This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

That's just it. It is a kiddie film. They were going for juvenile viewers of all ages, like myself, and adding homosexuality and sodomy would have killed the film's chances for a mainstream audience. As it was, I was disturbed by some of the scenes between Liotta and Dillon. And when Liotta runs Dillon through near the end, please don't try to tell me this wasn't a symbolic penetration scene, and exactly what the Beast (Stuart Wilson) was looking for.

There doesn't need to be an excess of homosexuality on the island. Ray Liotta's camp had a midget. Since the midget could not have protected himself from the other hardened convicts on the island he was forced to contribute in other ways. Remember, prison sex is not about the expression of a person's sexuality. It's about power. The midget was basically the camp b#tch. Think about it.

"Please do not think of me as a gay basher. It is my right to voice my opinion. If you say otherwise you are infringing upon my rights."
Freedom of speech doesn't come without consequences. It is my right to voice my opinion. If I want to call you a gay basher, that's my opinion. Not fact. Just an opinion based of the reasoning for your opinion.

Escapefrom Alcatraz? Did you even watch that movie. One of the sub plots was that big guy trying to make Clint his bitch. He even tried to rape him in the shower room.
Advocatus Dei.

don't want to burst your bubble, but check papillon again - it has gay rape in it.
and why are you so threatened by other people's sexual preferences? No one's asking you to participate - or to watch.

lmao at some of the critical analysis presented in this thread

Merci "canedust" !!!
STUK
**

This is a prison movie. You can't do a prison movie without homosexuality.
Birdman of Alcatraz, Fortress, Papillion and Escape from Alcatraz.
http://z11.invisionfree.com/No_Holds_Barred/index.php?act=idx
Home of Team DDBZJFMSRFJ

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.

yes I noticed that once you pointed it out.

This message has been deleted.

There was also a complete lack of hetrosexuality and masturbation. I was shocked and appalled. How dare they not bring up sex. That's the only reason I watched this futuristic action movie.
-What are you gonna see?
-Whatever looks good and starts soon.

Lord knows that if the film had been made today (2007) there would have been some gay interludes, but in 1994 the aids epidemic was raging and the already jam-packed social issues agenda of the movie may not have had enough room for both of those sadly inseperable issues.
Here also is perhaps one of the last relics of the pre-political correctness entertainment agenda when things like realistic portrayals of social dynamics were done away with lest the guys in the audience start to feel all queasy. Nowadays not only would there be an abundance of gay content, but Robbins would have been a black woman who had come across some evil plot to deny global warming.

Why does that threaten you so much?
I've seen Gay movies with more straight sex shown than Gay sex in them (example: Everyone). I prefer not to see naked breasts, but I don't get upset about them!

dude- nobody wants to see that $h!t!!!

This is a prison movie. You can't do a prison movie without homosexuality
People defecate and urinate. You can't do a movie without that. And anyone who ever has has failed.
http://tinyurl.com/cjsy86c

This message has been deleted.

Not for fundamentalist christians, but (at a guess) a male, action loving, assumed to be heterosexual target audience, so it's pretty clear it wouldn't go beyond innuendos that could be overlooked or shrugged off as a joke, unless one wanted to see them.

"Just because it involves a prison environment (where we all know/assume that gay sex and rape goes on), doesn't mean that this film needs to broach the subject. That would likely alienate people more than it would attract or enthuse."
I don't think this movie was made for fundamentalist christians.
"Neonlicht, schimmandes Neonlicht
Und wenn die Nacht anbricht, ist diese Stadt auslicht"

Are you lot being serious here? Only I have to ask.
It's a cheaply made, run-of-the-mill action film.
Just because it involves a prison environment (where we all know/assume that gay sex and rape goes on), doesn't mean that this film needs to broach the subject. That would likely alienate people more than it would attract or enthuse.
Plus the fact it was made in the early 90's. Do you really think that an easy watch, cheap thrill film really needs to address this issue?
I liked this film for what it is. I don't think it should be looked into too deeply, because i'm sure the makers never intended it to be.
I think maybe the point is being over-looked. This film is trying to address the battle of good versus evil, the choice of ethics, and the decisions of each individual no matter what the circumstances.
As oppossed to trying to strike fear into the audience using every cheap trick in the book, by including everything little thing that the majority of men are fearful of.
Also i think it's worth mentioning, that the guys who wrote, produced and directed this film would probably find it quite amusing that anyone would bother looking any deeper into this film than is obviously intended.
Now i must go to bed because i'm drunk and talking tosh and have written far too much on a thread that relates to a very simply constructed film.
Thank you and good night.

This is a prison movie. You can't do a prison movie without homosexuality.
"Neonlicht, schimmandes Neonlicht
Und wenn die Nacht anbricht, ist diese Stadt auslicht"