MovieChat Forums > Broadcast News (1987) Discussion > Gay only makes sense here...

Gay only makes sense here...

posted 16 years ago by KGotschall
33 replies | jump to latest

I am having a hard time 'getting' Brooks' character in this film. I don't understand the descisions his character makes. Unless he were gay.

I serioulsy thought through the entire film till the end that he was gay. And that made sense. It made sense that he would have an attraction/great chemistry with his female producer and never make a move. It would make sense that she would cry whenever she came face to face with the doomed love she obvioulsy had for him. It would make sense that he would profess his love but still do nothing, and she would understand the boundries of their friendship. It would make sense that he would drunkedly kiss her and joke' "I think I definately felt something" without upsetting thoer friendship. It would make sense that he would continually feel slighted and underappreciated by early 80's management if he were openly gay. It would make sense that the executive producer would come to him with an important story about gay rights (yes this happens in the film). It would also make sense that he has a huge crush on the national news anchorman, cares so much about his story making him smile.

Yeah and it would also make sense as Brooks acts pretty gay, too. It is almost like it was written in the script, Brooks had made the choice, run the risk to play the part that way, and at the last minute the filmmakers shrivelled and added a family for him at the end and cut as much gay as they could. This film would have been 1000% better if they had just gone with the risky choice. It would have paid off, as this film may have entered the cannon, instead of being swept under the rug for its datedness and inconsequence.

They really missed(or sunk?) the boat on that one, in my opinion.

They're so flamboyant and melodramatic, it just makes me want to set myself on fire.

[–] Paul_Ke 16 years ago

he would have an attraction/great chemistry with his female producer and never make a move.

He does kiss in her the movie. He also later admits to her that he's in love with her.

that he would profess his love but still do nothing

What exactly is he supposed to do? Throw a lasso around her? He wanted her, but she didn't want him.

Aaron was not gay. Just look at his reaction when Joan Cusack tells him: "My gosh... and for a while there I was attracted to you." Aaron replies: "Wait a minute, that changes everything!

Your theory that he was gay is ridiculous. Didn't you see how much he was hurting from his unrequited love for Jane? He told her he was in love with her. He's not gay.

[–] KGotschall 16 years ago

Aaron was not gay. Just look at his reaction when Joan Cusack tells him: "My gosh... and for a while there I was attracted to you." Aaron replies: "Wait a minute, that changes everything!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wait, how does that quote prove ANYTHING? He is sarcastically saying he is unaffected by a woman being attracted to him. If anything It SUPPORTS my argument that the character is indeed gay.

They're so flamboyant and melodramatic, it just makes me want to set myself on fire.

[–] Paul_Ke 16 years ago

No, Aaron is saying he IS affected by a woman being attracted to him. He says, "...that changes everything!" which means had he known she had been attracted to him, he wouldn't have given her a hard time about her ass-kissing.

Besides, why in the heck would a gay guy pine away and hurt so much for his unrequited love for a woman (Jane). Doesn't make any sense.

[–] KGotschall 16 years ago

No, Aaron is saying he IS affected by a woman being attracted to him. He says, "...that changes everything!" which means had he known she had been attracted to him, he wouldn't have given her a hard time about her ass-kissing.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think you misunderstand the meaning of sarcasm! He was sarcastic in his reply, and was communicating that he is unmoved by ber profession of attraction. But hey, Albert Brooks NEVER plays sarcasm so that is unlikely.

Besides, why in the heck would a gay guy pine away and hurt so much for his unrequited love for a woman (Jane). Doesn't make any sense
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, umm that's one of my points that he DOSEN'T pine away and hurt, it is just understood that it wouldn't work out although there is chemistry there and they obviously get along well. SHE's the one bursting into tears all the time, wether it's because of him or being unhappy with her lack of a romantic relationship in life.

[–] Paul_Ke 15 years ago

I think you misunderstand the meaning of sarcasm! He was sarcastic in his reply, and was communicating that he is unmoved by ber profession of attraction.

You just simply do not get it. That was not sarcasm. After she gets up, Albert Brooks turns and watches her walk away from him. His eyes are locked on her in regret the whole time she is walking away.

