Is it okay yet to be queer - as a character in a film, or as a queer actor in real life - in Hollywood, or in Asia?

[stevenkesslar]

So I'm starting this thread to put a positive spin on where we are in 2023.  There are three threads that start with negatives - Spacey's court verdict, an Asian boy band predator, and an overall discussion about "wokeness" in films and plays.  Tangentially, we could throw in Bernstein and Bradley Cooper as a ridiculous example of "nose-baiting," which I guess is kinda like "queer-baiting."  🤔

So this will be a long rambling think piece.  But I'll summarize my two main points. 

First, I'm delighted that we have broader, better, and more positive representation of queers in films than ever before.  I'll use Red White & Royal Blue, Heartstoppers, and Uncoupled as examples.  I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein to make a few points, too. 

Second, while it's easier to be a Gay character in a film, it seems like we still have a mess on our hands in terms of whether it's actually okay to be a Gay or Bi actor.  At one extreme, the concept of "queer-baiting" suggests everyone should come out, even by force, and mostly or only play roles that match their real life sexual orientation.  In real life, Kit O'Connor was forced out, with this idea used as an excuse for cruelty.  TZP is being outed right now, all over the world.  Not for queer-baiting, but for being queer.  But what that means is fans are collecting and commenting on things he posted on social media for about a decade.  I would not call it cruel.  But I would call it a mess.  Meanwhile, we have what I'll call the Luke Macfarlane standard.  Which is "just be honest about who you are."  That seems to work these days.

That's one of my favorite clips from one of my favorite LGBTQ films, The Celluloid Closet.  So I'll use it to do a compare and contrast between three time periods over a quarter century apart:  1962, 1995, and today.

When The Celluloid Closet came out in 1995, it was itself a sign that it was just becoming okay to talk about how queers are portrayed on film.  I'm a fan of Lillian Hellman.  But I agree with MacLaine.  They had no idea what they were doing.  They were totally unaware.  Had they been lesbians, in real life, they almost certainly would have been more aware.  And they almost certainly never would have been cast, or had successful careers.  MacLaine is being a bit hard on herself, and her character.  What was one supposed to do in 1962, when most people still thought being a lesbian actually was a disease?

The spate of new Gay films I named, all rom coms or love stories, suggest that we really have learned a lot about representation of queers in film since 1995.  There's a nice thread on Company Of Men of posters' favorite LGBTQ films.  Almost all of them were made after The Celluloid Closet.  This is why.

I love both Heartstoppers and RWRB.  I've read the criticisms of RWRB.  That it's a mediocre Hallmark movie, based on fan fiction that reads like Marvel dialogue.  But I think the book and film are so successful because they summarize and dramatize decades of learned LGBTQ wisdom.  I'll single out one line that I've seen criticized repeatedly as Marvelesque:  "Starting today I shall no longer be the prince of shame and secrets."  That line, and much of the movie, could have been written as a direct response to The Children's Hour.  Finally, we have Gay adults, in Uncoupled, and a Gay and Bi teen, in Heartstoppers, and a Gay prince and Bi First Son, in RWRB, who are willing to fight for their queer love.  No wonder the world loves it.

I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein.  One person who posts here commented that it's one of the saddest movies he ever saw.  I agree that it is sad.  But I also see it as hopeful.  I loved it.  It is significant that it was the most successful LGBTQ movie ever in Taiwan.  And the most successful movie of 2020 in Taiwan, period.  I thought both the movie and its success was a recognition of how growing up in a culture like the one portrayed in The Children's Hour makes it challenging, but not impossible, to live a happy queer life with a partner.  The other Asian movie I finally saw this year that I'd compare it to is Bishonen, from Hong Kong in 1999.  It did prove you could cast gorgeous young Straight ABC actors, who would become friends in real life and have very successful careers.  But the film was a flop.  And like The Children's Hour it carried the message that these queer romances never end well.  These are two examples of good LGBTQ cinema that makes it very easy to understand why audiences, especially young audiences, love the idea that we really can have queer fairy tales now.  Where boy meets boy and does live happily ever after.

In terms of whether boy actor can meet boy and fall in love in real life, I feel like we are at about 1995.  Meaning we are just starting to be able to talk about it.  In that TIME article I hyperlinked, Your Name Director Patrick Liu talked about using a trumpet as a symbol of "a sound quality of wanting to say something, but not being able to get it out."  That seems to be where we still are.   One anecdotal proof of concept is Kevin Spacey himself.  He won his first Oscar right around when The Celluloid Closet came out.  I don't blame him for prioritizing privacy, and his career.  We know how Don't Ask, Don't Tell turned out in that era.  So you can take that as an indicator that it was better for him not to tell the world he was Gay at that time.

Kit O'Connor, 18, did not want to come out as Bisexual.  He did mostly thanks to the cruelty of Twitter, in his own words.  But taken to its extreme, "queer-baiting" means any actor, even a teen, should be required to declare his sexuality.  Then we know whether it matches the character he plays.  It's ridiculous.

Polo Marin, Mexico's most popular Gay actor, was outed twice in his mid-20's.  What he said in this interview captured some important nuances:

Quote

“I was already talking about doing it [coming out] with my bosses and my producers, because it was something that I did want to do for younger Polo, because I never had that example in my youth. I wanted to be that person for someone else. But I was not ready, because I was really scared that I would never work again in Mexico.”

Then there is Luke MacFarlane, who along with a lot of other Gay actors - like much of the cast of Uncoupled - is setting what I view as the gold standard.

Quote

“Bros” actor Luke Macfarlane was more scared of lying about his sexuality than coming out.

“I think so many of the people I saw were tortured and ruined by the lies that they had to tell,” Macfarlane — who came out in 2008 — tells us. “Hollywood is very important, work is very important but I think being honest is much more important.”

There's also the argument that, essentially, fans should not be fans.  Or even human.  We have no right to know anything about these people.  One really good response I read from some actor to some question once was, "I like to keep my private life private."  That's fair. 

That said, what both Marin and Macfarlane capture is that this does not happen in isolation.  And it is a two way street.  Marin wanted to be a role model for others.  And now he is.  Macfarlane made a pragmatic decision that he could afford to be honest to his fans.  First, there's absolutely zero evidence that fans are going to stop acting like fans just because you are Gay.  Second, he calculated he could be honest because his fans would love him and respect him for who he is.  He was right.  Plus, being honest is always easier.

Out of curiosity, I Googled to see who the most private celebrities in the world are.  I came up with this list.  I think it is telling.  If these are the most private celebrities in the world, we know a hell of a lot about them.  Like their spouses, whether they have kids, their divorces.  So if the idea is that fans are evil for wanting to know these things, good luck with that. 

I'll single out Matt Damon.  Like MacFarlane, he seems to be a wise guy who figured out how to get ahead of the curve.  Several friends have told me the story about how Damon is the kind of down to earth guy who would meet his wife in a hotel bar, where she was bartending.  He is not so private that he didn't share with the world that his wife helped him through a period of depression.  It makes perfect sense that celebrities who value privacy for their family try to manage it by curating what their fans get to know.  I think they are wise. 

On the other hand, Harry Styles has proved you can do very well by essentially saying, I could care less what people say about me or my sexuality.  He said there is going to be a set of narratives, anyway.  And he feels no need to control or shape them.  Although I suspect Harry can say that because it actually helps shape the Harry Styles mystique.  It still means that his fans know he is dating Olivia Wilde, who wisely calls Harry's fans "kind."

And now Taylor Zakhar Perez is in the global hot seat.  Which is more proof that we're now better at portraying queers in film than we are at knowing how to talk about queer actors in real life. 

It is easy enough to blame TZP for about a decade's worth of queerish content he posted on social media.  It is also easy enough to blame fans (or not fans) for caring about queerish content he posted on social media.  I don't feel either are very fair to TZP, or his fans.  But it does prove that if you are a nobody who becomes a big somebody on social media, keeping your private life private is next to impossible.  So, like Damon or MacFarlane, it probably makes sense to think that through as early as you can.

