The last we heard from the tragic, bitter, nasty old lady known as Rupert Everett, he was being fired from Vanity Fair for calling the editor, Graydon Carter, “rather fat” and “a weird character”. This came after Rup’s spiral of self-destruction, where he bitched and moaned about his fellow gay men being “tiresome middle-aged queens” focused on “egocentric and vain” child-rearing. This was also after Rup mangled his face with some kind of extreme surgery and Botox.
Rup’s new temper tantrum is in The Daily Mail. He is advising young gay actors to stay in the closet. Because, you see, Rup blames the fact that no one wants to work with him on his gayness. Not the fact that he’s a horrible person that no one can stand.
Actor Rupert Everett is urging gay stars not to ‘come out’ and to keep their sexuality a secret as it could end their film career.
The 50-year-old My Best Friend’s Wedding star came out as gay 20 years ago and admitted that since then, he has been given supporting roles and not lead parts.
Everett is now suggesting that aspiring actors stay in the closet as it could harm their career.
He said: “It’s not that advisable to be honest. It’s not very easy. And, honestly, I would not advise any actor necessarily, if he was really thinking of his career, to come out…The fact is that you could not be, and still cannot be, a 25-year-old homosexual trying to make it in the British film business or the American film business or even the Italian film business.’
‘It just doesn’t work and you’re going to hit a brick wall at some point. You’re going to manage to make it roll for a certain amount of time, but at the first sign of failure, they’ll cut you right off.’
‘And I’m sick of saying: ‘Yes, it’s probably my own fault.’ Because I’ve always tried to make it work and when it stops working somewhere, I try to make it work somewhere else. But the fact of the matter is, and I don’t care who disagrees, it doesn’t work if you’re gay.’
However, Everett added that he does believe that he is happier that those other major stars who are keeping their sexuality a secret.
He said: ‘I think, all in all, I’m probably much happier than they are. I may not be as rich or successful, but at least I’m vaguely free to be myself.’
[From The Daily Mail]
Yes, I have a rebuttal for Rup: Neil Patrick Harris. Granted, I don’t think that naming just one “mainstream” young gay actor will solve all the homophobic world’s evils, but it’s a start. And until young gay actors and actresses live and work in a life out of the closet, Rup’s nastiness will prevail. Doesn’t he just sound out of touch? Doesn’t he sound like some old coot sitting on a front porch, bitching about the way things used to be? Compare Rup’s comments with someone like Sir Ian McKellen, who always sounds like a fascinating, hell-raising, gay rights advocate (who is still working steadily), and you wonder just what Rup is really complaining about.
Rupert Everett attending the ‘Shangay Awards 2009’ in Madrid, Spain on November 30, 2009. Credit: WENN
Okay, I have to admit that some of the things that he has said over the years are funny as hell and true of certain people, however, this is totally irresponsible of him to advise people in the gay acting community to remain closeted. That helps no one and in truth, being in the closet is more of a stigma than being out.
The fact of the matter is no one wants Rupert anymore because he looks strange, acts strange and made terrible choices accepting certain movie roles. As long as people like him say the things that they do, then people will stay tortured with their sexuality and nothing will change.
I will say though, I love that he doesn’t give a crap at this point what he says, and I feel a lot of it comes from a place of trying to keep his name out there, but I have to admit the bitter queen moniker fits him well and he is good at it.
The reason he stopped getting good roles was not that he came out of the closet. It is his nasty attitude and bad plastic surgery.
I hate to say it but he’s right. I don’t watch HIMYM as much anymore. Part of the fantasy is that you want to picture yourself in that lead actor’s arms. They get into the business knowing these are the rules so they can’t complain.
I like him! I thought he was great in the Importance of being Earnest and the ideal husband!!!
I think I understand what he’s getting at.
Years ago, gay males weren’t looking for monogamy or nesting situations. It was a kind of dangerous, predatory lifestyle, and that was part of the appeal for a lot of guys….Very masculine in a certain sense of the word.
