Support NeoGAF

[LordOfLore]

Saw it pop up on my twitter and didn't find a thread.

After hinting that Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 includes an LGBTQ character, writer/director James Gunn is trying to correct the record. “We don’t really know who’s gay and who’s not [in the Marvel franchise],” Gunn told Digital Spy. “It could be any of them.”

Then, he gave an interview that prompted the Guardian headline, “There are gay characters in the Marvel Universe.”

“What I meant is, there’s a lot of characters in the MCU, and very few of them have we delved into what their sexuality is. Whether it’s guy or straight or bisexual, we don’t really know. So I imagine that there are probably, you know, gay characters in the Marvel universe, we just don’t know who they are yet.”

By continuing to answer these questions, Gunn puts himself in an awkward position. Because in reality, there aren’t any LGBTQ characters “in the MCU.” Those characters could just as easily be androids or aliens. James Gunn is talking in distant hypotheticals, but LGBTQ representation requires some actual commitment onscreen.

Gunn is the latest filmmaker to publicly support LGBTQ representation in theory, while failing to follow up in practice. The most infamous example is Beauty and the Beast director Bill Condon, whose “exclusively gay moment” turned out to be a split-second shot of two men dancing in a crowd scene. Power Rangers barely did better, dedicating a ton of publicity to a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it line where a female character says she has “girlfriend problems.”

Filmmakers like Gunn and Condon see the enthusiasm for LGBTQ representation, and offer subtext in response. The problem is, LGBTQ audiences are already very familiar with subtext, because that’s all they usually get.

Gunn’s example was particularly ridiculous, because after seeing Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, I’m pretty sure I know which character he was talking about. There’s a scene where a woman rejects a man because he’s not “her type,” in a way that could refer to his gender, his species, or any number of other reasons. In the context of the MCU, it’s less noticeable than the queer subtext between Captain America and Bucky Barnes, a relationship that provided the driving force for three movies. Subtext isn’t always intentional, and it’s not the same as representation.

In Gunn’s defense, this situation is only partly his fault. If a blockbuster like Guardians of the Galaxy had a gay protagonist, it wouldn’t get released in China, a highly desirable overseas market. Given a choice between LGBTQ representation and the Chinese market, studios will invariably follow the money. It’s just embarrassing when filmmakers want to toe the line of homophobic censorship, and be celebrated as progressive at the same time.

Give us Moondragon and Quasar if old.

 

[Speevy]

Nebula?

 

[excelsiorlef]

I'll defend the Power Rangers scene... it was part of literally the biggest and best character building scene in the move and no one in that movie was in a romantic relationship at all... there was literally not a single one. And it was a very believable scene. So I guess if you blinked and missed the scene dedicated to building all their characters you could miss it sure

The scene also was followed by a hella sapphic undertones scene between Trini and Rita.

It established her as a Ranger who happened ti be queer rather than The Queer Ranger.


There's no defense for Marvel though.

 

[El Topo]

Where were all the gay protagonists (or prominent characters) before China became this giant market?

Nebula?

?

 

[enzo_gt]

Stop? This is hardly a trend, let alone advertising gay characters specifically (which actually also upsets people because they feel they are defined solely by their sexuality a-la tokenism).

Also, the MCU has gay characters already, several in the TV shows, and all of this is getting upset over a hint? Brehs went to the theatre and paid money because there was a hint of someone being LGBTQ? What?

This seems like a super forced story.

 

[Speevy]

?

I'm trying to figure out who in the Guardians universe could be a homosexual or bisexual, since Gomorrah and Peter are warming up to each other, Drax had a wife, Groot is a child, dunno about Yondu, not clear about Rocket.

It's definitely not a series without sexuality though.

 

[Zolo]

I didn't know that about China. Does that apply to any obviously gay character in the film, or is it just main characters? Both suck, but I'm wondering what the limit is on that since that could be really bad for representation in the future.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I didn't know that about China. Does that apply to any obviously gay character in the film, or is it just main characters? Both suck, but I'm wondering what the limit is on that since that could be really bad for representation in the future.

Between that and China only releasing X number of Western films each year, if a filmmaker wants to reach the most people it can, there are stringent guidelines they have to follow unfortunately.

 

[Escape Goat]

It's definitely not a series without sexuality though.

Wat

Peter has a one night stand in his first scene. It's an action film, not a romance.

 

[John Kowalski]

That shit is queer baity af

 

[Shanlei91]

I figured that was what the Mantis line was hinting at, but that was without me looking for it.

Did Gunn advertise it? He gave a very PR response when asked, at the premiere, if he would be interested in having a gay protagonist in one of his films. It's like when someone asks a PC developer if they're interested in bringing a game to a Nintendo console, they say "MAYBE" and it spawns a 20-page thread.