On Company Of Men I have raved repeatedly about how Galitzine finally came out as Straight in an interview with a Gay reporter at Variety when RWRB opened.  It's funny that some fans on social media still think it's a ruse, and he didn't really say it or mean it.  Fans will always be fans.  I'm guessing that Galitzine and RWRB Director Matthew Lopez had to have talked about that interview.  Galitzine kind of put Lopez on the hook by saying he wanted to discuss this with the openly Gay director right out of the gate, before he was cast.  I view the interview as an honest and wise way to get ahead of any possible queer-baiting or outing adventures regarding Galitzine and RWRB.  It is too much to hope that it will permanently end queer-baiting, and more cruel attacks on actors like Kit O'Connor.  But it is a big step in the right direction.

Even though RWRB was brilliantly scripted as a movie, and there seems to have been a script to undermine any possible queer-baiting backlash in real life, there is no apparent script for dealing with the fact that one of the two lead actors is Gay, or Bi, and married to a man.  TZP could have gone to Variety and talked about being a queer actor in a queer movie.  If these guys are as smart as I think they are, it suggests maybe there is a script.  Like Harry Styles, TZP may have decided he is fine with fans developing any narrative they want.  For now, at least.  Fans are already deep into speculation about whether he shares his husband's somewhat more conservative political beliefs.  That's a good reason to value privacy these days!

I do hope this results in a lot more behind the scenes reflection on how Hollywood can do better.  We now have lots of examples of queer actors who were outed.  So it makes perfect sense that in the future queer actors should factor in that if they get their wish, and are wildly successful, they may not have a choice.

The concept that curious fans should stop being curious fans is ridiculous.  This is fun for me in part because it so NOT me.  When I watched My Policeman with a Gay friend recently, he actually had to explain to me who Harry Styles is.  I'd never heard of him.  I skipped Kissing Booth 2 because I could care less about TZP, but wanted to know how the cheesy story in Kissing Booth 1 ended.  Now I've been following gossip websites I've never heard of, and reading articles in magazines I never read, to see how we got to TZP being outed.

So I'll point to one example of an article that is kind of innocuous, but also a perfect example of the problem.  Right when Kissing Booth 2 was being released, TZP was interviewed by Glamour. Here's a few snippets:

Quote

Are you single?

I’m not dating anyone.

Would you ever date a fan?

You know, that’s a good question. Hmm. Like, I’m a fan of Joey [King] and wish that she would date me, you know what I mean? [Laughs.] 

First of all, let's stop pretending that magazines like Glamour, or almost any other magazine or website in the world, are going to stop asking questions like that.  So sexuality is on the table.  Because they know that's what fans want to know. 

None of those answers are dishonest.  But they are somewhat misleading, and a bit transparent.  A few months later, if you Google it, there are all these articles in which TZP says he is not dating Joey King, who is a friend.  And he wonders where fans even got that idea.  Geez, who knows?  😉   A few people in these 100+ page "outing" discussions on TZP have speculated that Galitzine, having more experience, is more media savvy.  That may be true.  Glamour is clearly not doing upcoming queer actors any favors by asking these questions.  I'm guessing TZP might have been thinking, "I could tell you.  But then I'd have to kill my career."

I'd be fine if we all just forgot about queer-baiting and instead focused on how the entertainment industry can help the LGBTQ actors who are starting to break through to just be who they are.  We know Hollywood could exist for most of its history without outing queer actors.  The old solution was they had to lie and be something they were not.  I'm fine with the new solution being silence.  At least for some people, for some time.  If queer actors like Macfarlane want to tell the world they're Gay, and married to a guy, great.  My bias is I'd rather they all come out.  But if they don't want to, edit the question out of the interview.  It's clear that a lot of this is discussed with directors and publicists in private.  At least with some actors.  So change the script.

That said, now that TZP has gotten his wish, after what sounds like a decade or so of endless auditions, I'm guessing 99 % of the world will overlook these trivial things.  If it makes anyone look bad, it should be the industry that insists on pigeonholing sex symbols into stereotypes.

I have no idea what a better solution is for the awkwardness of being queer but not being ready to come out.  The good news to me is that the increasingly viable long term solution is what Macfarlane did in 2008.  Be honest.  It did not end his career.  He actually says it has helped his career.  I hope he is right.

 

[PeterRS]

Wow! There is so much in that post I do not know where to start with a response. Unfortunately, I have never heard of most of those individuals and movies you mention!

That aside, in principle it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if a gay part in a movie is played by a gay or a straight man. I see no reason why we should know. We are watching a movie, not a gay man acting in a movie. The case of Bernstein's nose is not quite the same. I don't care that the actor is straight when Bernstein was, as his wife acknowledged in a letter soon after their marriage, "a homosexual and will never change." The nose was an attempt to make Cooper look more like Bernstein, which to me it doesn't!

Going way back in time, were average (perhaps all) movie goers aware that matinee idol Rock Hudson was an out-and-out gay when away from the silver screen? Of course not, because these  were the times he lived in. Moving over to the general entertainment business, we can turn the quesion on its head. The highest paid entertainer in Las Vegas history for many years was Liberace. He did a lot to hide his status as a gay man, even suing and winning a law suit against a UK newspaper by telling lies. Yet those in his audiences were mostly middle-aged ladies who, if they did not know, surely all guessed that he was not straight. Did that affect his popularity? It probably helped it! 

Yet not many years earlier, the gay actor, singer, playwright, and general man of so many talents, Noel Coward, had told his biographer that he did not want to be known as gay - even though like Liberace he often seemed more gay than many gay men. His reason? He believed that most of the middle-aged ladies who would come in buses to see him in matinees - essential to the profitability of many plays in London at the time - would be put off if their suspicions were found to be true. This was the actor who had had a 20-year affair with a member of Britain's Royal Family, Prince George the Duke of Kent, the fourth son of King George V. George had started one letter, "Dearest, darling Noel." The government and society of the day were determined that no word of the relationship leaked out - and not only because under UK law at the time it was an offence to be gay. After George's death during WW2, Churchill himself authorised a break-in of Coward's home to steal the letters between the two men.

One of Coward's many quips concerned two other in the closet  UK actors, one gay and one very bisexual. With a friend he was crossing London's Leicester Square in the 1950s and noticed the cinema was showing a movie billed as Dirk Bogarde and Michael Redgrave in THE SEA SHALL NOT HAVE THEM. "Why ever not?" said Coward. "Everyone else has!"

2 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein.  One person who posts here commented that it's one of the saddest movies he ever saw.  I agree that it is sad.  But I also see it as hopeful.  I loved it.  It is significant that it was the most successful LGBTQ movie ever in Taiwan.  And the most successful movie of 2020 in Taiwan, period.  I thought both the movie and its success was a recognition of how growing up in a culture like the one portrayed in The Children's Hour makes it challenging, but not impossible, to live a happy queer life with a partner.  The other Asian movie I finally saw this year that I'd compare it to is Bishonen, from Hong Kong in 1999.  It did prove you could cast gorgeous young Straight ABC actors, who would become friends in real life and have very successful careers.  But the film was a flop.

You mention Asian movies. Given the cultures in Asian countries, the lack of gay-themed movies is understandable. I have seen neither of those you list, but am surprised that the movie made from Taiwan's most famous book about gay men Crystal Boys published in 1983 is not mentioned. This was penned during martial law at a time when there were no gay venues in Taiwan. It concerns a group of boys who sell themselves by being available in the famous New Park. This was made into a movie in 2003 and also a popular tv series. It's 20 one-hour episodes are avaiable on youtube. Now, of course, Taiwan has become arguably the most open country in Asia for the gay community. So it is hardly surprising that Your Name Engraved Herein was such a success. I find it interesting that it is set in 1987, the year when martial law was finally ended and slowly a gay scene began to emerge.

In some ways, Hong Kong cinema was further ahead than Taiwan. Arguably Hong Kong's best-known gay-themed movie is the gritty and very gay 1997 movie Happy Together starring gay Leslie Cheung and straight Leung Chiu-wai as a gay couple who travel to Brazil to try and reignite their relationship. It was nominated for the Palme d'Or in Cannes and its director Wong Kar-wai won the prize as Best Director. It also received many accolades at Film Festivals. In 2016 it was ranked the 3rd greatest LGBT movie of all time by the British Film Institute.