I think he is railing against the feminization of male homosexuality, with marriage, childrearing, and a pretty house the major goals.
Well, he is right. You could only come up with two actors, both of whom didn’t come out until after they made it big.
Fact is that openly gay actors will only be cast in certain roles. They won’t get the lead in a romantic comedy or an action movie. Straight actors can get gay roles (Brokeback Mountain, Milk), but not the other way around. If up&coming stars like Zac Efron or R-Patz would come out to be gay, it would seriously influence their careers as A list movie stars.
I agree that RE seems a bit mean and bitter, but I don’t know him personally. Maybe he’s just mean and bitter over years of fighting a losing battle?
Sorry, but I think you mean that he blames the fact that no one wants to work with him on his gayness, not that he’s gay because no one wants to work with him.
“Because, you see, Rup blames his gayness on the fact that no one wants to work with him.”
Spot on Portia. George Clooney, Tom Cruise, John Travolta, they all build their career on that fantasy. If any of them are really gay, I can’t blame them for not wanting to come out for the sake of their careers.
It is incredibly naive to think sexual preference doesn’t matter in Hollywood.
Sorry, I fixed it Ronnie.
@ Portia: that statement betrayed a little ignorance. Firstly, I just have a hard time believe you watched HIMYM for the eye candy, of all things. Also, does knowing an actor is married ruin the “fantasy” as well? Because it’s the same.
Second, what exactly are the “rules”? That gay men get crap roles? Isn’t the beautiful thing about society that “rules” are not actually rules as such, but merely norms that change and evolve along with us?
I don’t care if he’s gay or whatever. I can’t believe how freaking old I am – I remember when he came out 20 years ago.
I agree with Jeane to an extent. I’m sure studios actively encourage their leading men to stay in the closet and just not answer any speculation to preserve that image (you’d think they’d have learned from Rock Hudson that you don’t have to be a flaming heterosexual to be convincing in traditional romantic roles). I have no idea if Clooney’s gay and if Cruise is, I kind of think his wackadoo Xenu-ness makes him suppress it, which may be why he seems so ticked off all the time.
On the flip side, I had no trouble with Jake G. and Heath L. in Brokeback “playing gay,” but I never was one who thought they really were. I still don’t think it matters.
I agree that it’s all changing and evolving. I’m not gay and I’m not going to speak for anyone but myself, but it seems like it’s less of a stigma for an actor to have a sex life that’s completely separate from their roles. I don’t know why it matters – I never saw NPH as much of a sex symbol anyway, so whatever he does or doesn’t do with a character’s sexuality doesn’t mean anything to me.
IMO, RE’s messed up his own chances in movies because he just comes across as a nasty, unhappy bitch. Who’d want to work with him?
Interesting article from him on the same day Meredith Baxter (The mother on Family Ties) has just admitted she is gay
Also can you tell me a film where NPH is the lead character? I’m from England and have no idea really who he is and only know his name as I visit this site?
No offense, westender, but whenever I see the word “admitted” used when someone says they are gay it sounds like they just owned up to something unsavory or something. I always prefer that the word be acknowledged instead because it just affirms a reality instead of making it sound tawdry. Didn’t want that statement to sound harsh, but a smilie sign put here on the end just doesn’t seem right, so take it as just an observation, okay?
What I find interesting about the NPH lurve (and don’t get me wrong, he’s a funny, dry guy) is that he didn’t share his private life with the public at large until others were going to, which I completely disagree with, the idea another has a right to give that information out in your stead; it’s always the person’s choice of when/if. Doesn’t mean he was in the closet, per se, as he was out in his personal and professional circles, with a partner of longstanding. But, not to the general public, and he was already established in what could be termed heterosexual roles, like HIMYM and Harold and Kumar, etc. So, it’s always a little fuzzy for me when a big deal is made that he is successful in spite (for lack of a better word) of being openly gay. He was already in the conciousness of the public, currently, in a straight role, and acting the role so convincingly that coming out had no or little affect. In other words, he was doing his job well enough that people believed him. See, Rupert, it can be done.;-)
It doesn’t demean it at all, mind you, but it made it easier for others to accept that he was capable of being believable in those roles, which is a good thing.
