towards Harold when Michael throws his barbs. Someone also posted earlier, that Harold is "overall hostile". I don't see this at all in any of Harold's interactions with anyone else. He is of course, hostile to Michael, but only after Michael comes for him first."

It seems that Donald is the only person who did not bring a gift for Herold.

Speaking of gifts, anyone have thoughts about the inscription on the photo given to Herold by Michael?

"

In the original, he has a gift for Harold.  A five finger discounted one with the help of Bernard, but still a gift.

[herewegoabc]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 4:19pm

In the short Netflix companion documentary, Mart Crowley confirmed that the real life inspirations for Donald and Harold couldn't stand each other.

[Alexander Lamar]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 7:29pm

Knowing nothing about the play or previous film, I loved it. God that main character was a bitch.

[Impossible2]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 8:41pm

The original film is fantastic, this was not good. Watered down to meaningless by the direction. Glad I didn’t bother schlepping over to see the play I’d have been mighty disappointed.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 8:47pm

Harold was based on legendary dancer, choreographer and movie producer Howard Jeffrey. Mart Crowley met him on the set of the movie "West Side Story". Jeffrey was assistant choreographer to Jerome Robbins and Crowley was assistant to Natalie Wood and remained so for many years until "BITB" took off. Wood formed a bond with Jeffrey and Robbins. Jeffrey, along with Crowley and several others formed part of Wood's "nucleus" or "inner circle". Jeffrey and Crowley actually shared a guest house (platonically) on Wood's property for many years. 

 

Natalie Wood and Howard Jeffrey:

Natalie, Mart Crowley, and the cast of "The Boys in the Band" on the set of the film:

 

Updated On: 10/3/20 at 08:47 PM

[noradesmond]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 9:56pm

My friends and I, all underage, went to see the original film numerous times when it was first released. It was like a right of passage and of course, we absorbed the language, the cuts, the zingers. Similar to South Park Bigger Longer Uncut when they go see the Terrance & Phillip movie, we were obsessed. So I have that William Friedkin directed film with the original cast indelibly planted in my mind. I approached this remake with cautious optimism and some of it I liked; much of it I didn't.

Jim Parsons was the wrong actor for Michael, I think. I really didn't like his take on the character. Zachary Quinta was wrong for Harold but in all fairness, Leonard Frey in the original is hard to compete with. Z Quinto didn't seem to know where to go and would sometimes just do a poor imitation of the original, 'Let's have a salad!' I've been thinking all day they should have switched parts - Parsons as Harold and Quinto as Michael. What do you think"?

I dreaded most Robin De Jesus as Emory but I enjoyed him a lot. Matt Bomer was okay as Donald and I agree with someone's earlier comment about the friction between him and Harold. I don't remember that from the original film. Everyone else were okay but I found lacking.

So I was largely left wanting. It was good to see the material again but I can't imagine I'll want to revisit this remake.

Updated On: 10/5/20 at 09:56 PM

[joevitus]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 10:02pm

HogansHero said: "joevitus said: "Little known fact: there's no such thing as"earning" the right to opine."

Ah, entitlement rearing its ugly head again here.

Maybe you will get it if I say you don't have "standing."Kinda like my relative who has never traveled anywhere but is filled with opinions on what's wrong with people in other countries.

@Brody, thanks for the youtube link. It makes me realize how time affects resonance. I also enjoyed seeing the staging differences and a few of the missing lines."

The real entitlement is in thinking one can determine who has "earned" the right to comment on something. (And people who post insults should beware having responses removed--not anyone else's fault a stone was cast from a glass house.)

[HogansHero]

Posted: 10/3/20 at 10:28pm

joevitus said: "The real entitlement is in thinking one can determine who has "earned" the right to comment on something. (And people who post insults should beware having responses removed--not anyone else's fault a stone was cast from a glass house.)"

You obviously misapprehend what I have said. As I made clear earlier, I in no way suggest that anyone tamper with you right to post whatever you please. What I said it that you have not earned that right. In other words, when you watch the opening montage of a film (or the first act of a play, as comes up here every so often), and shut it off (or leave), your assessment of the film/show is meaningless because you do not have the requisite frame of reference. But post away. And regarding insults, I have not insulted you (I don't even know who "you" are; I have challenged the basis on which you opined. That's what people do when they disagree. And about the glass house, fire away; I don't mind shagging stones. If someone (other than you) thinks I have violated the terms of service of this site, they can act accordingly. I'm pretty sure I have not, but I'm not sweating it.

Have a nice weekend, and if you have time, you might want to watch the rest of the film since you don't have to pay extra to do so. You might find that it has more going on than scratchy records and costumes you think are off by a couple of years (and that it matters).