Disney Star playing gay **** star in new movie

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

Obviously not wrong at all. Nobody has said that it is wrong. But it isn't any more right either. And why would it be more right? You are acting as if the casting crew are being disrespectful. Why?

Besides, the article only reveals 3 of the casted actors. And you've already jumped to conclutions. 

because, in my opinion, when a big budget movie doesn't cast lgbt for lgbt roles, they aren't doing enough justice to the actual story. (and don't try and say that " well then is it disrespectful for movies to use prosthetic aliens or fake blood or CGI? do they also not give enough justice to the actual story?" because those are completely separate things.  that's all. that's my opinion.

and again, it wasn't just this specific movie, it was a general problem i've had with hollywood. if you don't agree, fine. 

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

also, i think it's kind of funny that a thread about a gay p0rn star is in the "hot entertainment topics" but not for the usual reasons

[Didymus 32,914]

i'm sorry that i can't be bothered to reply to every single one of these posts.

and that was clearly a joke but i see you took out the lmao emote to fit to your agenda  and yes, my second statement was a little general and i'll give you that but you can't say it isn't true for the most part. it is harder for fem gays to get jobs because their roles are limited, which is why it's important that the roles that they can qualify for are open to them.

i've said the answer to your question multiple times  because representation is important. I like to know that there are gays (not only masc. or straight-passing ones but fem and colored ones) out there succeeding. that's why. i

Roles for gay people are limited? Where are these ideas coming from?

And representation has nothing to do with what you're calling for. Proper representation doesn't depend on the person who's portraying the character that needs to be represented. And there are already so many examples of gays succeeding in nearly all businesses, I again fail to see the importance of your cause.

I mean, I instantly think of the actors who change their entire body shape to qualify for a role that is very unlike themselves. That's what actors want, a challenge. Jake Gyllenhaal shouldn't be rejected from his boxing film because he's not a boxer or doesn't have the body shape of a boxer when he auditions. I seriously, again, doubt that gay people are jumping out of their chair to play a character that doesn't require them to do anything but portray "themselves" for "a good cause". That's not even acting and no serious actor wants to be seen as a one trick pony.

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

Roles for gay people are limited? Where are these ideas coming from?

And representation has nothing to do with what you're calling for. Proper representation doesn't depend on the person who's portraying the character that needs to be represented. And there are already so many examples of gays succeeding in nearly all businesses, I again fail to see the importance of your cause.

I mean, I instantly think of the actors who change their entire body shape to qualify for a role that is very unlike themselves. That's what actors want, a challenge. Jake Gyllenhaal shouldn't be rejected from his boxing film because he's not a boxer or doesn't have the body shape of a boxer when he auditions. I seriously, again, doubt that gay people are jumping out of their chair to play a character that doesn't require them to do anything but portray "themselves" for "a good cause". That's not even acting.

you seriously think that gay people have the same opportunities as straight people in the entertainment industry? 

and please do not compare boxing to this topic because that is a reach.

 

[Squidward T 1,810]

Brent corrigan is better looking sorry 

[Didymus 32,914]

you seriously think that gay people have the same opportunities as straight people in the entertainment industry? 

and please do not compare boxing to this topic because that is a reach.

Erm.. that's not what you were talking about lmfao. What you posted:

"it is harder for fem gays to get jobs because their roles are limited, which is why it's important that the roles that they can qualify for are open to them."

You're talking about roles gays can play in theory, not about job opportunities.

And I'm not comparing boxing with anything, I made other points.

[ARTPOPdidntflop 3,987]

Gay people who play straight roles: Wentworth Miller, Neil Patrick Harris, Jim Parsons, Sara Gilbert, Matt Bomer,... and these are all famous and multiple of them already had children with their partners when they were cast.

They were already famous before they came out. I think it's harder for out of the closet actors to climb that ladder

In my opinion straight actors shouldnt play gay characters. How are they ever meant to encapsulate the experience of a gay man or women? It's like casting a man as a woman character, a white person as Mulan.

