Video Blogs
TV Shows:
Find Articles On:
Who's onlineThere are currently 14 members and 763 guests online.
|
Readers' Choice: The Top 25 Gay TV Characters Revealed!
What can we say about Jack MacFarland, or “Just Jack!” as he often referred to himself. And when it came to every possible gay stereotype, the boy hit the bullseye each time. Vain and self-absorbed? Check Flighty? Check. Catty? Check. Oversexed. Definitely check. Naturally, he even obsessed over pop culture divas. Who can forget the time he met Cher in person and mistook her for a drag queen? “You're not that great, Mr. Sister. I do a better Cher than you." He realized his mistake when she slapped him and, referencing her iconic line from Moonstruck, told him to “snap out of it.” At which point he promptly fainted. And yet for all the negative stereotypes Jack embodied, Sean Hayes managed to make his character completely endearing and, yes, strangely palatable for straight audiences. Hayes earned seven Emmy nods and one win for his over-the-top portrayal. No surprise then that two years after Will & Grace went off the air, this comic creation would still rank as number two on our list. The boy is simply unforgettable.
Showtimes’s Queer as Folk wrapped up its 5-year run in 2005, but the anti-hero of the show, Brian Kinney (Gale Harold), still managed to win the most votes from AfterElton.com readers. It’s likely that if there’d been a vote for least popular gay character, he’d have won that, too. That’s partly because Brian Kinney pretty much wins at everything he does, and partly because the character is a very polarizing one in the gay community. Handsome, arrogant, successful, and slutty, Brian spent five seasons running from love, almost-but-not-quite selling his soul for money and power, and drinking, drugging, and clubbing while trying to hide most of his good deeds – and the fact that he had a heart – from everyone around him. All of those contradictory qualities might make for good drama, but they don’t make Brian Kinney the best representative of the gay community in TV history. His character was often criticized for perpetuating negative stereotypes about gay men, even while his bad boy persona won him passionate fans.
Brian wasn’t just a bad boy, though; he was considerably more complex than that. The show included storylines in which he fathered a child for a lesbian friend, master-minded the downfall of a homophobic politician, and gave up power and financial success trying to bring the killer of a teenaged gay hustler to justice. He even ultimately admitted he’d fallen in love. And he did it all while wearing Prada and pretending not to give a damn. Really, other than the promiscuity, drug abuse, and anti-social behavior, what’s not to love? Here are Brent and Michael, our Two Gay Guys, discussing the results! -- Also contributing to this article were Dennis Ayers, Brian Juergens, and Christie Keith.
Submitted by on Thu, 2007-11-29 00:33. |
 Recent Comments
Recent blog posts
|
Welcome to AfterElton.com!
- Login
- Join Now!
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media
Matt Fielding
Anyone remember that Melrose Place skit they did on SNL, the one where Wayne from Wayne's World dreams himself onto the show? David Spade was done up in Josie Bissett ("Jane') drag and crying by the pool. Wayne comes by and asks Jane why she's crying, to which she responds "I have the worst part on the show." Wayne's reply? "Yeah right, next to Matt, the token gay guy." And Matt (Jay Mohr) walks up and says "Hello...goodbye!" and leaves.
That skit pretty much sums up Matt Fielding to me.
SNL
You didn't miss much
Actually
He said "That's me! Gotta go!"
And then was gone for the rest of the skit.
- Kirby, moviedearest.blogspot.com
I think that Matt is exactly where he should be
I respect and trust that the character's deeds are as highlighted, but to me he, not only was the character written as a "saint"/"movie of the week token day" but Doug Savant was also not to to par. He has grown so much as a actor andto me it is reflected in his role on Desperate Housewives. Great comedic timing and none of that unremarkable and forgettable work that he did on a show that was all about excess.
One thing that I take issue with that posters who jump to disturbing conclusions simply based on who caught caught our communal attention irrespectively of morality. I did not vote for Brian, although I am not bothered by his topping the list at all as I don't see it as a vote of confidence to his ways, but simply some character who some loved to hate/hate to love.
You sound like a person with a good head on your shoulders and I would not assume that "do-gooder status" or "authencity" due to the characters who've had an impact on us. Liking Matt Fielding or Brian Kenney as not a determinant of who we are an individuals or a community. As said said "Brain was fun to watch." I too would send his butt away is he approached me, but it's not about me or my life. "Depth" is something that we can keep pushing for as a community so that there are more representations of us in the media, but to say that Matt taught people about "real gay life' may not resonate with many people as our lives are as diverse as the people who are on the list. I just want great guy chsracters and if they can be entertaining heroes, bring them on.......
