One of the things not discussed here - but noted elsewhere- was that this project was going to portray the lead character as a cross dressing lesbian. When community folks pointed out the contemporaneous history showing he identified as a man, used male pronouns, name and had medical treatment- the discussion changed with those producing and starring.
So - having a star and producers not of the community did matter in something as basic as who the lead was. And input from trans people - from outside the production - changed how they viewed the main character.
This isn’t insignificant.
Reported here and elsewhere:
“Johansson has bafflingly announced her plans to portray Gill in her next film, currently titled Rub & Tug. According to a report last week on Deadline, the film (directed by Rupert Sanders, who worked with Johansson on her reviled turn as a Japanese woman in last year’s Ghost in the Shell, and co-produced by Tobey Maguire) will portray Gill not as the man he was, but as a butch lesbian who adopted a male identity to “make it” in the world of organized crime.”
The only job of an actor is to portray someone who is a different person than themselves.
Being transgender should be no exception, it’s one of many characteristics a person can have that an actor can portray.
I have a couple transgender friends, who often say the worst part about it is being alienated and being made to feel abnormal. By insisting that only an actor with that trait can play a person with that trait, those who protested are making it less normal to be transgender. They are widening the gap, not closing it.
Not from out of nowhere, despite the legend of Lana Turner and Schwab’s. There’s a whole career progression an actor goes through before he’s given a lead and talent and charisma are only the starting points, base qualities possessed by a lot of actors but enhanced by the Hollywood machine. What people are discussing here is not talent but the various formal and informal networks and systems that get an actor there and how biased those institutional structures are against anyone who’s not white and cisgender.
You’re confusing an actor with a movie star (h/t “My Favourite Year”) and a film with a tentpole picture. Again, that tiny minority of movie stars is chosen by a system that favours white cisgender people, often to the exclusion of others.
A young actor doesn’t get the opportunities to practise them (and not just on-screen) if she’s constantly denied them based on her race or sexual orientation or gender. What’s being argued by many here is that there are ways to give them those opportunities.
Which (like “all lives matter”) would be a noble sentiment if the default attitude in Hollywood wasn’t “we need to see cisgender actors given first shot at the roles they’re best suited for, gay or straight.” Until that changes there needs to be an extra and affirmative push.
People adjust, new fandoms are born. To use an example from a related industry, lots of women swooned over Anderson Cooper back in the 1990s when he wasn’t officially “out” (he wasn’t closeted but it was an open secret within the industry and NYC). When he came out in public those women just switched from wanting him as their boyfriend to wanting him as their gay best friend, while meanwhile he became a heartthrob and role model for a lot of gay guys. Representation can be a win-win even in the “free” market, hallowed be Its name.
I’ll conclude this exchange by saying, as a white male cisgender guy with talents of my own that others recognise, I understand why there’s a lot of anxiety around and pushback amongst folks like me toward these ideas. When one has the advantage of being considered the default choice it’s comforting to believe it’s all about pure merit and talent and blind ourselves to all the biased systems and assumptions that help us out. It’s a sign of maturity to recognise one’s privilege and a sign of basic decency (and, in the long run, enlightened self interest) to try to let others share in it.
For lots of trans people, their trans-ness is a pretty small part of their identity. Think about an average straight person - how much of what makes them interesting people is wrapped up in them being straight?
We’ll be making progress when a movie has a trans character and the movie isn’t about that.
Many big-name actors came from connections in the industry, and they’re often not at all good at what they’re doing. Look at Nick Cage. Dude often flatout dropped roles he was expected to carry, and if it weren’t for his family connections, none of us here would ever have heard of him. Same with that middling hack Sofia Coppola (granted she’s a director, but the same principle applies).
I’m not talking about the actor’s identity, I’m talking about the character’s identity. With so few trans characters out there (especially now) it becomes more important for a trans actor to get the first shot at playing one.
Yes, but they’re usually white so it goes unnoticed for a long time.
In the past, theatrical dynasties like the Booths or Barrymores were rarities and the members who were stars had to live up to the accomplishments of their predecessors. Now it’s more common, with actors of varying ranges of talent (some with a lot, many with a paucity) and charisma achieving stardom because they’re part of a successful Industry family like the Coppolas or simply because they were born into a generic wealthy family.
Edward Norton is an extremely talented and hard-working actor, but it’s hard to say if he would have achieved stardom without being born with a lot of privilege (beyond being white cisgender) and the opportunities and connections that go with it.
Again, there is no reason not to cast a transman in the role. There is no reason why a transman can’t play a cisgendered man. None.
It’s not rocket science here. People haven’t been cast because of lack of talent. They haven’t been cast due to casting people’s belief that cisgendered people will not watch trans people in films.
And plenty of actors who are “bankable” stars have been in films that were commercial flops and still end up doing other things.
Except for all the films about trans people that have been critical successes have yet to do so. However, the greater visibility of a few trans actors have indeed translated into at least a conversation about it…
Clearly, you’ve not seen Senese8. I think that Jamie Clayton is just a good an actor of SJ.