There are lots of actors that live openly, Broadway’s Cheyenne Jackson for one, that are very believable in a straight role. It’s acting, for goodness sake. It can be done. Why does the actor/musician/whatever absolutely have to make some kind of official statement? Straights don’t. Well, some flaunt their various lives and conquests, but that’s more due to immaturity and neediness, imo, and not to prove a point. Anyway, an actor that pulls off a role, whether it’s a vicious criminal, a lover, a father, a killer, whatever, and does so convincingly, doesn’t HAVE to be that in real life to do so; it’s called talent and acting. That’s what counts.
People really need to stop worrying about WHOM someone sleeps with/loves/spends their life with, and just live their own.
And this:
Years ago, gay males weren’t looking for monogamy or nesting situations. It was a kind of dangerous, predatory lifestyle, and that was part of the appeal for a lot of guys….Very masculine in a certain sense of the word.
I think he is railing against the feminization of male homosexuality, with marriage, childrearing, and a pretty house the major goals.
is bullshit. Gays have wanted the same things straights have wanted all along; to place them in such a light, when straight males/females have basically done the same damned “predatory” “whorish” shit as part of some of their passage is insulting. That attitude is part of the problem plaguing the gay rights effort, the thought that gays only wanted to be promiscuous and predatory, reckless with themselves and others, and couldn’t really want to be in a settled relationship, with a family. It’s part of the right’s excuse for non acceptance of marriage for all. It does the gay community a huge disservice.
As to gay men being feminized by wanting to be parents…puh-leeze. Tell that to every damned straight dad out there, then. Guess they become a woman then, too?
Gay men, by virtue of being gay, do not automatically wish to BE women; they are attracted to men. That’s the gist of it. Are there men who are effeminate? Hell yes. Straight and gay, matter of fact. Are there gay men that like makeup, dressing up, etc.? Yep. Still doesn’t make them a woman, nor does it make them desire to be so, with the caveat that there are those that do wish to be, but they are transgender, not strictly gay males. It’s a bitch to be something you are not, at your very core, and to have others stick yet another label on you is difficult at the very least, and heartbreaking at most.
Not meaning to lecture, as this is about Rupert and his cranky ass ways, but there are comments that just make me want to at least clarify or inject my own view. Rupert lost his acting ability long ago, his bitchiness overcame his willingness to make good choices, and his bitterness/jealousy is often on open display. I get what he’s trying to say, but I don’t agree with it. I also feel that the choice, however, is with the individual, on when or if to share their private life with the world. It’s their choice. I hate outing; it’s no one’s right but the person themselves to choose when/if they want to divulge their own identity. Everyone’s road is different.
The only exception is when someone is in a position of power and uses that power to affect others and their rights.
All bets are off then. You can not keep your life off limits yet affect another’s because you can.
Sorry for the dissertation…I’m finished.:-)
Coming out in 2010, “Beastly”
Also 2010, “The Best and the Brightest”
Many theater productions and television shows. Why does it matter if he was lead or supporting? He has tons and tons of supporting and voice work.
I have some more rebuttals: Stephen Fry, Sir Ian McKellan, Graham Chapman, Alan Cumming, Harvey Feinstein, Sir Nigel Hawthorne, Nathan Lane, David Hyde Piece, BD Wong, Anderson Cooper (albeit in a glass closet) etc etc
And you notice something old Rup? A pretty high percentage of british men around the same age as you, who are working and winning Tonys/BAFTA’s etc. They just aren’t jerks and people actually want to work with them.
I don’t know if it’s the right thing to do or not, but that sitcom with Doogie Houser as the lady killer is just too hard to believe to me knowing he’s gay. I still watch it tho. Often an actor’s personal life is so big that I can’t separate it from the character they are portraying. Freaking Tom Cruise used to be one of my favorites, but I haven’t been able to watch his weird ass in years.
hm I read his autobiography awhile ago and he came across as anything but self pitying. Most of the out gay actors mentioned in this thread are working yes, but in non-conventional, as opposed to leading man roles, let’s be honest.