Mr. Savant
A cheer for ''Queer''
This thread is ostensibly about the 25 favorite gay/bisexual characters on TV, but practically 80% of the postings are about ''Queer as Folk,'' and I'm thrilled that Brian Kinney won the top spot. Clearly, ''Queer'' inspires a lot of debate in our community. It never got a single Emmy nomination (even though I believed it deserved the attention). Heck, it never won a GLAAD Media Award in its five-year run, even though it was nominated every year. But I've got to take my hat off to Ron Cowen and Daniel Lipman, who took a British series by Russell Davies and made it their own.
At the time (2000), it was the only hourlong drama that featured nothing BUT gay and lesbian characters. Can we remember how groundbreaking that was? Or how hard it was to cast the role of Brian Kinney because a number of actors (and agents) wouldn't go near it? Love it or loathe it, ''Queer as Folk'' had an impact on many of us. So is it any real surprise that FIVE of ''Queer as Folk's'' characters made this list? Was the show perfect? No. My own gripe is that I wish it included more gay characters of color.
That said, I'm so grateful that ''Queer as Folk'' was on the air. Thanks to ducdebrabant for your eloquent defense of Brian Kinney. To me, Brian is the most complicated gay character I've seen on TV. He was proud of who he was; didn't apologize for being gay, and didn't seek the straight world's approval. Plus, he was hot, sexy and good-looking, and under his sullen exterior, he had a heart of gold and a really screwed-up upbringing. Yeah, he could be an arrogant ass****, but he also could be your best friend and he was afraid to open up to others (and who among us doesn't know that feeling?). I can't thank the writers of ''Queer as Folk'' or Gale Harold enough for giving us a character of such depth and dignity.
About GLAAD
Thank you for the compliment, but I have a small correction. According to this( http://imdb.com/Sections/Awards/GLAAD_Media_Awards/2001 ) the show did win a GLAAD Media Award the first season it was nominated. Thereafter it lost to Six Feet Under twice, once to Playmakers, and once to The L Word.
GLAAD seems to have turned very negative on Queer as Folk at some point, though they never minded using the cast members as hosts or to raise money. The lesbian head of GLAAD gave an interview in which she spoke of it very coldly, and then there was the scandal of the "Out Image Award" won by Randy Harrison.
Harrison polled, as I recall, 23 percent of the vote and Gale Harold 22. The very next day, GLAAD announced the winner: Eden Reigl of All My Children. When the polling closed, as the fans well knew, Reigl had been at 8 percent. There was no mention of the actual totals, and the press release simply stated that she had triumphantly won.
When a firestorm ensued on the Internet, GLAAD's responses took the form entirely of informal emails by GLAAD officers that the recipient was encouraged to re-post. They were based on the strange premise (which was nowhere in the rules) that you had to show up in person to claim the prize (like a raffle) or you lost.
They further claimed, bizarrely, that they had bent over backwards to obtain the presence of Randy Harrison or Gale Harold at a ceremony, but as they had conflicts, they were forced to give it to Reigl, who was available. When all this laborious scheduling negotiation was supposed to take place is obscure, since only a matter of hours elapsed between the closing of the voting and the announcement of a winner.
GLAAD never committed itself to any official explanation in the form of a press release. I don't know what would happen now, since they have a new director, but obviously it's too late to show any more respect to Queer as Folk.
My 2 cents about Brian Kinney.
Alright, it's time for me to throw my 2 cents in the "Brian Kinney won the top spot" debate, or as I call it:debacle.Yes, that's right.I'm one of the nay sayers.I couldn't agree more with my friend JBE that i'm disappointed, but not surprised Brian came out on top.....no pun intended.I too don't understand his appeal.
"Brian's hot, confindent, charismatic, complex, unaplogetic and brutally honest, but has a heart of gold, blah blah blah."Could he be any more overrated?Let's break this down.Is he good looking?Yeah, he's ok, but he's not an exceptional beauty.Gay guys talk about him the way straight guys talk about Jessica Alba.Is he confident?If you define confident as thinking you're "the hottest guy on liberty avenue" without the body or personality to back it up then yeah, he's confident.
Speaking of his personality, he's really lacking in the charisma department.I have to say that that's what really turns me off about him.I just don't see it.I hear people trying to defend what an asshole he is like he's some kind of gay anti-hero.There's one quality about him that I liked, and that's that he didn't give a fuck what straight people thought.I don't think nearly enough gay characters have had that quality, so i'll give him and all you Brian lover's that, but this shit about him being harsh sometimes, but caring about his friends, and having a heart of gold.......were you watching the same show as me?
Not only was he just down right mean most of the time, but he even did things that set the gay community back to further his own personal gain.Does anyone remember season 3 when he helped try to elect the homophobic mayor Stockwell for money and connections?Or how when Ted got in trouble because of Stockwell's crack down on Ted's porn business Emmett had to beg him to give a shit?What's so hot about a guy who would sell out his friends and community?Any sex appeal he supposedly has, which again I don't see, is totally overshadowed by the fact that he's just a loathsome person.