Leslie Cheung finally came out as gay during a long run of concerts in Hong Kong in 1997 when he stated he had been in a relationship with an old schoolfriend for about 20 years whom he called "the love of my life". It had absolutely no effect on his fan base - other perhaps than to increase it. His earlier gay-themed movie hit Farewell My Concubine was also a major success. It was the first Chinese language movie to win the Cannes Palme d'Or and won the Golden Globe as Best Foreign Film. That Leslie died by suicide aged only 46 was tragic. But I suggest the knowledge of his being gay was not merely a result of his being effectively a mega-star. It was a realisation among his generally young audiences that gay/straight stereotypes were gradually changing.

Going back to your main theme, I am totally against outing anyone. As you suggest, the popular media will always want to know about 'stars' lives and who they are sleeping with. That's their business. If a gay man says "I have dated girls but am not ready to marry" it will do less harm to his career than "fuck off, it's none of your business."  Who are we to say he is being unfair to other, perhaps younger and struggling LGBTQ actors? Acting is a dog eat dog profession. Everyone knows that. If that was not the case, there would likely have been no Bill Cosby, no Harvey Weinstein, no Kevin Spacey and no Johnny Kitagawa Japanese movie mogul raping Japanese boys for almost 50 years (see the thread  Japan's Boy Band 'King' a Serial Sexual Predator under Theatre, Movies, Art and Literature).

We live in an increasingly unfair world. Those who fall into the LGBTQ category have to fight just like everyone else. We need understanding. We should not expect nor ask for favours.

[stevenkesslar]

34 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

That aside, in principle it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if a gay part in a movie is played by a gay or a straight man.

 

34 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

Yet not many years earlier, the gay actor, singer, playwright, and general man of so many talents, Noel Coward, had told his biographer that he did not want to be known as gay

First, thanks for recommending Happy Together.  I've heard of it, and knew it has great IMDB scores.   It's on my list of films to watch.

Second, you may have predicted Nicholas Galitzine's next Gay role - LOL.  He's doing Mary & (bi) George now.  Can a movie where he plays Noel Coward be far behind?

I'm joking, of course.  Galitzine brought up in the Variety interview that some of his friends in the LGBTQ community feel more of these queer roles should be played by queers.  Others friends don't care, he said.  The issue isn't going away.

More important, the issues around coming out for queer actors aren't going away.  I think we're going to be talking about this for a long time.

The point about Noel Coward is a good one.  Arguably, it was easier when the solution was simple:  you just didn't come out.  But that was hardly simple, for Gay actors or Gay anyone.   I'm not sure any actor wants to be known first and foremost as Gay.  But I think Macfarlane is probably right.  Whether they've felt "tortured and ruined," which is a bit dramatic, most queer actors probably don't want to have to lie and live in the closet.  I think we know that simply from the increasing number of popular and successful actors who are out.  But it is very much a work in progress.

Matthew Lopez said there are as many queer stories to tell as there are queer people.  To use 1995 and The Celluloid Closet as one starting point, the explosion of good LGBTQ cinema since we've started talking about how queers are represented in movies proves Lopez is right.

So if we use these recent awkward if not awful coming out dramas for Gay or Bi actors as a starting point, hopefully this leads to an explosion of queer talent in the decades to come.  

The only thing I disagree with you about is I think the world is an increasingly fair place.  At least on these issues.  We do have same sex marriage in many nations.  We do have more and better queer cinema.  Now we can even have fairy tales with happy endings.

The Oscars So White pushback appears to be working - slowly.  Both at the bottom, in terms of more actors, writers, and directors who are not White men, and the cherry on the cake - who is nominated for and wins Oscars.  That itself raises a touchy issue.  If queer actors, writers, and directors are not out, how do we know these things?  Do we even want to know?  Like I said, we'll be talking about this for a long time.  

Those numbers suggest Latino representation is a big problem.  Lopez has said that queer Mexican American representation is what really drew him to RWRB.  And, it seems, to TZP.  I strongly agree with your point that acting is extremely competitive.  They're actors, not activists.  So I wouldn't begrudge a queer Hispanic actor for being more worried about what he has to say to get a role than he is about how he represents the queer community.

[PeterRS]

I don't understand why when I press 'Quote' on your last post, absolutely nothing happens! That's totally unusual. So I'll just have to copy and paste the relevant sections.

Quote

Second, you may have predicted Nicholas Galitzine's next Gay role - LOL.  He's doing Mary & (bi) George now.  Can a movie where he plays Noel Coward be far behind?

I've still never heard of Nicholas Galitzine or Mary and George! Nor do i know what TZP is. Sounds like something you gargle with! Sorry!

Quote

The issue isn't going away . . . 

most queer actors probably don't want to have to lie and live in the closet. 

You are probably right. And certainly there are more openly LGBTQ actors now in the business. But if they do not want to lie, then they can tell the truth. It's an issue only they can face and those of us who are not in the acting profession can't do a thing about it. Nor should we, in my view.

[stevenkesslar]

54 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

I've still never heard of Nicholas Galitzine and TZP

I'm referring to he two actors in Red White and Royal Blue.  Pictured in the GIF in my post above.  TZP on the left, Galitzine on the right.

Nicholas Galitzine is a British actor who has played I think about half a dozen Gay or Bi characters.  So for a decade, probably starting with Handsome Devil, there has been speculation about whether he is Gay.  And as much as anyone else, he's an object of all these questions about "queer baiting," or whether Straight guys should be taking so many Gay roles.  As I said, he just acknowledged he is Straight, and that this is a sensitive issue that needs to be discussed, in a Variety interview.

Taylor Zakhar Perez's biggest role prior to RWRB was The Kissing Booth 2, in which he played the Straight sex symbol, Marco.

So in case I was assuming people knew things they don't, part of the catalyst to this post is that the film, which is a Gay fairy tale filmed by an out Gay director, is a global hit.  It's not clear to me why this would not have happened a few years ago, when The Kissing Booth, also a global hit, came out.  But Taylor has been outed as a Gay married man on social media.  Probably one reason is that suddenly he is very hot, as a star, in addition to the fact that he has always been very hot, as a guy.  And some of it is probably because of all the views about queers playing queer roles.  I was clueless when Mexico's Polo Marin was outed in a similar fashion several years back.   But I don't think there's any going back, even though it's all on social media for now.  Add Heartstoppers Kit O'Connor, who recently came out as Bi at 18 on Twitter after being bullied on Twitter for allegedly "queer-baiting" his fans.

I would not call any of these three the most prominent Gay actors ever.  But they are among the most prominent Gay actors of the moment, in the US, Mexico, and the UK.  And they all were outed, in one fashion or another.  It's a nice problem to have, in that none of this would be happening if queers were not being represented in cinema in new ways, or the movies were just flops.  My main point is I think we're just starting to be able to talk about queer actors and coming out - as opposed to the queer characters some actor, queer or not, plays.

[Phoenixblue]

I don't support bullying actors over accusations of queer-baiting but I really would have loved to see Nicholas Galitzine as a gay man in real life. His roles as a gay character in the many movies he made, which are superb, to me seem to suggest that he has had extensive prior experience. Also, doesn't it seem odd that a straight actor would play so many gay roles in his career so far?

All the same it is best to respect his privacy and enjoy his marvellous acting talent. 

[Phoenixblue]

11 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

 But Taylor has been outed as a Gay married man on social media.  Probably one reason is that suddenly he is very hot, as a star, in addition to the fact that he has always been very hot, as a guy.

This is news to me! Didn't know that TZP has been outed. Just googled his name and all I got was that he keeps his sexuality private, but perhaps I am missing something?

[Keithambrose]

16 hours ago, PeterRS said:

Wow! There is so much in that post I do not know where to start with a response. Unfortunately, I have never heard of most of those individuals and movies you mention!

That aside, in principle it doesn't matter to me in the slightest if a gay part in a movie is played by a gay or a straight man. I see no reason why we should know. We are watching a movie, not a gay man acting in a movie. The case of Bernstein's nose is not quite the same. I don't care that the actor is straight when Bernstein was, as his wife acknowledged in a letter soon after their marriage, "a homosexual and will never change." The nose was an attempt to make Cooper look more like Bernstein, which to me it doesn't!

