
Although most reviews of the comedy movie, I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry, were generally scathing, a Huffington Post blogger has claimed that you need to wear "special gay decoder glasses" to really appreciate the message that seems to have been hidden from the other reviewers. Joan Garry, Executive Director of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), admits that she at first hated this movie:
There is something about it that feels duplicitous and I left the theatre mad. Sandler has done something ingenuous. The pimply teenage boys love gay jokes. Sandler knew he would get great mileage from playing a flagrantly heterosexual homophobe surrounded by men dressed as butterflies and young sissies in tap shoes. And the weekend box office results prove it -- Sandler beat Potter this weekend -- $34.8 million to $32.2 million.
Despite her initial disgust with this movie, Ms Garry claims that this film is really a great work of cinematic art thanks to her special glasses:
But here's the ingenuous part. There's a second movie hiding in there but you can only see it if you wear your special gay decoder glasses.
There is the hilarious movie in which Adam Sandler plays a total sexist pig who agrees to pretend to be gay to help out his friend who needs pension benefits. That film uses words like "butt pirate" to great comic effect.
Then there is the film you can see only with the special glasses. In this one, the premise is the same but the sexist pig is changed by the experience. He reaches a greater understanding of issues facing the gay community as well as a greater understanding of what it really means to be in a relationship. In this version of the film, there are sweet and preachy moments and you must ignore the use of words like "butt pirate."
Apparently the majority of other reviewers are not wearing those special gay decoder glasses since their reviews have been mostly unflattering such as this one by Peter Travers of Rolling Stone:
Say it isn't so. Not that Adam Sandler as Chuck and Kevin James as Larry play idiot hetero fireman who fake being gay for health benefits. I mean that Sideways writers Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor actually contributed to a script that trots out every fag joke -- yes, even dropping the soap -- and then tells us how wrong it is to laugh. No comedy this year can beat this dud for mealy-mouthed hypocrisy.
Perhaps Mr. Travers would learn to appreciate this movie if he borrows a pair of special gay decoder glasses from Ms Garry. Of course, the liberals always seem to be wearing those special glasses from the movie, They Live, in which the main character is able to see that successful conservatives are really evil aliens. Those are the same glasses which enable liberals to see that 9/11 was really a U.S. government plot, that Karl Rove controls all aspects of our society, and that the new Wal-Mart stores are really future detention centers in which to incarcerate "progressives."
—P.J. Gladnick is a freelance writer and creator of the DUmmie FUnnies blog.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Not only are they wearing
July 29, 2007 - 12:24 ET by mibrilaneNot only are they wearing the THEY LIVE glasses, but they had to have an all-out brawl for 20 minutes for one of them to get the others to wear them.
Also, they're all out of bubblegum, but they can't do the other thing, so it leads to a lot of internal angst.
They Live!
July 29, 2007 - 13:02 ET by P.J. GladnickAbsolutely Repulsive
July 29, 2007 - 13:08 ET by Lame CherryGladnick, I do not know if your post was to show what trash is on the liberal left in coming up with stuff like this or if you are that Huffington KOS ilk.
I do know though that George Bush has nothing to do with a Hollywood movie nor the factor of glasses and homosexuality the blogger was refering to.
I also know this is why I asked the editors of the site to only allow photos of themselves as garbage like this would come up that is beyond distasteful and adds nothing to the debate.
In any case, this garbage is out of place as it has nothing to do with the post.
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Lame Cherry, It's P.J.'s
July 29, 2007 - 13:17 ET by BlondeLame Cherry,
It's P.J.'s blog. He can post whatever he feels like.
I thought it was a riot.
Seeing how you're relatively new and all, I'm just pointing this out in the spirit of friendship.
They Live Pic
July 29, 2007 - 13:31 ET by P.J. GladnickThat They Live pic is a common one on leftwing sites since they claim to have special vision to see conservatives for what they fantasize they are. Also the flick, They Live uses the same premise.
But perhaps I am spending too much time explaining all this to Lame Cherry.
P.J., Thanks for the
July 29, 2007 - 13:42 ET by BlondeP.J.,
Thanks for the info...I couldn't bring myself to visit one of those sites, and rely upon you intrepid N.B. bloggers to apprise me of what's happening there.
