The Gayest Academy Awards Ever--And What It Means for Us
by Michael Jensen, March 2, 2006
(xposted to oscar thread)
http://www.afterelton.com/movies/2006/3/awards.html It's a long standing joke that the Oscars are the Super Bowl for gay men. If that is true, then this Sunday's broadcast of the 78th Annual Academy Awards is when our beloved-but-downtrodden team of perennial losers has unexpectedly made it to the big game. In football-ese, this makes Brokeback Mountain the St. Louis Cardinals and Sunday night our big chance for legitimacy. (For those who don't know football, the Cardinals stink worse than the sheep Jack and Ennis have to herd.)
So what does it mean that were in the Big Game at last? That we're even the prohibitive favorites to win?
Much of that answer depends on what happens Sunday night. Don't kid yourself that this won't be important. A billion plus people will watch clip after clip from the "gay cowboy," most of whom will never see Brokeback themselves. More importantly, they will see and hear about two men who fall in love.
Given that Brokeback is clearly the frontrunner for Best Picture, it would be a devastating psychological blow if it were to lose to Crash, its closest competitor. Brokeback not only dominated the other award shows this year, but is truly a breakthrough in cinematic history. Not to acknowledge that would have real implications. Most certainly, those on the right would trumpet the news to high heaven as proof that America isn't nearly as accepting of queers as we might like to believe. Nor would we see as many gay movies
in the future as we might otherwise.
Fortunately, an upset of Brokeback isn't likely to occur.
No matter what does happen when that final envelope is opened, the Brokeback "phenomenon" already means we have arrived. Playing gay used to carry a risk for an actor. Yes, William Hurt won an Oscar for his role in Kiss of the Spiderwoman, but the character was so stereotypically "gay" that it didn't feel like a breakthrough. Nor did it
lead to a boom in mainstream gay movie roles.
Tom Hanks also pulled off a gay role, but when he won for Philadelphia, he was already a box office saint. America perceived him as a noble actor doing a good "deed" by taking the gay part in what was more a social statement than a real movie.
Other actors haven't been so lucky. Harry Hamlin feels his role in Making Love nipped his film career in the bud, while Michael Ontkean, who played Hamlin's lover, didn't even manage Hamlin's successful television career. Indeed, up until now most actors would rather play a man-eating, child-beating, puppy-kicking serial killer than take a gay role.
But that is no longer the case. With nominations for Heath Ledger, Jake Gyllenhaal, and Philip Seymour Hoffman, queer roles are no longer something to be feared. Word has it that even heterosexual sex-symbol Brad Pitt is quite keen to play a gay role himself. (Perhaps he didn't see his own performance in Troy.)
Beyond the recognition bestowed on the actors and filmmakers involved in Brokeback Mountain and Capote, what Sunday night might ultimately mean for the GLBT community won't be immediately known. Some clues, however, might be found in how the movie is treated during the ceremony itself.
It's a good sign that Jon Stewart is this year's Oscar emcee. Stewart's show, The Daily Show, usually has a progressive take on GLBT issues. Surely, he will address the controversy that has swirled around Brokeback Mountain, and the homophobes will probably be the targets of his barbs. If that is the case, a billion people will see homophobia being ridiculed rather than GLBT people. That alone will be a breath of
fresh air.
When the cast of Brokeback Mountain appeared on Oprah, one of the most pressing questions for fans was how Oprah would react to the movie. Would she love it? Would she tell her legions of fans they had to see it? Most importantly, would she show "the kiss?" For the record, she did all of the above. It was a significant moment, for if Oprah wasn't bothered by a same-sex romance, then how controversial could it really be?
Similarly, it will matter which clips from Brokeback the Oscars decide to feature. Will it be "the kiss" or something more palatable to mainstream America? Perhaps Ennis with Alma? Jack and Ennis arguing? Whichever the choice, a message will be sent to those watching. If "the kiss" is shown, for many viewers it will be the first time they have witnessed a same-sex kiss.
To be fair to the Academy, they are in a difficult position. Conservatives have already painted Hollywood as trying to shove a homosexual agenda down America 's throat. Raising Brokeback's profile further only stokes that anger. There are commercial considerations as well. Brokeback's makers will hope for a Best Picture bounce at the box office, not to mention the eventual DVD release. Nonetheless, gay men will feel cheated if Brokeback is “de-gayed.” For too many of us that is already a daily occurrence of which we are sick.
Movies matter in America. They are how we display what we value, what we celebrate, and who we are. Part of what made Saving Private Ryan so moving was its implicit acknowledgment of the sacrifice made by those who fought WW II. Movies are also often a way of acknowledging past wrongs and bringing outsiders into the mainstream culture. Witness the power of Schindler's List, Rain Man, or One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.
Conservatives know the power of movies. That is why they have desperately tried to derail Brokeback's momentum. First, they predicted the critics would pan it. When that didn't happen, they said it would tank at the box-office. In fact, it did spectacularly,
even in so-called "red" parts of the country. Next, they claimed that any awards it received were only further proof of Hollywood 's depravity.
Now they are predicting the ratings for Sunday night's Oscars will fall dramatically. So what if millions went to the theater to see it? If ratings fall, they will argue it proves that millions more were so disgusted by Brokeback, Capote, and Transamerica that they stayed away in droves.
For the record, ratings for the Oscars, and almost all award shows for that matter, have declined for years now. The reason for the decline has less to do with the American public's disgust with Hollywood, than the sheer number of entertainment choices available. The terrible ratings for the just completed Winter Olympics are a perfect example, losing out to both Grey's Anatomy and Desperate Housewives (another show conservatives rail against). Or perhaps conservatives think Johnny Weir, the is-he-or-isn't gay figure skater, is to blame for that.
For gay men watching the Oscars, it will also be important who says what about the movie. Will there be any controversial comments or actions such as those that greeted the Special Oscar presented Elia Kazan several years? (Kazan was reviled in some quarters for having named names during the McCarthy hearings.) Will there be a Marlon Brando moment when Susan Sarandon or Sean Penn denounces Congress' attempts to amend the constitution to ban same-sex marriage? Or perhaps some winner will tearfully acknowledge his or her partner in a moving acceptance speech.
And what of the possible acceptance speeches made by Ang Lee, Larry McMurtry, Heath or Jake? When Tom Hanks won for Philadelphia, he made a point to thank his gay drama teacher, thereby putting a very human face of the subject of gays. Imagine Heath making a plea for tolerance, even acceptance, of gays. No, it wouldn't change the world, but a billion people would hear it and suddenly homosexuality would be a little less "other."
No wonder conservatives are so frightened of Brokeback Mountain. Let's hope that come Monday morning, they are even more upset.
