Thanks!
I just discovered this thread. And like it and I will find it more and more interesting!!
Even if it was true that Nash did not pay $ firstly for his first son's welfare, still he is human... (straights and others act like that too unfortunately) and everything needs to be said and found out, I feel yet!
Coming back to this thread headline: Rewriting Homosexual Biographies in Film, I find that very interesting and may it continue!
Regarding this title, you have mentioned (by a critic...): Yet sadly, because the film has not been judged a success, and because it did not set the box office alight, there is a high probability that these failures will be attributed to its frankness regarding Alexander's sexuality, and thus used as reasons for Hollywood not to green light future big budget epics that involve such a depiction. Thus could it be that those who extolled Alexander for its daring representation were premature in their praises...
....
To that, may I say that this Alexander film would probably or possibly been better to make $ if it had shown Alexander the Great as an gay or bi man!! Then, it would have made maybe more than 200 millions bucks the Brokeback Mountain movie did?? Likely so, I feel since I always read that Alexander was gay!! So, why now such greek lawyers against that - is it because Greece is now becoming muslim and thus anti-gay??
....
Concerning Certainly one might expect some agreement on this point from writer Paula Martinac, who suggested it was a good thing that A Beautiful Mind did not portray John Nash as a homosexual; because his eventual marriage would be seen as making a comment on the (non-)viability of homosexuality.
.........
To this may I reply, is that so too with the Brokeback Mountain film: (non-)vialibity of homosexuality?
Since some think that even the two main charators (Ennis ansd Jack) are straights??
.....
Hugs!!