The fact that the men on this site voted him their favorite gay character of all time is very disappointing.Even if you don't think the top spot should go to a saint, or a hero for gay guys, this guy is so far in the opposite direction that it just blows me away.What does it say about gay men when our favorite gay character is not only a negative portrayal, but also abusive towards other gays?I'll post more about what I think of the rest of the list later.
And then?
Does anyone remember season 3 when he helped try to elect the homophobic mayor Stockwell for money and connections?Or how when Ted got in trouble because of Stockwell's crack down on Ted's porn business Emmett had to beg him to give a shit?What's so hot about a guy who would sell out his friends and community?
Did you not watch that storyline till the end? When Brian had his change of heart, he divested himself of everything he owned to pay for the ad blitz that defeated Stockwell. And he did it anonymously.
Yes, I did watch the storyline 'til the end.
Addenda
You can overlook anything you please, and you'd better, because unfairness like this is hard to sustain without serious omissions.
Brian didn't turn on Stockwell just because of the backrooms crackdown, although it's perfectly all right to care about that, even if you don't. Brian started working against Stockwell even while working for him, in the sense that he protected Justin's efforts to undermine him with posters created at the agency (he risked his own job there, by the way, which he then lost).
Also, he found out that Stockwell protected a murderer, and he actively pursued that matter (at possible personal risk). That was the last straw, not the closing of backrooms. As we saw, Stockwell merely drove the sex scene underground.
When Brian took over the Stockwell account in the first place, he had no idea that Stockwell would be scapegoating gay people. What is more, Stockwell's main opponent was no white knight, but a total jerk, as we learned when Brian tried to feed him information.
Yes, he made a few ads for Stockwell, and because Brian was a brilliant ad man, they were good. That's it. They weren't anti-gay ads or even law and order ads; they were merely feel-good family man ads.
If you recall, even when backrooms started closing, the gay community in Pittsburgh was completely apathetic. As long as you're accusing Brian of caring nothing for the gay community (there's truth in that; he was a rugged individualist who didn't care about movements) you might well recall that the community didn't care that much about itself either. Debbie and Justin and a handful of others seemed to form the only oppositiion to Stockwell.
You don't have to overlook anything Brian did wrong, or forget it, but making ads for a client of the agency you work for even after his campaign takes a bad turn is more than outweighed, it seems to me, by completely impoverishing yourself to defeat the man. In the end, what Brian did was sell the gay community (so apathetic until then) on avenging Dumpster Boy, and they're the ones who made the difference,
Brian was never a perfect person but he was always an extraordinary one. A lot of us make compromises in our life, and if you've never been indirectly responsible (by voting for the wrong guy, for example) for something wrong in the body politic, I'd be very much surprised. But I'd be a lot more surprised if you'd ever sold your car and your furniture and emptied your bank account to defeat a Rick Santorum anywhere.
Brian sacrificed his job for Justin, then sacrificed all his assets (anonymously) to defeat Stockwell. That wasn't the first time he'd made a large sacrifice, either. He sacrificed Michael's friendship, even making Michael hate him, to break the bond enough for Michael to go to David.
For a selfish guy, he did a few things in his life that deserve to be factored in, not willfully ignored. You can dislike him if you please, but here those things are to be read by anybody who won't learn them from you.
A lot of people, for reasons impossible to analyze without knowing them better, viscerally dislike Brian Kinney, and others respond to him positively. I've noticed that his fans are much less likely to skate over the bad things he did than his detractors are to omit his good actions, or do backflips to minimize them.
The thing about good deeds is that it's always possible to tarnish them by finding a selfish psychological imperative to explain them. Hell, you can do it with St. Francis of Assisi. But the fact that Brian did even his good deeds for the sake of his own conscience, not for the aplause of the crowd, is a kind of "selfishness" more people might want to practice.
that may be the funniest thing i've ever read.
oh dear.
let me guess...you write Brian slash/fic, don't you?
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
that may be the stupidest question I've ever been asked.
oh dear.
let me guess...that's as good as your "zingers" ever get. try putting more cleverness into the post than into the choice of avatar.
the answer to your query is no.
[uncapitalized in deference to the previous poster]
why so defensive?
seriously...calm down.
I happen to think that Brian is a garish, vulgar, GAY CARTOON CHARACTER. The only thing missing is a scene of him twirling a mustache as he commits his dastardly deeds. he's a one note joke. a joke that quickly became tiresome. The fact that you are so willing to espouse these long winded rants about how THIS detail proves THIS point, and THIS scene proves EVERYONE is wrong....
seriously...calm down.
Some of us just don't like him.
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
Calmly
you're doing it again
to paraphrase Homer Simpson "you take forever to say nothing".
I (and a lot of other people) prefer complicated, well written gay characters over the gay looney tunes in QAF. (especially brian, whose personality changed depending on what the plot required him to do). It's OKAY that you like Brian, but don't fool yourself (or us) into believing that he was anything but a tool.