On the flip side, Power Rangers did advertise their bit a ton.

 

[BlazinSkatinAxel]

A good character is a character that is X which happens to Y. Anytime you say this character is a Y Character, it is bad writing.

Unlike different races, you won't know the sexual orientation of a character unless there is some time up relationship. Marvel movies don't really have relationships like that. Marvel TV does though.

 

[Razmos]

Stop? This is hardly a trend, let alone advertising gay characters specifically (which actually also upsets people because they feel they are defined solely by their sexuality a-la tokenism).

Also, the MCU has gay characters already, several in the TV shows, and all of this is getting upset over a hint? Brehs went to the theatre and paid money because there was a hint of someone being LGBTQ? What?

This seems like a super forced story.

You obviously underestimate how much representation is super fucking important and that LGBT people and people of all races and genders are thirsty for non straight, white men to represent them in media.

It's very much a trend, an annoying one. Maybe one you don't personally see, but we do.

A good character is a character that is X which happens to Y. Anytime you say this character is a Y Character, it is bad writing.

Unlike different races, you won't know the sexual orientation of a character unless there is some time up relationship. Marvel movies don't really have relationships like that. Marvel TV does though.

I'm trying to think of a single Marvel film that doesn't have a hetero romance front and centre and I'm coming up blank.

 

[Boke1879]

I'll defend the Power Rangers scene... it was part of literally the biggest and best character building scene in the move and no one in that movie was in a romantic relationship at all... there was literally not a single one. And it was a very believable scene. So I guess if you blinked and missed the scene dedicated to building all their characters you could miss it sure

The scene also was followed by a hella sapphic undertones scene between Trini and Rita.

It established her as a Ranger who happened ti be queer rather than The Queer Ranger.


There's no defense for Marvel though.

Seriously I'd defend that scene in PR as well. Unless you were asleep or your ears were clogged. You could not miss that moment. It also wasn't made a big deal of. She made a comment. Everyone understood and that was the end of it.

 

[99Luffy]

Its a nicer answer than 'Nope.'

 

[eso76]

Stop? This is hardly a trend

Well, it isn't the first time I heard a writer say "oh yeah, I think we have gay characters ! Just pick one of those we haven't specifically stated or shown otherwise and pretend they are !".

This is a bit cowardly, no ?

 

[AlfonzoPalutena]

Yeah, that's annoying

But the MCU does have LGBTQ characters, Jeri Hogarth, her ex-wife Pam, and her secretary were in Jessica Jones, Daredevil Season 2, and Iron Fist.

The movies should catch up though, and in the mean time they should stop pretending they're the pinnacle of diversity. It's been over a dozen movies and there still isn't one solo film starting someone who isn't a white guy

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

I'm torn on this.

On the one hand, having a character who just happens to be gay without the movie making a big deal about it is great because it shows that there is more to that character than just 'the gay one'.

On the other hand, virtually every movie has some love interest or another so there ought to be some gay relationship front and centre. Unfortunately that won't happen because idiots get triggered about gay propaganda being forced down their throats.

Well, it isn't the first time I heard a writer say "oh yeah, I think we have gay characters ! Just pick one of those we haven't specifically stated or shown otherwise and pretend they are !".

This is a bit cowardly, no ?

Exactly, don't want to affect those toy sales.

 

[yanipheonu]

I mean it's a universe of golden aliens and tentacle beasts. I'm sure some of them are gay, and it probably isn't even a big deal in world of talking racoons.

 

[hateradio]

That shit is queer baity af

Bait and switch

Spoiler

to straight

.

 

[Meowster]

I'm happy that China is expanding and increasing revenue for movies but it really sucks that it comes at a cost like this. A lot of television and comic and video game representation has increased so much while I think major movies could be doing so much more..

 

[Ridley327]

I'm happy that China is expanding and increasing revenue for movies but it really sucks that it comes at a cost like this. A lot of television and comic and video game representation has increased so much while I think major movies could be doing so much more..

We did have Moonlight take home a Best Picture Oscar not too long ago, but I do agree that LGBT representation in major blockbuster films is rather lacking.

 

[Fj0823]

Seriously I'd defend that scene in PR as well. Unless you were asleep or your ears were clogged. You could not miss that moment. It also wasn't made a big deal of. She made a comment. Everyone understood and that was the end of it.

Me too. Scene was great.

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

Beauty and the Beast was a big disappointment on that front. Especially coming from Bill Condon.
Oh, so a minor character (who's also a piece of shit) MIGHT be gay? What an achievement! Thank you, Disney!
It wouldn't have bothered me at all if they hadn't pushed that angle so much prior to release.

