you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Constantine 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Oh, God, I just made the connection of where this movie came from. When I first read about it, I thought it must be based on some other novel about a real historical woman who hunted fossils, because none of that was in the novel I read. But no, the guy just made it up, and I did read Remarkable Creatures.

The book was excellent as it was. Oh, this makes my blood boil. Why can't women just be single/have fulfilling platonic relationships without it being sexualized. It's like they thought, "There's no man in this story, that's a problem. Okay, let's just make the other woman her love interest because this story can't possibly be interesting enough without some steamy stuff thrown in." This is a problem I have with the TQ+ people, they just have to rewrite everything to pigeonhole people into labels. Like u/reluctant_commenter said, I think they're really uncomfortable with uncertainty, and perhaps to an even greater extent, nuance.

[–]lovelyspearmintLesbeing a lesbian 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It looks like the director is one of those people who's trying to capitalise on gay romance movies. I'm pretty sure his previous movie was a period drama about gay men too.