Yeah, umm that's one of my points that he DOSEN'T pine away and hurt,

He DOESN'T pine away and hurt??? Were we watching the same movie? ...Okay, so let me get this straight. When James L Brooks wrote the scene where Albert Brooks is spending 10-15 minutes of screentime professing his love for Jane and how much it hurts him to admit this to her, he meant it all as a smokescreen for the character's gayness??? Yeah, that's really a plausible theory you got there.

[–] Victover 16 years ago

You knowt what KGotschall?
You're complicating things too much. Aaron's unhappy love life happens all the time. The whole point being that smart Jane falls for dumb Tom in front of the nose of her also smart colleage/friend. A contradiction explained by real life never contradicted fact that hormones work stronger than fríendship, loyalty and any other values.

If pigs had wings the sh*t of this world would be perfectly shared

[–] cooper-29 16 years ago

Lots of people are afraid to profess their love. That does not make them gay.
Oh brother your post is scary.

[–] KGotschall 16 years ago

Wait--I don't think I said that he was afraid to profess his love and that makes him gay. That is dumb and scary--and not my point(although people DO put themselves in preconcieved 'I am' boxes, and it can interfere with their happiness, but dosen't necessarily have ANYTHING to do with sexuality). And not what happens in the film, because he does profess his love. But there was an understanding that it would'n work out, on some level (not really addressed to my satisfaction), so neither pursued it.

I'm just saying that the culmination of all the things I observed in his character, it would only make good sense if he were gay. Like it was missing.

They're so flamboyant and melodramatic, it just makes me want to set myself on fire.

[–] MorePeasPlease 16 years ago

Wow, in all the years I've watched this film, I never once thought, "Damn, this movie would be 1000% better if Aaron were gay!"

I think that your post is saying far more about your perceptions and your projections than about Brooks' character.

[–] kevcowiffle 16 years ago

It's interesting to think about this without immediately turning it into a flame war (as a few posters have already). In the beginning of the film, it seems obvious that Jane is in love with Aaron. He sees her advances, chuckles at them, and then moves along with his life. As someone who has been in a friendzone relationship, this is quite different. If he were really pining over her day and night like he claims to be, he would jump at those opportunities.

But he doesn't jump at them. He passes them off, treats her like just another friend, and goes on with his life. Though the love confession scene at the end is quite powerful, it's also out of nowhere. Sure, we see a bit of tension build whenever he makes a comment about her dating Tom, but those have more to do with his job envy than anything related to dating.

Gay would make sense for most of the choices he makes, and it certainly would have helped explain his early standoffishness.

[–] KGotschall 16 years ago

Lord, thank you kevcowiffle. Thank you for actually reading my initial post, instead of the first line, getting pissed, and writing a lecture about the 'issues' I must have.

I swear reading some responses makes me wonder if any of these people actually are reading each other's posts. I think their eagerness to jump on me about this says alot about THEM.

There is so much stuff to me that points to it, and I really think it would have made the film more relevant, and less dated.

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

[–] Paul_Ke 16 years ago

He sees her advances, chuckles at them, and then moves along with his life. As someone who has been in a friendzone relationship, this is quite different. If he were really pining over her day and night like he claims to be, he would jump at those opportunities.

What advances did Jane make towards him? I sure didn't see any.

[–] MorePeasPlease 16 years ago

Yeah, apparently the OP is seeing a different film than the rest of us, or really, really wants it to go in a different direction.

[–] Jackeblu 15 years ago

I have watched this movie countless times, and I totally see what you are getting at. The character of Aaron is not gay...however during the first half of the movie I could see how it would be mistaken that he is. Or at least flirt with the notion. However once he professes his love for Jane..its clear he's not gay. I think he just had a tough time getting over the "being friends" part but then when Tom comes in the picture he finally gets the balls to say something. But at that point its too late cause Jane is hot for Tom.

But forget all these people here finding it insane to think Aaron is gay. It's just a different perspective that I haven't thought of before but none-the-less interesting. Isn't finding different perspectives one of the things that makes a great movie great?