Going way back in time, were average (perhaps all) movie goers aware that matinee idol Rock Hudson was an out-and-out gay when away from the silver screen? Of course not, because these  were the times he lived in. Moving over to the general entertainment business, we can turn the quesion on its head. The highest paid entertainer in Las Vegas history for many years was Liberace. He did a lot to hide his status as a gay man, even suing and winning a law suit against a UK newspaper by telling lies. Yet those in his audiences were mostly middle-aged ladies who, if they did not know, surely all guessed that he was not straight. Did that affect his popularity? It probably helped it! 

Yet not many years earlier, the gay actor, singer, playwright, and general man of so many talents, Noel Coward, had told his biographer that he did not want to be known as gay - even though like Liberace he often seemed more gay than many gay men. His reason? He believed that most of the middle-aged ladies who would come in buses to see him in matinees - essential to the profitability of many plays in London at the time - would be put off if their suspicions were found to be true. This was the actor who had had a 20-year affair with a member of Britain's Royal Family, Prince George the Duke of Kent, the fourth son of King George V. George had started one letter, "Dearest, darling Noel." The government and society of the day were determined that no word of the relationship leaked out - and not only because under UK law at the time it was an offence to be gay. After George's death during WW2, Churchill himself authorised a break-in of Coward's home to steal the letters between the two men.

One of Coward's many quips concerned two other in the closet  UK actors, one gay and one very bisexual. With a friend he was crossing London's Leicester Square in the 1950s and noticed the cinema was showing a movie billed as Dirk Bogarde and Michael Redgrave in THE SEA SHALL NOT HAVE THEM. "Why ever not?" said Coward. "Everyone else has!"

You mention Asian movies. Given the cultures in Asian countries, the lack of gay-themed movies is understandable. I have seen neither of those you list, but am surprised that the movie made from Taiwan's most famous book about gay men Crystal Boys published in 1983 is not mentioned. This was penned during martial law at a time when there were no gay venues in Taiwan. It concerns a group of boys who sell themselves by being available in the famous New Park. This was made into a movie in 2003 and also a popular tv series. It's 20 one-hour episodes are avaiable on youtube. Now, of course, Taiwan has become arguably the most open country in Asia for the gay community. So it is hardly surprising that Your Name Engraved Herein was such a success. I find it interesting that it is set in 1987, the year when martial law was finally ended and slowly a gay scene began to emerge.

In some ways, Hong Kong cinema was further ahead than Taiwan. Arguably Hong Kong's best-known gay-themed movie is the gritty and very gay 1997 movie Happy Together starring gay Leslie Cheung and straight Leung Chiu-wai as a gay couple who travel to Brazil to try and reignite their relationship. It was nominated for the Palme d'Or in Cannes and its director Wong Kar-wai won the prize as Best Director. It also received many accolades at Film Festivals. In 2016 it was ranked the 3rd greatest LGBT movie of all time by the British Film Institute.

Leslie Cheung finally came out as gay during a long run of concerts in Hong Kong in 1997 when he stated he had been in a relationship with an old schoolfriend for about 20 years whom he called "the love of my life". It had absolutely no effect on his fan base - other perhaps than to increase it. His earlier gay-themed movie hit Farewell My Concubine was also a major success. It was the first Chinese language movie to win the Cannes Palme d'Or and won the Golden Globe as Best Foreign Film. That Leslie died by suicide aged only 46 was tragic. But I suggest the knowledge of his being gay was not merely a result of his being effectively a mega-star. It was a realisation among his generally young audiences that gay/straight stereotypes were gradually changing.

Going back to your main theme, I am totally against outing anyone. As you suggest, the popular media will always want to know about 'stars' lives and who they are sleeping with. That's their business. If a gay man says "I have dated girls but am not ready to marry" it will do less harm to his career than "fuck off, it's none of your business."  Who are we to say he is being unfair to other, perhaps younger and struggling LGBTQ actors? Acting is a dog eat dog profession. Everyone knows that. If that was not the case, there would likely have been no Bill Cosby, no Harvey Weinstein, no Kevin Spacey and no Johnny Kitagawa Japanese movie mogul raping Japanese boys for almost 50 years (see the thread  Japan's Boy Band 'King' a Serial Sexual Predator under Theatre, Movies, Art and Literature).

We live in an increasingly unfair world. Those who fall into the LGBTQ category have to fight just like everyone else. We need understanding. We should not expect nor ask for favours.

Too long!

[stevenkesslar]

1 hour ago, Phoenixblue said:

This is news to me! Didn't know that TZP has been outed. Just googled his name and all I got was that he keeps his sexuality private, but perhaps I am missing something?

"Outed"  may or may not even be the right word.  Which goes back to my main point:  I think we are just beginning to figure out how to talk about this.  

As a one liner, since I know I tend to go long and hard, I'm thrilled that we have a hot Gay actor who was cast in a beloved queer role.  🙂  That said, I've enjoyed watching Straight Nick in every Gay role he has played. 🙂

This website is the one I've been following, and where somebody posted that photo.  Along with probably thousands of others.  That thread started in 2020, circa Kissing Booth 2.  I became aware of it around when RWRB hit.  I think it was maybe 50 pages long then.  I found it precisely because I was curious about whether he is Gay.  And a Google search led me there. 

There's a thread on Nicholas Galitzine on that website, also.  Which has an interesting discussion about "queer baiting" where people go back and forth.   There's at least a few other websites that I ended up looking at, because somebody put a hyperlink on LPSG to some other lively, and sometimes nasty, fan discussion.  I can't remember the name, but one website had hundreds of thousands of members and had a logo that said something like, "Celebrities are expendable.  The gossip is precious."   

The thing that came closest to "outing" is somebody posted some of these pictures and videos on TikTok.  Which seemed to make it incredibly clear that Taylor is Gay or Bi, and married to a man.  That was removed by Tik Tok, but only after tens of thousands of other people viewed it.  On the website I linked there has been a lively discussion about how Taylor's Chinese fans have been uncovering his entire social media history.  And speculating about whether a fairly homophobic country will accept him more easily because he is married to a guy of Chinese origin. 

So the horse is out of the barn, without Taylor's consent.  Which is I think what happened with Polo Marin.  Although his somehow involved a masturbation video, which I'm guessing many of Taylor's fans wouldn't mind having been included with the package.  🙄  But I think 100 % of the content is something Taylor posted somewhere at some time.  It was not hacked, as it was with Morin (and Taylor's character in RWRB).

I went through that in detail to illustrate the issue, circa 2023.  I'm not sure it counts as "outing" when fans are speculating about you on websites.  Which then quickly includes pictures or videos you posted years ago, when you were nobody.  Before you deleted or archived them because you cared whether somebody might reach conclusions based on pictures like the ones above.  Problem is, somebody saved it on their hard drive, and reposts it, if I understand what is happening. 

You can also argue that it is the Gay actor's fault, because he never should have posted anything anywhere.  There's a reason why a lot of people are very careful about what they post, because it could later impact their career.  But it is a different world than the one Noel Coward was living in, when he could perhaps more easily choose not to be seen as Gay.

I know how I feel about this.  I think it's silly to argue fans should not, or will not, speculate.  Or course they will.  And of course every fashion or glamour magazine in the world will feed the speculation, to make money.  So my view is don't blame it on me, or fans, or Taylor.  I think the thing that needs to be talked about is the system as it is.  And how it might work better for LGBTQ actors trying to make it, but also trying to be honest and out.  I hope "queer baiting" is quickly becoming seen as a problem, not a solution.

I also thing "fandom" is a two way street.  I can relate to it easily as a past escort.  There are lots of escorts who keep many secrets about many celebrities, Gay or Straight, they had sex with.  So if the idea is that, simply as a fan of Taylor's, I have to spend the next 20 years hearing him talk about how he wishes Joey King would date him, I guess I can live with that.  I think it would be better if he could just say he went to Joey's wedding, not as the groom.  And he brought his husband with him. 

As I said above, Luke Macfarlane could come out in 2008 knowing that being honest with his fans would not ruin his career.  Because his fans would accept the truth.  And maybe also admire his honesty.  Kevin Spacey did NOT feel that way in the 1990's.  And I don't blame him for that.  It's a work in progress. 

Taylor, like Kit O'Connor and Polo Morin before him, is going through a trial by fire, whether he chose to or not.  And all these guys have millions of fans globally, not all of whom are queer, who probably now love them even more.  I would not argue it helps their career.  Or that it isn't hell on earth for them for a while.  But this is not the Hollywood Kevin Spacey rose in.  It's at least somewhat better.

