Sixteen years after Brokeback Mountain, another cowboy movie that explores notions of masculinity and sexuality is being tipped for awards. However, the relationship at the center of this one sounds far more ambiguous.
The Power Of The Dog stars Benedict Cumberbatch (Doctor Strange, Sherlock). Directed and written by New Zealand’s Jane Campion (The Piano, The Portrait of a Lady), the 1920s-set Western finds Cumberbatch as sadistic, Montana farmer Phil Burbank.
He forms a bond with a younger man, Peter, played by Kodi Smit-McPhee, who comes to the same farm when his mother, played by Kirsten Dunst, marries Burbank’s brother.
Related: Benedict Cumberbatch’s obsessive fans have some “scary behavior”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Described by the BBC as a “slow-burning gothic melodrama”, the movie premiered at the Venice Film Festival and is already being talked about as an awards season contender.
Over the weekend, it was shown at the Telluride Film Festival. Cumberbatch and Smit-McPhee attended and took part in a talk about their roles.
We’ve not seen the movie, so can’t comment on the sexuality of Cumberbatch’s character. However, he was asked about discussions around which actors play what roles. He famously played the part of persecuted maths genius Alan Turing in 2014’s The Imitation Game.
“I feel very sensitive about representation, diversity, and inclusion,” he said, as reported by IndieWire. “One of the appeals of the job was the idea that in this world, with this specific character, there was a lot that was private, hidden from view.”
“It wasn’t done without thought,” he continued. “I also feel slightly like, is this a thing where our dance card has to be public? Do we have to explain all our private moments in our sexual history? I don’t think so.”
It’s unclear whether he’s talking about his own sexual history or is speaking about actors in general.
Ultimately, he suggests he went with the director’s vision.
“Jane chose us as actors to play those roles. That’s her question to answer.”
Related: Director spills the tea on which A-listers turned down “Brokeback Mountain”
Smit-McPhee, 25, first came to attention in the 2009, post-apocalyptic movie, The Road. His character is more gawky, artistic, and clearly a fish-out-of-water among the ranch hands.
“I would say that there’s a lot in Peter that I relate to,” said Smit-McPhee. “Sure, I’m a straight man, but I’m extremely in touch with my feminine side. I was raised by my mother and my sister.
“Of course, my dad has a huge masculine influence on my life but he could never really take me away from the feminine side that I just intrinsically have in myself. It was just a matter of bringing it out… and letting it be in the world. It was a really experimental but beautiful thing to do.”
The Power of the Dog will hit theaters on November 17, before streaming on Netflix from December 1.
You can watch a trailer below.
Donston
Cumberbatch has some kind of point. Actors should not feel forced to give the public identities, nor should they feel as if they have to reveal their dimensions and experiences. While no matter what these actors present publicly, we really have no clue what anyone’s sexuality, preferences, experiences, lifestyles are or where someone is in the gender, sexual, romantic, affection, emotion, commitment spectrum. All we have are what folks present.
On the other hand, some of these actors expect people to act naive. The fact that almost no high-profile “queer” roles (especially high-profile cinematic queer roles) actually goes to unabashedly “queer” actors is not an accident. For whatever reasons, that’s a pattern Hollywood seems to love. Just like it’s no accident how “straight-washed” Cumberbatch’s role in The Imitation Game was. Just like it’s no accident that Hollywood still only really seems invested in movies that highlight “queers” and same-sex dynamics when the story is centered on repression, self-hate, homophobia, A-I-D-S, secret affairs. It’s Hollywood. There are no coincidences. And these actors could definitely learn how to talk about issues in a more nuanced, sensitive way instead of focusing entirely on defending and justifying their choices.
basils_Herald
As much as I liked Cumberbatch in Sherlock, his excuse is neither a justification nor a reasonable explanation. He could have simply said, “it is what it is.“ He could have used this as a plug for the Trevor Project, for example.
The reason why this role should go to a queer actor is because they will instinctively use their role as a platform to help other queer people. We’ve still got a long way to go regarding LGBTQ rights in the US and the UK and it’s visibility/representation of queer people in media that has made progress possible. You’re not a LGBTQ ally if you take a job that should have gone to a queer person, you’re queerbaiting.
