Luckylyn

Exactly as someone said another thread Gay people can get married but can’t be shown explicitly in a TV movie. It’s weird how restrictions on even a mild romance between same sex couples are still a thing. Hallmark couldn’t even have them say they are dating.

90s Sitcoms Warned Us

Unrequited: A History of Queer Baiting The White Savior Trope Explained

Unrequited: A History of Queer Baiting

I’m a big fan of Ginger Rogers. My favorite movies with her are Bachelor Mother with David Niven and Once Upon a Honeymoon with Cary Grant.

Finally saw Disclosure and it was really interesting and enlightening. It really does establish the problematic patterns seen on screen.

I wish they played the whole thing instead of a little but I get the point is to entice. Made me think of Jonathan Groff reacting to the Mixtape version of Satisfied.

I’ve been thinking about it and the distinction for me is that wearing drag and being transgender are not the same thing. A man or woman who wears clothing that is associated with the opposite gender is not necessarily a transgender person. So I can object to a cis-actor playing a transgender character while accepting a cis-gender actor performing in drag. I think the unfairness stems from the fact that transgender actors are not being cast for cisgender parts and so it’s unfair to also give transgender parts to cisgender actors too. Let’s say there are thousands of roles for cisgender characters but only 10 for transgender (These are random made up numbers. I’m sure someone else knows where to get accurate statistics). Part of the problem is the lack of opportunity because there isn’t enough diversity in roles that are being offered. The other problem is that people are being shut out of roles in general but then also shut out of roles that are about them too. But I could easily be interpreting this wrong. I remember watching a documentary about disability in film that aired on TCM a few months ago. One person commented that casting can be biased in that it’s assumed unless specifically written that characters have to be not disabled, white, slim, straight, not transgender, etc... They give an example of a casting notice says they need a character to play the ex-girlfriend of the lead for one scene. It’s really vague and should open up casting to a variety of actors but that’s not what happens. Casting defaults to the biases people may be aware of or biases they don’t know they have. There’s also the Lethal Weapon example where when Danny Glover was suggested Richard Donner initial said no because Murtaugh isn’t black. Luckily the casting director didn’t let it go and challenged Donner to find in the script where it says Murtaugh was white. There was nothing in the script that dictated Murtaugh’s ethnicity. Donnor was startled that he had defaulted to white. He was someone who was pro civil rights and participated in marches but had biases he wasn’t conciously aware of. Diversity in casting requires conscious effort because it’s so easy to slip into bias. Because bias can be unintentional, people need more training about developing awareness of biases and to be more flexible in casting choices. People have to sit down and think about why it’s assumed a character must be a certain way instead of considering other options.

Respect

The Cory/Shawn so close they are like boyfriends is a running joke going back to the original series Boy Meets World. It was very much in the same vein as Turk and JD on Scrubs. Turk and JD even had their own love song “Guy Love.” The writers purposely used couples language and subtext for platonic male friendships. I don’t know if that would be considered Queer Baiting or not. I remember a YouTuber saying she didn’t think it counted as Queer Baiting because it was made clear the characters were never going to be a couple from the beginning and so the audience wasn’t promised something the show runners weren’t going to give. I think it’s worth a debate. It was clear that Cory and Shawn could be so close that other people (Topanga, Riley) could sometimes be made to feel left out. Topanga who was married to Cory also used couples language in reference to Cory and Shawn. I remember a scene where she’s talking to Riley and Topanga mentions something from the past as Cory and Shawn’s first date. She says it with affection and not derision. The continuing the Cory and Shawn are so close they are practically a couple joke on Girl Meets World didn’t bother me because I was so used to growing up with it on Boy Meets World. The running joke on BMW, GMW, and Scrubs was amusing to me. I enjoyed the friendships and the humor in their wives/girlfriends reactions to sometimes feeling left out. Carla asking if Turk will ever love her that way after Turk and JD run into each other’s arms after Turk returns home from his and Carla’s honeymoon was funny. Is the couple’s language and subtext as a source of humor offensive? That’s a fair question. I’d really like to read more opinions on it. Men in friendships don’t get to be affectionate as easily as women do in theirs which isn’t fair. Cory/Shawn and Turk/JD adoring each other and openly finding joy and affection in their friendships was nice to see. There was an episode of Scrubs where interns make fun of the Turk/JD friendship where they dress as Turk/JD and make out. Turk is disturbed by this and decides he and JD can’t be openly affectionate with each other anymore. But by the end of the episode Turk and JD run into each other’s arms with their love song “Guy Love” playing in the background. Basically they publicly took as stand about how they should be allowed to be close if they want to regardless of other people’s judgements and jokes. The question is what was the writers of these shows intentions with the romantic references between same sex friends as humor.

I really hated how Riley would force hugs on Smackle.

I hadn’t considered it but Johnny Depp does fit as a Manic Pixie Dream Boy in Benny & Joon.

I know on Mad Men the child actors were given edited scripts to avoid exposure to inappropriate things. There was a scene where Sally was supposed to walk in on something shocking but it was filmed in a way that didn’t let her see what was happening and she didn’t even know what her character was supposed to be seeing. This Is Us should have protected Lonnie the same way.