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
so are you
You're damned right it's OKAY that I prefer Brian. It's also okay that he won this poll. You ("and a lot of other people") can prefer fleas to Ferraris for all I care; you're the one who attacked me, not the other way around. But if you ever put up an actual argument instead of trying to shut one down, I'll respond -- if I choose -- at any length I choose.
You're right about one thing
You certainly did say plenty, but it doesn't add up to much. I can read more than 50 words, if those words have any kind of real insight, which yours don't (it WAS entertaining, though). It reminded me of the same kind of obsession that Annie Wilkes must have had about Misery Chastain.
"trust me Brian...it's for the best"
I have put up actual arguments. He's a badly written cartoon character who was treated like SYBIL, giving him multiple personalities to fit the needs of that particular episode's plot.
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
Still being silly, eh?
I have plenty of insight into the show, and my comments didn't lack it, or you'd have pointed out specifically where I went wrong (as I did, much to your chagrin, with the person who brought up the Stockwell events).
You couldn't, so you didn't, and instead you pretended the comments were a knee slapper, characterized me as a slash fiction writer, and hid behind a screen of ridicule and vitriol. Which you're still doing, I see.
If you had searched for an example of Brian's supposed inconsistency with the same vigor that you searched for the right picture of Kathy Bates, I might have more respect for you. Alas, as I observed before, you're entirely about insults and avatars.
Your "arguments" aren't arguments, they're just assertions -- sweeping generalities with no examples to support them. You chide me for challenging somebody else's examples, and you chide me for providing my own, but without evidence, there's nothing, and you offer none.
I happen to think Brian was an extremely consistent character up till Season 5, when he started pursuing Justin in a conventionally romantic way, saying "I love you," buying a dream house, proposing. But the show actually acknowledged that -- Justin told him he wasn't being true to himself. If you want to point to a character inconsistency in the first 4 seasons, I'm ready to entertain an actual argument.
There were a lot of things in the show that were sloppy or inconsistent or unrealistic or factually problematical, but Brian's character wasn't one of them, it seems to me. Now if you want to talk about the fact that Mikey -- who was never shown interacting with Gus before, who never showed the slightest interest in any child -- is suddenly discovered to be perfect daddy material when Melanie wants somebody other than Brian as a sperm donor, that's a case of multiple personalities.
Nothing about that made sense. Melanie's decision insured that their two children had absolutely no DNA in common. Plus, she acceded to demands for parental rights that as a lawyer, she never would have done. Yet another complication, after the Guillaume incident? I hardly think so. And that's not even to mention the sudden miracle cure for endometriosis that enabled her to get pregnant at all.
But Brian was always Brian, I thought, until he consciously tried to be somebody else. People sometimes do that. I didn't like it much, but it can easily be argued that it's not a character inconsistency, just a plot development.
It wasn't in response to nothing, either. The bombing of Babylon, and his fear that he might have lost Justin, started it off. If Brian had suddenly, apropos of nothing, turned into a sloppy romantic, if Justin had said yes, and if they had married and moved into that house, it would be a clear cut case of what you're talking about.
I personally wanted them to stay together, but not like that. Well, the show kept Brian consistent by having Justin recognize the inconsistency. And so Brian ended as he began. A lot of us had a problem with the ending they chose (it seemed somehow punitive to me), but for all the stages he went through, he was still recognizably Brian.
still being disturbingly obsessed, eh?
Brian was a one note character, until they realized that he was TOO monstrous, and implausibly tried to "humanize" him. too little, too late.
This was only one problem with a show that had a ton of them. they couldn't decide whether to be soft core porn, turgid soap opera, or realistic "issue" show, so they tried to do it all at once. In their attempt to have something for everyone, they blew their chance at becoming the gay and tv milestone they should have been.
And that's a shame.http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
3 or 4 episodes per season?
How you feel about the characters, I don't care. Feel any way you please. But to say that Brian was portrayed inconsistently throughout the series is to make a statement of fact, and that cries out for examples. No wonder you don't have any. Maybe you would have to watch the series again (or at least those three or four episodes) to recall any specifics, but I didn't. Not surprisingly, I remember it better than you do.
The reason they never went into the panic mode you describe is that he was by far the most popular character on their most popular show. The fans didn't consider him monstrous, or if they did, they kept tuning in anyway. Cowan and Lippman had a much bigger incentive to leave him exactly the same.
In the final season, when Brian's behavior changed the most, it was in order to give the show closure, not to correct a character who was giving them audience problems. Brian was as popular as ever, and it was their last season. The could do whatever they pleased; no more need to keep the show running. They merely had to try to give it a dramatic ending so that the whole DVD series would have a beginning, middle and end.
