Lili The Danish Girl

[N13]

Surprised no one has mentioned this yet. Saw The Danish Girl last night. A very moving and emotional story that is very well told. Eddie Redmayne is brilliant and Alicia Vikander keeps up with him. I am surprised that Vikander is nominated in the supporting actress catagory for the SAG awards. She is is almost every scene and is a huge component of the movie.

 

Redmayne is turning out to be one of the finest actors of his generation. His Lily is nuanced, fully realized and riveting to watch. For the Academy awards I think this is DiCaprio's turn....but it will be a popularity win, not a deserved one in the face of Remayne's performance.

[foxy]

I first saw Redmayne on Broadway in Red, the play about painter Mark Rothko with Alfred Molina. This was in 2010. Since then Redmayne has gone from one terricific portrayal to another. He has that wonderful ability to disappear into the character he's playing. He's got a long illustrious career ahead of him.

[actor61]

I first saw Redmayne on Broadway in Red, the play about painter Mark Rothko with Alfred Molina. This was in 2010. Since then Redmayne has gone from one terricific portrayal to another. He has that wonderful ability to disappear into the character he's playing. He's got a long illustrious career ahead of him.

There is no dispute that Redmayne and Vikander are superb in "The Danish Girl" but I was frankly bored by the movie itself. The story is compelling, fascinating and really worth telling but the movie's recounting of the story is so plodding that I lost interest. Tom Hooper just loves close-ups of people crying. "Les Miz" was full of them and now "The Danish Girl" has so many shots of tears running down the 2 principal actors' faces that it became laughable to me. I wish I had liked it better. I tried. I really did.

[MrMiniver]

There is no dispute that Redmayne and Vikander are superb in "The Danish Girl" but I was frankly bored by the movie itself. The story is compelling, fascinating and really worth telling but the movie's recounting of the story is so plodding that I lost interest. Tom Hooper just loves close-ups of people crying. "Les Miz" was full of them and now "The Danish Girl" has so many shots of tears running down the 2 principal actors' faces that it became laughable to me. I wish I had liked it better. I tried. I really did.

 

I actually thought that Vikander was better than Redmayne (who gives a terrific performance). I liked the movie very much. But the way they significantly changed the last part of the movie was unnecessary and dishonest. They got DIVORCED in real life. The marriage was dissolved. She was re-married when he DIED ALONE. It would be like making a movie about Lincoln and having him not die. I'm don't get the dishonesty. The movie would have been far more powerful if they had stuck to the original story.

[actor61]

I actually thought that Vikander was better than Redmayne (who gives a terrific performance). I liked the movie very much. But the way they significantly changed the last part of the movie was unnecessary and dishonest. They got DIVORCED in real life. The marriage was dissolved. She was re-married when he DIED ALONE. It would be like making a movie about Lincoln and having him not die. I'm don't get the dishonesty. The movie would have been far more powerful if they had stuck to the original story.

That just reinforces my contempt for how Hollywood handles most movies with gay subjects. They often don't respect the source material or they sensationalize it or they twist it to be more conventional and therefore "acceptable" and hardly ever get it right. We could also discuss who gets cast in the principal roles. I get nauseated when I see some straight actor on a talk show being lauded for his "bravery" because he (or she) is playing a gay character. I'm a gay actor who plays straight roles - nobody ever tells me I'm brave and I don't need them to. I just need them to sign the paycheck!

[MrMiniver]

That just reinforces my contempt for how Hollywood handles most movies with gay subjects. They often don't respect the source material or they sensationalize it or they twist it to be more conventional and therefore "acceptable" and hardly ever get it right. We could also discuss who gets cast in the principal roles. I get nauseated when I see some straight actor on a talk show being lauded for his "bravery" because he (or she) is playing a gay character. I'm a gay actor who plays straight roles - nobody ever tells me I'm brave and I don't need them to. I just need them to sign the paycheck!

 

Of course, I'll disagree with you because I don't consider this movie to be a "gay subject." It's a human subject. And if anything they made the story "nicer" rather than the horror it really was. So, if you want to argue it's a "gay story" you could argue they gave it a somewhat happier ending (although he still dies, he just doesn't die alone).