The Sleepy Hallow situation felt like a bait and switch. They started off really strong and then it shifted to make Katrina more screen time. I wasn’t happy with the direction the show seemed to be going in and quit after Season 2.

So Hallmark’s Love Under the Olive Tree included a subtle same sex romantic b plot. Some people are fine with it and others are not happy. This is a huge step for Hallmark regardless of how it was received. I didn’t mind the hint of a potential same sex romance between the friends. It is not unusual for the friends of the leads to get a little romantic subplot of their own in Hallmark movies. I was disappointed at how it was handled. They implied something romantic was developing, but the body language between to two men was so restrained. There’s a scene where they kinda stiffly sit next to each other on the hayride which may or may not be a date. The faces say spark, the body language says “not too close.” The best friend’s body language with the female lead is more demonstrative than with the guy he’s supposed to be falling for. Plus, when the male lead mistakenly thinks she’s dating her best friend his friend corrects him super vaguely in multiple scenes. He just insists they aren’t a couple. He never simply says “He’s gay” or ”He’s with me” which would have cleared things up much more clearly. So there’s a hint of a romance there, but the story contorts itself to avoid being explicit about it. The only conclusion is that we’re supposed to think they are both closeted otherwise why would his friend not know about the guy his buddy is apparently interested in. The female lead seems to know her friend is gay with her “I’m not his type” line but there’s no scene of him confiding in her he’s falling for anyone, but they did include a scene earlier of him saying he hadn’t meet anyone he was interested in yet. So there’s representation but it’s somewhat regressive. It’s okay to have gay characters, but it has to be hush hush. They want to imply things but want room for deniability. I will say the actors did generate some chemistry despite the obvious restrictions placed on them. I think being so coy made a bigger deal out of it than if they had just allowed the actors to have more natural interactions. It’s clear to me that if they had been a heterosexual couple their b plot romance would have been less restrained. They want the brownie points for representation but don’t want to actually commit to it. I am happy to see more progess from Hallmark. I figure these frustrating baby steps are better than nothing and hopefully just the beginning of better representation in the future. There was another movie whose name I can’t remember on Hallmark that had a “blink and you’d miss it” implied romance between two same sex minor characters. So Hallmark is clearly testing the waters. There’s been a big change up in who is running things so the future should be interesting for Hallmark.

I thought the leads had chemistry and the movie held my interest. I found the male lead annoying sometimes at the beginning but I got over that. I knew the misunderstanding was inevitable and rolled my eyes hard. I didn’t mind the hint of a potential same sex romance between the friends. It is not unusual for the friends of the leads to get a little romantic subplot of their own in Hallmark movies. I was disappointed at how it was handled. They implied something romantic was developing but the body language between to two men was so restrained. Look how they kinda stiffly sit next to each other on the hayride. The faces say spark, the body language says “not too close.” The best friend’s body language with the female lead is more demonstrative than with the guy he’s supposed to be falling for. Plus, when the male lead mistakenly thinks she’s dating her best friend his friend corrects him super vaguely in multiple scenes. He just insists they aren’t a couple. He never simply says “He’s gay” or ”He’s with me” which would have cleared things up much more clearly. So there’s a hint of a romance there but the story contorts itself to avoid being explicit about it. The only conclusion is that we’re supposed to think they are both closeted otherwise why would his friend not know about the guy his buddy is apparently interested in. The female lead seems to know her friend is gay with her “I’m not his type” line but there’s no scene of him confiding in her he’s falling for anyone, but they did include a scene earlier of him saying he hadn’t meet anyone he was interested in yet. So there’s representation but it’s somewhat regressive. It’s okay to have gay characters, but it has to be hush hush. I will say the actors did generate some chemistry despite the obvious restrictions placed on them. I think being so coy made a bigger deal out of it than if they had just allowed the actors to have more natural interactions. It’s clear to me that if they had been a heterosexual couple their b plot romance would have been less restrained. They want the brownie points for representation but don’t want to actually commit to it. I am happy to see more progess from Hallmark. I figure these frustrating baby steps are better than nothing and hopefully just the beginning of better representation in the future.

Eric Stoltz vs Michael J Fox Footage

I really liked Timeless Love. I think it was made elsewhere and purchased by Hallmark? The premise was something different and the leads had chemistry. The characters acknowledged that her story was hard to believe in a realistic way. Overall I enjoyed it. My expectations were low and I was pleasantly surprised.

Women and the Oscars: What is Going On?

DC Universe Streaming Service Future Potentially Uncertain With HBO Max https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiyuYfL8vLpAhVzl3IEHf5mBUAQFjAAegQIAhAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fscreenrant.com%2Fdc-universe-streaming-service-future-uncertain-hbo-max%2F&usg=AOvVaw1ZDBFxZB6DRDMWT--agTLi

That would have been really interesting.

I always wanted a scene between Don and Peggy’s mother after “The Suitcase” when Peggy told Don her mother hated him because she assumed he was the father of her baby.

It was Chandler before Will came out.

I remember when Will Horton on Days of Our Lives saw himself in the mirror and spit at his reflection.