Jim
I don’t want a gay actor playing a gay character. I want a good actor playing a gay character. We deserve the best!!
By the way can you imagine anyone else beside Olympia Dukakis, trans or not, play Mrs. Madrigal? Seriously.
End of discussion.
Donston
People really need to stop being basic and saying the same basic shit: “the best actor should get the role” crap. We all know that these issues are more complicated than that. And we all know that casting decisions are not strictly based on who are the best options for whatever roles. Money, buzz, status and politics always have an impression on this stuff.
Huron132
I totally agree. The actor is the key. If it is a great representation of the character itself then I am happy. If the gay actor is the best, even better. But sometimes the story gets destroyed if you complain too much. So lets see a good actor in a good movie with a great story.
barryaksarben
Like all minorities we have taken this BS from the beginning. The first thing I thought of after reading your comment is the great actress Anna May Wong who supposedly gave an oscar worthy audition for “The Good Earth” but was whitewashed out of the role. It isnt like it is a fair playing feild and all a gay actor has to do is give a good performance or even a great performance when it is already stacked against them. Ian McKellan come to mind as someone who should have had lead gay roles in the past or the many other out gay British actors if the American gay actors were still to afraid. Again, someone who comes to mind is Dirk Bogard and his movie “Victim” a LANDMARK gay film mainly because it was widely known that he was gay although in the closet with the door wide open. I personally dont care to see any more straight men in gay roles until we have a gay James Bond or an out gay actor play other iconic male roles but we know that isnt going to happen no matter how good they are
BLAKENOW
AMEN. I could not have said it better myself. And also people are forgetting that it is a job and equal opportunity job that is protected by labor laws and if they want to dabble in discrimination they’re shooting them selves in the foot this topic is completely ridiculous if you’re an actor you’re an actor you’re an actor you’re not supposed to be playing yourself. JESUS H.
dinard38
@ barryaksarben I watched that movie, Victim. That movie was sooooooo good. It was fascinating how they tackled such a controversial subject of homosexuality back in the 60s.
Openminded
Barry, I have to disagree with your gay James Bond statement. Bond is a character who was written as a white, British, womanizer. I’m all for promoting gay actors, but every character can’t simply be replaced with a “gay” character and not change the whole premise of the original story.
ScottA_B
Yes. yadda yadda yadda yadda. A good actor can play any part. Blah blah blah. We get it. The problem is – no queer actors EVER get to portray a major role involving our lives. At least no “out” ones do. Once film producers stop being scared of casting a queer actor playing a major queer role, it can stop being an issue. Everyone takes the “any actor can play a gay role” stance. “It’s not a big deal” “It’s about the craft” “I’m straight but I’m in touch with the character”. Yes, you’re right. You’re absolutely right, good for you, bravo. Everyone keeps missing the point. Cast a queer actor in a major queer role for once and let us tell our own stories. After that, “brave” straight actors can then apply. The reason you don’t hear of any big-name successful & out queer actors is – they are shunned by casting agents if they are out. They don’t get the lead roles. The other argument about there being no “good” out actors… is bs. Yes there are. Studios are still too afraid. It’s not the same in smaller roles or theatre, but until a major role is played by an actual person who gets to tell our own stories, this conversation is very tiring.
Donston
Most of these actors seem to be saying indirectly: the majority of us actors have at least “experimented”, half of Hollywood is in the queer spectrum, a significant percentage of actors are in the gender, sexual, affection, emotional investment, commitment spectrum. So, who cares about identities. And I kinda do get that point. I also understand how misguided it is to think that only “gays” should play “gay” or that actors need to reveal their identities, experiences, dimensions, lifestyles, preferences, relationships to the public in order to justify being in whatever role.
However, I think a lot of these actors know what the core problem is and the thing most people complain about: not seeing unabashedly “queer” actors in high-profile “queer” roles is just a bad look and purports hetero supremacy rather than “diversity”. The fact that none of these high-profile, sought after “queer” roles go to unapologetically “queer” actors is definitely a problem, and it is not an accident.