Some Gays feel RWRB is mediocre Hallmark fluff with Marvel dialogue.  I fell in love with it.  In part because the director and writer, Matthew Lopez, seems spot on about almost everything.  He said something about how he cast the characters to be a little older than in the book because he wanted them to be at an age where they could confront these private issues publicly in an adult manner.  I think that accurately reflects how this is actually playing out in real life.  Kit O'Connor, at 18, was pissed about being forced to say anything about himself so soon.  Polo Marin was in his mid-20s, and was clearly torn between wanting to come out and not wanting to ruin his career.  Macfarlane, and I think a lot of America's top Gay actors, tended to come out and find their partners in their 20's or 30's.  Taylor is 31. 

I'm thrilled that younger queer actors have choices that Spacey and others of his generation did not feel they had.

[stevenkesslar]

2 hours ago, Phoenixblue said:

I don't support bullying actors over accusations of queer-baiting but I really would have loved to see Nicholas Galitzine as a gay man in real life. His roles as a gay character in the many movies he made, which are superb, to me seem to suggest that he has had extensive prior experience. Also, doesn't it seem odd that a straight actor would play so many gay roles in his career so far?

All the same it is best to respect his privacy and enjoy his marvellous acting talent. 

I know I will post things with a whole bunch of points.  So this one I'll focus on one point, which is repeating a point I made above.

‘Red, White & Royal Blue’ Sex Scenes Are Fueled by ‘Voracious and Animalistic’ Desire, Says Star Nicholas Galitzine

The British actor stars in the LGBTQ rom-com with Taylor Zakhar Perez

That is his interview with a Gay Variety writer.  There's an audio version which is worth a listen.  I view it as a nice contribution to this discussion about "queer baiting."  He is right that it is a sensitive issue, and it should be openly discussed. 

This is an assumption on my part.  But it assumes intelligence and empathy.  I assume Galitzine and the director, Lopez, who he mentions, had to discuss this before the interview.  So in addition to the fictional characters in the book and movie sending these really positive, welcome, tolerant, and queer-affirming messages around the world, the actors who play them seem to be doing the same.  Galitzine is doing it overtly, it seems.  It's of course possible that the question of whether Nick is a Straight actor playing a Gay role just happened to be asked by a well known reporter, who just happens to be Gay.  But I strongly suspect this was written into the script, wisely.

I'll speculate a little more.  Galitzine seems more like the character he played in Handsome Devil than in RWRB.  He was less experienced, and not as good an actor.  He seems like a jock who likes rugby and doesn't wear his sexuality on his sleeve, whatever it is.  Which is fine.  He will not be the first or last handsome Straight actor who advances his career by playing Gay men.  His career is now at a point where he can get just about any role he wants, probably.  But I won't complain if he plays more Gay men.  And if there is not an RWRB sequel, I will be extremely pissed.  He does at least owe that to The Gays, regardless of how challenging  it is for him to be outed on film.   Or adored by millions, in real life.  😉

Taylor, ironically, has the opposite problem.  Can a hot Gay boy play a hot Bi boy and still have a career?  Right now, it's looking good.  And so is Taylor, of course!

 

[PeterRS]

3 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

Too long!

It's not mandatory that you read any posts. 😵 And I think you must be aware that mine do tend to be on the longer side!

[stevenkesslar]

3 hours ago, Keithambrose said:

Too long!

 

18 minutes ago, PeterRS said:

It's not mandatory that you read any posts. 😵 And I think you must be aware that mine do tend to be on the longer side!

 Damn!  I feel so embarrassed.  I just assumed he was talking about my penis. 

Sometimes I forget that I am posting, and not reading old reviews.  😉 

Seriously, I do feel a bit vindicated.  Because I have never liked Twitter, and never had an account on it.  Too easy to promote endless brief lies and shallow thinking.  I'm hoping it is falling out of fashion.

In this article on "queer baiting,"  Harry Styles appropriately targeted Twitter and said this:

Quote

"[Twitter is] a s---storm of people trying to be awful to people."

 

 

[omega]

I think as progress continues to be made, as fewer queer children grow up with homophobia, and more grow up in homes where their sexuality is allowed to develop in the open, it will become less important for queer actors to play queer roles - and for straight actors to play straigh roles.

The biggest issues I think surrounding this are

• Straight actors cannot have the same understanding of a queer character, because they did not grow up facing the challanges the character would have.
• Queer actors are often locked out of roles in big movies because the character is straight... even if there is no romance in the movie.

I think as time goes on, it'll be less important what the actors sexuality is.

I think the issue with queer-baiting will also subside for the same reason. There are examples of queer-baiting - corporations do it every year when they slap a rainbow flag on everything and pretend they give a shit. But when it comes to famous people, I'm minded to allow them privacy to think what they want or be what they want. People today are far more interested in celebrities than is healthy for anyone.

 

[PeterRS]

16 hours ago, omega said:

I think as progress continues to be made, as fewer queer children grow up with homophobia, and more grow up in homes where their sexuality is allowed to develop in the open, it will become less important for queer actors to play queer roles - and for straight actors to play straigh roles.

We all know the problem lay originally with the moguls who ruled the major studios in Hollywood. For the same reason that decades ago they went to remarkable lengths to hide Rock Hudson's overt homosexuality - and many others like Richard Chamberlain and Sal Mineo, present day studio executives are only marginally less terrified that public reaction might affect profitability. American-made movies generally depend on American cinema-goers for the bulk of the revenues that cover the costs of production, distribution and marketing. Particularly, the opening week-end 'take' can still sometimes make or break movies. And unfortunately the majority of that audience comes from a huge largely conservative church-going bunch settled in Middle America. Slow burners which build audiences over time remain in the minority.

Thankfully, things are slowly changing. Ang Lee's Brokeback Mountain is one of the most obvious in terms of theme. Earlier serious US-made movies included the 1969 Midnight Cowboy, 1970 Boys in the Band, 1971 Fortune and Men's Eyes and arguably in 1972's Deliverance. But it is the independent companies that are much more to the fore in promoting gay-themed movies and gay actors. One of the most viewed in recent years has been Call Me By Your Name - made by independent producers, although later distributed by Sony Pictures. FIlm Festivals are a key indie outlet. Not surprisingly, Call Me By Your Name made its debut screening at the Sundance Film Festival. Incidentally its cinematographer was Thai.

But we need to remember there were older movies which bcame classics of their kind and which did feature gay themes and/or gay or bisexual actors, whether out or not, like Murray Head in Sunday Bloody Sunday (that deep lips-on-lips French kiss with Peter Finch was the first on screen), BD Wong (I thought superb in the Broadway stage production of M Butterfly in the role played far less effectively in the movie by John Lone) and Alan Cumming.

Producers in other countries, particularly continental Europe where sex is far less a taboo subject, have been bolder than their American contemporaries. Homosexuality is strongly hinted at in Ken Russell's 1969 Women in Love during the nude wrestling scene between Oliver Reed and Alan Bates. Sunday Bloody Sunday was made in Britain in 1971. 1974's A Bigger Splash about the break-up between the openly gay artist David Hockney and his then partner Peter Schlesinger is also British and featured both frontal nudity and a naked love scene. Openly gay Derek Jarman's 1976 Sebastiane shocked many but still found an audience. 

As long as the movie industry in general is run by executives whose bottom line will always be more important than the artistic end product, greater change will continue to depend on independent producers and the money men prepared to finance them.

[Phoenixblue]

On 9/9/2023 at 2:53 AM, stevenkesslar said:

He will not be the first or last handsome Straight actor who advances his career by playing Gay men.  His career is now at a point where he can get just about any role he wants, probably.  But I won't complain if he plays more Gay men.  And if there is not an RWRB sequel, I will be extremely pissed.  He does at least owe that to The Gays, regardless of how challenging  it is for him to be outed on film.   Or adored by millions, in real life.  😉

Pity that. Nicholas Galitzine is too cute to be straight. <sight>😔

 

[Phoenixblue]

About 4 years before "The Celluloid Closet" was released this gem of a film was made, "My Own Private Idaho." For many reasons it strikes a chord with my heart as it was made when I was young and the introduction of gay characters was starting to rise in earnest. Not to forget that the two main protagonists are among my favorites. It may not be an overtly gay movie but the the hints and tender moments make it all the more magical and haunting at the same time. It's portrayal of growing up gay is even more realistic than films made nowadays. A tribute to the both Keeanu Reeves and the sweet, charming angel that is River Phoenix.