[N13]

 

She

[MrMiniver]

 

She

 

Whatever. I can't keep all that shit straight.

[+ quoththeraven]

She

 

Whatever. I can't keep all that shit straight.

 

Which is why this is a queer subject, not a human one: you think it's too much work to use the pronouns the character, and the person she is based on, prefers.

 

If that's treating them like a human, that bar is not set very high. So much for LGBTQ understanding and cooperation...

[stop]

I actually thought that Vikander was better than Redmayne (who gives a terrific performance). I liked the movie very much. But the way they significantly changed the last part of the movie was unnecessary and dishonest. They got DIVORCED in real life. The marriage was dissolved. She was re-married when he DIED ALONE. It would be like making a movie about Lincoln and having him not die. I'm don't get the dishonesty. The movie would have been far more powerful if they had stuck to the original story.

 

i agree with you 100%. I was really pissed that they changed the story so much. I thought the movie started out strong and Redmayne was great but I think Vikander was even better she delivered two of my top 5 female performances this year. This is such a compelling story and its sad they had to give it a "hollywood" ending. What I find most interesting is I used the same analogy that you did after the movie to my friends. I said it would be like making a movie about Jackie O but not having JFK get shot and die. I went with a few friends that did not know the story and thought how it played out was true and they were so moved by how she stuck with him to the end which made me feel cheated for some reason.

[MrMiniver]

Whatever. I can't keep all that shit straight.

 

Which is why this is a queer subject, not a human one: you think it's too much work to use the pronouns the character, and the person she is based on, prefers.

 

If that's treating them like a human, that bar is not set very high. So much for LGBTQ understanding and cooperation...

 

It isn't that it's too much work. I just can't be worried about being "pc" all the time, 24/7 especially when I think the jury is still out on what it all means and where it's going to all fall out. Period. End of lesson.

[MrMiniver]

i agree with you 100%. I was really pissed that they changed the story so much. I thought the movie started out strong and Redmayne was great but I think Vikander was even better she delivered two of my top 5 female performances this year. This is such a compelling story and its sad they had to give it a "hollywood" ending. What I find most interesting is I used the same analogy that you did after the movie to my friends. I said it would be like making a movie about Jackie O but not having JFK get shot and die. I went with a few friends that did not know the story and thought how it played out was true and they were so moved by how she stuck with him to the end which made me feel cheated for some reason.

 

I had had the benefit of having read the book about the subject so as it got closer to the end I was waiting for the divorce and the horrific way that he/she died. It didn't come. I still thought it a beautiful film -- as a film -- and Vikander was fantastic, but regretted that they didn't give it the accurate ending.

 

BTW, for what it's worth, my favorite Vikander performance of the year was in the little seen TESTAMENT OF YOUTH. Fantastic film, fantastic performances.

[N13]

[quote="MrMiniver, post: 1044515, member: 10487".......horrific way that he/she died."

 

Why is it so hard for you to accept that he trans gendered and became a she....not a he/she? i.e. Bruce Jenner was a he. Caitlin Jenner is a she.

[+ quoththeraven]

No one "became" anything.

 

If you think of yourself as gay, you were always gay, right? Even though you may have resisted it and tried to be "straight."

 

As I understand it, it's the same for transgender people. They feel that the gender they were assigned at birth - which may be the one that corresponds with their genitals and secondary sex characteristics - is not their actual, true gender. That means a trans man thinks of himself as being male ALL HIS LIFE and a trans woman thinks of herself as being female ALL HER LIFE. The trans designation is for the benefit of those of us in the cisworld who can't otherwise understand the concept of women with penises (bottom surgery is expensive and doesn't always work) and men without.

[N13]

No one "became" anything.

 

If you think of yourself as gay, you were always gay, right? Even though you may have resisted it and tried to be "straight."

 

As I understand it, it's the same for transgender people. They feel that the gender they were assigned at birth - which may be the one that corresponds with their genitals and secondary sex characteristics - is not their actual, true gender. That means a trans man thinks of himself as being male ALL HIS LIFE and a trans woman thinks of herself as being female ALL HER LIFE. The trans designation is for the benefit of those of us in the cisworld who can't otherwise understand the concept of women with penises (bottom surgery is expensive and doesn't always work) and men without.

