AfterElton Briefs: "That's So Gay" wins big, can macho actors "play gay?", and more!

"Actually, he said, he's happy about Milk's post-election timing, because seeing the film will make people 'wise up' to gay civil rights, which will do more than passing 'just one proposition.'" It's that last statement that has ruffled a few feathers.

^ I really think i'm stupid, because i keep reading the statement and i can't figure out why it is getting people riled up. 

I'll just wait for someone to clarify it for me. EH

Section is ON FIRE!

WTF? IDIOTAS!

"Heterosexuality is not normal, it's just common." (Dorothy Parker)

people are upset because he's minimizing the damage done by Prop 8 by calling it "just one propositition".  But another way (and far more likely what he meant) to look at it is that he's saying we're stronger than that, and we can't let it get us down.  I'm so tired of people picking apart everything everyone says.  It gets very old.

OK, I agree the copy editor who came up with the headline is worthy of beheading (as he's obviously not using his head anyhow), but I didn't find the article itself to be offensive. Quotes from Queerty, Van Sant being honest, Cheyenne Jackson being honest.  I thought it was pretty honest.  I didn't like the facts it presented, but that doesn't make them any less true.  It just would have been nice it the copy editor had read more than 3 paragraphs before writing the headline.

should have been the headline.

Also: In all the discussion of gay actors re Milk, no one has mentioned the Big Ol' Gay Homosexual who plays George Moscone!!!!!

afhickman

"The mountain has wings."

To me it sounds as if Gus is saying that the issues involved here are bigger than just one measly little proposition.  After all, we're out to conquer the world!  No, but, he really does seem to have his heart in the right place.  I am not in the least offended by Van Sant's comments.  Now "Gerry" is another matter...

Well I couldn't but i'm a big pansy!! :)
That article was a load of rubbish! I didn't find it offensive, but i did find it to be tripe. I understand that it would have been good to have a gay actor to play Harvey milk, but at the same point i seriously think it would have harmed the film. Sean Penn, while he is admittedly like the butchest man alive, is a large name and because he's straight and such a large name it's given the film more of a hype and a buzz around it. Like when Brokeback mountain was made everyone was like "OMG it's two BUTCH straight guys playing gay!!" and as a gay man I know it's a little cringe worthy because everyone talks about how amazing it is that they "play" gay, but look at the sucsess of Brokeback. If that had been two gay guys it wouldn't have recieved half the hype it did, or been seen by as many people. I think that by having a large named, straight actor in a gay movie does increase the films fan base and really that's a good thing in my opinion because it's getting a message out there that I really do think would be lost if a gay actor played the role. I don't like that fact anymore than most people, but at the end of the day, we are all still fighting for visibility and the chance to be seen as an equal group of people (like the old saying goes Equal Rights are not Special Rights) and if it takes a couple of ol' butch straight guys to help get the message across, power to them for realising that they can help change opinions and bring gay visiblity forward!

The article does make a little sense because admittedly there is a shortage of out gay actors but if you look at some of the out gay actors there has been one or two sucess stories. Take Ian Mckellan's career that man has made some MASSIVE movies. He's played Magneto in all 3 X-men films (which are closely linked to gay people and their struggle) he played Gandalf in all 3 LOTR films. For a gay guy he has had a great career and is now in my opinion Iconic. I would say that he's an A-list actor (although I could be wrong) and while I know Cheyne Jackson is a hottie and out as an actor, he isn't that big a name. He said int he article, "If it's between me and dean cain i know who it's going to" well yeah, because Dean Cain is well know, he's superman (and wasn't he scrummy!!) i think that sometimes its not about sexuality but about the name. It's crap, but that really is the world that actors live in. (Hark at me, like i know what i'm talking about!!)

And poor Boy George..... kinda. There must have been a point where he thought "maybe i shouldn't cuff this guy up" but lets be honest, Boy George is partial to a little bit of erm.....well, drugs! So this might have altered his perception of what he's doing. Has anyone seen that shocking documentary of his a few years ago when he wsa on probation and having to do community service? It was horrid!!

(and I know it's un-related but I've just heard that Paul O grady who is a well known gay chat-show host/ex-drag queen called Lilly Savage has been in the news this week because he got bit by a snake! (muyst resist making easy gay joke here.....) anyway I've attached a link for you to read the story and little picture of Lilly Savage because she's a brilliant Scouse (that's where I'm from - lill ol Liverpool) drag queen. If you ever get the chance to see any of her old stuff I highly recogmend it!!sd

 

http://www.heatworld.com/Article/8229/I'm+A+Celeb%e2%80%a6+/The+9+0Clock+News+%e2%80%93+Wed+3+Dec

Oh and HOW sexy is that underwear guy :)

James

"Can Macho, Non-Metro Actors Play Gay?"
I don't find the question offensive, because some macho, non-metro actors have done a piss poor job of playing gay. (has Stalone, Schwartznigger or Nicholson played gay?, though I can imagine Nicholson.) I'd be interested to know why people think that question alone is without merit. Or if anyone has an example of a macho actor being unable to convincingly play gay.

The point of that item is that playing gay is no longer a career breaker. The point of the title, which is the point of all headlines, is to provoke you into reading the story. You're passing judgment on the story because of a title which wasn't even written by the author? Or were you trying to pass judgment on the real culprits: abcnews.com?

Hauslaib points out in the article that for some playing gay "It's just another notch in a belt for a straight actor. For a gay actor it could have been a breakout role." Like it or not these straight actors were already rewarded for their roles with multimillion dollar contracts. They really don't need the gay community anymore after that.

"Of all the colors in the rainbow, green [the color of money] still seems to be the most important,": Canfield.

To Fisher's credit he also brings up the irony that the possibility of out gay actors, (Cheyenne Jackson) taking on straight leading roles in the big screen is rare.

The final statement of the article is a challenge to Hollywood. Now that America's sensibilities are changing, when will Hollywood's?

Snicks, did you even read the fricken article?


I watched Milk yesterday, and I was like the kid in the wheel chair from Minnesota, who was inspired after watching milk on T.V. (I was actually hanging posters for a fundraiser the day Milk was shot. I was one of his recruits, if you will.) My reaction to the movie which I saw yesterday? From the very first lines out of his mouth, Penn is Milk. I never for a second doubted that.

But because I think their recent comments are tacky I was unconvinced that Luna and Franco were gay or anything but playing gay (and they are metro, btw.) I don't want to ruin the movie, but it is ironic that one of the points of the movie revolves around Harvey's gaydar. (Luna, Franco: not gay. Sean Penn embodies Milk.) I really can't imagine anyone else portraying Milk. Penn was the fist to sign on to the project. The other two? Bullshit casting.