I kinda figured out immediately what the pic was all about. What's up w/these leftwingers and their spy glasses anyway? I guess they have no idea how silly they sound in general, and then they go off on these lunatic rants....what's a conservative to think?
Hey, L.C. is new here....and his posts are generally spot-on, just a beginner's error. No harm, no foul.
Blonde
July 29, 2007 - 16:20 ET byanother case of the <sarc on/ sarc off>glasses failing to boot-up properly (IMO)
"Television is where you watch people in your living room that you would not want near your house." Groucho
They Live Movie
July 29, 2007 - 13:27 ET by P.J. GladnickApparently you are not familiar with the They Live movie. The premise of that flick was that successful conservatives during the Reagan era were really extraterrestrial aliens bent on controlling society. They looked like everybody else unless you looked at them through special sunglasses which the main character did. The HuffPo blogger claimed you needed special glasses to understand what Chuck & Larry was really about. Thus the special glasses connection.
Get it?
You don't need special
July 29, 2007 - 16:10 ET by drillanwrYou don't need special glasses to see the inner core of democrats ... Below is a picture of Hillary Clinton cleaning up after her philandering husband again :
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1362/9130_0004.jpg.html?path=gallery&path_key=0047577&seq=3
Notice how there is a striking likeness between, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Chris Dodd, and Chris Matthews to the person on the TV in this picture:
http://mst3k.booyaka.com/mstview.cgi?view=episodes/images/M01%20-%20This%20Island%20Earth/_M01-024_dr_.jpg
Coincidence? I think NOT!
Perhaps Mrs. Huffington
July 29, 2007 - 14:11 ET by fitzfongPerhaps Mrs. Huffington should have invested in some gay decoder glasses before she got married.
Was her gay-dar off, too?
July 30, 2007 - 08:32 ET by GalvanicI find it rather remarkable that GLAAD Director Joan Garry didn't see the "hidden gay" message as she was watching the film. She admits to hating the film at first, but came to appreciate its hilarity after she put on her "special gay decoder glasses." Whoa. As a homosexual, isn't she wearing those glasses all the time? I mean, GLAAD seems to be pretty astute at finding the homophobic messages in films; perhaps in those cases, they have their special gay decoder glasses on backwards.
And did the film's distributor err in not providing the special gay decoder glasses to audience members like the 3-D glasses of yesterday? It may cost this klunker a Best Picture Oscar.
Well, maybe the DVD sales in San Francisco and Fire Island will reduce the losses.
(duplicate entry erased0
July 29, 2007 - 14:30 ET by Galvanic(deleted)
(duplicate entry erased)
July 29, 2007 - 14:29 ET by Galvanic(deleted)
Dosn't anyone understand English anymore?
July 29, 2007 - 19:39 ET by Alfred J. LemireJoan Garry wrote: "Sandler has done something ingenuous" and "here's the ingenuous part." Ingenuous suggests something innocent and untrusting. Ingenious describes someone or something that cleverly created something new. The context suggests “ingenious.”
Schools apparently have abandoned instruction on the meaning and uses of words. People confuse "further" and "farther." Journalists err in the use of comparatives and superlatives and don't know when to use "less" or "fewer" or "any more" or "anymore." If people don't get basic instruction on the language in schools, do they learn basic facts of our political, religious, and cultural history? One doubts they do.
<li>
As for the gay references in the movie, I'll have to take your word. Watching an Adam Sandler movie qualifies as a Dirty Job, but I might get in the back row of a theater as the man performs in a movie if I were paid $15,000, no strings. Count me in for sure, for $100,000. I’ll wear sunglasses as I enter and sunglasses when I leave. And a fake beard.
Leftists and rose colored
July 29, 2007 - 19:13 ET by bigtimerLeftists and rose colored glasses go together like rubber and glue...no matter what the venue.
And to think, this guys
July 29, 2007 - 19:40 ET by BlazerAnd to think, this guys been wearing them for over thirty years now. Who knew?
http://www.mediacove.com/events/U_Mag/jpg/fashion/elton-john.jpg
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious. "
- Ben Kenobi on Liberals, and the MSM.
Perfect
July 29, 2007 - 19:44 ET by bigtimerPerfect Blaze!
LOL!
'bout says it all now doesn't it?