But I thought Power Rangers handled that stuff pretty well tbh.

 

[Eumi]

Titles fairly misleading. I was thinking there was some entire gay character that was absent from the movie.

Actual article's on point though. I wouldn't get too hung up over Gunn's comment since it was a PR response. Like, what was he supposed to say? Gay characters don't exist in the MCU?

But of course if he isn't going to say that then they really have no excuse for not having any LGBT characters. The MCU has so many characters and films that their abscence is becoming almost bizarre. I mean, these are people who write comic book adaptations. You'd think they'd be used to taking heat enough that they wouldn't be scared off by the homophobes yelling at them on YouTube.

 

[Lights and Waves]

Tbh I really liked it in Power Rangers.

 

[Zolo]

Actual article's on point though. I wouldn't get too hung up over Gunn's comment since it was a PR response. Like, what was he supposed to say? Gay characters don't exist in the MCU?

"We can't have explicitly gay characters in our films because of China." Yeah. I know that wouldn't go well.

 

[El Topo]

"We can't have explicitly gay characters in our films because of China."

People would ask questions, such as "Where were all these gay characters before China blew up?" or "Couldn't you cut the scenes for China?" or "Didn't you say you had complete freedom in the last interview?".

 

[PBalfredo]

In Gunn’s defense, this situation is only partly his fault. If a blockbuster like Guardians of the Galaxy had a gay protagonist, it wouldn’t get released in China, a highly desirable overseas market. Given a choice between LGBTQ representation and the Chinese market, studios will invariably follow the money.

Gross. This is what has been worrying me about China's growing influence over Hollywood. China's restrictions on content are creeping in and slowly becoming the de facto rules for what can and can't be in big budget movies.

 

[Glass Rebel]

I read the response Gunn gave to the LGBTQ question and this article's total misrepresentation of his statement just goes to show once again why they give such non-answers.

Needless to say, Marvel's stance on the matter is a little... problematic, judging by their Black Panther PR statement.

 

[Par Score]

A good character is a character that is X which happens to Y. Anytime you say this character is a Y Character, it is bad writing.

Unlike different races, you won't know the sexual orientation of a character unless there is some time up relationship. Marvel movies don't really have relationships like that. Marvel TV does though.

Name one MCU film that doesn't feature a Hetero relationship front and centre.

I'll wait.

 

[Zero315]

Yeah, that's annoying

But the MCU does have LGBTQ characters, Jeri Hogarth, her ex-wife Pam, and her secretary were in Jessica Jones, Daredevil Season 2, and Iron Fist.

Meh, the Netflixverse is part of the MCU in name only.

I'm torn on this.

On the one hand, having a character who just happens to be gay without the movie making a big deal about it is great because it shows that there is more to that character than just 'the gay one'.

The argument that gay characters need to be "well written" is some bullshit. Straight characters don't need to justify their existence, so why do gay characters need all these prerequisites?

 

[jon bones]

+1 poster bummed at China's growing influence in the blockbuster space

I read the response Gunn gave to the LGBTQ question and this article's total misrepresentation of his statement just goes to show once again why they give such non-answers.

Needless to say, Marvel's stance on the matter is a little... problematic, judging by their Black Panther PR statement.

which pr statement?

 

[MB99]

I read the response Gunn gave to the LGBTQ question and this article's total misrepresentation of his statement just goes to show once again why they give such non-answers.

Needless to say, Marvel's stance on the matter is a little... problematic, judging by their Black Panther PR statement.

This seems to be more of a general Hollywood blockbuster issue than a Marvel one. Also there was nothing wrong with thier Black Panther statement.

 

[Glass Rebel]

which pr statement?

They have two characters from the recent BP run in the movie. In the comics they are in a lesbian relationship but apparently they stripped them of that aspect.

This seems to be more of a general Hollywood blockbuster issue than a Marvel one. Also there was nothing wrong with thier Black Panther statement.

Well, there's nothing wrong about the PR statement but there's certainly something wrong about their choice to take a romantic lesbian relationship and take out the romance for their movie.

 

[Zvonimir Boban]

The argument that gay characters need to be "well written" is some bullshit. Straight characters don't need to justify their existence, so why do gay characters need all these prerequisites?

You know why. Straight and white is the default for basically everything so those shitty characters are easily handwaved away where minorities are always held to a higher standard.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Seriously I'd defend that scene in PR as well. Unless you were asleep or your ears were clogged. You could not miss that moment. It also wasn't made a big deal of. She made a comment. Everyone understood and that was the end of it.

