Defamer outs gay character on NBC's "Kings"
We've been buzzing about NBC's new alternate-reality show Kings for a while now due in part to the fact that it includes a major gay character. We've actually seen the first four hours (which premiere March 15th) and I even chatted with Kings' creators about the show as well as the gay character with the understanding that we wouldn't reveal anything beforehand. But thanks to Defamer.com that isn't a problem anymore although I still won't be saying which character is gay. So if you really want to have the fun taken out of that particular reveal, you can go read it here. Frankly, I think it was really bad form of Defamer to post the info without so much as a spoiler warning. Most Internet users are sophisticated enough to know this info is often floating around out there, but with Defamer's post there is no warning at all. You start reading this post about a gay character and before you know it, bam! But whatever, as long as you get the page views — right, Defamer? As for Kings, I have high hopes for the show if folks can get past the rather unconventional first two hours of this modern day retelling of the David and Goliath story. Don't get me wrong — I loved the first two hours, but it's not much like your typical TV show and I worry the average viewer might not get it right away. After the premiere episode the show settles into a more conventional format, but I still think it works quite well. As to the gay character, we're a little divided here. Brent found him to be a stereotype and unsympathetic while I think they are doing something interesting and that it won't be going where it might appear to be headed. Here is hoping NBC gives us a chance to find out by letting Kings have the time it needs to find an audience. Feel free to discuss in the comments, but if you know who the gay character is, please don't give anything away in the subject line of your comments or without a spoiler warning in your comments. After all, you don't want to be as thoughtless as Defamer, do you? Submitted by on Tue, 2009-02-24 13:09. |
![]() Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|







Yep, bad form.
I stumbled upon the post through my RSS, the title lured me. I even didnt have to read the article, as soon as I saw the picture I knew what it was about, then I just did not care and read the whole thing.
They give away the plot too, so dont click if you really do not want to know. Bad Defamer, Bad.
Looking forward to this show.
I may be wrong --spoiler--
Nope, we posted about the show
Michael, I think he means this article
Okay, I feel stupid!
And now you did it again ...
But it's okay. I'm just gonna sit down right now and watch so much TV that I will actually force the information out of my head in lieu of newer fresher information.
'Cause that could work, right?
I'm the guy who blogs at http://IAmATVJunkie.com, and I would love for you to visit.
Tricksy
Changing words on me.
I'll edit my original comment and remove the spoiler warning.Oops, edit to say you can't edit your own posts once someone has replied.
You don't need to edit. You should get
I'm actually fascinated
by the concept of the show, and the chances being taken in it - which I wasn't expecting from NBC - with this Defamer post on the character, I'm even more intrigued, since it was who I hoped but didn't expect - that's way too prominent for a character on an NBC show, in my opinion. Maybe they woke up?
I'm going to give the show my time, and hope it turns out to be as interesting as it sounds. I just wish it wasn't on Sunday nights and forcing me to make DVR choices with other shows I like - my favorites seem to be concentrated on Sun, Monday, and Thursday, and a DVR can only handle so much.
I figure NBC will give this thing several episodes to find its feet and audience - it looks in the clips like it cost a fortune to build sets and shoot, so they have an investment to recoup. Anybody know if this is an in-house production, or is it by an outside studio?
I guessed a long time ago
I agree...
russell tovey and friend
Since you were the first site to draw my attention to Russell Tovey I thought this photo was interesting. I came across it doing a search for the guy Defamer says is playing the boyfriend of the main gay character on Kings.
Are they just friends?
photo @ this link:
http://images.broadwayworld.com/upload/19840/New%20Folder%207/MICHAEL_S_CAMERA_228.jpg
I guess it was bad form, but
I will wait to see what it's like
The gay character...
Check out my new fantasy website: TheTorchOnline.com. It's like AfterElton.com for fantasy geeks! And I Twitter
Yeap does not sound like my cup of tea
PS
It's cliche in some ways
Check out my new fantasy website: TheTorchOnline.com. It's like AfterElton.com for fantasy geeks! And I Twitter
Why does he have those characteristics? (SPOILER-ish)
I mean everything you've said about him - pretty, cowardly, jealous, resentful, Machivellian - that would, to me apply to anyone with his birthright, regardless of being gay or straight. Granted, you've watched the show and I haven't (and I've read your article on TheTorchOnline), but that sounds like anyone born to his position, not necessarily those of a gay man. Don't we need to consider the fact that we want characters that are who they are, good or bad, and oh, yeah, they sleep with men, too?
Nothing any site has leaked about the show yet tells me that he's a bad gay stereotype, but a lot of it says he's a bad stereotype of a prince. Nightclubbing with the boyfriend instead of presenting a kingly image? Princes William and Harry have stumbled out of quite a few clubs after having partied too much and flirted inappropriately with girls (and a few boys, in Harry's case). Prince Harry, for all his ginger hotness is a hell of a case of a prince who's not likely to be king acting like an entitled prick.