The campside fire scene is the particularly heartwarming. The exchange was poignant and romantic and profound and intense.

💗Mike Waters: If I had a normal family, and a good upbringing, then I would have been a well-adjusted person.

Scott Favor: [Laughs] Depends on what you call normal.

Mike Waters: Yeah, it does. Well, you know, normal, like, like a mom and a dad and a dog and shit like that. Normal...normal.

Scott Favor: So you didn't have a normal dog?

Mike Waters: No, I didn't have a dog.

Scott Favor: Didn't have a... a normal dad?

Mike Waters: Didn't have a dog or a, or a, or a normal dad. anyway, that's alright. I don't feel sorry for myself, I mean, I feel like I'm, I feel like I'm, you know, well-adjusted.

Scott Favor: [Laughs] What's a normal dad?

Mike Waters: I don't know. [pauses] I'd like to talk with you. I mean I'd like to, uh, really talk with you. I mean we're talking right now, but, you know. I don't know. I don't feel like I can be... I don't feel like I can be close to you. I mean we're close, you know, right now we're close, but, I mean, you know...

Scott Favor: How close, I mean...

Mike Waters: I don't know, whatever.

Scott Favor: What?

Mike Waters: [pause] What do I mean to you?

Scott Favor: What do you mean to me? Mike, you're my best friend.

Mike Waters: I know, man, I know... I know... I know I'm your friend. We're good friends, and it's good to be, you know, good friends. That's a good thing.

Scott Favor: So...?

Mike Waters: So I just...

[pauses]

Mike Waters: That's okay. We can be friends.

Scott Favor: [flustered] I only have sex with a guy for money.

Mike Waters: Yeah, I know...

Scott Favor: And two guys can't love each other.

Mike Waters - Yeah. [pauses] Well, I don't know, I mean, I mean for me, I could love someone even if I, you know, wasn't paid for it. [pauses] I love you, and... you don't pay me.

Scott Favor: Mike....

Mike Waters: I really wanna kiss you man.

[pauses]

Mike Waters: Well goodnight man.

[pauses again]

Mike Waters: I love you, though. [pause] You know that. I do love you.

Scott Favor: Alright, come here, Mike.

[Pats the ground]

Scott Favor: Let's just see. come on, man. I Just wanna see, come on.

[stevenkesslar]

40 minutes ago, Phoenixblue said:

About 4 years before "The Celluloid Closet" was released this gem of a film was made, "My Own Private Idaho."

Hard to believe it was over 30 years ago.  I had just moved to Portland.  Which is where the film was set, as you know.

Gus Van Sant was a groundbreaker.  Drugstore Cowboy was another one of his great early films.

And, yes, that scene was remarkably tender, and sweet, and also sad.  

Probably the best part of a very good movie.  Although there is also that brief memorable moment on the motorcycle.  But only because Keanu looked so incredibly pretty. 😍

[Pete1111]

On 9/7/2023 at 8:13 PM, stevenkesslar said:

So I'm starting this thread to put a positive spin on where we are in 2023.  There are three threads that start with negatives - Spacey's court verdict, an Asian boy band predator, and an overall discussion about "wokeness" in films and plays.  Tangentially, we could throw in Bernstein and Bradley Cooper as a ridiculous example of "nose-baiting," which I guess is kinda like "queer-baiting."  🤔

So this will be a long rambling think piece.  But I'll summarize my two main points. 

First, I'm delighted that we have broader, better, and more positive representation of queers in films than ever before.  I'll use Red White & Royal Blue, Heartstoppers, and Uncoupled as examples.  I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein to make a few points, too. 

Second, while it's easier to be a Gay character in a film, it seems like we still have a mess on our hands in terms of whether it's actually okay to be a Gay or Bi actor.  At one extreme, the concept of "queer-baiting" suggests everyone should come out, even by force, and mostly or only play roles that match their real life sexual orientation.  In real life, Kit O'Connor was forced out, with this idea used as an excuse for cruelty.  TZP is being outed right now, all over the world.  Not for queer-baiting, but for being queer.  But what that means is fans are collecting and commenting on things he posted on social media for about a decade.  I would not call it cruel.  But I would call it a mess.  Meanwhile, we have what I'll call the Luke Macfarlane standard.  Which is "just be honest about who you are."  That seems to work these days.

That's one of my favorite clips from one of my favorite LGBTQ films, The Celluloid Closet.  So I'll use it to do a compare and contrast between three time periods over a quarter century apart:  1962, 1995, and today.

When The Celluloid Closet came out in 1995, it was itself a sign that it was just becoming okay to talk about how queers are portrayed on film.  I'm a fan of Lillian Hellman.  But I agree with MacLaine.  They had no idea what they were doing.  They were totally unaware.  Had they been lesbians, in real life, they almost certainly would have been more aware.  And they almost certainly never would have been cast, or had successful careers.  MacLaine is being a bit hard on herself, and her character.  What was one supposed to do in 1962, when most people still thought being a lesbian actually was a disease?

The spate of new Gay films I named, all rom coms or love stories, suggest that we really have learned a lot about representation of queers in film since 1995.  There's a nice thread on Company Of Men of posters' favorite LGBTQ films.  Almost all of them were made after The Celluloid Closet.  This is why.

I love both Heartstoppers and RWRB.  I've read the criticisms of RWRB.  That it's a mediocre Hallmark movie, based on fan fiction that reads like Marvel dialogue.  But I think the book and film are so successful because they summarize and dramatize decades of learned LGBTQ wisdom.  I'll single out one line that I've seen criticized repeatedly as Marvelesque:  "Starting today I shall no longer be the prince of shame and secrets."  That line, and much of the movie, could have been written as a direct response to The Children's Hour.  Finally, we have Gay adults, in Uncoupled, and a Gay and Bi teen, in Heartstoppers, and a Gay prince and Bi First Son, in RWRB, who are willing to fight for their queer love.  No wonder the world loves it.

I'll throw in Your Name Engraved Herein.  One person who posts here commented that it's one of the saddest movies he ever saw.  I agree that it is sad.  But I also see it as hopeful.  I loved it.  It is significant that it was the most successful LGBTQ movie ever in Taiwan.  And the most successful movie of 2020 in Taiwan, period.  I thought both the movie and its success was a recognition of how growing up in a culture like the one portrayed in The Children's Hour makes it challenging, but not impossible, to live a happy queer life with a partner.  The other Asian movie I finally saw this year that I'd compare it to is Bishonen, from Hong Kong in 1999.  It did prove you could cast gorgeous young Straight ABC actors, who would become friends in real life and have very successful careers.  But the film was a flop.  And like The Children's Hour it carried the message that these queer romances never end well.  These are two examples of good LGBTQ cinema that makes it very easy to understand why audiences, especially young audiences, love the idea that we really can have queer fairy tales now.  Where boy meets boy and does live happily ever after.

In terms of whether boy actor can meet boy and fall in love in real life, I feel like we are at about 1995.  Meaning we are just starting to be able to talk about it.  In that TIME article I hyperlinked, Your Name Director Patrick Liu talked about using a trumpet as a symbol of "a sound quality of wanting to say something, but not being able to get it out."  That seems to be where we still are.   One anecdotal proof of concept is Kevin Spacey himself.  He won his first Oscar right around when The Celluloid Closet came out.  I don't blame him for prioritizing privacy, and his career.  We know how Don't Ask, Don't Tell turned out in that era.  So you can take that as an indicator that it was better for him not to tell the world he was Gay at that time.

Kit O'Connor, 18, did not want to come out as Bisexual.  He did mostly thanks to the cruelty of Twitter, in his own words.  But taken to its extreme, "queer-baiting" means any actor, even a teen, should be required to declare his sexuality.  Then we know whether it matches the character he plays.  It's ridiculous.

Polo Marin, Mexico's most popular Gay actor, was outed twice in his mid-20's.  What he said in this interview captured some important nuances:

Then there is Luke MacFarlane, who along with a lot of other Gay actors - like much of the cast of Uncoupled - is setting what I view as the gold standard.

