:smack:
I am constantly confusing those two for some reason. Oh well, since I’m posting again, let me just add EXTRA kudos to Lumet for leaving in Sonny’s sexuality givn the star Al Pacino’s own homophobic response to the character (apparently, he demanded it be written into his contract that there would be no scene in the film depicting him physically interacting with a gay character, e.g. no kissing scenes.)
As Good As It Gets prominently featured a gay character played by Greg Kinnear. If I recall correctly, Cuba Gooding Jr.'s role in the film was also gay.
Thanks. And thank goodness for Netflix. I’ve added *Dante’s Cove, Rick & Steve, The Lair, *and two of the Donald Strachey films to my queue. And here I was thinking I was running out of things to Netflix.
Not that I doubt your word, but I find it hard to believe that Vito Russo wouldn’t have mentioned something like this in his book on gay cinema “The Celluloid Closet”. I also seem to recall a scene between Pacino and Chris Sarandon with some physical intimacy (face caresses specifically) but it’s been yonks since I’ve seen the film.
Odd that Pacino would take on the role in “Cruising” just a few years later if he were that averse to touching other men in a sexual fashion on-screen.
I take no responsibility for The Lair.
In the interest in furthering discussion — and so this doesn’t turn into a thread about Let’s Name All The Movies We Can Think Of With LGBT In It — I’ll pose a few questions.
Does a movie with a gay character necessarily have to be about being gay? Is it better for the character’s sexuality to be a throw-away tidbit, not central to the plot, barely worthy of mention, and completely accepted… or for an audience to appreciate the character, must the character’s sexuality be a central theme? (In the first case, if the character’s sexuality is easily overlooked, it can also be easily be changed in the script; in the second, if it’s central to the plot, it moves further from the mainstream, by Hollywood’s logic.)
For instance, and in all seriousness, what if you took an ordinary action film with a background romantic subplot (such as Die Hard) and made the John McLane/Holly Genarro relationship a pair of gay men, or gay women? As in the original, both characters would be strongly written in a positive light and get to do heroic things. Would a mainstream audience get that, as long as it had sufficient butt-kicking in it?
The Krays didn’t make any special issue out of the fact that one of its two lead characters was gay. But it doesn’t qualify under the standards of the OP being as it was a British film made in 1990. And arguably it’s further disqualified by the fact that it’s based on real people so it was reality and not the writer who made the character gay.
I will hesitatingly throw out the not terribly great comedic parody D.E.B.S. as a film where the lesbianism of the main characters really isn’t that central to the plot. It would have worked just as well ( plotwise ) with heterosexual characters.
It seems like the gay character is relegated to the “best friend” role in most situations. It’d be nice if, at some point, gay people could be protagonists in movies which are not focused on their gayness per se. A couple of TV shows have done this successfully, but not many movies have. This thread has turned into scrounging around for gay characters in any movie you can think of, which sort of proves the OP’s point, that there just aren’t that many movies with a gay protagonist. Most are in supporting roles or are gay tragedies like *Brokeback Mountain * or Boys Don’t Cry. I hope it changes at some point, and I think people are ready for it, but apparently the studios aren’t yet, despite the success of Brokeback.
No, not at all. But there is an assumption of heterosexuality, in life and in fiction, that has to be overcome somehow. So the filmmaker has to decide how to use limited storytelling time if the character’s sexuality isn’t central to the story.
here! has produced a few films, Tides of War (a.k.a. Phantom Below), Deadly Skies and Trapped!, that did this. in ToW the lead character is a gay submarine commander who’s in a long-term relationship with his second-in-command. There’s a non-explicit sex scene in the first few minutes that establishes the relationship. Deadly Skies has a more explicit scene and a mention of the lead’s being discharged from the military under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Trapped! had some non-sexual scenes that established the relationship between the lead and her partner. They were no different from any of 100 similar scenes in 100 similar action films. So yeah, it can easily be done.
Except of course to increase their mainstream marketability these three films were also released internationally with the gay-identifying scenes omitted.
That’s the fine line, though — if the relationship isn’t integral to the plot, it’s easy to lose it on the cutting-room floor. If it’s essential to the plot, you narrow your demographic scope.
But seriously, it can’t be that hard to make a mainstream movie with a gay central character. Hollywood writers can do it, why can’t we? Based on the dreck that gets pumped out of Hollywood these days, we’ve gotta be smarter than those schmucks. 
How about La Cage aux Folles and The Crying Game? And, of course, there’s the Rocky Horror Picture Show.
But really, surely there are any number of films where one or more of the main protagonists could be gay or straight and it not make a blind bit of difference? For instance, in Predator, Billy (the Amerindian) could well be gay, simply judging by his not getting the sexist joke: it matters not one whit.
I can think of films where I didn’t need to know the protagonist’s orientation, but I can’t think of many where the protagonist’s orientation wasn’t made fairly explicit, whether needed or not.
In Star Wars, neither Qui-Gon nor Obi-Wan had girlfriends, but then as Jedi Knights, they were practically celibate priests. Seems like if you’re not openly straight, there’s always an excuse as to why you’re celibate. Not gay, celibate. Very rarely is a main character’s orientation left open.
If Hollywood wasn’t so chickenshit, they could have done it with the upcoming The Martian Child. Instead they chickened out and made the main character a widower instead of an unattached gay man. I hate that they changed it.
The Opposite of Sex is a great movie with a gay lead. It was kinda mainstream.
But I’m a Cheerleader, Boys Don’t Cry and I Shot Andy Warhol had lesbian protagonists.
This is a different definition of mainstream that I’ve ever seen. Great film, but definitely not mainstream.
I think that was handled reasonably well. If Dumbledore’s girlfriend had been prominent, it would have been annoying, as would mentioning Dumbledore’s boyfriend. Dumbledore’s love life has absolutely no bearing on the story, so bringing it up would serve to illustrate nothing.
Sheesh. People are gay, or white, or short. That’s the way it is. Can’t we all just get over the labelling and posturing?
For a real life example, my husband and I have met another couple who may become Friends-with-a-capital-F. This is exciting because finding four people who all like each other is a right royal bitch. This could easily become a giant load of boring bullshit because three of those four people happen to be male. Two commited couples, with reasonably compatible interests and personalities, but OMG!!!1! Stop the Presses! There are Gay People Involved!
Too bad we’re all middle class WASPs or we’d could be a sitcom and get rich.
The religious wrong might get all up in arms about “sneaking in” TV characters who just happen to be gay, but it would be more realistic. I don’t introduce myself as “Hi, I’m Pansy and I’m straight. Please pay your past due bill. I’m also short.” Gay, straight, short, tall, clumsy, graceful, pale, dark, in between, whatever. People are different, but not really very, so let’s focus on advancing the plot, shall we?
Yeah… uh… just pretend that the OP was “Let’s name all the movies with LGBT characters.” Carry on.
Oh, c’mon. Don’t kill your own thread. Remind people what it is you’re asking for. They’re playing “name every movie with a gay in it.” If that’s not what you want, bring the thread back on track. If you’re just going to pout, no one’s going to play.
Frankly, I think it’s a tough subject. I want a gay James Bond. I don’t think I’m going to get one because nobody’s going to shell out the dough, even though it could be a cool movie.
Midnight Cowboy. Won 3 Oscars.
Or you can say it’s not mainstream, invoking a version of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy. In other words, if it’s about gay lovers, it’s not mainstream- thus Hollywood has never made a mainstream film with gay main characters. :rolleyes:
As has been shown here, there has been quite a few movies with gay main characters. Simply dismissing them as “not mainstream” doesn’t make an argument.