Okay, so in case you don’t know, in the kid’s film “ParaNorman” there is a character that alludes to the fact he has a “boyfriend” to a girl that is crushing all over him during the movie. At the end, the girl asks him out to a movie and the jock-type guy says, “Yeah, you’ll love my boyfriend. He’s really into chick flicks.” or something of the like. I wasn’t prepared for it and it wasn’t that I was disgusted or anything like that. I was just very surprised. For a lot of reasons…
I’m about as liberal as they come folks. I love all human beings and I want it so people don’t have to hide who they are within reason (and I’m more concerned with idiots wearing latex zipper suits out there in the wild and shit not homosexuality). I’m for marriage equality (among humans) and I want everyone to live a good and satisfying life. Hell, I even disagree with some of the “laws” regarding the handling of pedophiles and the like. Don’t get me wrong, I want them punished, but wouldn’t we better off understanding why they do what they do more than what we have going on right now? But, when you give up on reformation in prison and just allow it to be punishment (as we’ve done ages ago) you just agree to create “super-killers”, “super-rapists” and “super-predators” to be released back into society. And, knowing their names and addresses from a map on the web isn’t going to keep them from whatever they want to do with your children.
Okay, going off on a tangent there that has nothing to do with a homosexual character in a children’s movie.
Thing is, this is a kid’s film that really has no place in it for sexuality at all. I understand the writer here is homosexual and that’s all well and fine. It still doesn’t excuse this lamely placed line that really doesn’t have anything to do with the story at all. Short of the girl being embarrassed some at the end, that is.
As a matter of fact, if I were gay, I’d be pissed at this incident within the kid’s film. To me, it does nothing to help further the cause at all. It steps you back a few years. Here’s why:
- The “outing” of this character comes delivered as part of a joke. So, are you not serious then about homosexuality? Should we all just laugh off homosexual relationships?
- The “boyfriend” within the outing comment loves “chick flicks”. Okay, so now you’re stating that gay men are effeminate and are more like women than men that are gay? I’m nitpicking here, but still.
- The line serves no plot point whatsoever and is poorly misplaced. It’s nonsensical and seems “tacked on” much like the last 20 minutes or so of the film “Religulous” in case you haven’t seen that.
- This was an attempt to say, “Hey, kids can handle the fact that some people are gay and some people are straight!” from what I can see. It’s to help fight for the cause and make homosexuality seem more “normal” or whatever. Thing is, it does everything but that. If you were wanting to do that, make the character announce his “outness” earlier in the film. Then we see him doing heroic things and all that. Isn’t that more respectable than making his homosexuality the butt of a joke?
So, screenwriter dude, you failed…and miserably. Not because you put a homosexual character in your script. That really is a moot point. You failed because you were so dead set on throwing in some “gayness” that you shot yourself and your cause in the foot while doing so. I’m overly critical of films, I’ll give you that. I could write this script ten times better than you, however, and though I don’t wear hipster skinny jeans and invest highly in hair gel, I would be willing to bet I could write a gay character better than you.
Like another review on this film I read by William Bigelow said,
“If they really were “brave” they’d announce from the start that Mitch was gay and see just how many parents would take their children to see this movie.”
Touche’ and slam dunk. There’s nothing brave about this attempt at all.
C’mon hollywood, quit worrying about an agenda and make some effin’ films already. Where is the “Goonies” of the 21st century?
Hawkman Out! (well, not out, but done here)