There's also the argument that, essentially, fans should not be fans.  Or even human.  We have no right to know anything about these people.  One really good response I read from some actor to some question once was, "I like to keep my private life private."  That's fair. 

That said, what both Marin and Macfarlane capture is that this does not happen in isolation.  And it is a two way street.  Marin wanted to be a role model for others.  And now he is.  Macfarlane made a pragmatic decision that he could afford to be honest to his fans.  First, there's absolutely zero evidence that fans are going to stop acting like fans just because you are Gay.  Second, he calculated he could be honest because his fans would love him and respect him for who he is.  He was right.  Plus, being honest is always easier.

Out of curiosity, I Googled to see who the most private celebrities in the world are.  I came up with this list.  I think it is telling.  If these are the most private celebrities in the world, we know a hell of a lot about them.  Like their spouses, whether they have kids, their divorces.  So if the idea is that fans are evil for wanting to know these things, good luck with that. 

I'll single out Matt Damon.  Like MacFarlane, he seems to be a wise guy who figured out how to get ahead of the curve.  Several friends have told me the story about how Damon is the kind of down to earth guy who would meet his wife in a hotel bar, where she was bartending.  He is not so private that he didn't share with the world that his wife helped him through a period of depression.  It makes perfect sense that celebrities who value privacy for their family try to manage it by curating what their fans get to know.  I think they are wise. 

On the other hand, Harry Styles has proved you can do very well by essentially saying, I could care less what people say about me or my sexuality.  He said there is going to be a set of narratives, anyway.  And he feels no need to control or shape them.  Although I suspect Harry can say that because it actually helps shape the Harry Styles mystique.  It still means that his fans know he is dating Olivia Wilde, who wisely calls Harry's fans "kind."

And now Taylor Zakhar Perez is in the global hot seat.  Which is more proof that we're now better at portraying queers in film than we are at knowing how to talk about queer actors in real life. 

It is easy enough to blame TZP for about a decade's worth of queerish content he posted on social media.  It is also easy enough to blame fans (or not fans) for caring about queerish content he posted on social media.  I don't feel either are very fair to TZP, or his fans.  But it does prove that if you are a nobody who becomes a big somebody on social media, keeping your private life private is next to impossible.  So, like Damon or MacFarlane, it probably makes sense to think that through as early as you can.

On Company Of Men I have raved repeatedly about how Galitzine finally came out as Straight in an interview with a Gay reporter at Variety when RWRB opened.  It's funny that some fans on social media still think it's a ruse, and he didn't really say it or mean it.  Fans will always be fans.  I'm guessing that Galitzine and RWRB Director Matthew Lopez had to have talked about that interview.  Galitzine kind of put Lopez on the hook by saying he wanted to discuss this with the openly Gay director right out of the gate, before he was cast.  I view the interview as an honest and wise way to get ahead of any possible queer-baiting or outing adventures regarding Galitzine and RWRB.  It is too much to hope that it will permanently end queer-baiting, and more cruel attacks on actors like Kit O'Connor.  But it is a big step in the right direction.

Even though RWRB was brilliantly scripted as a movie, and there seems to have been a script to undermine any possible queer-baiting backlash in real life, there is no apparent script for dealing with the fact that one of the two lead actors is Gay, or Bi, and married to a man.  TZP could have gone to Variety and talked about being a queer actor in a queer movie.  If these guys are as smart as I think they are, it suggests maybe there is a script.  Like Harry Styles, TZP may have decided he is fine with fans developing any narrative they want.  For now, at least.  Fans are already deep into speculation about whether he shares his husband's somewhat more conservative political beliefs.  That's a good reason to value privacy these days!

I do hope this results in a lot more behind the scenes reflection on how Hollywood can do better.  We now have lots of examples of queer actors who were outed.  So it makes perfect sense that in the future queer actors should factor in that if they get their wish, and are wildly successful, they may not have a choice.

The concept that curious fans should stop being curious fans is ridiculous.  This is fun for me in part because it so NOT me.  When I watched My Policeman with a Gay friend recently, he actually had to explain to me who Harry Styles is.  I'd never heard of him.  I skipped Kissing Booth 2 because I could care less about TZP, but wanted to know how the cheesy story in Kissing Booth 1 ended.  Now I've been following gossip websites I've never heard of, and reading articles in magazines I never read, to see how we got to TZP being outed.

So I'll point to one example of an article that is kind of innocuous, but also a perfect example of the problem.  Right when Kissing Booth 2 was being released, TZP was interviewed by Glamour. Here's a few snippets:

First of all, let's stop pretending that magazines like Glamour, or almost any other magazine or website in the world, are going to stop asking questions like that.  So sexuality is on the table.  Because they know that's what fans want to know. 

None of those answers are dishonest.  But they are somewhat misleading, and a bit transparent.  A few months later, if you Google it, there are all these articles in which TZP says he is not dating Joey King, who is a friend.  And he wonders where fans even got that idea.  Geez, who knows?  😉   A few people in these 100+ page "outing" discussions on TZP have speculated that Galitzine, having more experience, is more media savvy.  That may be true.  Glamour is clearly not doing upcoming queer actors any favors by asking these questions.  I'm guessing TZP might have been thinking, "I could tell you.  But then I'd have to kill my career."

I'd be fine if we all just forgot about queer-baiting and instead focused on how the entertainment industry can help the LGBTQ actors who are starting to break through to just be who they are.  We know Hollywood could exist for most of its history without outing queer actors.  The old solution was they had to lie and be something they were not.  I'm fine with the new solution being silence.  At least for some people, for some time.  If queer actors like Macfarlane want to tell the world they're Gay, and married to a guy, great.  My bias is I'd rather they all come out.  But if they don't want to, edit the question out of the interview.  It's clear that a lot of this is discussed with directors and publicists in private.  At least with some actors.  So change the script.

That said, now that TZP has gotten his wish, after what sounds like a decade or so of endless auditions, I'm guessing 99 % of the world will overlook these trivial things.  If it makes anyone look bad, it should be the industry that insists on pigeonholing sex symbols into stereotypes.

I have no idea what a better solution is for the awkwardness of being queer but not being ready to come out.  The good news to me is that the increasingly viable long term solution is what Macfarlane did in 2008.  Be honest.  It did not end his career.  He actually says it has helped his career.  I hope he is right.

 

I disagree with the term queer baiting.  I don't like how that term has been stolen from its original use.  To me, it is insulting and disrespectful to true victims of queer baiting wrought by the police and bashers.

That said, even gay directors admit they prefer freedom who they cast, with no requirement to confirm where the actor lands on the Kinsey scale. 

I was at a Q&A for Call Me by Your Name where a woke young woman asked Luca Gudagnino why he didn't cast gay actors in the lead.  He asked her if only those that practice cannibalism should be cast for a cannibal role.   

In CMBYN, neither character landed at Kinsey scale 6.0.   So yeah, the queer baiting idea itself is as messy as it is futile.

I prefer watching actors that are talented and nice looking.  Sadly, the "nice looking" is the piece attacked as queer baiting when a role is not awarded to an out actor.

Fellow Travelers cast gay actors in the lead rolls, a successful choice.

Bailey and Bomer have both successfully played straight and gay roles.  I have no problem when straight or closeted actors do the same.  In the end, casting is a business decision, like it or not. Casting affects the product.  Directors need the largest available population of choices that make sense for the role.

Back to the "positive" theme of the OP.  HBO recently streamed Angels in America during World Aids Day.  I love Al Pacino.  He was fantastic playing Roy Cohn.  I have also seen him play a gay role live on stage.  Again he is an amazing actor.   Angels in America was produced nearly 20 years ago.  HBO and Al Pacino thought it was "OK" to play gay content back then.  In the ensuing years, as "old thinking" has transitioned out of the industry, playing gay and being gay in Hollywood has become more and more "OK".

But it would be blind to ignore reality.  For example there are regions in Poland that recently voted themselves "LGBTQ free zones."  Some religions in the States still preach that gay men risk burning in Hell.  Therefore, marketing entertainment with gay content is probably a tricky path.

So kudos to the actors and content creators that took risks decades ago, helping move the ball in the right direction towards a time where it is OK to be gay or play gay in Hollywood.

