• The Queer Beacon offers insights as to the representation of gays in wider released movies.

    About | F.A.Q. | E-mail

    Press CTRL + D to bookmark

Search it like you mean it:

  • Powered by Rollyo


Wear it proudly

For a bigger beacon:

  • GAY.COM Premium Dating - 50% Off Netflix, Inc.

The lawyer in me made me do this:

  • Queer Beacon does not claim credit for any images featured on this site unless otherwise noted. The copyright to the images on Queer Beacon belongs to its respective owner(s). Queer Beacon is not responsible for, or has control over, the content of any external web site links. Information on this site may contain errors or inaccuracies; the site's proprietor does not make any warranty as to the correctness or reliability of the site's content. If you own rights to any of the images, and do not wish them to appear here, please contact us and they will be promptly removed.

« Have a Good Weekend! | Main | The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen - 2006) - No Gay Content »


Johnny Bristau

wow interesting movie will watch it thanks for the post


um, ok, first of all, in the 1960s it was common--even for shrinks and cops--to think of psychopaths as latent homosexuals. Doesnt mean it was true, just that it was a frequent dimestore-psychology diagnosis. And it shows how the cops and the media were stuck in a mindset that didnt let them listen to outside ideas like the one Gyllenhal had.

Besides, should historical pics change reality to protect people's sensibilities? Would you say there shouldnt be Jews in concentration camps in Schindler's List because its a negative representation of Jews?

You're looking at a movie that basically has no gay content whatsoever, and calling it homophobic. Do that enough and no one will pay attention when real homophobic stuff-like 300--comes out.

Myspace Generators

Jake makes my bones quiver.

Queer Beacon

Hey Thor, thanks for your comment!

I've seen movies do that kind of thing often (hide homophobia behind a pretense of historical or cultural context). That sometimes is justified for one reason or another, but that doesn't make the depiction of gays any less homophobic, historically accurate? Maybe. Homophobic? Usually, yes.

Sometimes, I do concede that homophobia is shown in a movie more as criticism (that was the case in Hollywoodland), but that was not the case in Zodiac (that's my opinion, of course).


I don't know if it's fair to slam the movie for the "latent homosexual" deal. It was the '60s, after all.

The comments to this entry are closed.