 

And your authority for this OPINION is?

[+ quoththeraven]

And your authority for this OPINION is?

 

From friends who are transgender or are the parents of a child who is transgender and has gone through the lengthy and expensive process of transitioning. From a daughter who has gender identity issues, has many trans friends, and for whom I once bought a binder that did not work very well because she's more well-endowed than I am. The issues may boil down to her disliking being categorized and hemmed in. (So maybe more non-binary/agender than anything else.) Gee, wonder where she got that from?

 

From the trans woman who is an active member of the church to which I belong who died just before Christmas of complications from pre-transition cancer. I had no idea that she was transgender until she transitioned, listening to her was weird because I was so used to hearing a male voice, and in the privacy of my own mind I got the pronouns wrong a lot, but when I saw her -- most recently when she was liturgist this past Easter -- I always got her name right: "Ann" (short for Angela) instead of "Dan." Awhile ago, when both my ex and I were working and had more money to spend, she and her wife (they have two children) and my ex and I went out for dinner to celebrate our anniversaries for a number of years, as we got married the exact same year one week apart. So we were not casual acquaintances.

 

BTW, her wife and her children were completely cool with her transition. So were people at church, where the entire family had always been an active presence.

 

From reading essays written by transgender people. From the people on Twitter who tweet essays written by transgender people and advocacy for transgender people.

 

From this guide by GLAAD and other resources linked therein:

 

http://www.glaad.org/transgender/allies

 

I suggest that you look at the text following the heading Challenge anti-transgender remarks or jokes in public spaces - including LGB spaces. (And no, I didn't look at this guide before my earlier post.)

 

I believe that in a different thread (don't remember which one), rvnswd (hope I got the username right) shared a link to a GLAAD guide to terms to use and not to use that may also be helpful. The link above doesn't discuss the precise issue I raised, but I suspect it can lead you to such a discussion.

 

ETA: I should add that I appreciate the rest of your post and am supportive of it. I realize it may seem I'm not being sufficiently supportive of you. But the view that someone who is trans "became" male or female is the way someone who is looking at it from the outside sees it. It does not in general reflect the experience of trans people for whom the whole point is aligning outward gender identity with inner gender identity. For them, they have always been whatever gender it is they have transitioned to. That's even true of those who are trans but who have not, for whatever reason, transitioned, whether it be due to fear of backlash, employment issues, or expense.

[N13]

"For them, they have always been whatever gender it is they have transitioned to."

Isn't that my point?

[+ WilliamM]

 

ETA: I should add that I appreciate the rest of your post and am supportive of it. I realize it may seem I'm not being sufficiently supportive of you. But the view that someone who is trans "became" male or female is the way someone who is looking at it from the outside sees it. It does not in general reflect the experience of trans people for whom the whole point is aligning outward gender identity with inner gender identity. For them, they have always been whatever gender it is they have transitioned to. That's even true of those who are trans but who have not, for whatever reason, transitioned, whether it be due to fear of backlash, employment issues, or expense.

 

I really appeciate the back and forth between quoththeraven and N13. I remember a ways back in the 1970s, a co-worker making a bad joke concerning gender identification. The secretary spoke up and said, "you are talking about my husband."

 

Usually the discussions here are with people who strongly disagree. In this case, the disagreement are not major (N13, feel free to speak up), so everyone, even someone well informed, can learn.

[MrMiniver]

No one "became" anything.

 

If you think of yourself as gay, you were always gay, right? Even though you may have resisted it and tried to be "straight."

 

As I understand it, it's the same for transgender people. They feel that the gender they were assigned at birth - which may be the one that corresponds with their genitals and secondary sex characteristics - is not their actual, true gender. That means a trans man thinks of himself as being male ALL HIS LIFE and a trans woman thinks of herself as being female ALL HER LIFE. The trans designation is for the benefit of those of us in the cisworld who can't otherwise understand the concept of women with penises (bottom surgery is expensive and doesn't always work) and men without.