But it was good. The melodrama worked; people were intrigued and emotionally involved. The sex worked; people were titillated and taken aback by the show's overall frankness. The politics worked; people thought about the issues and discussed them. 50 dedicated websites, the corporate website, IMDB and another dozen Yahoo message boards demonstrated all of this weekly.
I'll be the first to admit the show had its faults, but it wasn't popular for nothing. And one thing in particular they got very right: I'm not alone in thing Brian Kinney was one of the most iconic, fascinating and indelible characters ever to appear in a dramatic series.
I'm not a masochist!
3 or 4 episodes a season is all i could stand. I couldn't take much more of the histrionics followed by fake sincerity followed by ludicrous sex scene (in which the lead actors contorted themselves to keep from showing weenage). believe me, i was able to get the gist in those few episodes, because the whole damn thing was SO DAMN OBVIOUS.
"I'm not alone in thinking Brian Kinney was one of the most iconic, fascinating and indelible characters ever to appear in a dramatic series."
Yes, I know...and that's the sad part.
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
And if you want a picture of the person you remind ME of:
It's Nelson Muntz:
The beginning of wisdom for you will be learning you can't win every dispute with Ha ha!
pot...meet kettle
This coming from a person who ended a response to me with this: "But if you ever put up an actual argument instead of trying to shut one down, I'll respond -- if I choose -- at any length I choose."
That's the equivalent of sticking your tongue out and going "NYAH NYAH NYAH".
maybe if you spent more time on creating a reasonably intelligent response instead of looking for pictures of nelson muntz...
http://whitewingeddove.blogspot.com/
Uh uh
My friend I should
have waited for you to post then I could have saved myself a lot of typing! You did a much better job of communicating how I felt about the character of Brian Kinney then I did. Now if I could only get that star button to work!
Cheers
JBE
Yes you could have
Sorry to disappoint
you I just finished QAF two months ago, and did not blackout once! Why the abuse, it is only a TV show and an entertaining but mediocre one at that, nothing to get excited about.
Cheers
JBE
Only a show?
Actually, "only a TV show and an entertaining but mediocre one at that" describes "Cavemen." It does not describe one of the most groundbreaking shows in the history of television, a cultural phenomenon of deep importance both historically and personally to millions of people.
It was not only the first American television series concerned entirely with gay people, it was just about the last one to this very moment about gay men. And there is every indication that when "The L Word" ends, Showtime will imitate HBO and never do anything of the kind again (even "Six Feet Under" folded its gay plot into a larger heterosexual family drama, and the network has avoided the subject ever since).
QAF's only male successors have been soft-core porn like "Dante's Cove" on Here! and an African-American clone of itself -- with worse acting, writing and production values -- on Logo. And please note, it was on premium cable -- not confined to the ghetto of a gay channel.
The justified excitement that still greets it all over the world is an event in the lives of all its viewers. I'm astonished that any gay man can already take it so completely for granted when the number of gay characters on regular television is lower than it has been for years.
Anybody wanting to vote for a favorite gay character here either has to pick a supporting one on a current show of which that character is not the focus (and with whose actual romantic life the show is almost never seen to concern itself) or delve into the past of gay programming -- series that were cancelled in some cases more than a decade ago.
The number of gay characters on TV, even historically, is still rididulously finite. "Queer as Folk" definitely had its flaws, and it was certainly no "Sopranos," but it was not only anything.
I was commenting more
on the quality of the show not its' cultural significance. Don't get me wrong QAF had its' good points, but it could have been a heck of a lot better. The UK QAF seemed so much better what I have seen of it. GLBT people have made tremendous strides in many parts of the world without a lot of help from TV shows including QAF. I don't think gay marriage passing in Canada had much to do with QAF being shown, most people never watched it, it had more to do with the Canadian charter of human rights and freedoms that was passed in the 80's, and the court challenges gay people made against discrimination.
Cheers
JBE
However ...
Whether QAF caused change or merely marked it is a question. I argue that it did both.
I cannot speak about Canadian politics with any authority, but what I can say is what any poller will tell you -- a book, a play, a movie need not have an enormous audience to have an enormous influence. There is a ripple effect, especially if it reaches opinion leaders (who aren't necessarily important people in the ordinary sense; maybe just people who are listened to at work or at the PTA).
Canada may not have needed QAF to achieve a change in its laws, but a change in law doesn't automatically change all attitudes. Moreover, the attitude that "gay people ought to be equal under the law" doesn't necessarily equate to the attitude that "gay people are full human beings with significant differences among them and a range of issues of which I am fully cognizant ... and gee, I would be interested in hanging out with them more."
I have had many lengthy discussions online with heterosexuals (particularly women) apropos of QAF, and I know that many of them were Canadians because I had many of these conversations on the web boards of Showcase, the Canadian entity, when those existed. I know for a fact that QAF educated those people, and what is more, I know that they were also educated by the general discussions that followed each episode. Some were even educated by Yours Truly.
