What 's the first American film that had an overtly, out of the closet homosexual character that was specifically recognized or understood to be gay?
This is going to be a tough question, because there were many films that had characters who some viewers would consider obviously gay but others would not. I realize this is the sort of thing your OP is meant to exclude, but how overt is overt? It’s pretty clear to me that there’s a gay character in 1933’s 42nd Street, or even earlier in The Broadway Melody (1929), but they weren’t shown making out with other men or anything.
Are you looking for a character who actually says “I’m a homosexual”, one who declares love for a person of the same sex, an onscreen kiss, or what?
I saw James Coco say it to Marsha Mason in 1981’s Only When ILaugh. Right there in her kitchen.
TEA: I’m sure that can’t be the first time it happened. Just the first time I ever saw it.
There’s no “maybe” in Lot in Sodom (1933!), although it’s not the main characters getting it on.
I question calling ancient characters homosexuals. They may have engaged in homosexual acts, but this very different from saying they are homosexuals in the modern sense. There was a differnet understanding gender and sexuality in the ancient near-East.
It was a long time coming but finally Different From Others which was the first feature to openly deal with gay themes was made in 1919.
Lot in Sodom is also an art film, never intended for more than a tiny and presumably sophisticated audience.
Although, referring to my previous post, it is a little lacking in Americanness for the OP.
So? What does that have to do with the homosexuality of the characters?
Unless I’m mistaken, it was made at the Eastman School of Music in Rochester, NY.
He meant Different from Others, which is a German film.
Thinking of German films, I believe Maedchen in Uniform (1931) was the first feature film with a lesbian lead character. It was released in the US, but was soon censored by having footage removed. The subtitles also rather loosely translated some dialogue to make it less overtly homosexual. At a school party the young heroine announces that she’s in love with her (female) teacher, but the English subtitles have her merely offering a toast in honor of the teacher.
Yes, it was very different from that of 1933 America.
The orgy in the temple seems to be tied to religious ritual, ending as it does in a human sacrifice, but it is rather clear from facial expressions that sexual arousal and release are involved as well. And towards the end, Lot is clearly doing his best to sell the men of Sodom on the pleasures of heterosexual intercourse, which leaves them cold, despite the fact that he’s offering them his rather delectable daughters. The natural conclusion is that the men prefer sex with other men to sex with women, which would make them homosexuals, in common usage of the word.
True. If the OP meant to limit discussion to popular, mainstream films, Lot in Sodom would not qualify. Neither would Kenneth Anger’s Fireworks (1947), a short depicting the homoerotic, violent dream of a teenager, which was declared “art” by the California Supreme Court.
And if there were a film made in the ancient near-East you would have a valid point.
However, we’re talking about 20th century films and the meanings they would convey to contemporary audiences.
For a mainstream American movie, 1962’s Advise and Consent would have to be one of the earliest films that qualify under the thread’s topic.