Just a thought from some who's seen less than 4 minutes of tape. I just don't want the gay media (and with the number of posts I make here, I might have to count myself a part of soon) to get their underwear in a wedgie about it being a bad gay stereotype, which the MSM will latch onto as fact (do you guys realize that every article you write gets picked up on IMDB's coverage of shows?), and it becomes a gay issue when it's really a spoiled brat/homophobic father issue.
/end soapbox.
Both the princes in great Britian
You have a point (speculative spoilers)
In retrospect, my own comment came across a lot more belligerent than I meant it to be when I started writing.
I've just read, in the last 4 hours, the take on the character on 5 different gay blogs, which ranged from Michael giving it credit for maybe being more complex than we might expect to for the first couple episodes, to Brent (who I usually agree with) leaning toward gay stereotype, to Queerty headlining "NBC Kings has at Least 2 Queens" and I have to wonder, do we toss these stereotypes up ourselves to have shots taken at us? We say we want complicated characters that, oh, by the way, happen to also sleep with men - but that's just a part of them, not what defines them. The words used to describe the prince seemed more like words to describe a person of privelage who knows no consequences (maybe a Hilton?), not necessarily a bad gay stereotype.
I used the English princes because I'm most familiar with their antics. I know they do a lot of charity work, and both do their military service, sometimes in a war zone - and good for it, seriously. But they've also had their very public stumbles, particularly Harry, who's not likely to take the throne (like our gay here in the show). If I were older, I probably could have used Prince Albert of Monaco as an example, since his refusal to marry and produce a legitimate heir threatened the future existence of his country until 2002. But I couldn't easily document the details of his public stumbles.
I'm actually hoping that the show makes this complicated like it should be. You got a Kingdom, pretty obviously steeped in tradition. Maybe one of the traditions says only a straight guys gets to sit on a hereditary throne (kinda makes sense with the whole hereditary business). Like any monarchy, they're probably been some gay guys on the throne in the past, but hey, it was easier to keep quiet back in the olden days.
This guy serves his kingdom in the military (commoner rescues him from war), but he also parties with his boyfriend in clubs when he's home. Shining hero who saved him seems to get too much attention from daddy (who knows heros make good political capital), bringing into play "court politics" that mattered so much in old monarchies, with all the scheming. King daddy must reconcile tradition with his love for his son, stability of his reign, modern times with olden. Actually serves up a lot of dramatic tension, all without making the gay guy the villian because he's gay, but maybe because like a lot of people of power and privelage, as much as they seem untouchable, they're actually also quite trapped by history and expectations.
Wow, that was a lot of speculation on my part - just a lot of guessing. I'm just trying to give the show the benefit of the doubt about what it could be, before I label it. It has so much potential, execution will matter. I just see so may of the gay blogs labelling it so quickly, it bugged me. I'm certainly not trying to argue with you or Brent, or heaven forbid, downplay the good the Royal family does - I've actually always been kind of jealous of Brtain and Commonwealth states - they're something cool about looking to that history and continuity.
It doesn't really matter where the stereotypes
Actually, I read an
Why is the gay character a secret anyway?
I mean really. If the show wasn't treating this character as such a big scandalous secret then it wouldn't be a problem.
It's time that TV shows and movies got over that crap.
That's an excellent point!
David and Jonathan loved EACH OTHER
D & J
It's pretty strongly implied, given both Jonathan's father's reaction to their "friendship" and David's statement at Jonathan's death.
However, this is one of the most controversial pieces of the Bible (and David did much else controversial besides). Conservative Christians and Jews alike have been known to react with amazing degrees of outrage to the suggestion that David and Jonathan might have been lovers. In one instance an Orthodox legislator in the Israeli parliament had to be carried out he became so hysterical when another legislator mentioned the idea during a debate.
In ancient cultures, including in what became Israel, bisexuality was fairly normal and a lot of men had intimate relationships with close male friends in addition to with women. In fact, because of the perceived inferior status of women on an intellectual and emotional level, a lot of "bromances" not only flourished, but also became sexual.
Judaism obviously had a prohibition against this, but like any culture in history what was legal and what was really going on were two different things. And David was hardly a rigorous devotee of religious laws as it was.
Not sure I can support the show
Sebastian Stan and Michael Arden are both hot but this show outright, based on Defamer's article, predicts a homophobic future. Call me overly sensitive but It says all the work we are doing will come for naught in their future. Since the true nature of the relationship between David and Jonathan will never be known we can at the very least say they were supportive friends. We can hope that will take some of the edge off the stereotypical gays-are-always-villians of the show. I will take a wait and see position but it doesn't look good.
That's all I am saying...
INSIDEGUY
I like you Michael, but
I like you Michael, but don't you think posting the headline "Defamer outs gay character on NBC's "Kings" and opening a link to the site are ALSO about getting page reads? You seem to be sharing in the spoils of Defamer's "bad form".
I am excited about the show.