Event ‘Milk Skimmed’ to Explore What the Film Was Missing

I couldn't agree more with the first poster.

No film will ever please everybody. How about a round table event called "GET OVER IT!"?

yawn.....our tax dollars at work

I saw the movie and thought it was interesting but not at all what it had been hyped up to be. The Martin-Luther-King-style rhetoric was over the top and disproportionate to Harvey Milk's actual accomplishments. The actors were all much more attractive than the real historical figures, exacerbating the body image issues that already exist in our community. And there were moments when seeing Sean Penn in the lead role struck me as a kind of minstrelsy. Not to mention that Milk's personal life was totally distorted and many of the intimate scenes took place in shadows and behind pieces of furniture.

@ Sam Borelli, Where does this article, or the linked website, say the purpose, of the roundtable, is to point out problems with the movie "Milk"? I read this article as: a reminiscence of Milk's legacy from a different point of view -- a point of view different than Mr. Gus Van Sant. If, by your own admission, the movie was cut short and the movie was not a documentary; then, what is wrong with people gathering to talk about Milk from their unique point of view? What is wrong with people adding details to the movie? How is talking about "Milk", from a lesbian's point of view, tearing apart the movie? Or -- on a scarier note -- are you angry because the article mentioned lesbians and people of color?

This is absurd. This was one movie about one man's story. Some of the key players at Milk's side were consulted and right alongside the filmmakers before and during filming. The filmmakers have spoken about decisions that they made to focus on certain areas in order to keep the film to an acceptable length. This was not a documentary. Furthermore, those that were also there and have a story to be told should shop their story for a film based on their experiences. Are we now going to tear apart something that needed to be made, a timely story that needed to be told to the next generation? It seems like many out there, including the Advocate, will now jump on the "what's wrong with this?" bandwaggon!

I wish I could attend this event. I hope they engage in other critiques of the film (which I thoroughly enjoyed and appreciated nonetheless). For example, I did not like the suggestion that Dan White was a closeted homosexual. I never heard this before. Yes, some gay-bashers, etc., are closeted homosexuals. But I believe, from everything I have read or heard, that Dan White was a plain old regular guy heterosexual who basically disliked gays, and who was envious of Milk, and who felt lost and defeated in the changing and ever-more-liberal and pro-gay San Francisco. A screwed up guy? Yes. But not a "sick self-hating homo." I hope the panelists will definitely bring to light information about the Harvey Milk era (including people who worked so hard on gay issues alongside Milk) during this program, and I hope I will be able to read a good write-up about it in The Advocate.