First we fight to simply be acknowledged. Then we fight to be acknowledged but not in a stereotypical patronizing way, then finally we win when we get to simply be there, without it raising eyebrows or causing straight men to run out of the theater.
IIRC, Ellen’s sitcom was already on the ropes before she came out, and likely would have been cancelled even sooner if not for the novelty of her sexuality.
I’m going to go out on a limb, here, and suggest, “The memory of kissing a woman.”
What about “Touch of Pink”? Okay, the movie is about the main character struggling to get his mother to accept who he is (a gay man). But it’s not just about that–he’s also a gay Muslim man, who doesn’t want to marry another Muslim woman. (Also, he’s got an imaginary friend who’s the spirit of Cary Grant, played by Kyle Machlachlan.) So while homosexuality is an issue, it seems like it’s more about family, love, breaking away, learning to accept one another. All that good stuff.
How about Legabit? Or Legabiter?
Agreed, and some of the episodes after she came out were just dumb television.
But her coming out episode was probably one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen.
Um, Alexander?
Colin Farrell dressed like Cindy Brady? No thanks. You can keep that one.
Since Hollywood is now a global sales machine, I feel compelled to mention that here in China, racial prejudice against blacks is alive and thriving. I’ve known many people that think that blacks are just “ugly”, with some also mentioning the following gems: “poor”, “dirty”, “stupid,” and “violent”. A black action lead is fine (since that caters to black people’s strengths), but a black romantic male lead will definitely have far fewer Chinese girls swooning over him, and far fewer folks willing to shell out cash to see him in the theater.
Although it is true that gayness is still a much bigger turn-off here than blackness.
How about a biopic about somebody who was gay, but who was much more famous for something else? E.g., Alan Turing, or Plato, or Richard the Lion-Hearted*, or pick your own favorite from here.
*Already been done, actually – see The Lion in Winter.
Richard the Lion Hearted was gay? Seriously?
BTW, Fish, do you not consider Gods and Monsters a “mainstream movie”?
Well, probably; historians are divided in their opinions.
And there’s been a dozen other examples. So your premise is wrong.
And **Otto ** is right. Read reviews of the film. Sure, the point is debated as the filmaker wanted to be subtle. Still, that’s the read most reviewers seem to have got from the film.
Much to the Church’s distress, casual bisexuality was very common among the male Norman upper-class in this period. The sons of nobility usually moved in bachelor herds of similar age cohorts in their teens and twenties ( juvenes ) and also tended to marry late. For example Henry I may have been an exception among his brothers, if only because of his incessant impregnating of women ( he sired at least 35 bastards ) would hardly have left him much time for men ;). In that regard it wouldn’t be that extraordinary.
At any rate the evidence is highly equivocal in Richard’s case, as noted in part in that wikipedia article. In addition to the Sodom comment, one of the most common pieces of evidence was the chronicle mentioning him ‘sharing a bed’ with Philip Augustus in 1187. But like a similar note that declared that Philip was dismayed to see Richard ‘hand in hand’ with the counts of Boulogne and Flanders some years later, this has most often been interpreted as implying political alliances, not sexual ones.
Could’ve been both of course - we just don’t know. His granduncle William II Rufus on the other hand, probably was gay ( or certainly bisexual, anyway ) :).
Here is the difference:
Transsexual has a clearly-defined, straightforward meaning and criteria. Transgender is an extremely nebulous term which has been stretched to form an umbrella concept to cover several disparate groups (one of which is transsexual). It gets a bit more confusing since nowadays in colloquial language TG tends to replace TS altogether. Maybe people are still squeamish about saying the word “sex” and prefer substitute words.
Thank you. There often seems to be a casual assumption that trans is a subset of gay… as in many of the examples suggested in this thread like The Crying Game and Boys Don’t Cry which do not even have any gay characters, just trans. Neither is a subset of the other-- they’re two different and distinct phenomena, albeit they’re often considered in tandem. Trans refers to gender identity, which is about who you are. Gay refers to sexual identity, i.e. who you want to date. Trans people can be of any sexual identity or even none at all.
When “gay” subsumes all the different queer identities into itself, they become invisible, their existence being colonized.
First of all, “Gods and Monsters” was from 1998, so it doesn’t qualify as “after Brokeback Mountain.” Second of all, I never said there weren’t mainstream movies made with gay characters — I said that the 1.1% of characters falls short of reflecting the true percentage of gay people in America. There are gay characters, but there are not enough of them, and mostly not in lead roles.
My premise is wrong? Show me. My premises were:
-
There are not enough gay characters in film and television to reflect the estimated percentage of gays in real life.
-
Brokeback Mountain, a financially successful film from 2005, was expected by many in the media to change Hollywood’s perception that mainstream movies with gays were box-office poison. Despite Brokeback’s success, since 2005, the percentage of gay characters in film in television has gone down.
So… your counter-example of a movie with debatable “gay character” content from 38 years ago proves… what? And my question, regardless of premise, was: “What kind of movies with gay characters would we like to see?”
And your answer was “la la la la la, I can’t hear you, and you’re wrong.” Thanks for participating. 
Are we reading the same thread?
Examples given of movies made before Brokeback Mountain:
My Best Friend’s Wedding (1997)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005)
Boondock Saints (1999)
Top Gun (1986)
Dog Day Afternoon (1975)
As Good As It Gets (1997)
The Krays (1990)
D.E.B.S. (2003 or 2004)
The Birdcage (1996)
La Cage aux Folles (1978)
The Crying Game (1992)
Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)
The Opposite of Sex (1998)
But I’m A Cheerleader (1999)
Boys Don’t Cry (1999)
I Shot Andy Warhol (1996)
Midnight Cowboy (1969)
The Family Stone (2005)
Examples given of movies made after Brokeback Mountain
Little Miss Sunshine (2006)
300 (2007)
So… a dozen counter-examples, eh?
We had Kinsey about a year after BBM, about a bisexual man who was much more famous for something else. Not sure how mainstream that was.
An assumption that is fostered by the T’s attachment to the LGB acronym and movement. I don’t know how much of that attachment was fostered by the LGBs and how much by the Ts but the two are by this point probably inextricably welded to each other.
Here’s what you asked for in your op *“So the trick is to come up with a mainstream movie that also has a gay main character or two — preferably as something more substantial than the comedy-relief hairdresser! — which straight audiences will shell out money for.” * We have done exactly that a /several/many “mainstream movie that also has a gay main character or two” for which audiences have shelled out money for.
Having been shown wrong, you now want the % of gays in film to = the % of gays irl.* Different request entirely*.
As for "“What kind of movies with gay characters would we like to see?” my answer is “good entertaing ones.”, the same requirement I ask for in movies with all hetero characters. What difference should a gay character make to me? 