As far as Asia, my sense is that places like Bangkok, Hong Kong and Taiwan are regions where gay actors are "ok", e.g. Leslie Cheung in Happy Together (R.I.P)

[stevenkesslar]

1 hour ago, Pete1111 said:

Fellow Travelers cast gay actors in the lead rolls, a successful choice.

An interesting compare and contrast to me is Fellow Travelers and Red, White, and Royal Blue.  Both movies have great eye candy.  One is getting mostly rave reviews, and will probably get lots of awards.  The other is a fan favorite, but got trashed as superficial by many critics.  It won't be taking home Oscars.  Both have Gay directors and writers, which informs the content and tone - whether the actors are queer or not.

If you put me on a desert island and said I can have only one of those movies to watch for the rest of my life, it is a no brainer.  Red, White, and Royal Blue.  I view it as a Gay fairy tale.  To paraphrase Matthew Lopez, he wanted the film to reflect the past, but point toward the future.  It makes me feel hopeful, and good.

I usually like serious movies, and skip the Marvel stuff.  But I am half way in to Fellow Travelers.  And I am having to force myself to watch it.  I get the point.  The director said in a great interview that he wanted to show our community had all this shit thrown at us - the lavender scare, AIDS - and we survived.  I take the series as a compliment, and testament to the resilience of LGBTQ folk.  That said, it is just depressing to watch.  Part of my own emotional reaction is, "Okay.  Okay.  Enough heavy gay stuff.  Let's have the RWRB sequel, okay?  With more nudity."

I don't really mean that.  It's a good thing that we can now have high budget and well made dramatic series by Gays, and for Gays, that lots of people who are not Gay like.  But I'd rather live in a world where it is mostly all mixed up.  And whether you are Gay or Black or a woman isn't the whole or even the main point - most of the time.  

Same for casting.  I agree with you @Pete1111 that I'd rather have queer baiting restored to its original meaning:  what Joe McCarthy did.  And stop picking on Straight actors who do a good job playing queer roles.

Since I started this thread, it is interesting that Taylor Zakhar Perez's "outing" has been much ado about nothing.  I put outing in parentheses because whether he is even out, or has been outed, is a question.  But he has basically lived by his character's principles.  Which is that the choice to come out - or not - is personal.  That said, what happened all over the internet after the movie came out suggests that fans are simply not going to tolerate leaving the slate completely blank.  They have filled in the blanks with photos and videos that strongly suggest he is happily Gay, and happily married.

I think it's a good look for TZP.  You can talk about me all you want.  But I don't have to confirm or deny anything you say.  Kind of like the McCarthy hearings.  But a lot better.  😉

[Pete1111]

2 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

An interesting compare and contrast to me is Fellow Travelers and Red, White, and Royal Blue.  Both movies have great eye candy.  One is getting mostly rave reviews, and will probably get lots of awards.  The other is a fan favorite, but got trashed as superficial by many critics.  It won't be taking home Oscars.  Both have Gay directors and writers, which informs the content and tone - whether the actors are queer or not.

If you put me on a desert island and said I can have only one of those movies to watch for the rest of my life, it is a no brainer.  Red, White, and Royal Blue.  I view it as a Gay fairy tale.  To paraphrase Matthew Lopez, he wanted the film to reflect the past, but point toward the future.  It makes me feel hopeful, and good.

I usually like serious movies, and skip the Marvel stuff.  But I am half way in to Fellow Travelers.  And I am having to force myself to watch it.  I get the point.  The director said in a great interview that he wanted to show our community had all this shit thrown at us - the lavender scare, AIDS - and we survived.  I take the series as a compliment, and testament to the resilience of LGBTQ folk.  That said, it is just depressing to watch.  Part of my own emotional reaction is, "Okay.  Okay.  Enough heavy gay stuff.  Let's have the RWRB sequel, okay?  With more nudity."

I don't really mean that.  It's a good thing that we can now have high budget and well made dramatic series by Gays, and for Gays, that lots of people who are not Gay like.  But I'd rather live in a world where it is mostly all mixed up.  And whether you are Gay or Black or a woman isn't the whole or even the main point - most of the time.  

Same for casting.  I agree with you @Pete1111 that I'd rather have queer baiting restored to its original meaning:  what Joe McCarthy did.  And stop picking on Straight actors who do a good job playing queer roles.

Since I started this thread, it is interesting that Taylor Zakhar Perez's "outing" has been much ado about nothing.  I put outing in parentheses because whether he is even out, or has been outed, is a question.  But he has basically lived by his character's principles.  Which is that the choice to come out - or not - is personal.  That said, what happened all over the internet after the movie came out suggests that fans are simply not going to tolerate leaving the slate completely blank.  They have filled in the blanks with photos and videos that strongly suggest he is happily Gay, and happily married.

I think it's a good look for TZP.  You can talk about me all you want.  But I don't have to confirm or deny anything you say.  Kind of like the McCarthy hearings.  But a lot better.  😉

I agree, Fellow Travelers was a bit of a chore for me too, but I recognize how a lot of people do like it.   There are a lot of great scenes.

But, I enjoyed Ryan Gosling getting kissed on both cheeks by two guys during the #I'mJustKen dance scene in Barbie, more than all the graphic sex in Fellow Travelers put together.  Maybe I am just a victim of Queer Baiting.

 

Skip to 3:45 for the male dance sequence and queer-baiting man-on-man kisses.

 

[stevenkesslar]

17 minutes ago, Pete1111 said:

But, I enjoyed Ryan Gosling getting kissed on both cheeks by two guys during the #I'mJustKen dance scene in Barbie, more than all the graphic sex in Fellow Travelers put together.  Maybe I am just a victim of Queer Baiting.

That's so Gay!

If I admit publicly that I prefer Straight Ryan kissing Straight Emma, is someone going to accuse me of being homophobic?  Or, worse, that I'm un-woke?  😯

For the record, just so they don't put a stamp in my Gay card, they could have cast Jonathon Bailey instead of Ryan Gosling.  And he would have been just as cute, but more Gay.

[Pete1111]

41 minutes ago, stevenkesslar said:

That's so Gay!

If I admit publicly that I prefer Straight Ryan kissing Straight Emma, is someone going to accuse me of being homophobic?  Or, worse, that I'm un-woke?  😯

For the record, just so they don't put a stamp in my Gay card, they could have cast Jonathon Bailey instead of Ryan Gosling.  And he would have been just as cute, but more Gay.

Gosling got his start singing and dancing on the Mickey Mouse Club which is kinda gay.  And yes, Ken getting kissed by two other Kens when he hugs them is pretty gay.

Gerwig showed how Ken was perfectly fine with it, because, as the OP asked, 

Yes, being gay is

OK.

 

 

[forky123]

9 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

For the record, just so they don't put a stamp in my Gay card, they could have cast Jonathon Bailey instead of Ryan Gosling. 

Saw Jonathan Bailey in Beautiful Thing at the Sound Theatre, London in 2006. The theatre was a small one where the stage was fairly small and the seating wrapped around it. The front row of the audience was roughly a metre or so from the actors and effectively on the stage. Jonathan was amazing at such a young age. I think that theatre and show is one of my all time favorites as sitting so close to the actors made you feel part of the action.

[Moses]

17 hours ago, stevenkesslar said:

An interesting compare and contrast to me is Fellow Travelers and Red, White, and Royal Blue.

IMHO:

• Fellow Travelers has story, The Story. 7.9 IMDB
• RWRB is just attempt to make "gay film", cheap and flat tale with eyecandy actors, 7.0 IMDB

[Pete1111]

7 hours ago, forky123 said:

Saw Jonathan Bailey in Beautiful Thing at the Sound Theatre, London in 2006. The theatre was a small one where the stage was fairly small and the seating wrapped around it. The front row of the audience was roughly a metre or so from the actors and effectively on the stage. Jonathan was amazing at such a young age. I think that theatre and show is one of my all time favorites as sitting so close to the actors made you feel part of the action.

Live theater can really show an actor's true colors as far as their acting chops.  I'm not surprised how good you say Bailey was  in Beautiful Thing. 

All the players were good in Fellow Travelers, but for me Bailey was the best part, every scene he was in.    

I look forward to seeing more from him, whether gay or straight roles.