MovieChat Forums > Father of the Bride (1991) Discussion > What a disgusting homophobia.

What a disgusting homophobia.


This film has such a degrading, inhuman and manichean portrayal of the ONLY gay character of the film (there is not another gay character that has a normal and human personality ). The rest of the characters doesn't have THAT ridicule and simple treatment . The gay character is only there to mock on him, that is something that doesn't happen with any other character of the film (the rest of the characters are comical... but also have some humanity and are enjoyable).

But what can I expect from a "conservative" northamerican movie from the 90's.

I have to warn that this kind of movies "for all family" (including children and teenagers) encourages homophobia in society.

reply

You're reading way too much into it. Frank is an over-the-top wedding coordinator who is there to make George miserable. And they never actually say that he's gay.

reply

That's a bit much CZJFan87. He's supposed to be a "loud" character. It was nothing to do with the fact that he was gay. And how do you know he was? Are you stereotyping?

reply

I'm assuming you're talking about Frank? He stole the movie, the best character! Everyone clearly accepted him and made no homosexual remarks. I think you're overreacting a little.

~xo.Devan

reply

I believe CGJFan to more of a TROLL than a viewer who is upset:(

reply

"I believe CGJFan to more of a TROLL than a viewer who is upset"

BINGO!

reply

@CJ I don't even remembering them mentioning him being gay. I think (like others have already said) he's just an over the top wedding coordinator. His scenes have nothing to do with him being gay, but about his profession. Just the fact that you can't understand a word that he says. He's is just a hilarious character in the movie. Please point out the point in the movie that mentions him being gay because I don't recall it, nor do I recall anything in the movie that is homophobic.

"When I'm sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead."

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I really hope that was an attempt at trolling, because...that's all it could've possibly been, really. Frank is not gay, as far as anyone knows. If anything, perpetuating the stereotype that if someone acts, moves, or speaks in some specific way, then s/he MUST be of one sexual orientation or other, does a real disservice to the entire human species.

Even if Frank HAD been "the gay character," he was portrayed in a very positive manner, anyway. He's hilariously funny, yes, but also a super-enthusiastic, friendly, helpful, caring, and knowledgeable wedding coordinator. ("A person who coordinates weddings!")

As for the equally terrible post at the bottom:

LOL. "Trying to portray homosexuality as being mainstream?" You couldn't have been for real, either. You honestly think that most people don't know any homosexuals unless they're gay themselves?! Maybe they THINK they don't know any, but there's quite a difference. And anyhow, I'm straight and can right off the top of my head think of at least five or six gay people who are friends of mine. I went to school with quite a number of them. Less than 2% sounds a bit low, although they are certainly a minority.

But there is no "gay agenda." If demanding to be treated with respect as normal human beings without getting insulted, belittled, shunned, prejudged, and attacked is an insidious "agenda," then I'm the bloody Pope. Those who would attempt to interfere with the lives of their fellow people and deny them civil rights enjoyed by others based upon an irrelevant, harmless, and inconsequential difference are the ones with the disturbing (and very, very creepy) agenda.

Another person's orientation is not something that requires your "approval" or "agreement." (And just who the heck do you think you are to confer your approval upon somebody else's lifestyle, anyhow, O Mighty One?!? I'd be willing to bet that your morals are the pits compared with the majority of homosexuals'...) There is nothing with which to agree or disagree. A minority portion of the population is bisexual or homosexual; that's all there is to it. Always has been. You might as well disagree with people having different-colored eyes or hair than you, people listening to different kinds of music, people dressing differently or preferring different foods, or whatever other nonsensical reason you can come up with for saying that someone's doing something "wrong" which is plainly not wrong in any way, shape, or form, and insisting on some pathetic Dark Ages crusade against them. (Better yet, why not go after ALL the people doing ALL the other things supposedly "forbidden" by your holy texts? Oh, wait...that would involve persecuting yourself, more than likely, so that wouldn't do!)

With an increased population come increased numbers of homosexuals and bisexuals. Big shocker! (And then of course there are asexuals as well, and any number of extreme-minority orientations which one might claim when they're taking into count transsexuals, the genderqueer, etc.) The way I see it, homosexuality is one of nature's brilliant population control mechanisms. They enjoy their relationships, there's never any risk of babies resulting--yet some of them can provide wonderful adoptive homes--and nobody gets hurt. It's a win-win situation. (So if anything, we can use more of them!) They are the way they are meant to be; there's no need for everybody to be alike. Because being gay does not involve infringing upon anyone else's rights or doing harm to anything or anybody, they have the absolute right to be treated exactly like heterosexuals. The obsession with pinpointing gays, of all groups, as "sinners" is way beyond vile, disgusting, pointless, and brainless. Besides, nobody "chooses" to be attracted to one sex or the other; so long as your desires don't lead you toward rape or abuse, you just go with what you feel. (Try and tell somebody struggling with the agonizing anxiety of "coming out" to family and friends that they've chosen that for themselves. Even if they HAD, again, it wouldn't have been a bad choice in any way!)

So live and let live. If it harm none, do what ye will.
And your right to exercise your religion (talk about your critique-worthy chosen lifestyles...) ends when it dares to try and prevent someone else from exercising the freedom to live as s/he sees fit.

reply

Your post was beautifully written. I'm an ordained minister and I agree with everything that you have written. God bless.

reply

Well, thank you very much! I appreciate that, as I always try to state my case in a civil, sensible, rational manner. :)
And right back at ya! ;D

reply

Thank you very much. Is it possible, that we could become friends on here?

reply

Absolutely! I'd be glad to add you. =]

reply

Thank you.

reply

Hey buddy. I want to hear your take on pedophilia.

reply

I'd agree with you if it wasn't for the fact that Franck is arguably the coolest and most interesting character in the film. The film might have been more enjoyable if it had revolved around him because his scenes were by far the most memorable and entertaining (and I say that someone who is otherwise a big Steve Martin fan).

Was Martin Short playing a gay/effeminate stereotype? Yes, I guess so. But he was a likeable and fun character and not one to laugh at but to laugh along with. I doubt many people came away from this movie hating gays. Hating upper-middle-class white people perhaps. But not gays.

reply