VALUTAZIONE IMDb
7,5/10
1785
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaAn indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the U.S.An indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the U.S.An indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the U.S.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 5 candidature totali
James C. Hormel
- Self - First Openly Gay US Ambassador
- (as Jim Hormel)
Recensioni in evidenza
Outing somebody,s sexual preferences is a complex thing. People are certainly entitled to privacy, even when they are public figures. The trouble starts when people spew hatred for gay people, vote against their basic rights, and in a same time have gay relationships out of public eye. There is an exception to the privacy rule. When you have a man who testifies about sickness of gay people, tries to cure them from their "perversity" and then gets caught with a young gay male escort, he has it coming. " Outrage" is a very good documentary. It lets the subjects of the story tell us all we need to hear. It doesn't lecture or pressure us , it just tells it like it is.
I walked into this film with quite a bit of ambivalence on "outting" anyone regarding their sexual orientation. True, it would be nice to live in a world where that isn't or shouldn't be an issue.
The phenomenon of "interalized self-hatred" is something I was introduced to in the early 1990's. It may not be the reason someone--in particular a closeted homosexual--takes a position on a particular political issue, yet this film lines up a number of politicians and people who work in Washington's legislative community and lays out quite convincingly the argument that bigotry indeed is at work in our Nation's capitol, and the suppression of a group of people's rights is achieved through collusion with people who cannot or will not be honest with themselves or the people they represent.
Does exposing these individuals accomplish anything other than the satisfaction of calling a spade a spade? This film makes the case that, yes, in more than a few cases it is worthwhile.
A superb example of the art of film-making, together with passionate testimony from people on one side of a fence that often aren't covered in the mainstream press, this is one of the better documentaries of the decade. I was a convert by the time I walked out of this film.
The phenomenon of "interalized self-hatred" is something I was introduced to in the early 1990's. It may not be the reason someone--in particular a closeted homosexual--takes a position on a particular political issue, yet this film lines up a number of politicians and people who work in Washington's legislative community and lays out quite convincingly the argument that bigotry indeed is at work in our Nation's capitol, and the suppression of a group of people's rights is achieved through collusion with people who cannot or will not be honest with themselves or the people they represent.
Does exposing these individuals accomplish anything other than the satisfaction of calling a spade a spade? This film makes the case that, yes, in more than a few cases it is worthwhile.
A superb example of the art of film-making, together with passionate testimony from people on one side of a fence that often aren't covered in the mainstream press, this is one of the better documentaries of the decade. I was a convert by the time I walked out of this film.
Here is a much better logistical argument.
1.The government is involved in marriage.
2.All adult citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under law.
3.Therefore, the government has two choices.
A.Not be involved with marriage at all
-OR-
B.Treat all adult citizens equally
This whole debate is not complicated guys. So if you do not like the idea of gay marriage get used to it, because the authors of the constitution laid down the groundwork for this centuries ago.
p.s. as for your "slippery slope" theory about people one day marrying their pets, it should first be noted that a pet does not have a choice in the matter so it would not be able to be defined as marriage. The pet would not even know that it had been married. In other words, that part of your comments is laughable, and can be construed as very rude. Very similar to a comment like this, "I mean, why would anyone be religious, thats just left over tradition from cavemen." Don't be inconsiderate of others please.
1.The government is involved in marriage.
2.All adult citizens of the United States are guaranteed equal protection under law.
3.Therefore, the government has two choices.
A.Not be involved with marriage at all
-OR-
B.Treat all adult citizens equally
This whole debate is not complicated guys. So if you do not like the idea of gay marriage get used to it, because the authors of the constitution laid down the groundwork for this centuries ago.
p.s. as for your "slippery slope" theory about people one day marrying their pets, it should first be noted that a pet does not have a choice in the matter so it would not be able to be defined as marriage. The pet would not even know that it had been married. In other words, that part of your comments is laughable, and can be construed as very rude. Very similar to a comment like this, "I mean, why would anyone be religious, thats just left over tradition from cavemen." Don't be inconsiderate of others please.
Just watched "Outrage" and I must say that it's a very revealing and interesting doc. As many know politicians are crooks, and they lie and cheat and get involved in scandal mostly bribes and sexual affairs. However one secret that has been hidden which of late is becoming more and more the scandal norm in D.C. and of elected officials all across the land, is that many are closeted homosexuals. Who in engage in affairs and sexual encounters with their own gender. You must stand up and cheer for director Kirby Dick who you can tell as you watch really researched this topic well and was well informed as he interviewed many top sources who knew about the secret lives and sexual scandals of many closeted politicians.
Interviews come from many independent internet people and off beat newspaper reporters who have connections to the political world and have even personally seen many of these closeted politicians at gay spots and been told by others of their activities. As gay journalists Andrew Sullivan even gives his take. Also well displayed is the most well known cases beginning with Idaho senator Larry Craig who was caught by an undercover cop in a bathroom stall at a Minnesota airport asking for sex. What's even more shocking is even after this we see in interviews that Craig will not own up and say that he is gay. As shown during his segments and something that is revealing and hurts gay people the most is it shows along with Craig he and all other outed gay politicians continue to vote no and against gay rights bills time after time. As it shows many other lesser known congressman who were found to be gay vote no on gay rights bills.
As mentioned in the film from many gays that are fighting for rights they state that this voting no hurts the community. As those in power will not own up to their own faults and guilt of being gay as it hurts deep down inside so therefore their power of voting no defeats the hurt they feel as it's better to keep it inside. As the film states those with power can hide their homosexuality with no problem take the case of former New York mayor Ed Koch who had so much power that he banned his ex lover from the city! And the historians of literature and film give their history take as Tony Kushner showed with his "Angels in America" that this underworld of gay life in politicians from the right wing dates back many years as mentioned the most notable closeted figure was right wing attorney Roy Cohn. It even mentions many friends and staff members of both the Reagan and W. Bush administration were gays.