Rupert came across as quite self effacing about his acting ablities in his book, I think with his looks he easily could have been the leading man type had he stayed in the closet, perhaps it is this admittedly less noble aspect of the profession he feels he missed out on, and I don’t think he is unjustified.
I don’t get all the antagonism towards him, yes he’s a silly vain man for having his face messed with/up, but so are plenty of other straight men in Hollywood of his age(Michael Douglas as one example). Sorry but the whole slant of the argument towards him being a bitchy queen is pretty homophobic, yes he is and quite a witty one at that, what of it? For people criticising his film choices, do not think for a minute that to stay a working actor he had that much of a choice. Think about how many old codgers like Nicholson, Travolta, et al are still being cast as leading men opposite women 30 yrs younger. I just think the man has a point, and am sure there are any number of closeted movie stars who agree with him, secretly.
I think Rupert has a point. In his case, bad plastic surgery ruined his career. You can point to NPH and Ian McKellan as working, successful gay actors. But I think there is a realize stigma for gay actors who seek to become leading men. It’s based on a sexist-macho persona and Hollywood DOES typecast gay actors.
John Barrowman and NPH found success on TV. Barrowman is on a British series and NPH is part of an ensemble cast. Ian McKellan is a strong character actor. There is alot of homophobia in Hollywood, because there is alot of it in America period. Agents and studios are thinking about the bottom line — money and they are hesistant to put their weight behind gay actors for leading roles. This in turn causes so many people to hide in the closet.
We need to put pressure on Hollywood to show this discrimination — that’s what it is — is not acceptable! Why is it straight actors get kudos for playing gay characters BUT the opposite is never praised in the open? This double standard needs to stop. Acting is about the craft and in a perfect world it should make no difference who you sleep with. However, we live in reality so let’s not kid ourselves about the very real stigma Rupert is speaking out against.
@L: You hit the nail on the head. It isn’t Rupert’s homosexuality or his bad plastic surgery that really ruined his career – it’s his mouth. He’s been pissing off people for years and it finally caught up with him.
He can’t have it both ways. It’s great that he doesn’t give a shit and says whatever he thinks about other people, but then he can’t complain and look for excuses when he can’t get jobs from the same people he insulted.
Ian McKellen recently did an interview regarding the same subject, but he had the opposite view. He didn’t think homosexuality was a liabilitity at all because he felt that viewers were smart enough to tell the difference between reality and the character being played. Though Sir McKellen is a prodigiously talented actor, I must disagree.
Take this media hurricane that is Twilight…So many girls (albeit they are young and impressionable and are not going to exercise the same judgment as an adult) use Robert Pattinson’s and Edward’s name interchangeably like they are the same person. Moreover, they are quite capable of concocting elaborate fantasies and projecting false assumptions and character qualities onto him because it is Edward that that they’ve become acquainted with, not Pattinson. Women project onto attractive men in the media and though in most cases consummation is not possible there is still this imaginative space in your mind in which you indulge in fantasies about whomever.
Yes, people can intellectually differentiate, but the thrill is gone if you know that Pattinson wants your boyfriend, not you. Yes, open gay actors will work, but their jobs are varied and marginal (i.e. not silver screen leading man). If an actor is okay with this, so be it. If he want’s to be Brad Pitt, is IS damaging.
Though I would like to see more actors be able to embrace their true sexuality and live their lives openly and accordingly, if they want leading man notoriety on the silver screen they may have remain mum about their sexuality.
@ L – I don’t much like your list… and I don’t think it makes the point you want it to.
Alan Cumming, Nathan Lane, David Hyde Piece, and BD Wong are NOT leading men in the normal sense of the word. If and when they have a starring role, like Lane, it’s often a gay character. Stephen Fry and Harvey Feinstein are most certainly character players, a different beast.
And ouch that you included Anderson Cooper. Until he outs himself, how dare you? That’s just fucking rude.
