Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
colin firth

‘I’m not saying that all gays should be depicted in a way where it doesn’t make an issue of it, but it should be considered a triumph when you finally have a character whose sexuality is secondary to the plot’

SOUNDBITES — “But as militant as you can get on this issue is to actually say that it’s incredibly important that we get to a place where we don’t care one way or another. The world is full of battles where a minority is struggling for its rights, so of course I certainly get that you need a militant front. I’m not saying that all gays should be depicted in a way where it doesn’t make an issue of it, but it should be considered a triumph when you finally have a character whose sexuality is secondary to the plot. It’s just about human feeling, and I think that’s wonderful.” —A Single Man‘s Colin Firth, on the positioning of Tom Ford’s movie not as a gay film (via)

On:           Dec 10, 2009
Tagged: , , , ,
    • Cam

      Yes, but we haven’t reached that point yet, and this movie has not only not advertised the fact that it it’s plot is gay, it has gone out of it’s way to mislead the public into thinking it’s a story about a straight couple. If you look at the trailor you think that Colin firth and Julianne Moore are a couple. You have no idea that he’s gay and she is his best buddy. All the shots of them shown completely make it out as if they are married. So again, this wasn’t the marketers going “We don’t need to totally fucus on the fact that he’s gay because we’ved moved beyond that…..it was them going “Lets hide anything that shows this movie to be gay and hope that once they get into the theater they won’t be pissed when they find out they were mislead.”

      Dec 10, 2009 at 2:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • RomanHans

      Cam is exactly right. The movie is from the book . . . where the sexuality is hidden because the dude is CLOSETED. Can’t film the thing now and say the sexuality isn’t mentioned because suddenly dude is post-gay.

      Clearly not “wonderful.” In fact, pandering to homophobes makes it close to bullshit.

      Dec 10, 2009 at 3:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • mk

      If you read the actual article Firth says he doesn’t agree with the advertising campaign:

      There’s been some controversy over the “de-gaying” by the Weinstein Co. of the film’s new one-sheets and trailers, which focus less on the gay love story and more on the platonic relationship between George and Julianne Moore’s character, Charley. Do you think that does a disservice to the film?

      Yes, I do. It is deceptive. I don’t think they should do that because there’s nothing to sanitize. It’s a beautiful story of love between two men and I see no point in hiding that. People should see it for what it is.

      Dec 10, 2009 at 5:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam

      MK… Thank you for posting that. i’ve always liked Colin Firth as an actor, but this definitly up’s my opinion of him even more. Good for him!

      Dec 10, 2009 at 5:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dave

      This is the problem with most of you…ALL YOU SEE IS GAY. And when you do that you fail to see a person. Stop ranting on the movie. Go play a Lady Gaga cd. Some of us aren’t ruled or control by our sexualities.

      Dec 10, 2009 at 7:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Grunt

      Yeah, you really have to read the whole article on this one – not just those two quotes. Lots of good points made on both sides, but glad someone’s finally taking Ford and Weinsteins to task. http://www.advocate.com/Arts_and_Entertainment/Film/Colin_Firth_Singled_Out/

      Dec 10, 2009 at 7:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Fantabuloso

      I see Colin Firth’s point, but in real life, sexual orientation continues to be a big taboo. So for sexual orientation to take a backseat in a film centered on a gay lead, the reality within us has to follow the same path.

      Dec 10, 2009 at 9:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Will

      Filmmaking is about choices. If you choose to have the character as gay, then it is meaningful.

      If the sexuality isn’t important, then don’t make the character gay. Your audience can then focus on what you’re trying to say about loss (or whatever).

      Dec 10, 2009 at 11:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • cboy

      Haven’t seen it yet, but this is a film of a book that was written in the early sixties that was set in that period.

      Plus it’s a commercial enterprise that is designed to make a profit. If you have Julianne Moore in a movie and she is by far the biggest star in it and you don’t make her the most prominent item in every piece of publicity, you are a fool. So get a grip, people.

      Dec 11, 2009 at 12:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • WTF

      I’m glad Mr. Firth stepped up and admonished the deceptive promotion of this film, but as for his post-gay comments… Every dumbass who says this shit needs to get out of LA or NYC – try being openly gay in those small and medium sized cities and small towns that make up most of the country. It’s a myopic self-delusion, post-gay. Most are still fighting for even a shred of respect and dignity. Let’s not rest on our laurels just yet.

      Dec 11, 2009 at 8:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason

      I have to agree with Colin Firth. I prefer when the homosexual interaction is integrated and unannounced. It makes us normal.

      Think of the movie Midnight Express starring Brad Davis, made about 30 years ago. There was a very passionate kiss between Brad and another man, but it wasn’t heralded and it wasn’t made a big deal of by the script. It was just there, yet still as effective.

      Dec 11, 2009 at 11:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rodrigo, UY

      Jason, the movie Midnight Express is not about a gay man in the closet, it’s about a drug-smuggling prisoner who’s straight (he has a girlfriend in the beginning of the movie) and endures a lot of traumas before he finally escapes imprisonment from Istanbul.

      So, no, that movie scene didn’t make gay “normal”, it didn’t even address the topic properly. What you mean by normal is a discussion for another day/blog post, I guess.

      Dec 26, 2009 at 3:12 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.