Largest arms in the world, BROTHER!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Re: Mary Jane a male, Gay Spiderman.. the fuck??
The problem with writing gay characters nowadays is that it feels like it is done just to push the social message that homosexuals are awesome, but because they don't put much thought into it beyond pushing the message, it just comes across as preachy and forced. You ever see Brokeback Mountain? Personally I thought the movie sucked. Weak acting, bad dialogue ("I can't quit you" is up there with "You had me at hello" as far as stupid cheese romance lines go), and if the movie were about a heterosexual couple, it would have died a quick death. But because it was about two men falling in love, it was championed as this great arthouse film and felt like it was presented to push an agenda when quite honestly, I didn't think the film was that good was more about pushing a message rather than actually making a good movie.
Two of the best gay characters I've ever seen are Jodie Dallas from Soap (played by Billy Crystal, his first significant role), and Wallace from Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World. Jodie started off in the early episodes as an in your face stereotype and it was a little annoying. In the last season of the show, he actually turned straight which was horrible and a sign that the show had jumped the shark. In between the start & the end though, Jodie was treated as a perfectly normal human being that could make friends, have relationship issues, and the such. His relationship with Dennis and subsequent break ups actually felt very real and not just something played up for shock or cheap laughs to shove a message down the audience's throats and that to me was more effective. And him having to gain the full acceptance of his stepfather & his brother were also moments that felt very real and something you'd see in a real family.
Wallace in Scott Pilgrim is just a normal guy with great wit, charm, and sarcasm. He just happens to be gay. He is the funniest character in the movie, but it isn't because he is perpetuating stereotypes. He is legitimately funny and probably the most quotable guy in the film, and when you look at how messed up everybody else, Wallace actually seems like the most normal & well adjusted character in the entire film. He is fine with who he is and has no problem speaking his mind or cracking wise at the insanity going on around him. Is he in a relationship? Nah, he's promiscuous and doesn't care what anybody thinks of that; Again, he feels like a real human rather than a stereotype used for cheap laughs or to show off a message at the expense of any substance for the character or the story.
So lets say they actually did do this and made Spider-Man gay. They won't, but lets say they did. I HATED the romance in the last movie. Gwen and Peter just came off like two awkward Twilighty teenagers with bad dialogue (I like kissing you, Its so beautiful, chocolate house!) and awkward moments. Why on Earth would I believe the people behind these films could get any romance right after watching that, homosexual or heterosexual? I would probably just wind up annoyed with it as they would try to just make that the defining element of the movie rather than what I want the movie to be about: A superhero stopping bad guys. Romance is usually side stuff anyway but if they put Spider-Man in a homosexual relationship, it would just take over the whole film and just wind up being one note & preachy and filled with the same bad dialogue and awkward moments that the Gwen/Peter romance had.