So it can still be argued that open homosexuality will severely limit a man’s options in Hollywood.
@ ViktoryGin: Please. You’re talking about freaking Twilight here. I repeat my earlier comment: if the girls can fantasize that they are compelling enough to lure RPattz away from Kristen Stewart, they can most certainly believe that they’d be able to lure him away from Taylor Lautner.
How about Jodie Foster? Queen Latifah? Game, set AND match.
Coming out as gay as an actor is tricky. I do think that the more actors that do come out the less of an issue it will be. I never really think about NPH being gay. He just is. And I think moving forward he is a good example of handling the issue. The reason Rupert doesn;t work much is because he is an ass*ole. Hollywood is a very small community and when you start actively offending people, they talk to their friends and so on, and you are off the list based on nothing more than your nasty mouth.
There are thousands of actors in Hollywood who are pleasant and grateful to work.
I don’t see how acknowledging anderson cooper as gay is rude, but I’m sorry if it offended you princesspea. Not my intention.
I read Everett’s comments as being less about being a ‘leading man’ and not being able to choose his work, and that actors who come out are made to settle for what he perceives as lesser roles. “You’re going to manage to make it roll for a certain amount of time, but at the first sign of failure, they’ll cut you right off”
I would argue that most of those actors make strong decisions for parts that interest them. Maybe it’s naive, but I don’t like the idea of someone like Ian McKellan being ‘forced’ in Everett’s words to settle for something less.
Gay, straight, male, female-I don’t care what anyones preference is. If you are rude and constantly making snarky comments to/about the people who you will have to work with-people are not going to want to work with you.
I know this is not the politically correct thing to say – but I agree that gay male actors should not come out of the closet. (And don’t jump on me, I’m not saying that because I hate gay people – I don’t – I could care less what other people do in their private lives – just keep it private – why do people feel the need to be an exhibitionist about it)?
But I digress – I used to love the Rock Hudson/Doris Day movies and McMillan and wife, etc. But recently I was watching one of those old movies, and the thrill was gone. I couldn’t suspend belief in the character and get lost in the movie anymore. Kind of like once an actor/actress is over exposed and you know everything about their personal life – you can’t seperate the character from the real person. Prime example is Lindsay Lohan. Not because she’s gay, but because of all her problems being broadcast day in and day out in the media – maybe 10 people would show up for ANY movie she was in now. She’s pretty much ruined her career – unless she leaves the public eye for a few years and comes back at least APPEARING to be cleaned up and in control.
It’s just the FACTS. I don’t care how much society tries to shame and belittle heteros in this culture like they’re the ones with the problem and shove it in their faces 24/7 – heteros make up a huge part of the spending market – and if you want a long and varied character career – keep your private life private, as long as you’re fine with being gay – don’t cut off your nose to spite your face by trying to force other people into approval of your personal lifestyle.
@ ViKtoryGin:
Well put.
There is no doubt in my mind that Ian Mckellen is a great actor in movies especially in Lord of the Rings. But I view him as a grandfather type: old and wise. I could care less about his sexual preference because I don’t view him as a sexual being. (I’m in my twenties so this is acceptable in my eyes.) I didn’t know he was gay until the last month or so when I read about him tearing out pages from the Bible and it makes no difference to me.
I recently started watching White Collar. I found the leading man Matthew Bomer to be the hottest most charming man I’ve seen in a while. Part of his charm on the show is him flirting away at women and getting what he wants. Then I read on a gossip site that he was gay and I googled it to find stories supporting it. I still watch the show but I can’t help but think he’d sooner jump Willie Garson’s (Plays Standford Blatch on Sex & the City) bones on the show than any of the beautiful woman he’s charming. I still watch it but I have to admit he’s lost a bit of appeal.
So I completely agree with ViKtoryGin when you say: “Yes, people can intellectually differentiate, but the thrill is gone if you know that Pattinson wants your boyfriend, not you.”
