This week, Newsweek writer Ramin Setoodeh caused widespread outrage when he suggested that gay actors have a hard time playing it straight.
He even claimed that one of the reasons the Broadway revival of "Promises, Promises" was getting such bad reviews is because Sean Hayes, of "Will and Grace" fame, can't convincingly play a straight man.
To say that Setoodeh is missing the point is a little obvious, but there's another point that I think a lot of people are missing.
Do gay actors have a hard time playing it straight? Not necessarily. (See Rock Hudson)
Do people have a hard time accepting that a character is straight when they know the actor playing him/her is gay?
That would be the trickier question.
I remember my first crush--Rupert Everett (My Best Friend's Wedding)
I remember hearing that he was gay, and being shocked.
A gay guy playing a gay guy? Amazing.
Admittedly, though, every other movie I saw Rupert in when he wasn't playing a gay man was...a little hard to take.
Whether we like it or not, our perceptions of our performers is sometimes based on our knowledge of their personal life.
This isn't limited strictly to gay actors. Katie Holmes wasn't asked to reprise her Batman Begins character for The Dark Knight because of her marriage to Tom Cruise.
Megan Fox will probably never be asked to play anybody with a brain cell thanks to her inability to form a sentence in whatever interview she does.
That's not even taking into consideration how many television stars failed for years to make it in movies because America only wanted to see them as one particular character.
The trouble isn't whether or not a gay actor can play a straight character. The trouble is that once an audience is aware you're gay, they might not accept you as being straight. Suddenly any slightly feminine gesture becomes a critical flaw.
Forget that Hugh Grant might be the gayest actor of all time when it comes to mannerisms--in real life, he likes women, so people are free to accept that he could actually fall in love with whatever girl they stick him with--of course, nobody's forgotten about that little prostitution thing yet, have they? They've just chosen not to care.
That's the thing--audiences might not care you're gay, but that means you then have to work twice as hard to suspend their disbelief. I think it would be reasonable to say that Sean Hayes isn't a good enough actor to pull that off, and my old crush Rupert Everett might not be either.
It doesn't matter why an audience doesn't like or believe you. It's your job to make them. They paid for the tickets, which means they can like or dislike you for whatever reason they want.
I'll never be able to truly enjoy an Angelina Jolie performance because of how I feel about her personally, and that's my right as a movie-goer and general consumer.
Don't like it?
Oh well.
That's show business.
He even claimed that one of the reasons the Broadway revival of "Promises, Promises" was getting such bad reviews is because Sean Hayes, of "Will and Grace" fame, can't convincingly play a straight man.
To say that Setoodeh is missing the point is a little obvious, but there's another point that I think a lot of people are missing.
Do gay actors have a hard time playing it straight? Not necessarily. (See Rock Hudson)
Do people have a hard time accepting that a character is straight when they know the actor playing him/her is gay?
That would be the trickier question.
I remember my first crush--Rupert Everett (My Best Friend's Wedding)
I remember hearing that he was gay, and being shocked.
A gay guy playing a gay guy? Amazing.
Admittedly, though, every other movie I saw Rupert in when he wasn't playing a gay man was...a little hard to take.
Whether we like it or not, our perceptions of our performers is sometimes based on our knowledge of their personal life.
This isn't limited strictly to gay actors. Katie Holmes wasn't asked to reprise her Batman Begins character for The Dark Knight because of her marriage to Tom Cruise.
Megan Fox will probably never be asked to play anybody with a brain cell thanks to her inability to form a sentence in whatever interview she does.
That's not even taking into consideration how many television stars failed for years to make it in movies because America only wanted to see them as one particular character.
The trouble isn't whether or not a gay actor can play a straight character. The trouble is that once an audience is aware you're gay, they might not accept you as being straight. Suddenly any slightly feminine gesture becomes a critical flaw.
Forget that Hugh Grant might be the gayest actor of all time when it comes to mannerisms--in real life, he likes women, so people are free to accept that he could actually fall in love with whatever girl they stick him with--of course, nobody's forgotten about that little prostitution thing yet, have they? They've just chosen not to care.
That's the thing--audiences might not care you're gay, but that means you then have to work twice as hard to suspend their disbelief. I think it would be reasonable to say that Sean Hayes isn't a good enough actor to pull that off, and my old crush Rupert Everett might not be either.
It doesn't matter why an audience doesn't like or believe you. It's your job to make them. They paid for the tickets, which means they can like or dislike you for whatever reason they want.
I'll never be able to truly enjoy an Angelina Jolie performance because of how I feel about her personally, and that's my right as a movie-goer and general consumer.
Don't like it?
Oh well.
That's show business.
Comments
Post a Comment