• FriendOfElphaba@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    271·
    11 months ago

    When The Birdcage came out, Nathan Lane was terrified that his portrayal of Albert was going to out him. Even in the mid-90s (gods, I was strong then), being gay was a potentially career-limiting thing. He was having a bit of a panic attack in the green room before their Oprah appearance promoting the film, and he told Robin Williams that he was frightened. Robin calmed him down and told him not to worry.

    In the course of the interview, Oprah openly asked Nathan if he was worried that his performance would make people think he was actually gay. Without giving Nathan a chance to answer, Robin jumped in and really camped it up. He went completely over the top, drew all the attention to himself, and the interview moved on.

    Here’s Nathan talking about it.

    I get it though. I would not have minded one bit if Robin had been gay. Riding from San Francisco to the north bay you get to drive through the Robin Williams Tunnel, with a rainbow painted on it.

    I could do with a bit more of that kind of thing, speaking personally.

    • flicker@kbin.social
      3·
      1 year ago

      This is exactly what I would have done, and now I think… if I have something in common with Robin Williams, I must not be a monster after all.

  • Damaskox@kbin.social
    7·
    1 year ago

    I’m not gay and I’m honestly intrigued to hear thoughts behind this gay disappointment.

    Is it about the actor faking a thing? Is it about not wanting/being able/feeling stupid to fantasize about the character because the actor isn’t gay?

    • DaGeek247@kbin.social
      9·
      1 year ago

      Probably the latter. It’s not like this isn’t common; you see the manufactured pop stars get told to keep their relationships quiet because it’ll drop their sales money/upset the fans.

      • Nepenthe@kbin.social
        31·
        1 year ago

        Hopefully the latter. Thinking someone is attractive, I get, and being sad about it isn’t the kind of thing people can control.

        Unfortunate that I even have to question the meaning, because there absolutely are people on other platforms who are quite loud about their belief that only a real actor who is X in real life should play a role about X. Which is…not entirely how acting works.

        I didn’t want to think an idea so far left it became discriminatory would make its way to the fediverse so quickly, but I wish that chance was zero.

        • Damaskox@kbin.social
          11·
          11 months ago

          only a real actor who is X in real life should play a role about X

          I personally don’t mind these kinds of aspects being or missing in an actor’s personality/characteristics.
          If I don’t know what something looks like authentically, acting whatever while acting to be “it” seems good enough for me 😁 And if someone not being something acts authentically anyway, that’s good too!

          Exterior resemblance has a bigger impact on me.
          An example: It feels a bit weird how Disney’s new mermaid movie has a different-colored main actress compared to the animation. I know it’s important to bring all kinds of people to the mix but…I kinda got used to what Ariel originally looks like.

        • hydrospanner@lemmy.worldEnglish
          22·
          11 months ago

          only a real actor who is X in real life should play a role about X. Which is…not entirely how acting works.

          I just have to assume that these people never watch any fantasy or sci-fi, since it’s gotta be a real birch finding elves and aliens and centaurs and death robots and orcs and lizard people.

          Like… it’s literally called acting. In a sense, their entire job is to lie (convincingly) about who they are.

    • jol@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      2·
      11 months ago

      Even thought the chances of you ending up in bed with a famous actor are virtually null, they are not zero. But when you find out they are totally not gay, your dreams are shattered. That’s how horny minds work.