How are straight people ever supposed to act "being gay".

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

Erm.. that's not what you were talking about lmfao. What you posted:

"it is harder for fem gays to get jobs because their roles are limited, which is why it's important that the roles that they can qualify for are open to them."

You're talking about roles gays can play in theory, not about job opportunities.

And I'm not comparing boxing with anything, I made other points.

and i stand by that. it is harder for gays to get booked and even harder for fem gays to get booked.

don't see why you're trying to argue against the obvious.

[Gianni Versace 2,987]

I think it's harder for out of the closet actors to climb that ladder

mte

[AlexanderLevi2 5,849]

so it's okay that "gay representation" can only be shown using straight people? that's pathetic. 

don't make a movie about gay people!! if !!! you!!! don't !! want ! to !! cast !!! someone !!! gay!!!!!!!!!!

do we know 100% that the role is a GAY gay p0rn star or is the role a STRAIGHT gay-for-pay p0rn star?

[Didymus 32,914]

They were already famous before they came out. I think it's harder for out of the closet actors to climb that ladder

In my opinion straight actors shouldnt play gay characters. How are they ever meant to encapsulate the experience of a gay man or women? It's like casting a man as a woman character

Well, that opens up all the roles that are inappropriate according to that theory incl. all the characters in Titanic, 12 Years a Slave, The Help, Brokeback Mountain, Braveheart and a trillion other movies.

Then I guess only d--g addicts should play addicted characters etc. etc. it's just hilariously unlogical I get what you mean but imo you and blue's logic is being clouded by your undoubtedly genuine concern for gay rights. It sadly just doesn't make sense what you're saying.

[ARTPOPdidntflop 3,987]

How are straight people ever supposed to act "being gay". If an important plot line was for the character to be gay, they could NEVER act that.

 

If the plot wasnt so focused on the s-xuality on the character, and they just happened to be gay then that's a different story. A straight actor will never capture the gay experience

[ARTPOPdidntflop 3,987]

Well, that opens up all the roles that are inappropriate according to that theory incl. all the characters in Titanic, 12 Years a Slave, The Help, Brokeback Mountain, Braveheart and a trillion other movies.

Then I guess only d--g addicts should play addicted characters etc. etc. it's just hilariously unlogical I get what you mean but imo you and blue's logic is being clouded by your undoubtedly genuine concern for gay rights. It sadly just doesn't make sense what you're saying.

But being a d--g addict isn't a state of being. Drugs aren't YOU. Drug taking is an experience but it isn't your ethnicity/s-x/s-xuality. 

I have my own views of the trivialization of d--gs in cinema anyway

[Lucifer 1,981]

because, in my opinion, when a big budget movie doesn't cast lgbt for lgbt roles, they aren't doing enough justice to the actual story. (and don't try and say that " well then is it disrespectful for movies to use prosthetic aliens or fake blood or CGI? do they also not give enough justice to the actual story?" because those are completely separate things.  that's all. that's my opinion.

and again, it wasn't just this specific movie, it was a general problem i've had with hollywood. if you don't agree, fine. 

Why the need to make up an argument I didn't make, and even argue against it? 

My final opinion is that actors are cast to portray and getting a role. The actor most suited gets  cast. Most people are straight, so it's logical that there are more straight actors. And why would a great straight actor portray a gay character any less than a gay one? Are we supposed to give roles out of pity? I'd  be so emarrased and disappointed if I ever were to be cast based on my s-xual orientation. 

[AlexanderLevi2 5,849]

They were already famous before they came out. I think it's harder for out of the closet actors to climb that ladder

In my opinion straight actors shouldnt play gay characters. How are they ever meant to encapsulate the experience of a gay man or women? It's like casting a man as a woman character, a white person as Mulan.

How are straight people ever supposed to act "being gay".

I completely agree that it is harder for gay actors to get roles but does that mean that gay actors are only going to be cast for gay roles? Should they never play a straight person? Should the only role an actor play be based on his own life experiences and nothing else? Wouldn't it just be a reality show then?