And none of them needed any discussion to be spontaneously involved on an emotional, spiritual and empathetic level -- for the first time in their lives -- with a love affair between two men. For a lot of people, trust me, Brian and Justin have loomed as large as Rhett and Scarlett, or Rick and Elsa.
Exactly the same thing is happening all over the world. There are not only websites in many languages dedicated to Gale Harold, but there are websites dedicated to QAF and even to Brian and Justin as a couple. Of all the factors influencing Canadian thinking, I doubt very much that QAF was the least significant.
But even if every mind in Canada or elswehere had already been changed before Queer as Folk went on the air, it would be important. Because even if milestones don't create distance, nobody thinks as clearly about distance without any milestones.
Moreover, we are not merely parts of a body politic, we are people. A 15 year old gay person in Saskatchewan seeking personal validation, role models, a sense of belonging, a feeling of community, and way of styling his future life and conversation will be far more likely to turn to Queer as Folk than to the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, which is a document, I expect, a lot less expansive and nuanced than a television series running 5 years with rich and suggestive characters.
Maybe that kid will want to tell homophobes off as Brian does, maybe he'll want to marry as Michael does, maybe he'll hope that his plainness will still attract a boyfriend like Blake, maybe he'll wish he had a mother like Debbie, maybe he'll lick envelopes to defeat a candidate like Stockwell. And maybe, too, he'll turn down that hit of crystal meth, and be sure to use a condom at all times.
Equality before the law is of enormous importance, but what kind of cakes and ale we consume matters too. Yes, the show could have been better. So could the British version. So could almost anything.
In particular, the British version could have gone on for 5 years instead of 10 episodes (less than half of the American series' first season). The very fact that the American Queer as Folk lasted long enough to touch on so many issues and fix itself so firmly in viewers' minds and lives accounted for some of its ups and downs. Russell Davies has always spoken respectfully of it, and in particular of the way it managed to sustain itself so long. Moreover, there are many aspects of it I prefer to the British version. (And I'm not quite, in any case, sure how anybody who hates Brian manages to love Stuart.)
But if art is all you care about, you might just as well compare the show to Hill Street Blues or The Mary Tyler Moore Show or The West Wing, or even Playhouse 90. Queer as Folk was ours. Finally!!! Forget the miracle endometriosis cure, or whether Justin was righthanded or ambidextrous, or a thousand other quibbles. Brian drove that jeep through a window, Emmett got dragged out of that funeral, Debbie told off that customs official, Mel and Linds held that wedding, Ted walked into that rehab facility ... for all of us. A lot of us know it, too. And we appreciate it.
It's all subjective
Ok, took another look over the list to see why Matt Fielding didn't make the top 25, since as Lancer pointed out, he could be considered a 'groundbreaking' character from the early ninties.
What I found looking at these top 25, was most had one or a combination of characteristics which people love to see. They have attitude, toughness, complications, struggles with their homosexuality, passionate, crudeness, violence or could kick ass verbally or physically if needed. Most of the characters on this list are far from cuddly and sweet like Matt Fielding. The guy was too damn nice!!
When I look over the reveiws of those who love the Brian Kinney character, most point out his toughness and take no BS attiude, not giving a damn who liked or disliked him, and he didn't seek approval from anyone, epsecially the straight community. I think these are some of the main reasons why he topped the list. Oh, and nearly all these characters on the list, bar a few, had a lip lock. Matt Fielding didn't kiss once on camera in all those years he starred in Melrose Place. We came close, but FOX choked and it was edited out. The kissing on camera is a very important factor in a gay storyline. I think if the Matt Fielding character had shared a kiss or two he would have made the list, even with his niceness.
But what we see is very subjective. Hell, I don't think that Luke Snyder of ATWT should be at number six, I don't think his character deserved to be above many others on the list, but hay, he kissed twice on camera about two months ago in 'daytime' and that was considered very 'groundbreaking' for US daytime TV. But nothing much has happened since except an attempted shooting of Luke from Noah's crazed father, which more or less has halted the progression of the storyline since Luke is now hold-up in a wheelchair. Also a lovely little excuse to squash the intimacy between Luke and Noah. Fans has to be satisfied with a few hand holds, leg lifts and talk in the kitchen, but they kissed in daytime, not the first mind you since 'Passions' got their first, but this kiss was the one which garnered publicity . Personally, I'm very disappointed in CBS and ATWT since it is blatently obvious the affection and story development between Luke and Noah has been severly subdued. Even the air time has been cut short to five minutes or so for one or two eps a week, if lucky. But the kiss is there, so number six it is.
Hell, if I had my list 'John Paul' of HollyOaks would be number one followed by 'David Fisher' of Six Feet Under at number two and 'Kevin Walker' of Brothers & Sisters at number three. But it really is a matter of opinion, and the people have spoken...Brian Kinney is considered number one, voted by the people.