It showcases how politicians work around their hidden homosexuality but yet to stay in the spotlight and to look more acceptable for the right wing they will even do a marriage of convenience. Take the case of Florida republican governor Charlie Crist who married just to look more acceptable for the right wing and Republican voters. Yet still Dick shows an honorable and acceptable side when openly gay Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank talks telling viewers for years that he's been open about his homosexuality and that he feels better for it. And most touching is the words of ex New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey who said it right he was living a lie as he was married to an attractive and elegant looking lady named Dana but inside no matter how hard he tried to hide it he was gay. And coming out and opening up made him feel better and it was a justice feel for all.
Overall "Outrage" is a doc to watch it's interesting and revealing you feel anger at the same time a big thumbs up for Kirby Dick who's interviews and resources have exposed many and elaborated on many that were already lit up as more shocking info was told. Even though it's theme is homosexuality it still proves that those in power especially politicians abuse power and go to any means to hide their deepest darkest secrets. And still they feel as if though their actions are above the law. Clearly it's a film that showcases hypocrisy at it's best. As in the docs end as many gays would agree ex San Francisco supervisor and slain gay hero Harvey Milk said it best it would be best if all gays open up to the truth not only for themselves but to everyone. As clearly that's the message these closeted politicians should take it would be a better world for them and everyone else.
Interviews come from many independent internet people and off beat newspaper reporters who have connections to the political world and have even personally seen many of these closeted politicians at gay spots and been told by others of their activities. As gay journalists Andrew Sullivan even gives his take. Also well displayed is the most well known cases beginning with Idaho senator Larry Craig who was caught by an undercover cop in a bathroom stall at a Minnesota airport asking for sex. What's even more shocking is even after this we see in interviews that Craig will not own up and say that he is gay. As shown during his segments and something that is revealing and hurts gay people the most is it shows along with Craig he and all other outed gay politicians continue to vote no and against gay rights bills time after time. As it shows many other lesser known congressman who were found to be gay vote no on gay rights bills.
As mentioned in the film from many gays that are fighting for rights they state that this voting no hurts the community. As those in power will not own up to their own faults and guilt of being gay as it hurts deep down inside so therefore their power of voting no defeats the hurt they feel as it's better to keep it inside. As the film states those with power can hide their homosexuality with no problem take the case of former New York mayor Ed Koch who had so much power that he banned his ex lover from the city! And the historians of literature and film give their history take as Tony Kushner showed with his "Angels in America" that this underworld of gay life in politicians from the right wing dates back many years as mentioned the most notable closeted figure was right wing attorney Roy Cohn. It even mentions many friends and staff members of both the Reagan and W. Bush administration were gays.
It showcases how politicians work around their hidden homosexuality but yet to stay in the spotlight and to look more acceptable for the right wing they will even do a marriage of convenience. Take the case of Florida republican governor Charlie Crist who married just to look more acceptable for the right wing and Republican voters. Yet still Dick shows an honorable and acceptable side when openly gay Massachusetts congressman Barney Frank talks telling viewers for years that he's been open about his homosexuality and that he feels better for it. And most touching is the words of ex New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey who said it right he was living a lie as he was married to an attractive and elegant looking lady named Dana but inside no matter how hard he tried to hide it he was gay. And coming out and opening up made him feel better and it was a justice feel for all.
Overall "Outrage" is a doc to watch it's interesting and revealing you feel anger at the same time a big thumbs up for Kirby Dick who's interviews and resources have exposed many and elaborated on many that were already lit up as more shocking info was told. Even though it's theme is homosexuality it still proves that those in power especially politicians abuse power and go to any means to hide their deepest darkest secrets. And still they feel as if though their actions are above the law. Clearly it's a film that showcases hypocrisy at it's best. As in the docs end as many gays would agree ex San Francisco supervisor and slain gay hero Harvey Milk said it best it would be best if all gays open up to the truth not only for themselves but to everyone. As clearly that's the message these closeted politicians should take it would be a better world for them and everyone else.
An indictment of closeted politicians who lobby for anti-gay legislation in the United States.
I found something missing here, though I am not sure what. I feel like there was some muckraking going on, but the film never completely raked the muck -- there was still something more they could have done. For one thing, they never really touched the religion connection -- perhaps a gay man is in the closet to try to appease what he sees as God's wishes?
Most interesting is viewing the 2009 film from a 2013 vantage point. Here we have the Republicans pushing for a same-sex marriage ban through a federal amendment. Four years later, we have same-sex marriage spreading to more states and even Rush Limbaugh saying the conservatives have lost the issue. What was seemingly impossible a decade ago is almost common sense now. And what this film shows is a step in that path we have taken as a country.
I found something missing here, though I am not sure what. I feel like there was some muckraking going on, but the film never completely raked the muck -- there was still something more they could have done. For one thing, they never really touched the religion connection -- perhaps a gay man is in the closet to try to appease what he sees as God's wishes?
Most interesting is viewing the 2009 film from a 2013 vantage point. Here we have the Republicans pushing for a same-sex marriage ban through a federal amendment. Four years later, we have same-sex marriage spreading to more states and even Rush Limbaugh saying the conservatives have lost the issue. What was seemingly impossible a decade ago is almost common sense now. And what this film shows is a step in that path we have taken as a country.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizDina Matos McGreevey made available to the filmmakers the home movie footage of her wedding to James McGreevey.
- ConnessioniReferenced in Film Junk Podcast: Episode 240: Where The Wild Things Are (2009)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Outrage?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- The Glass Closet
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 287.198 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 32.589 USD
- 10 mag 2009
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 287.198 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione
- 1h 30min(90 min)
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti