f-ckyeahfutbol:

sandraugiga:

f-ckyeahfutbol:

sandraugiga:

f-ckyeahfutbol:

I don’t know about you guys, but the film I’m actually legit upset about is the fucking remake of Ben-Hur because the erasure of the queer subtext from that classic to pander to an evangelical audience is fucking bullshit.

Me too! *insert grumbling noises of rage*

Should I make a Celluloid Closet post to inform people why removing the subtext is…rage inducing?

Please do! Its not as though there’s any ambiguity on it being there, as Gore Vidal has been extremely open about having put it there perfectly on purpose.

I think the only one they didnt tell was the lead actor, since he was such a macho. But they thought the only way for Ben Hur and the Roman relationship to work was that they were lovers in their teens and now that they were reunited the Roman hoped for that to return, but Ben Hur didnt feel the same way back.

I am having trouble to see how they could erase that and still make it work somehow. But the signs point to it being something similar to Troy, where they completely removed the subtext of Achilles and Patrochilles.

I did read somewhere that the actor who played Ben Hur then, (his name escapes me, Charlton Heston?) was angry about the revelation made in the Celluloid Closet in 1995, and said it was a lie to disgrace him personally. So I guess they made the right call not to tell him all those years ago.

Yeah, removing this element also dissolves the intensity between them and makes the film into a simple revenge tale, which is what it looks to be by the trailer, and that’s not what the film was about. You can’t appropriate queer stories only to remove the queer element and expect the story to play out the same, and I’m throwing shade at some other stories here, too.