It makes no difference to me if Neal Patrick is gay because HIMYM is such a great ensemble and absolutely hilarious. The character he plays on the show isn’t the type of person (womanizer)I’d like to meet in real life anyways.
Girls and women who are reading the Twilight books and watching the movies do project their fantasies from the book onto Pattison who plays Edward. We know we’ll most likely never meet actors we project our fantasies on but for a brief moment while watching movies it’s just fun to imagine what is being played out could really happen. If I knew that Pattison was gay then it would still be fun to imagine him as the character in the books Meyer described but in the back of my mind I’d think about the fact that he’d rather jump Taylor’s bones then Kristen’s. Part of the thrill would be gone. I mean if a man is gay, as a woman I can’t imagine “stealing” him away from a man because I lack certain parts he likes. That’s the difference.
I’m probably going to be scorned for being brutally honest but that’s just my take on it. My best friend since junior year in high school is a gay man. I love nothing more than hanging out with a bunch of cute, fabulous guys where I know I don’t have to worry if they might take advantage of me if I have too many drinks because I lack the parts they usually go for.
Like Dianne said it’s not politically correct but heteros makeup a huge part of the spending market and movies are a way for people to escape reality.
I hate it when people hold up one token member of a group to silence another member that they don’t like. Neal Patrick Harris is known primarily as a comedic actor and rarely does anything outside of that. Nobody minds gay people being funny or playing AIDS victims. Everett does comedy but he also does drama, including period dramas. That means he has had a harder time as a gay man than a comedian does.
The reason I think it’s rude is because he hasn’t chosen to make it public. I’m super against trying to out anyone before they are ready.
Technically, every single reference to Coop as a gay man should include the word ALLEGEDLY. It’s not cool to talk about someone’s personal life as you imagine it to be as if it were fact. Typically, we call that lying, but in this case it’s a pretty mainstream belief, so I’ll dial it down to ‘rude’.
(also, the point I should have made earlier: he’s not an actor at all.)
@Ling, I love both Jodie Foster and Queen Latifah and could really care less about either of their sexual orientation. Specifically re: Jodie Foster, the last romantic scenes I saw her in, was during “The Brave One”. She is a phenomenal actor, but those scenes just fell completely flat and had about as much chemistry and passion as a rock.
You are spot on, Mrs. Darcy and the others who point out Rupert always wanted to play leading men roles, not character parts. So who are the openly gay leading man actors out there? Can we say, “No one?” The bitchy tone towards Rupert puzzles me, too. I guess it’s okay to be a “politically correct” homophobe.
lin234, you have no butt?
@Kevin
lol But I was thinking more in line of a twig and berries.
Oh Rupie… just STFU and go back to being the bitter old tiresome middle-aged queen that you now are!
lin234 I know sweetie, just pulling your chain…oops you got no chain!!
I think Rup is funny. Cantankerousness is allowable.
My son is gay and an aspiring actor/singer/dancer. It is none of anyone’s business who he chooses to be with, people do not owe it to anyone to declare their sexuality, religion, political views, NOTHING!!
Stop calling them ‘closeted’ and call them humans, being.
He’s a total bitch, but he’s right, depending on the types of films the individual ‘mo wants to do.
Casting is all about image and perception. Chicks like to crush on guys in movies because somewhere in the back of her mind there is the off, OFF chance she could meet him somewhere and they’d fall in love. If he goes for dudes, no amount of good acting can make him appealing as a straight romantic lead.
That being said, NPH is hawt (because he is handsome, but also quirky and disgustingly talented) and I still fantasize about him ;o)
@anon mom– Calm down. “Closeted” is the gay community’s term for it. If your son’s a “singer-actor-dancer”, I guarantee you any female over the age of 17 can tell.
singer-actor-dancer- code for waiter
Unfortunately, Rupert is 100% correct. If any of you think Tom Cruise or John Travolta would be where they are today if they’d come out as gay 20 years ago, you are sadly mistaken…
“If I knew that Pattison was gay then it would still be fun to imagine him as the character in the books Meyer described but in the back of my mind I’d think about the fact that he’d rather jump Taylor’s bones then Kristen’s.”