[–] brian-btapple 14 years ago

I agree, it is interesting to consider an alternate interpretation of the storyline. Unfortunately, Albert Brooks acting is so poor, its difficult to know with any certainty. Brooks plays Brooks, he reads the characters lines, but it's always Brooks. I think he wants to play Hurts' character, but he can't.

[–] ellery-6 16 years ago

Aaron was not gay. He made all the wrong choices because he was crippled by his own neuroses and insecurities. (Let's not forget the early scenes of each of them as children, shall we?). And if he had repressed any of those insecurities at all, they came roaring back to the surface when Tom showed up: the blonde, WASPy, matinee idol looking anchorman. And when Jane, who always made a point of valuing substance over style, fell for Tom, Aaron could laugh it off for only so long. But he was crushed. He didn't show it through some melodramatic break down, of course, so instead he used sarcasm - which sometimes bordered on plain nastiness - as a defense/coping mechanism.

And as for acting gay? That would be like saying Woody Allen or Billy Crystal act "gay" in their romantic comedies. No, it was clear that Brooks was supposed to represent the prototypal "neurotic Jewish guy" (as he does in, let's see, ALL of his movies?) who would like to think that his intellect and acerbic wit could compensate for lack of polish and traditional looks when it came to landing certain women. But he realized, in this case at least, that would not happen, so he grew ever more disillusioned, saracastic, and spiteful, all the while still secretly carrying a torch for Jane.

[–] jerseyboynorth 16 years ago

I doubt if Aaron was gay. I think his confession of love was a last ditch effort to win Jane over because he may have felt he had nothing else to lose. Tom was more successful at work and with Jane. The only thing Aaron had over Tom was his intellect, and that didn't matter to Jane; she was already hooked on Tom.

[–] tmartin-15 15 years ago

Aaron GOT MARRIED AND HAD A KID AT THE END! HELLOOOOOOO!!!

Aaron's problem is that he doesn't know when to make a move - he's socially inept when it comes to breaking the ice with Jane, and only when he becomes vulnerable does he allow himself to admit it.

[–] Moon_and_New_York_City 15 years ago

WTF?!?

I am gay and I see no way Aaron's homosexuality makes this a better movie.

What a bizarre suggestion.

"the best that you can do is fall in love"

[–] KGotschall 15 years ago

WOW being gay I would think you would have a higher appreciation for ANY major, widely distributed film (in 1987 no less!)that had openly gay characters in realistic, non-farcical situations.

I still hold that the character may have been gay and the studio/producers shrivelled on the notion squashed that, creating holes in the plot and characterizations.

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

[–] ellery-6 15 years ago

Since we all know getting married and having kids CLEARLY means that one is heterosexual...:)

Haha, no I agree that he wasn't supposed to be gay (or that he was originally conceived as a gay character), for the many reasons that I and other posters have postulated earlier....

What's a rack?
It's a country.

[–] MorePeasPlease 15 years ago

Let's make him a replicant while we're at it.

[–] neuro 15 years ago

And a ghost too. A gay replicant ghost.

[–] pbl1 15 years ago

OP -- i would be happy to assist with your immolation!

What the $%*& is a Chinese Downhill?!?

[–] KGotschall 15 years ago

Sorry I have been flamed anough for my original post, but thanks for the offer.

Still stand by it though, something is just incomplete with that part's characterization, and I think it is that he is gay and they didn't want to go there for some reason. Maybe I'm wrong I'll admit, but there is still something missing from this film to make it part of the american film cannon.

And remember my friend, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

[–] Shambaby 14 years ago

Perhaps, what it is missing is PREDICTABILITY. I have to say that i really enjoy reading all of the conversation around your post. I am gay and I fell in love with the character of Aaron on the big screen in 1987. I have recently met many men in Boston who seem gay to me, but they are not. There are different kinds of men. This film wins for originality, great acting, funny lines, and the adorable Albert Brooks. I wrote more about my thoughts on the film in "Hurt or Brooks".

[–] jamiexmcl 15 years ago

I'm straight. No, I never got that vibe from this movie - and I have a pretty good gaydar. Brooks seemed hopelessly smart, wimpy (not to be confused with gay) and wonky and useless at winning the girl. Plus, gay men don't get flop sweats on TV!

Nope.