The 1993 film Philadelphia was a boon. Winning multiple Academy Awards, Philadelphia was about a gay lawyer (Tom Hanks) who contracts AIDS, and moves to sue his former employer for firing him because of his disease, but more likely because of his sexuality. The film is ham-fisted and feels dated today, but was a mainstream film, starring a known and bankable star, all about the plight of the gay man in the modern world. There is a wrenching scene in Philadelphia, one that is still being played out in hospitals today, wherein Hank’s boyfriend (Antonio Banderas) is denied access to his loved one because he is not a family member or a girlfriend. Now that gay marriage is rolling out across the country (slowly, but surely), these scenes are finally being erased from the discourse… 20 years later. Was Philadelphia a good film? Yes. Did it do everything right? Perhaps not. I’ve heard criticisms that Philadelphia turned gay men into noble martyrs, which is yet another way of reducing a group of people. I disagree with this assessment, but I can see where it comes from.
Whither gay films into the new millennium? Still in a largely ambivalent state. Gay characters can still be treated like token minorities or even like oddball buffoons (I’d rather not bring up A Haunted House or Grown-Ups 2 again). But at the same time, TV shows like “Glee” put gay characters in the center of the drama, treating their gayness like an incidental part of their romantic lives the same way a heterosexual’s sexuality is incidental. The drama is about coming out and being accepted, and not about staying in and being feared.
But gay and lesbian characters are still often ignored or vilified in movies. If a bisexual character arises (especially a bisexual man), they are instantly a bad guy. Seriously, apart from the TV series “Torchwood,” I can think of no movies or TV shows to feature a heroic bisexual male. Wouldn’t it be nice if Thor kissed a man in the next Thor movie? Or if James Bond actually bedded a man, rather than just talking about it like he did in Skyfall? There has been one heroic incidentally gay character from the ’00s that I can think of off the top of my head, and that would be Frank Martin (Jason Statham) from the 2002 action film The Transporter. Frank is not seen with lovers, but he does nothing to reinforce his heterosexuality. It’s widely accepted that Frank is gay, and yet he’s a kickass awesome action star played by Jason Statham. Good job.
Nowadays, gay films are common and accepted from both big studios and smaller indie houses alike. Gus Van Sant has famously made several queer films, including the downright mainstream drama Milk from 2008. We now have dozens of positive and great films about gay characters, and, thanks to film festivals like Outfest, new queer films are being given a venue all the time. Indeed, in this modern age of gay marriage and “Glee,” the notion of the “queer film” may even be becoming increasingly moribund. I say this is a good thing. We’re rapidly approaching a state where sexuality really doesn’t matter other than as a feature of a person’s makeup.
Homework for the Week:
What is the significance of queer film in the modern age? Are they still relevant as a subgenre? What was the first positive gay role model you recall from a movie? Is gay coding still in effect in the modern age? Do you feel gays are underrepresented in movies of the last decade? Do you have any favorite queer films?
Witney Seibold is a featured contributor on the CraveOnline Film Channel, co-host of The B-Movies Podcast and co-star of The Trailer Hitch. You can read his weekly articles B-Movies Extended, Free Film School and The Series Project, and follow him on “Twitter” at @WitneySeibold, where he is slowly losing his mind. If you want to buy him a gift (and I know you do), you can visit his Amazon Wish List.