Not to mention the fact that the whole plot would be blown.
He’s so grumpy!
I just want to make him some tea spiked with prozac.
Everette is right. Neil Patrick Harris will always remain a TV comedy star. He’ll never be a leading male character, but still, I don’t think that’s related to his openly gay status either. He’s not that great an actor. Look at Tom Hanks in Philadelphia, now that was a story focusing on a gay central character but Tom Hanks is a good actor.
Unfortunately, most films are sold on the superficial premise of the lead man being a romantic hero and that’s a fact. It’s the real reason why the two Twilight saga films are successful. Imagine if they had Neil Patrick Harris as Edward? The films wouldn’t work based on the looks factor.
But in the case of Rupert Everett, he’s just a mediocre actor, this, and the larger reason he doesn’t get work is because he shows his nasty inner queen and that, to me, is the main negative characteristic of many gay men – some are nastier or bitchier than women.
In general: when an actor comes out for all the world to see, their subsequent casting as a heterosexual character just doesn’t work. It doesn’t matter who it is. Jodie Foster is a good example. I think that is based on the realistic medium that is film.
Also, I agree with Dianne.
The majority financial pull is in the heterosexual community and an ordinary example of this is television advertising for cosmetic companies. Cosmetic companies wouldn’t spend millions on campaigns for a minority group, which is why their campaigns are based on the heterocentric view of a woman or man: each advert will focus on the opposite gender. You never see tv commercials for gay women or gay men.
Um, Bete, Ellen Degeneres has been the face of Cover Girl along w/the unbelievably ugly Drew Barrymore for two years.
kthanxbye,
“Unfortunately, most films are sold on the superficial premise of the lead man being a romantic hero and that’s a fact.”
Bete – I only disagree with this one thing you said, and don’t be mad. 🙂
(As a famous writer wannabe) I can tell you that it is NOT a superficial premise. It’s human nature for heterosexual women to want a lead man they can count on, possibly for the rest of their lives. Women are generally very sentimental about love and relationships and needing to respect the object of their desire.
And for heterosexual men, it’s to have a hero they want to relate to.
This is the reality in the hetero world.
As a hetero woman, I must say I disagree with you, Dianne. I’d much rather crush on a really gorgeous gay guy in a movie than a hetero guy who is too macho, bland or disreputable. It’s the movies, for god’s sake! It’s ALL illusion and so is the fantasy that I can ever get with any of those guys. And there are bigger obstacles to true love than a guy’s sexuality. For example, I find Tom Cruise’s Scientology and controlling personality, Mel Gibson’s anti-Semitism and infidelity, and Jude Law’s promiscuity and balding pate MUCH bigger turn-offs than Rupert’s sexuality. I’d certainly rather have dinner with Rupert. Although I couldn’t really imagine having sex with Rupert (in his autobiography he admits to sleeping with two women), I also couldn’t imagine having sex with Cruise, Gibson or Law because they are so distasteful to me REGARDLESS of their sexuality. So for me, the homosexuality factor doesn’t disrupt the fantasy, but the asshole factor in straight (or reputedly straight) guys definitely does.
‘It just doesn’t work and you’re going to hit a brick wall at some point. You’re going to manage to make it roll for a certain amount of time, but at the first sign of failure, they’ll cut you right off.’
Gee, sounds kind off like being an actress. No second chances and they don’t work at 50 either.
Lastly, homosexuality is NO reason not to respect your leading man. His sexuality has NOTHING to do with his character, which is the true crux of respect or disrespect.
I don’t think he failed to get work because he came out, he failed because he is not that good.
That said, for once I agree with him. He is absolutely right. Let’s be realistic, it is hard to imagine your romantic hero who is gay in your arms. And this is what those movies are about.
I have always said, you are gay, just keep the world guessing, do your job and act but don’t get lost in the whole gay persona. It just takes over your identity.
@ Ling
You write match like the game’s over. I’m just getting started.