}}}----> Sandler - The real story
July 29, 2007 - 20:09 ET by Cool ArrowThe real story here is that Hollywood is afraid to portray gays in anything other than the extreme.
Comedies abound (gay caricatures only, please). Drama is about AIDS (Philadelphia), or that Spider Woman show.
Why? Because America really is not interested in accepting the gay lifestyle.
Really? "Afraid"? So there
July 30, 2007 - 15:48 ET by balboaReally? "Afraid"? So there are no gay characters in TV shows and movies other than caricatures?
Hollywood is attempting to
July 30, 2007 - 15:55 ET by TruthMongerHollywood is attempting to engineer acceptance of the gay lifestyle, and gay marriage - while also trying to extinguish the Christian lifestyle of course...
Busy busy with their immoral agenda:)!
I would say they are positive caricatures - if any caraicatures at all...
Jack on will and grace was a caricature - but it was positive...
I think you give Hollywood
July 30, 2007 - 16:00 ET by balboaI think you give Hollywood too much credit, thinking they have an actual, collective agenda.
Ummmm, yeah. Anyone who
July 29, 2007 - 20:11 ET by ckc1227Ummmm, yeah. Anyone who needs "special glasses" to see the "hidden meaning" in this movie is a candidate for special ed. To argue that this meaning is "hidden" is like arguing that the Washington Monument is hidden in DC.
Please, Stevie Wonder could see this "hidden meaning".
Saw it, and liked it. It wasn't a cinematic masterpiece, it was what it was: a simple comedy made up of lot's of juvenile humor.
}}}----> Sight unseen
July 29, 2007 - 20:28 ET by Cool ArrowWithout seeing the movie, I think it's probably not much more than the zany antics of a couple of guys having to cheat the system to get what they want, lots of tongue in cheek (did I say that?) homo humor and an underlying tone suggesting people should be allowed to cheat the system as long as they have the right intentions.
So, did I miss something?
"So, did I miss
July 29, 2007 - 20:37 ET by ckc1227"So, did I miss something?"
Nope, that pretty much sums it up.
ruined the movie
July 30, 2007 - 15:08 ET by LionKingThanks for ruining the movie.
One thing needs no decoding.
July 30, 2007 - 04:55 ET by sarcasmoOne thing needs no decoding. My prediction about the Simpsons movie came true, and it's currently in the process of kickin' ass Nelson-style on all other movies. I still have not seen it. I predict a long run of high numbers and (this is the part humor-impaired Simpsons-whiners of the left & right seemingly will never understand) even more useful-for-America media dominance for decades.
JMR
}}}----> Simpsons Movie
July 30, 2007 - 06:07 ET by Cool ArrowSeems logical to me the movie would do well. If audiences will go see "Chuck and Larry" just to enjoy an hour and a half of publicly sanctioned gay bashing, it should be no surprise the public will pay to laugh out loud at a movie chock full of ethnic stereotyping.
I saw the Simpsons movie
July 30, 2007 - 15:00 ET by balboaI saw the Simpsons movie this past weekend. Great stuff. Some great lines and moments, all the stuff you want from a Simpsons movie. Don't waste your time on this Sandler / James dud.
Siimpsons movie
July 30, 2007 - 15:06 ET by Dee BunkGlad to hear it's good. I've only seen the show a couple of times and often don't get the all the references that the rest of the world does. I'm hoping the movie can bring me up to speed.
Did they suddenly change the pension rules?
July 30, 2007 - 10:48 ET by Tom PaineThe premise of this movie seems to be that Kevin James’ character has to be in a sham gay marriage in order to have his kids receive his pension benefits. Since when do you have to be married (gay or otherwise) in order to name anyone you want to be the beneficiary of your pension?
Tom, A man's pension
July 30, 2007 - 15:03 ET by 4arrowTom,
A man's pension stops when his wife passes.
Maybe you are thinking of estate.
4arrow - that just for "protected" unions
July 30, 2007 - 15:12 ET by Dee Bunkand government employees. Everyone else gets to have have portable pensions.
Just don't buy a ticket.
July 30, 2007 - 14:55 ET by 4arrowJust don't buy a ticket. We do not anymore.
The problem remains that we have to live beside "yutes" whose characters have been formed by Hollywood nonsense.