I've never been a 'Sex And The City' fan. I don't know if you're surprised by this, although I do know that if you're a film critic you're likely to be. The fact that 'Sex And The City 2' is apparently not a great film (and, let's face it, it sounds AWFUL) has given scribblers everywhere the opportunity for a good old bit of gaybashing-by-proxy.
It's something that started back in the days of the TV series. Someone noticed that the man who brought Candace Bushnell's book to the screen, Darren Starr, was gay, as was the exec producer, Michael Patrick King. At that point, someone made the not-unreasonable observation that the female characters in 'Sex And The City' sometimes talked and behaved in a way more usually seen in gay men. So far so tame.
But that tame little theory grew and grew. People- and not just people, columnists too- started to say things like 'Of course, the series is actually about gay men' which developed into 'Those characters aren't really women' and soon it became pretty much accepted that SJP and co were nothing but powerless pawns in a twisted gay game of 'hate the woman'. That opinion reached a very queasy nadir in the reviews of the film this week.
Several friends have posted a review from a Seattle newspaper on facebook; it's one of those things that has gone viral. And yes, it makes the case against the film quite brilliantly. But sitting right in the middle, there it is- the irrelevant mention of the sexual orientation of some of the producers. The film, says Lindy West, is 'a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls'. It's not an offensive remark, per se- but it is an unnecessary swipe, isn't it? I wonder how far I'd get if I described, say, the film 2012 as 'Jews playing with Action Men'?
Leave it to the good old Evening Standard, however, to go from the allusive to the flat-out offensive. Andrew O'Hagan starts by referring to 'Carrie Bradshaw and her gaggle of gay impersonators', thus reaffirming the idea that these characters, created by Candace Bushnell and exec produced by Sarah Jessica Parker, are nothing but projection on the part of some benders. Am I being oversensitive? Well, how about the description of Kim Cattrall's character, Samantha? As a preface to discussing her venality, vulgarity, and narcissism, O'Hagan chooses to sum her up as 'Stonewall on Ice'. Never mind that this is a meaningless piece of phrasemaking ('on ice', Andrew? Talk me through that) its implications are stinking; she's a deeply unpleasant character, as can be summed up by the word 'Stonewall'. You tell me if that is in any way acceptable. You explain to me how that isn't the rankest prejudice.
I'm sure that 'Sex in the City 2' is an egregious piece of film making (the scene where burqa'd women reveal they're wearing designer clobber underneath sounds particularly jawdropping) and of course many gay men have been involved in its creation. Millions more will go to see it. But I still don't think that justifies the journey our tame little theory has taken from 'it's by gays' to 'they're all gays' to 'oh, she's just vile. You know, pure Stonewall'.
Anyway, you'll have to excuse me. I'm off to dress dolls up in Louboutins for reasons hidden in my woman-hating pysche.
8 comments:
That's so interesting. Most of the SATC hating/critical deconstruction I've been exposed to has been by people who were feminists and/or gay, on account of its vapidity and tokenism. And by my mum because of its 'smutty badness'.
I've just read Lindy West's review, and in it we've also got a ho-ho-humourous rapey metaphor, a dig at the lesbian relationship of Cynthia Nixon, and a backfired ironic Jewish name joke. And she calls the smutty badness one a prostitute. Ironically. Perhaps. So you could take your pick of offensivenesses really. Yet she left out some ironic jabs at the gay cliche wedding of the century, as Bryan Safi called it over at That's Gay.
I always felt the series was a woman's representation of a particular kind of gay man's representation of a woman. The kind of man who'd buy the box set.
Here in the U.S. the assault on gay men is in full swing. The latest is that if the loathsome Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed openly gay soldiers will run riot at night in the barracks, imposing fellatio on innocently sleeping straights. There's no depth to which they will not descend.
One of the earliest incidents of what you describe concerning SITC 2 that I can recall concerned Edward Albee's Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolfe? It was rumored that his original concept was for the script was to be played by four gay men. I know for certain of one production that was cast as three gay men and a woman. Albee always denied that he ever had anything in mind other than two heterosexual couples.
Yep, very interesting - I hadn't picked up on that in the thisisbeyondbad reviews I read. Except for one which found the winkwinknudgenudge handling of the 'gay wedding' at the beginning utterly baffling given that the gay director might have shown more ease with it.
Anyway, it would be impossible to sit through this movie, I reckon. Do you intend to?
No, I have had limited contact with SITC during its television run and that was enough. We go out for a few independent films, foreign films, and the few (very few) intelligent films made in Hollywood, usually by fringe directors. The vast majority is all live performance of theater, opera, modern dance and symphony.
I didn't think for a moment you would, Will. I was more curious, if you don't mind, to know whether our host intends to take a dip in shallow waters, or desert sand...
On which note, I should ask you both if you've seen a quite outrageous turning of the tables on Porky's, Animal House et al in the form of Another Gay Movie? We watched it at home last night. The four stars are the teenage answer to Carrie and co. It's actually a bit sexy too, if truth be told, and very, very naughty. I wonder if Graham Norton's 'fans' knew he was in this sporting... but no, you have to see it.
Glory- yeah, Lindy West's been given a bit of a free pass, hasn't she?
David, I think I'd rather walk naked through the streets of Abu Dhabi and face the consequences than see SATC2 (although I will doubtless end up having to watch it on DVD or Sky at some point). I haven't seen 'Another Gay Movie' but from what I read on wiki it looks more like a gay 'American Pie' than anything else...
I have to admit that Fritz and I will sometimes rent (or watch on Logo, our gay TV cable channel) some gay fluff, particularly if the boys are serious lookers and/or appealingly underdressed. But "Another Gay Movie" hasn't appealed sufficiently as of the moment.
Post a Comment