01/10/2006
The story of Laurel Hester and Dane Wells is one that proves we are not all that divided. Hester is a lesbian dying of cancer who has been fighting with the Republican freeholders in Ocean County, New Jersey, so that her partner can receive her pension benefits once she has died. Dane Wells is a Bush Republican who found friendship with Hester and became a changed man and her strongest ally. Hopefully, the laws passed Monday will give Hester's partner Stacie Andree the right to inherit her pension.
Heath Ledger speaks to the Herald Sun about Larry Miller's pulling of Brokeback from his Utah megaplex, equating homophobia with racism: "I heard a while ago that West Virginia was going to ban it. But that's a state that was lynching people only 25 years ago, so that's to be expected. Personally, I don't think the movie is (controversial) but I think maybe the Mormons in Utah do. I think it's hilarious and very immature of a society. If two people are loving . . . I think we should be more concerned if two people express anger in love, than love."
Posted 1:31 PM EST by Andy in Elsewhere | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
I am glad Heath finally said something other than his normally ubiquitous statements.............
Posted by: Sean | Jan 10, 2006 2:00:16 PM
I think we expect straight people to fight our battles for us and to be perfect on our issues and to always say the correct thing.
Most of Heath's comments have been perfectly fine. This is one of the best.
Posted by: Donald | Jan 10, 2006 3:28:50 PM
I want him to win the Oscar so much, that I think anything controversial that he says (and some will think his comment about West Virginia controversial) may scupper his chances. I'm glad he said what he said, though, and agree with Donald's thoughts on Heath's previous comments.
Posted by: Darren | Jan 10, 2006 4:03:43 PM
I don't know any straight man who I expect to do that laundry list Donald. Seriously.
Posted by: gabe | Jan 10, 2006 4:09:48 PM
Many in our community expect perfection from straight people when addressing our issues. I was responding to Sean being glad Heath said something of substance.
I too would like him to win the Oscar but I think it will be Phillip Seymour Hoffman for Capote, which would also be fine with me.
Posted by: Donald | Jan 10, 2006 4:22:31 PM
I also think this is Phillip's award to lose. He was just way too good in Capote.
Heath is only 26 and his sure Oscar nomination will only catapult him higher the Hollywood food chain. He will also enjoy that all important fringe benefit of getting first dibs on better scripts.
PSH on the other hand is long overdue for an acting award. His body of work is amazing and let's face it, how often does an actor of his stature get offered lead roles that are of Oscar-caliber? Give the guy the Oscar already.
Posted by: gabe | Jan 10, 2006 7:12:04 PM
I just saw Jake comment on the situation on "Access Hollywood". He said "You shouldn’t judge something until you’ve experienced it. It’s unfortunate to take away that experience from people who might want to see it." To which the announcer said "Well said".
It was very well said. Right on Jake!
I have to agree with you Gabe that this is PSH's year. While Heath was brilliant, so was PSH and he has a brilliant body of work and deserves to be rewarded for that.
I do hope that both Heath and Jake are nominated for Oscars because they were both amazing in "Brokeback" and should be acknowledged.
Btw, Ang Lee was standing next to him as he made his statement.
Posted by: RS | Jan 10, 2006 8:12:14 PM
Heath Ledger on the possible Oscar Nom:
"It's bizarre," he says. "I'm obviously grateful and proud to be in a movie that's being well-received. But … I really find it hard to comprehend how you judge one performance against another, or one film against another, because ultimately we're all starting the race from different points and we're not ending at the same finish line … So how do you compete?"
From theage.com.au (http://tinyurl.com/dc4sq)
Posted by: Keith G | Jan 10, 2006 10:55:52 PM
Actually Mr Ledger sounds somewhat unclear in a segment of his statements to the Herald Sun.
Of course "West Virginia" was not going to ban his film. Private cinema owners made the choice to deny themselves the profit that the film would certainly bring- but tough for them.
Perhaps in Australia it is believed that a US state could ban a film.
Also his statement that "West Virginia" was lynching people 25 years ago.
West Virginia is a small border state with relatively few African-Americans.
Its history is less tarninshed with past lynchings than other states to its south.
http://www.nathanielturner.com/lynchingbystateandrace.htm
And Mr Ledger was talking as recently as 1981?
I only bring this up as the latter statement "If two people are loving . . . I think we should be more concerned if two people express anger in love, than love." was powerful enough that one wishes that the previous portion might have been more precise or perhaps even accurate.
Posted by: meh | Jan 11, 2006 1:07:57 AM
West Virginia's current senior US Senator Robert Byrd (Dem) was a leader of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) over half a century ago, for over ten years, when in his thirties, at the height of lynchings.
Posted by: HisHolynessDPope | Jan 11, 2006 2:04:23 AM
Hoffman has given many great performances, that should have received awards. However, although recognizing I'm in the minority, I feel his performance "as" such an idiosyncratic character as Capote who had almost cartoon like facial expressions, body language, and voice is something that any good "impressionist" could have done, just as they might imitate John Wayne or Jimmy Stewart. Ledger brought to three-dimensional life a character that previously only existed in print, and his was a much greater leap from his own personality [and previous roles] than Hoffman from Capote.
Posted by: Tagg | Jan 11, 2006 2:26:59 AM
Speaking of Robert Byrd, it was always a source of amusement for me that as an African American, I was awarded a Byrd scholarship upon graduation from high school.
ironic? retribution?
Posted by: tekay | Jan 11, 2006 4:56:07 PM
As a resident of West Virginia, I should probably be offended. I'm not. I have wanted to see this movie ever since I heard about it and was very disappointed when it didn't come to our cinema. I checked every Carmike Cinema in West Virginia and wasn't playing in those theatres either. I wouldn't be completely suprised if what Ledger was saying is true about it being banned, or at least complained about by conservative people. I was so upset it wasn't playing anywhere in the state. In fact, none of the other Best Picture Nominees were showed at the cinema either (at least the Meadowbrook Cinema) and that upset me too, especially when the show highly forgetable movies. If they banned BBM from WV, they should have banned a movie like Hostel (the worst movie I have ever wasted my money for) from the whole country.
Like I said, I wouldn't be too suprised if the heads of the WV cinemas got together and decided not to show it. I'm very open-minded, but a lot of people here are homophobic and close-minded (especially the teenage guys.)
As for the lynching, possibly happened 25 years ago in the southern incorperated parts of the state, but I live in the north central part and haven't heard about it occuring here for a long time.
I also go to the high school that Robert C. Byrd was named after and even though no one talks about it, he was, in fact a member of the Ku Klux Klan and supposedly gave up the beliefs of the uncivilized organization.
Posted by: Veronica | Mar 13, 2006 8:56:51 PM