Scott Mendelson

Scott Mendelson
Location
Woodland Hills, California, United States
Birthday
April 02
Bio
A ten-year Salon reader, Mendelson also has a film and politics blog/column at Mendelon's Memos: located at: http://scottalanmendelson.blogspot.com/. He is also a free lance voice over artist and occasionally contributes film reviews for www.ValleySceneMagazine.com.

Editor’s Pick
NOVEMBER 5, 2009 1:50PM

Another example of 'hide the homo' marketing?

Rate: 9 Flag

Guy Lodge and Jeff Wells have remarked about the new poster for A Single Man, which seems to be going out of its way to hide the fact that Colin Firth plays a (solitary) gay man.  This isn't a new thing. Marketing campaigns often go out of their way to hide character traits or story arcs that may be 'uncomfortable' to the alleged mainstream moviegoer.  But the threat of onscreen homosexuality seems to be the biggest target of selective hiding. Much amusement was found in the marketing campaign for The Talented Mr. Ripley ten years ago.  While the pleasantly spoiler-free trailer only hinted at the major first-act plot twist, it gave absolutely no hints that Matt Damon (who really should have received an Oscar nomination) was in fact playing a homosexual.  Scary stalker and possible murderer?  No problem, but don't let moviegoers know that he's queer too!

And let's not forget the DVD/Blu Ray cover art for I Love You Man, which made sure to shove Rashida Jones awkwardly onto the poster, next to Paul Rudd and Jason Segal.  That one wasn't quite as egregious, as Jones was the fiancee of Rudd's character, and the third lead of the film.  But the oh-so subtle reason for tossing her into the cover art ('it's a bromance, but they're straight honest!') should be acknowledged.  For what it's worth, DVD box art has often altered from the original theatrical artwork to make any number of films seem more 'audience-friendly'.  The worst recent example was for Jodie Foster's The Brave One, which replaced genuinely haunting artwork with a photo-shop design that could have been crafted by my toddler in her weekly pre-school computer class.

But the all-time winner in the 'hide the homo' award still belongs to the folks behind the campaign for Transamerica. To be fair, the theatrical trailer and posters were honest about the fact that Felicity Huffman was playing a transgendered man who was about to get sexual-reconstruction surgery.  But the trailer and the posters went out of the way to sell the lie that Huffman's son Toby was a rough-and-tumble heterosexual male.  The trailer went out of its way to highlight a thirty-second scene where Kevin Zegers's Toby flirts with and makes out with a random teenage girl in a bar (Stella Maeve).    Some newspaper ads even had Maeve on the poster with her arm wrapped around Toby.  In fact, said character was a drug-addicted homosexual who eventually ended up working in gay porno (I certainly hope the mediocre movie was not implying that gay men automatically give birth to gay sons, but I digress).  But even that all-too common bait and switch was too much honesty for the DVD poster art.

Scott Mendelson

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
Sadly I fear it will be another 50 years or more before society in general, and the media that is *supposed* to reflect society will be comfortable with honest open portrayals of homosexuality. We are still, sadly, far too close to our Puritanical roots for true acceptance of diversity, especially when considering something that has a moral value attached to it, such as sexuality (be it hetero or homosexuality)
I completely agree that Damon should have been nominated for Ripley. That's an engrossing film, and his was a complicated, nuanced performance.

Our society, I agree, is backward and, let's face it, getting stupider every day.

It's so terribly sad.
I don't understand what "Hide the Homo" means. Does it mean that gay actors should not be depicted standing next to a woman? Ridiculous. It's like suggesting that heterosexual actresses should not be depicted standing next to other actresses, as it might suggest they are in love with each other. Perhaps your friend won't be pleased until homosexual actors have a scarlet letter "G" sewn on to their chests when appearing in ads.
I don't remember what the art looked like for Brokeback Mountain but I don't think there was any confusion about the sexual orientation of those characters. Interesting--I just did a post about my teenage son's usage of the word "Gay" and I said that I think that he is so much more exposed to homosexuality today than we were as kids (TV shows like Brothers & Sisters with gay main characters). We have a long way to go but I think we're on the right path.
There is a difference, Chariot, between not going out of your way to acknowledge a gay character or situation in a given movie and actively trying to hide it. If you watch the trailer for Ripley, you are sold the false narrative that Ripley covets Dickie's relationship with Gynneth Paltrow. And when you watch the trailer for Transamerica, you get the impression that Toby is actively heterosexual and a smooth operator to boot. Greenberg is right in that the marketing for Brokeback Mountain was an example of honesty without resorting to titillation. I'm all for the idea that progress comes when we don't have to talk about it or acknowledge it, but outright false advertising deserves a notice.
Basically--A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down.
In my group therapy session, a gay woman talked about the subject of the day, lying. She said that gays and lesbians have to decide whether each new person they meet can be told the truth about their sexuality. Will this person hate you instantly because you are gay? Will that hatred cut you off completely from that person, or hurt your prospects for work/commerce/getting a home?

Previously, I never thought that gays saw the world of people as a minefield. Her revelation explains the central reason behind Mr. Mendelson's article.
C'Mon man, you protest too much... Nobody that matters gives a shit about this anymore. I know you'll bring up the recent Maine decision but when did any rights get passed through Majority Rules? Unfortunately, minorities have to wait until the Judiciary slams them through. I know it sucks but it's called the tyranny of the majority. Join Rosa Parks at the front of the bus.
I don't know much about A Single Man, so here's my thought on that one:

1) What is the character's relationship with Julianne Moore? Is his homosexuality the focus of the plot? If the central emotional drama involves Julianne Moore (in a platonic sense even), then featuring them together on a poster makes sense.

2) I also happen to love Julianne Moore, and I'm pretty sure I'm not alone, so putting her on a poster is definitely a way to attract my attention. A movie poster is there to sell you on the movie. Highlighting a popular actor, regardless of their role in the film, isn't a crime (in fact, in a genius twist, Drew Barrymore was plastered all over the advertising for Scream, and then they went and killed her in the first 5 minutes of the movie, and then the TRUE lead, Neve Campbell, took over)

3) What I take from the poster above is the following idea: I have no idea what the movie about, but seeing those two actors makes me suspect that it's some kind of indie film. The framing of the shot tells me that there's probably some level of emotional and probably sad drama happening there.

However, in a larger sense, I do get what your point is, particularly with those other films.
Points well-taken--but the original artwork for _The Brave One_ was "genuinely haunting"? In either poster, you've got a person and a gun. You've got an American movie poster, it seems to me.

Also, men give birth? I'm outta the loop on you youngsters and your world, it would seem.

*Creaks back to her rocking chair.*