By the way
Speaking of Fox editing kisses out, etc. ....
You know, David Marshall Grant's character on Thirtysomething might have become one of my favorite characters, but they showed him in bed early on with Peter Frechette, and the homophobes screamed bloody murder. There was no real skin, and they weren't making love. They were just talking in the aftermath. But the show cut the character back and then out, and that was it. I like David Marshall Grant anyway, and like all the characters on Thirtysomething, his was well-written.
Monday Morning Update
With over 100 votes so far over the weekend, Brian is still ahead by a large margin (46%) in my blog poll. In contrast, Kevin Walker is currently at second with just 16%, followed by Captain Jack with 9%. The "other" Jack ("Just Jack!") is behind with barely 4%.
Click here to to vote if you want to and haven't already.
- Kirby, moviedearest.blogspot.com
Question
Have you designated a cut-off date? I didn't notice one.
It will run for one week
It will close at 12:01 AM December 8, Saturday.
- Kirby, moviedearest.blogspot.com
Brian Kinney R.I.P.
This is my final comment on the Top 25 selection. First of all I thank AfterElton for letting us vote on our favourite gay TV characters, it certainly produced some interesting results. One of the things I noticed was that I had not seen most of the TV shows that have gay characters (probably because I do not watch soap operas, or much TV for that matter).
Another surprise for me was how passionate people were about the selections. I am not sure what this says about our society when people respond with near religious fervor over the results of a survey about a bunch of TV actors! On the other hand World AIDS day went by with barely a ripple! Hmmmm, interesting contrast, but that is another forum topic.
As for Brian Kinney's character, I would love to know what the actor Gale Harold (who seems like a really cool guy) thought about the discussions! He would probably be bemused about how seriously people were taking his character. I have already stated my views about Brian Kinney so I will not restate them here, I don't want to start another 111 comments! Just let me say that if the survey was about the most contradictory, controversial, or convoluted gay TV character then he would have been my #1. Furthermore, contrary to the belief of some people I did not "dislike" Brian Kinney (although in season 1 he was a bit much), he had many admirable qualities such as loyalty to friends, self-confidence, and a willingness to stand up to straight bigotry. I just wish he had been a more well-rounded person in terms of letting other people into his life (he was near the end). He also reaffirmed my belief that in the gay sub-culture if you are sexy you can get away with "murder" in terms of your behaviour. That is something I will never respect or appreciate.
Cheers
JBE
Okay, let's talk about AIDS
I doubt very much that Gale Harold has read any of these comments, though I'm sure he knows he won this poll and appreciates it.
As for World AIDS Day, what those of us who have commented here did or didn't do about World AIDS Day you don't happen to know. Not every ripple made in the world will rock your particular boat.
You can make almost anything seem trivial by contrast with something else. The activities that take place on World AIDS Day are arguably more trivial that yesterday's vote in Russia, which may mark another step in the comeback of an aggressive Soviet-style dictatorship, more trivial than global climate change (60 percent of the water in La Paz comes from glaciers that will be gone in 3 years; Beijing is about to empty its last local source of water, an underground aquifer), more trivial than the cutting down of the rain forest (the loss of thousands of indigenous plant species may rob us of hundreds of now-unknown potential medicines, including for HIV).
I make no apologies for being passionate about the first (and it appears the last) network dramatic series about gay men. If nobody had ever been passionate about this trivial thing, it would never have come to pass. And the same goes for the British series that preceded it.
Nothing new, good or significant happens without a little passion. And not all of us need a World AIDS Day to care about, or do something about, AIDS. I am of exactly the generation that was decimated by the first wave of AIDS, and all my dead friends dreamed of a TV show about themselves, and didn't live to see one. Would to God they had. They wouldn't have considered it trivial at all.
My ex-lover, who is HIV-positive, is very fond of it. I've raised money for God's Love - We Deliver (which provides meals for AIDS shut-ins), and I didn't do it one day out of the year. I don't care if the officially designated day of remembrance passed "without a ripple" on this particular website or not. Some of us remember it every day. And Queer as Folk hardly neglected the disease Ben Bruckner lived with and Vic Grassi died of. There's trivial and then there's trivial.
Shocked
Can't relate
Combine that with...
...Hal Sparks rather limited acting ability, and crash. It's difficult to become interested in a character when you can't get past bad acting. I don't know how it is the guy from "Talk Soup" and "Chopper Chicks in Zombietown" lands a leading role in a dramatic series, but QAF certainly suffered for it. At least he's cute.
Yeah
Sparks's acting is pretty crude, and his personality is even cruder. I think he just got away with it actingwise, but I'm not confused about why he hasn't gotten other dramatic roles. He was really born to be a game show host, I think, and I don't mean that to be insulting. There's a definite art to that, and God knows a lot of money in it.