I'd understand downplaying it if everyone else basically had romantic subplots and all she had was the camp fire scene but like I said there were no relationships at all in this movie... Which was kinda awesome...

 

[Prototype Viktor]

Name one MCU film that doesn't feature a Hetero relationship front and centre.

I'll wait.

that one with the thing and the other thing

I'd understand downplaying it if everyone else basically had romantic subplots and all she had was the camp fire scene but like I said there was no relationships at all in this movie... Which was kinda awesome...

eh i'd agree til the end with the unspoken line not from Peter this time. i'm impress they didn't shove a kiss in there

 

[jwk94]

I'd understand downplaying it if everyone else basically had romantic subplots and all she had was the camp fire scene but like I said there was no relationships at all in this movie... Which was kinda awesome...

Yep, just one of the reasons why Power Rangers was so refreshing. Makes me wonder why they cut the Kim and Jason scene though.

 

[excelsiorlef]

that one with the thing and the other thing




eh i'd agree til the end with the unspoken line not from Peter this time. i'm impress they didn't shove a kiss in there

Peter?

I'm talking Power Rangers.

 

[MB99]

They have two characters from the recent BP run in the movie. In the comics they are in a lesbian relationship but apparently they stripped them of that aspect.



Well, there's nothing wrong about the PR statement but there's certainly something wrong about their choice to take a romantic lesbian relationship and take out the romance for their movie.

The two characters in that scene are not a romantic couple in the comics. The characters in the scene are Okoye and Ayo. Ayo is a lesbian in the comics, Okoye is not. The character Ayo is in a relationship with is named Aneka. I think people are confusing Okoye with Aneka.

 

[Shaanyboi]

Hollywood will do the absolute minimum to hint at gay relationships, but think they deserve all the credit for being "so inclusive".

 

[excelsiorlef]

Yep, just one of the reasons why Power Rangers was so refreshing. Makes me wonder why they cut the Kim and Jason scene though.

Probably because the romance would have been forced and undercut the story of this being about going from strangers to friends, which was the biggest theme... this was a movie about the Power of Friendship and that's a different type, but no less important, type of love.

 

[jwk94]

Probably because the romance would have been forced and undercut the story of this being about going from strangers to friends, which was the biggest theme... this was a movie about the Power of Friendship and that's a different type, but no less important, type of love.

That was beautifully worded. I agree.

 

[hodayathink]

Captain Marvel's probably going to be there first hero post-Ike (and I said this in another thread, but Perlmutter and his heading of the "story group" was a big part of the reason for the lack of inclusiveness at Marvel up to that point) that they'll have a legit chance to start from scratch for, romantically (because there's no way they'll pair her up with Don Cheadle). I wouldn't be surprised if they made her a lesbian to add another hook to her story. Which then plays to the idea that lesbians are okay but gay dudes aren't, but I digress.

Edit: I just realized that Black Panther's most notable comic love interests are a character that can't be in the MCU (Storm) and a character that they've given no hints as to being in the MCU, but they aren't going to go there.

 

[Glass Rebel]

The two characters in that scene are not a romantic couple in the comics. The characters in the scene are Okoye and Ayo. Ayo is a lesbian in the comics, Okoye is not. The character Ayo is in a relationship with is named Aneka. I think people are confusing Okoye with Aneka.

My bad. I have only read the comics and (obviously) haven't seen the scene myself.

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

Name one MCU film that doesn't feature a Hetero relationship front and centre.

I'll wait.

Ragnarok might be the first Marvel movie to not feature any love interest. Ironically cuz Portman was tired of playing a love interest. The first Guardians didn't really have one outside of some small flirtation between Star Lord and Gamora.

 

[entremet]

Writers don't write headlines. Editors do.

And given that web ad revenue is increasing, you have editors who have real incentives to write click baity headlines, since that's how they're rewarded.

The Guardian is a fine publication, but they still need to pay the bills.

 

[hodayathink]

Ragnarok might be the first Marvel movie to not feature any love interest. Ironically cuz Portman was tired of playing a love interest. The first Guardians didn't really have one outside of some small flirtation between Star Lord and Gamora.

I wouldn't call the flirtation between Peter and Gamora small at all.

 

[Andrin]

Meh, the Netflixverse is part of the MCU in name only.



The argument that gay characters need to be "well written" is some bullshit. Straight characters don't need to justify their existence, so why do gay characters need all these prerequisites?

I generally agree, but there needs to be at least a baseline in how you write/present the characters. or we'll end up with more offensive characters like the two walking stereotypes/child predators in Persona 5. Unfortunately, we've had very few characters in any mainstream media who even lives up to that baseline so far.