They don’t want to truly confront that part of the conversation though. So, they try to divert the focus to other shit.
LumpyPillows
There are lots of gay movies with gay leads – they all bomb. What you want is irrelevant.
Seth
How many generations out do Americans have to live before they no longer have to suffer any further western-themed, cowboy drivel?
I envy that generation, however far in the future they get to live free of it.
Donston
The movie is getting a good amount of acclaim, and I like Campion as a filmmaker. It appears as the film (spoiler alert) is mostly about a “queer” man who becomes miserable and antagonistic primarily because of his repression, shame, toxic masculine instincts, and resentment towards falling in love with a guy. I mean, it’s probably a good movie. But do we need another awards baity flick where the main characters are “queer” and are played by “straight presenting” actors embodying repressed/closeted “straight presenting” characters? Is that all this industry has as far as “queer” stories and presentation? And we’ve already been down the hyper-masculinity vs inherent queerdom dynamics so many times. But because I like Campion and it’s getting acclaim, I’ll see it at some point.
Kangol2
More a reply to Donston: Campion can be hit or miss, mostly the former but sometimes the latter. Her early movies like Sweetie and The Piano are great. But In the Cut, which she directed back in 2003 or so, is a terrible movie. Gratuitously violent, misogynistic though it purports to be feminist, a bit racist, all stuffed into an hour and 30 minutes. And Meg Ryan starring doesn’t help. Back to this film, is Cumberbatch supposed to be a closeted gay villain of some sort? I hope not.
bivector
Totally fine with “straight” actors playing gay roles, and love his hint that he’s not necessarily some hetero purist himself (and shouldn’t have to list his old hookups to prove it). The only thing is they also need to keep up the trend of queer actors playing straight roles—and I love the increasing number of trans actors playing cis roles without comment (Chella Man, Ian Alexander, Tony Revolori, etc.). It *should* be true that “best actor should get the role,” but with the caveat that it needs to run both ways.
Donston
The problem is it’s never been an even game, and it’s still not. There’s a reason why so many “out” actors still talk about people in the industry telling them to be lowkey or to flat-out stay closeted, directors/producers flat-out telling them that their careers will be limited if they are “out”, especially if they embrace a “gay” identity or have unabashed gay relationships. Sure, they can get a TV role here and there or a supporting role in a movie here and there. But a high-profile “straight” role going to an out male “gay” actor is still not a thing. And it’s especially not a thing when it comes to blockbusters.
A lot of these actors who defend these castings like to overlook the discrepancies, the biases and the fact that the industry still pushes “sexy” guys to maintain hetero appeal and attachment first and foremost. The fact that the majority of actors who comment on this topic overlook these obvious details damages their opinions, even when they make good points.
whereshouldistart
The job of an actor is to convince me, in less than two hours, that the person he or she is portraying is believable.
While I believe the main character in “Philadelphia” would have been better portrayed by a gay actor, I cannot imagine anyone portraying Truman Capote better than Philip Seymore Hoffman.
I know this might come as a surprise, but there are a lot of actors who make the A-list, but couldn’t act their way out of a wet paper bag.
I can’t believe Mila Kunis and Nicholas Cage are still employed, but life isn’t always fair.
Fahd
Michael K. Williams, the actor who portrayed Omar in HBO’s the Wire, was found dead today in his apartment. The character, Omar, was a robber of drug dealers, which has to be a job requiring a lot of bravery, and he also was gay. As I recall, Omar fell in love in a big way too, with big demonstrations of affection and love.
Williams’ portrayal of Omar was so terrific that I can’t imagine anyone else in the role. I don’t know if Williams was gay.
I’ll have to watch the Wire again in his memory.
Kangol2
Williams also played a gay character on Lovecraft Country. Not only is he shown having sex with another man (great acting, bad directing), but there’s a transcendent scene where the character affirms being gay. Williams utterly inhabited the character. An out gay actor might have done the same, but Williams’s characterization is superb. May he rest in peace for this role, as Omar in The Wire, and so many more.