I mean… have you SEEN Tom Cruise? He kind of plays the same guy over and over again. Yet, he’s one of the highest paid stars in hollywood. He’s no Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellan or Daniel Day Lewis or Meryl Streep or Avery Brooks or Phillip Seymour Hoffman, etc. There are a whole list of actual great actors who aren’t “bankable” stars. What bankable stars have is that they pull in regular audiences. That’s a combination of some talent, looks, and a shit ton of advertising/promotion through the celebrity media. They also often have stakes in production companies, etc.
Maybe go see a TV show or film with a trans actor. I’m guess they’re just as good as a Tom Cruise if not better. Being trans doesn’t mean one can’t act, FFS.
Why? Why, when it’s the case that those people are being kept out of those roles BECAUSE IT IS ASSUMED A MAINSTREAM AUDIENCE WON’T ACCEPT THEM! They keep making that assumption, even when audiences prove them wrong. No one thought a majority black cast would pull in a white audience, but look at the success of Black Panther. Orange is the New Black and Sense8 are being watched by plenty of people who aren’t trans who are embracing the trans actors in those shows. In the case of Sense8, the producer was a trans woman!
Where are you getting this stuff?
Are you saying that because some one is gay and a man that a woman can’t fantasize about that? Have you like, met any women?
Ah, yes, the “real oppression here is addressing the oppression of minorities” argument! I hardly think giving trans actors more roles is oppressing incredibly wealthy stars.
I think several of us has said that. We’re not even remotely near that at this point. We’re still at “well, audiences won’t go see someone in a film that isn’t exactly like them” moment. It’s sad, because I bet there are tons of talented trans actors out there, who’d love to do a variety of roles.
OMG, he’s just so bad at acting, but I love watching him chew up the scenery around him! He was perfect for Wild At Heart, though.
Ugh… yeah. Her movies aren’t great, but everyone just keeps praising her white lady fantasies.
I agree that’s a problem, but it’s not a problem that’s solved by casting a trans actor for a major hollywood film at this moment.
Not really, I have no doubt there’s a lot of non-movie star actors good enough to carry a film, though I suspect it’s not quite as many as we think. Just because we don’t understand why some actors are particularly interesting on screen doesn’t mean the talent isn’t real.
I’m not sure we disagree here, I’m just saying that the lead in a major film isn’t the place to develop them.
My objection to that is you risk ghettoizing gay actors as people who only get work when a gay role comes up.
I’ve only seen Neil Patrick Harris play straight and he’s found himself a decent career doing that. Jim Parsons has been in straight roles for most of his career and Zachary Quinto’s two big roles have effectively been asexual.
When it comes to movies the gay best friend is a supporting role, not the lead. I don’t disagree there’s a path to some gay A-Listers, but it’s a harder path. And for that to happen the industry needs to develop lead roles that suit that kind of stardom, those aren’t necessarily gay roles, but they’re roles where you’re not relying on the actor’s sex appeal.
I’m in the same position and but I take a different approach to the fix. Equality doesn’t stop with giving other people the same opportunities because others don’t have the same built-in advantages.
Assuming you can throw some standard major roles at gay and trans actors and assume a bunch of A-list actors will pop out is just setting those actors up for failure. The progress needs to start from the ground up. More TV shows and indy films need to include interesting roles for trans actors to develop the talent and figure out how to write those roles. And they need to figure out the roles where a famous gay actor’s particular style of fame will help draw audiences.
True, I used to be more critical of him as an actor because of that but I’m not actually sure that’s fair. Audiences WANT to see Tom Cruise play that same guy over and over, he might have the ability to play something else, but that’s not what audiences want.
At the same time, even if he does just play the one guy, he plays it well.
There’s a reason why there’s so many TV shows and movies with crappy acting out there. Good acting is hard and somewhat rare, difficult and rare enough that you can sometimes become a famous actor for reasons other than being a great actor.
I’ve never suggested nor tried to suggest that being trans means one can’t act. I’ve tried to be very clear, trans actors need the opportunity to develop the skills to carry a major movie.
But to be brutally honest, there’s only 1.3 million trans people in the US. There’s about 47k actors in the US, or about 0.015% of the population Actors. That works out to ~200 trans actors.
Do you really think 1/200 CIS actors has the talent to be an A-Lister? Then why would you expect those 200 trans actors to be able to produce one?
This thread is starting to turn into a real clusterfuck, with multiple presumably Cisgendered people deigning to speak for transpeople, like they don’t have any agency.
O_o
Bottom fucking line:
Representation MATTERS.
There’s nothing wrong with seeking out actual trans actors and actresses to play trans characters, and the excuse “but we need a big star in order to make money!” is just a lame-ass justification for not wanting the status quo to change.
It’s been a long time coming, but CHANGE GON’ COME…
I didn’t say anything about cisgender people not getting enough gigs. My transgendered friends feel alienated because we insist on treating them as exceptions. Actors have always played all sorts of characters that have traits they don’t share, stop making it weird to be transgendered.
I know thousands of other trans people. Not a single one has noted your concern here. That cis folks getting these roles somehow is empowering or destigmatizing.