It might have been desperation casting. I know they had trouble casting Brian. They called every agent in Hollywood, and a lot of actors either wouldn't consider it or made appointments and simply didn't keep them. At the last minute, Gale Harold (their words) "fell from the sky." Maybe they had the same problem with Mikey, and Hal was way down their list.
Personally, I was excited when he was cast, since I liked him on "Talk Soup" and had never seen him act at all. I was curious. What's more, he and Gless were the only performers I had any familiarity with whatsoever.
Well, he's not the worst that ever lived, but his acting is very superficial and contrived. I always felt he was trying to woo audiences into liking his underlying bratty little boy persona, more than the Michael character. He had exactly the same problem in "Dude, Where's My Car?" You can tell from the script that he's supposed to be a nerd, but Hal clearly thinks he's too cool for school, and he simply couldn't do it. He just played Hal.
As he started to do publicity and interviews for QAF I found my good will towards him eroding more and more. Faux pas after faux pas. First of all, I don't care for his views. He's very cult-ish, into "The Secret" and all that, and he has rather weird ideas about the causes and nature of disease.
Plus, he establishes his heterosexuality forcefully and heavy-handedly in every single interview (eventually it became a running joke, and he still does it). I wonder if he thinks it's "playing gay" that has held him back. He actually attacked "Brokeback Mountain."
Finally, in his interviews since the show went off the air he's either tactless (telling us about his houseguest Harris Allen masturbating a lot) or kind of mean about his costars. None of them have said much about him at all, let alone anything negative.
I think he's pretty too (he has a gorgeous complexion), but his personality ruins it. His recent rock star delusion and that weird Beatles haircust constitute the nadir. His singing voice has no musicality (he just screams) and his notion of what a rock singer should look like is rather dated.
I know that quite a few people liked him on the show and still like him off it, and I don't mean them any disrespect. The show did work, and if Hal had been really impossible to take, it wouldn't have. His character was the everyman, the point of view, our way in, the one most of us identified with. But that funny walk he did, and the silly way he affected to ride a bicycle, and the over-emphatic delivery of every syllable (your microphone works fine, Hal) tried my patience.
Funny Hal
He was really born to be a game show host
I really enjoy him on those VH1 "I love.." specials, he's quite funny ("Keep your pope fresh!" he said, referencing the pope-mobile.) And he was quick-witted and humorous on that $25,000 Pyramid knock-off that was on a few years back. I can't believe I'm confessing to having seen it, but yeah, he's talented and funny just being himself.
I didn't know about his jerky ways as of late. How very un-Mikey of him.
Attitude made up for his looks....
Personally I think the 2 hottest regulars on the show were Michael (Hal Sparks) and Jusitn (Randy Harrison). But Brian's attitude added to his allure. The "you can't have me" attitude turns some guys on.
As long as I'm being very supeficial about the characters on QAF, two other honorable mentions in the HOT LOOKS catagory is Ted's drug addict boyfriend (played by Dean Anderson) and Justin's violin playing love interest. Either one of those guys could eat crackers in my bed anytime!
Justin
Half in agreement
I'm with you about Blake (Dean Anderson). I hated it when he left the show and jumped up and down when he came back. Not so much because he was cute, but because he was such a touching character and so well acted. In fact, Scott Lowell's acting on the show was better in any scene he did with Anderson than with almost anybody else.
But Ethan Gold (Fab Filippo) gave me the creeps. From the first scene, he oversold himself. The "I just met you but I want to be your lover forever and you'll never leave the pedestal I'll put you on" thing he used on somebody else's boyfriend while simultaneously claiming some sort of moral high ground grossed me out. Plus, I thought he was doughy, and I hated the soul patch.
By the way, the Israeli fans wanted Justin to end up with him. They saw him as a nice Jewish boy. They were royally pissed when he turned out to be be full of merde, but I saw it coming from the very beginning.
Yum Yum
I totally agree with the violinist, I have always had a soft spot for the sensitive artistic types with dark curly hair. The first crush I ever had on a guy (he was 13 and I was 12) was a dark haired guy with curly hair. He looked like somebody you would see in a Raffaelo painting.
As for Blake he also was quite sexy, I hate to say it but the fact that he struggled so hard to beat his drug addiction made him even sexier.
Only question is Justin what is this about eating crackers in your bed?
Cheers
JBE
QAF finally gets the recognition it so deserved
Portland Oregonian article
http://www.oregonlive.com/movies/index.ssf/2007/12/afterelton_readers_choose_best.html
Brian was complicated and difficult and sometimes impossible to like. But he also was riveting, and made so real by Harold that I sometimes -- when the writing/storylines got really cheesy -- was watching this show just for him. You would, too, I'd wager.
The Results ...
... are in: Click here.
- Kirby, moviedearest.blogspot.com