BoomerMyles
I always find it a distraction when a straight actor plays gay especially in a love scene.
It’s just so obvious they’re not gay. Something in their performance is always off.
inbama
That trailer is more turn-off than tease.
Cam
Here’s an idea.
If Hollywood would actually start casting LGBTQ actors in lead roles, or have LGBTQ characters as main characters, we’ll stop bitching that an LGBTQ actor should be considered for the one or two decent LGBTQ roles they bother to put out every few years.
This wouldn’t be an issue except for the fact that for a century Hollywood has kept LGBTQ actors from getting any roles, and now, when the tide is turning they claim “Oh, we can’t cast the becuase there aren’t any major stars who are LGBTQ”.
Yeah, there aren’t because you refuse to hire and promote them. So they can spare me the tears over a straight actor losing the one LGBTQ role they bother to cast every few years.
LumpyPillows
Cam gets this one 100% right.
basils_Herald
+1
radiooutmike
But acting isn’t only about acting.
A “major” studio will be looking at a return on their investment.
So, either the straight white male star must be sufficiently a big enough star in a gay role to overcome what blow-back may come (if there is any.) Or they have to be young promising actors who can take a risk a la Brokeback Mountain.
If there was a gay actor who had the potential to be major gay studio actor (say a Harrison Ford or a Michael Douglas in their prime), they probably won’t get to that point; because the studios still probably believe that gay actor would not be accepted in straight romantic roles.
Kangol2
Right on all counts, Cam!
LumpyPillows
People are unique and complicated. The same people who scream about how non-binary is so important then turn around and label actors as monolithically straight is the epitome of just how little some of you actually think before speaking. This is what Benedict says in the article, which no one seems to be addressing. He’s right. I prefer my movies to actually be entertaining and not exercises in social engineering.
TomG
It’s called ACTING, and all that matters is that the role is played convincingly.
basils_Herald
Acting is an art and is always in conversation with its culture. Is a portrayal of queer romance without actual queer people a part of queer culture or hetero culture? What does Cumberbatch bring to this role that any gay actor wouldn’t?
It’s obviously his fame and that’s honestly not enough for me to care to watch another version of Brokeback. If Cumberbatch wanted to portray a gay man, he should have fooled around with Andrew Scott as Moriarty when he had the chance.
Donston
Yes, Benedict has a point in the sense that because someone isn’t overtly and openly “queer” doesn’t mean that they don’t have queer aspects. And actors shouldn’t be forced to publicly explain their identities, dimensions, fluidity, experiences and sense of self.
Of course, many of the comments have pretty much been “cast who is best for the role”. However, that’s not what Hollywood is about. Whether someone can be good in a role or not is clearly not the only thing that goes into casting and it’s never been. And we have many years and tons of actors talking about not getting roles because they’re “gay” and industry people telling them to stay closeted. Hell, Kate Winslet recently talked about knowing a lot of guys who are closeted primarily because of industry pressures and fear of their careers being limited.
When it comes to blockbusters and awards-baity “prestige” films, Hollywood is simply not interested in promoting any male who is overtly “gay”/has unabashed non hetero preferences/has legit unabashed gay relationships. The fact that almost all of the “queer” roles that have gotten Oscar nods have been from seemingly cis, “straight presenting”/“hetero leaning” actors is not an accident. Ian Mckellan for Gods and Monsters is somewhat of an exception. But I don’t think he was publicly out at the time, and it was a role where he was depressed, anti-social, going insane and was obsessed with a “straight presenting” dude. The fact that no “gay presenting” dude has gotten a high-profile cinematic “straight” role is no accident.
Casting has always been about a mixture of acting, politics, fantasy and money. You can’t remove those things from the process. So, you may only care about the performances. But that’s clearly not entirely what the industry is driven by and what the casting process is about. So, your “cast who is best for the role” perspective is not the world we live in. Honestly, I think a lot of folks reveal their internalized phobias, gay inferiority complexes and inability to discuss nuanced issues when they talk about this topic.