 

I think the subject is far more complicated than what is being presented here. But it has become politically correct to just accept whatever one says on this subject and to not allow any discussion of what it really all means. Whatever. I'm not interested in that. There should be a full discussion -- in public -- around all of these issues.

 

I don't think you are something just because you say you are something. You can't be black, if you're really white, etc. The same is true here. But enough said.

[MrMiniver]

"For them, they have always been whatever gender it is they have transitioned to."

 

Isn't that my point?

 

But it isn't really just their decision to make, is it? There are certain scientific ... oh, well, we all know it's pointless. This is about politics, not gender. Could you self identify as a cat and actually be considered a cat? I mean, c'mon, this shit is completely ridiculous.

[N13]

But it isn't really just their decision to make, is it? There are certain scientific ... oh, well, we all know it's pointless. This is about politics, not gender. Could you self identify as a cat and actually be considered a cat? I mean, c'mon, this shit is completely ridiculous.

 

My last response on this is remembering that one can not argue with ..............

[+ WilliamM]

But it isn't really just their decision to make, is it? There are certain scientific ... oh, well, we all know it's pointless. This is about politics, not gender. Could you self identify as a cat and actually be considered a cat? I mean, c'mon, this shit is completely ridiculous.

 

When Al Gore invented the Internet, he would have had second thought if he knew that one day someone would write:

 

"Could you self identify as a cat and actually be considered a cat? I mean, c'mon, this shit is completely ridiculous."

 

Maybe a tree, or a daisy or even a keyboard, c'mon, you can do better than that MrMiniver. Haven't you always wanted to be MrsMiniver?

[+ quoththeraven]

"For them, they have always been whatever gender it is they have transitioned to."

 

Isn't that my point?

 

It might have been your point, but using the term "became" and saying Bruce Jenner was a he (as opposed to was perceived by us as a he) is inconsistent with a trans person's experience of themselves as always being a single gender: the one not assigned at birth.

 

The following is a response to MrMiniver, whose posts I am having trouble quoting.

 

Then explain the correct gender and sexual identity of intersex people (ambiguous genitals, chromosomal abnormalities etc.)

 

Even at the biological level, sex (which is what I understand you to be referring to) is not binary. It's a continuum, though not as much of one as gender identity or sexual orientation. Gender - the process of identifying with maleness or femaleness, or masculinity or femininity, as much as I dislike those terms - is a social construct.

 

You may think this is all bull. And it's true, just because most avademics think so doesn't make it so. But in the social sciences, there is broad agreement that gender is a social construct other than some possible dissension by the advocates of evolutionary psychology. As to sex, that it is more variable than we rhink is the predominant scientific and medical view, although medicine in practice lags behind academic medicine.

 

This is also accepted by a larger share of younger folks. It is the future. Once again, doesn't necessarily make it right or you wrong, but your way of looking at things is being superseded. It's also a very Western way of looking at things.

 

It wasn't until recently that most people accepted that gay people exist. Why is this different?

 

Finally, there are people who consider themselves otherkin. (Faery and that sort of thing.) I think it's delusional, but if they're otherwise functional, who are they harming?

[+ WilliamM]

The following is a response to MrMiniver, whose posts I am having trouble quoting.

 

We all should be so lucky.

[+ quoththeraven]

Addendum regarding intersex individuals:

http://56.media.tumblr.com/565eb4cd03348025e5e46680349a4ff4/tumblr_neiq4u4e571tm163xo1_r1_500.jpg

http://56.media.tumblr.com/27b956c5608093decbce7c6d0cd63d00/tumblr_neiq4u4e571tm163xo2_500.jpg

Source

 

To quote from the last comment on the Tumblr thread:

 

I’ve had people speak to me in the past who didn’t know what “intersex” means and just assumed “Tumblr’s making up words again,” so I will always reblog stuff like this.

 

To be intersex is to have a physical aspect to your body. It’s medically documented, it’s not “soft science” or psychology. It doesn’t have any bearing on a person’s actual gender but it has much too much to do with the term “assigned sex.”

 

And if you plan to have children, you absolutely must be aware of things like this, because you have to defend your kids from being cut up for no good reason.