There was a reason I didn't put all my eggs in the "The
Stonewall movie may be more accurate than the trailer hints basket," but no one ever said it wasn't a fictionalized account. I had a feeling it was going this way when Roland Emmerich made a snide comment about people reviewing it based on the trailer, but then turned around and said: "It's definitely a film about Danny's story." (Yes, that's what people were complaining about, Roland!) Again, if you want to hear from the real people, watch a documentary.
Michael Musto
writes:
Speaking of our community being weird to itself: I saw just Stonewall and was amazed to find out that it was a fictional white guy—a real cutie, by the way—who started the whole legendary revolt while wrinkling his pretty brow and yelling: “Gay power!" How perfect for a movie whose most repeated soundtrack song is “A Whiter Shade of Pale!" Gosh, you learn something every day—like how our history can be twisted to sell a hokey plotline (albeit with some good scenes and ambience and wrapped in a welcome message about gays battling oppression).
The lead character’s throughline doesn’t ring true as he transforms from deer in the headlights to rabble-rousing activist, which results in the riot scenes failing to make an impact since you’re not fully invested in the people by that point. In fact, the screening crowd tittered in the subsequent scene, where cute Danny tells a pal, “I’m too mad to love anyone right now!” After the screening, SiriusXM host Michelangelo Signorile suggested that the film might come off better if they didn’t even say it had anything to do with Stonewall. “True,” I replied. “It should be called Monster Bar or Pieces!” Or maybe they should have saved their money and instead shopped the true story of Stonewall regulars Sylvia Rivera, Marsha P. Johnson, and Titus Montalvo to HBO.
More than anything, it doesn't sound like a good film so I think I will pass on this one.