First, as regards Jodie Foster:
She is not out. This forum is debating the career prospects for OPENLY homosexual actors. Though her sexual orientation is considered a foregone conclusion, her reticence to to openly discuss it suggests that 1) it’s nobody’s bloody business and 2) it could potentially detract from potential film projects in that casting directors could very likely excercise more bias because of their not being able to “picture her in certain kinds of roles”. She would still work, but who knows what kinds of roles the studios would neglect to offer her. She’s probably not willingly ro risk it, and I don’t blame her. Moreover, Jodie Foster is 47. Not 25. If she came out now, though it could very likely still be an issue, she’s not a young actress who’s career would be completely sidelined. It’s hard enough getting plum roles as an actress over 40 without being gay.
Queen Latifah:
Ever noticed that Latifah really only occupies the lead on the small screen? She’s had a very limited number of theatrical roles wherein she is the lead character. She is not the best example, anyway, as this has more to do with ethnicity and weight. She’s not thin and not white (or at least ethnically ambiguous), so casting directors aren’t itching to place a phone call to her for the next Jane Austen adaptation. It’s a little harsh, but it’s the truth.
It should not be taken for granted that when all is said and done, they are WOMEN. Being a lesbian carries with it slightly less stigma than being a gay man in the US. Why? Because many men like seeing girl-on-girl action. Men project just like women do, but most of the time it is pure sex. And what is often one of the most indulged fantasies? You guessed it. Men were pratically writhing in their pants when Angelina Jolie said that she was bi. It can be argued that consequences do exist for actresses if they out themselves, but I’m willing to bet that it would be less damning than Zac Efron or Jake Gylenhaal officially batting for the gays (neither of whom I have on any authority to be gay).
Furthermore, I absolutely loathe Twilight, but it is a legitimate example of the delusion and projection that occurs between fans and the stars that they idolize. Whether you admit it or not, an actors performance (unless they are completely unknown) never occurs in a vaccuum. The individual audience members are going to attach their personal experiences, desires, and attractions onto the images that are flickering across their faces as viewing is a multiexperiential. It’s not just your conscious mind at work. Cinema plays on your emotions and manipulates more sublimated inclinations that escape the conscious mind. So, you can know with mental acuity that someone is gay, but as a women (and I don’t speak for all) if you knew that Johnny Depp (or any other supposed hearthrob) were gay, wouldn’t that curb the feelings? There could be objective appreciation, yes, but there is something missing. Celebrity idolization often carries with it a sexual element, that has nothing to do with acting but everything to do with fans’ flights of fancy.
Again, this theory is for YOUNG ACTORS who want to be LEADING MEN (usually suggestive of romantic leads) on the SILVER SCREEN.
ViktoryGin:
I suppose I’ve been projecting my own experiences on everybody… for me, sexuality absolutely does not matter one whit. I positively squirm when I watch Rupert E play Oberon in that red toga of his. But thinking back on it, the crowd with whom I “roll” is very, very liberal in terms of sexuality – there’s a pretty even mix of gay, straight, and bi, and people experiment all the time, lord knows I have – so perhaps it’s unfair to expect the same objectiveness from people who haven’t had the same life experiences as I have.
Also, having spent quite a bit of time around theatre people, I’ve kinda had to train myself into separating the role from the person ;).
Pardon my frankness, but he looks like a mean old queer.
Hey Rupert, you’re not given leading roles because YOU’RE A SHIT ACTOR.
I don’t care if he’s gay or bitter. Just shut up and act.
Ellen lost her TV show. When she came out being gay but got a great come back. Her partner is so hot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As a now working hollywood actor i dont think its someones sexual preferance that matters and as actors bringing A Sence Of fantacy i dont think actors gay or straight or anyone for that matter should be telling the world who they are sleeping with despite the fact that i think the whole issue in non sence if many gay actors dont get the role it may be more so because someone who tends to be feminine may have a harder time breaking out of it during the audition than for a straight acting male per say would be able to turn it on though its hardly ever a suggested even for gay roles.