MovieChat Forums > Fried Green Tomatoes (1992) Discussion > Soft-peddling the lesbian relationship

Soft-peddling the lesbian relationship

posted 11 years ago by HarveyManfredSinJohn
12 replies | jump to latest

This isn't a bad film but as with (the even better) 'The Color Purple' the filmmakers felt the need to effectively ignore the book's lesbian relationship between the leads. Why aren't cinema audiences treated with the same respect as book readers? Do filmmakers think cinema-goers aren't mature/sophisticated enough to deal with homosexuality?

Anyway, Jov Avnet is a hack going by his filmography which explains his ludicrous claim that the film's food fight sufficed as representative of the lead characters' lesbian relationship.

[–] ciddysaurus94 11 years ago

I remember reading that Spielberg regrets not portraying the romantic relationship between Celie and Shug in the Color Purple (more in depth anyway). We have to remember that acceptance of homosexuality has come quite a long way since these movies have been made. Back then it was still considered "taboo" to an extent. The filmmaker's were probably afraid that getting too deep into that topic would drive people from seeing it.

Why the books contained said content but not the movie: probably because those who read have a more open mind and aren't turned off to such ideas. These days, homosexuality is so much more accepted and embraced to the point were they have a Gay and Lesbian category on Netflix. It was probably just bad timing.

[–] dahoss65 9 years ago

Acceptance by who? Those whose minds are polluted?

[–] Druff (1845) 10 months ago

Acceptance by society as a whole.

[–] pastorjwallen 9 years ago

ciddysaurus94 said:

I remember reading that Spielberg regrets not portraying the romantic relationship between Celie and Shug in the Color Purple (more in depth anyway). We have to remember that acceptance of homosexuality has come quite a long way since these movies have been made. Back then it was still considered "taboo" to an extent. The filmmaker's were probably afraid that getting too deep into that topic would drive people from seeing it.

Why the books contained said content but not the movie: probably because those who read have a more open mind and aren't turned off to such ideas. These days, homosexuality is so much more accepted and embraced to the point were they have a Gay and Lesbian category on Netflix. It was probably just bad timing.

This. Back in the early 1990s, being gay or lesbian was still seen as something to hide for most people. "Philadelphia" is a great example of how society reacted to people who came out. It is only a recent development that being gay isn't an automatic loss of employment, or housing.

I wish they would have explored it more closely as it was in the book, but I feel what we got was still a wonderful story of love. Plus, I can't help but love the food fight scene, because it does sell the strong closeness of the two, and it's funny when Ruth smears that chocolate down the front of Grady's face. :D

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

-= J =-

[–] rackyroo 8 years ago

Why the books contained said content but not the movie: probably because those who read have a more open mind and aren't turned off to such ideas.

So, I'm guessing you are one of the so called movie goers with more of a closed mind, right?
How you can generalize movie goers as being so closed minded is beyond me.
They had no input as to how characters are portrayed.
So, a movie audience is closed minded because a director and/or producer choose to portray the characters as being straight?
Let's not even mention the fact that a guestimated half of those supposed closed minded people are the book readers who wanted to see how the book was portrayed.

I'm being extremely clever up here and there's no1 around looking impressed! What's the point in having you all? DrWho

[–] Ditto-head 11 years ago

In both movies, I think it was the cowardly choice to not openly admit the truth in the leads' relationships. It would have been more interesting to see in FGT how the Threadgoode family and the town just accepted Idgie and Ruth's relationship. (As they did in the book.) I agree that the food fight scene was pretty weak if it was supposed to explain the truth to the audience.

Love your name, OP. How's that KGB defector settling in?

[–] cpoet 9 years ago

I, too, think it was a shame the movie wasn't more candid about the relationship. The book wasn't vague; the author's been out for decades.

But every thread I read in this forum still has people clutching their pearls and insisting that Idgie and Ruth were simply pals whose love was "pure," with none of that nasty lesbian stuff to impugn it.

SIGH.

[–] cinecephale 9 years ago

I remember seing it as a teen and I understood the lesbian subtext right away. You don't necessarly have to be super explicit for people to understand...

[–] vinidici 9 years ago

I remember seing it as a teen and I understood the lesbian subtext right away. You don't necessarly have to be super explicit for people to understand...]

When the movie was new I was among those who mentally blocked out the idea of it being a bonafide lesbian love story ("Nah, just a 'close friends, female bonding' kinda thing!") But deep down I knew better and when I read the book that clinched it for me and from that point on I was no longer a denier.

On the other hand, I still see THELMA AND LOUIS as an example of a "girl-buddy" flick and not in the category of "lesbian lovers," despite the shared "farewell kiss" in the ending between the two protagonists; but there's just no getting around the facts about FRIED GREEN TOMATOES.

Secret Message, HERE!--->CONGRATULATIONS!!! You've discovered the Secret Message!

[–] lunacyregnant 8 years ago

As someone else pointed out, there are still people out there getting "offended" over people trying to perverse the pure, innoncent "platonic" love between Ruth and Idgie with The Gay Agenda, if the other topics whining about it are anything to go by.

So, why wouldn't movies show a romantic relationship between two women to a persumed mature movie-going audience? Because of the "Ew! Two girls kissing"/"It's Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" crowd.

[–] lemonhead1 (424) 4 years ago

What were they supposed to show in the movie, Idgie & Ruth scissoring? Geez!

[–] lemonhead1 (424) a year ago

What do you expect, a dildo scene?