The Gay Deceivers

No, it's not the most right-on of movies, but it could have been so much worse. Michael Greer fought very hard with the producers and directors to soften the worst edges of stereotyping in Malcolm, and I think he injected a teensy-weensy bit of realism. Greer, who also played Queenie in 'Fortune and Men's Eyes', was, rare for the time, an out gay actor and his honesty and his activism should be acknowledged. Given his talent, he sacrificed a much more lucrative Hollywood career because he wouldn't 'tone it down' (ie. pretend).

Incidentally, Keith Howes 'Broadcasting It' says that this was the first film ever to be turned down by the BBC on the grounds that it was offensive to homosexuals, but no more details than that. Has anyone heard of this, and do they have any idea of when the BBC became so solicitous of our feelings?

I'm nuts about films from the 60s and this was a pretty adequate comedy about being gay to get out of going to Vietnam. It is interesting to see how gays were being represented in the popular cinema during a time when homosexuality was still pretty underground. But for me it was interesting knowing that the producer-director team of this film also made ANGELS FROM HELL, one of my favorite biker films. Weird, huh?

Having watched this amateurish comedy recently, I was shocked at some of the other comments here. While "The Gay Deceivers" is as good an indication of how gays were portrayed in the late 60's (i.e. swishy, nellie queens and leather butches), it's no better than a curio - certainly not required viewing for anyone other than gay cinema completists.

There's very little here that's truly funny, since the direction and editing is so poor that basic comic timing goes out the window. Michael Greer has his first appearance as the queeny neighbor of the two hetero boys pretending to be gay to avoid the Draft. It became a typical role for him.

What's amazing is how long it took for Hollywood to graduate (even in part) from films like this, "Partners," and "A Different Story" to something approximating reality among gay people. And directors/writers still get it wrong more often than right.

When "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" came out in the summer of 2007, it jogged my memory about a movie called "The Gay Deceivers" that was out when I was in junior high and which I was too young to see. Netflix didn't own a copy, but evidently they keep track of who inquires on movies they don't have and send it out when they get it. So boom, "The Gay Deceivers" arrives by surprise in my mailbox six months later. Regarding the review headlined, "Offensive and Unfunny", I'm going to say just one thing, in my campiest voice, "Oh Mary, lighten up". (How dare they make a movie in 1969 that offends my 21st century sensitivities!) Yes, some of it is hard to watch, maybe for me especially. It was made about the time of my sexual awakening, and some of the stereotypes depicted underscored for me why I had grown up with so much internalized homophobia. But they were making a farce and all they had to work with was how gays were perceived at the time. It's a little too much to expect them to have transcended the thinking of the time in which it was filmed. But on the other hand, some of it is still laugh out loud funny. Especially the scene where Michael Greer makes breakfast. I laughed, then I turned to my partner of fifteen years and said, "I suppose as a gay man I ought to be offended, but it's just so silly!"

So two guys try to convince the army that they are gay to avoid being sent off to war. Of course, they decide they have to move in together, next door to the queeny landlord. Michael Greer should have received SOME award for this work. Lawrence Casey and Christopher Riordan were pretty much just hired to spend the movie with their shirts off. Kevin Coughlin and his big blue eyes do a great job in a very believe-able role. Watch out - that drag queen at the party is the butchest one in the flick. On the DVD from Dark Sky Films, there is a funny bonus interview with director Bruce Kessler. The big difference between this film and ones like "Chuck & Larry" or "Partners" is that this one treats the actual gays living in their natural habitat with a lot of respect, albeit with some stereotypes (the pink, the nudes, the ascots). I understand... at that time, that's how you knew who was gay and who was not. Fun for the most part. They spend so much time worrying about getting caught by their family, friends, or the army, that its a little more serious than it needs to be. Also some frontal female nudity and butt shots. Hats off to the actors for having the guts to make it.