2008
Oh.My.God!! Out next year: Lesbian Vampire Killers. A movie shamelessly catering to men’s girl-on-girl fantasies. Once more a movie exploiting lesbians and women is being made.
James Corden and Mat Horne (real shame about Horne, he seems like such a nice guy, shouldn’t let Corden push him into these things,) will star in this, the sort of movie that was thought to have died in the early 1980’s. Here is how the movie was thought up: “Writers Williams and Hupfield were challenged to think of the dumbest and yet most commercial title possible for a film, Lesbian Vampire Killers was the answer. They then went away and wrote the script.”
So this is how films are made nowadays? Think of the dumbest thing you can think of and you get your movie made?
If this wasn’t bad enough, the cheap storyline was released recently:
“Two no-hopers. One cursed village.
A bus full of foreign female students and an army of salacious lesbian vampires. It’s gonna be one hell of a night!As The Lesbian Vampire Killers!”
Eternal slacker Jimmy Maclaren and his friend, Fletch, are enjoying a walking holiday on The Moors. Thanks to an unfortunate series of events, they find themselves stuck in a remote cottage with a camper-van full of sexy foreign student girls, besieged by a hungry army of lascivious lesbian vampires. Can they make it till dawn or will the Sapphic soul suckers bleed them dry? The two friends have been sent to this desolate outpost as human sacrifices by the local townspeople – a group of terrified men, whose women have all been enslaved by a legendary vampire curse placed on their village by Carmilla the Lesbian Vampire Queen. Soon after the curse was cast, Carmilla was executed by 17th Century vampire hunter Baron Wolfgang Maclaren … who, by coincidence, was Jimmy’s great, great grandfather.
Back in the cottage, the army of the undead prove they have a bloodlust when the moon is full, matched only by their lust for the flesh of other women! As the pretty travellers are picked off one-by-one, joining the ranks of the undead, Jimmy and student Lotte are captured by the lesbian vampires who plan to use their blood to resurrect the spirit of Carmilla, their Vampire Queen! It’s up to Jimmy’s good-for-nothing best friend Fletch, and his newfound ally – a disgruntled local vicar – to save them all before sunrise.
Armed with the sword of long-dead vampire slayer Wolfgang Maclaren, Fletch and the vicar track down their preternatural prey to Carmilla’s mansion lair, and a life or death battle ensues. Jimmy and the last remaining girl, Lotte, are saved, the vampires slain and their curse lifted forever! Now all that is left for our heroes to do is rebuild their lives and embrace their newfound destiny.
It is said to be a bloodthirsty romp that features buckets of gore and plenty of bare breasts as they will be encountering a quartet of very sexy female companions. One of these unfortunately Lily Allen, a girl we always thought had sense.
Such a movie should not be made again and if it does it should be boycotted.
Why are we holding such a strong view for a comedy film?
Here are the reasons:
* Through the years lesbians have always been used to titillate men. Being a lesbian has never been seen as a “real” sexuality. These movies show lesbians as violent creatures that have to use force and evil to gain their partner who is then kept as a love slave and blood donor for their bloodlust. In the last few years we have made some progress, a movie like this could undo all this.
* This film will once more portray society’s idea of the homosexual as a kind of virus that wastes its victims and spreads its monstrosity unchecked. The coupling of homosexual and monster has been an enduring, They can easily be read as doubles for societal views of homosexuals as predatory, amoral, perverse, possessed of secret supernatural powers, capable of–and very interested in–destroying “normal life” and toppling such vulnerable institutions as the nuclear family, the church, capitalism, the heterosexual paradigm, or a combination thereof. Coding the queer as monster allows viewers the catharsis of experiencing the terror of a threat to “normal life,” while insulating them against that threat by presenting it as a fantasy character or demimondain usually destroyed by film’s end.
* These sort of films are not only derogatory to lesbians, but also to women in general. They are answering to a stereotypical male-fantasy. They are shown as scantly clad lust objects that feast on the blood, lapping it up and smearing it around. They’re porn stars, not persons. That this movie uses the same “vein” is already clear from the newspaper reports surrounding the movie. If you see the cast list, the part of one actress is simply labelled: “Blonde”.
There are more reasons why this movie should not be made but these are (for now) the main ones.
--------------------------------------------------
Rather he and she??
2008
Wednesday night we finally saw the full version of David Walliams’ drama “Rather You Than Me”. He played the part of Frankie Howerd in this special that was part of the BBC’s “Curse of Comedy” season.
Firstly this: David was perfect for the part of Frankie. He did an amazing job in a very difficult part. What made it even more difficult; is that both David and Frankie are very well known and both are comedians. This made a lot of people expect that the show would be funny. Instead David had to portray a tortured man that could not come to terms with his sexuality and the abuse he suffered in his childhood by the hands of his father. David portrayed this amazingly and his emotions were very real.If there was one thing that stood out in this series, then it was the extremely graphic heterosexual sex scenes that were littered throughout each broadcast. Hancock and Joan could have been called Hancock ON Joan (no not Hang cock in Joan as someone at the office helpfully suggests right now.) Hughie Green seemed almost pornographic at times and Harry H Corbett had his ways an’ all. Not, though, Harry H’s gay co-star Wilfred Brambell and there wasn’t as much for Frankie either. The media titillated us with reports on “shocking sex scenes”, though David talked about “tastily filmed scenes”. Neither were seen in the finished product. Where in the other movies women had been taken from behind and breasts and even hints of penises had been seen in abundance did we get to see anything like this here? Nay, nay and thrice nay. It wasn’t even really suggestive.
Rafe Spall had the easier job, as no-one actually knew what Dennis Heymer was really like no-one expected anything of him. For some reason Rafe’s Dennis never seemed truly loving to David’s Frankie, making you wonder why Frankie never threw Dennis out and returned to his old ways and own life.
Now that the dust has settled the reactions to the film are getting in and Frankly (pun may or may not be intended, you choose) we are a bit shocked.
The closest we got to seeing anything was when David’s co-star cheated on Frankie with another man.
David had described the scenes we were supposed to see in several interviews, and they seem to differ from what was broadcast. This is strange. What is also strange, is that Heat Magazine was promised an exclusive of these scenes in advance to promote the series on their site. This was pulled by the BBC at the last moment. Why was this? Did the BBC get cold feet about showing full on male on male action? Was the film edited at the last moment? What we do know is that the scenes weren’t there. So where gay sex scenes were concerned, gay men just had to please themselves.
So in the light of there being no gay sex scenes in sight, why do most people claim the film was too explicit? It is said people found it “difficult to watch”, and that they were disappointed that “the film was all about his private life, not his career”. Strange, all three previous films were all about private lifes as well. Apparently gayness is still to difficult for people to watch. Where people enjoyed learning more about the lives of Green, Hancock and Corbett, they claim that the names of Howerd and to a lesser extend Brambell are sullied and tainted. Then, on the other hand they also fill page after page with horrific accusations on Mr. Howerd.
Matters did not end there, there is also the treatment David Walliams received in the media during the promotion of the film. Most articles leading up to the premiere of the film were marred by vile digs at his sexuality, his campness and his femininity. What has this got to with it? Is knowing his sexuality vital to enjoying the drama? Did John Cleese first have to work at a hotel for a few years to become Basil Fawlty? Whether or not David is gay, bi or straight or nothing at all is his prerogative and should have nothing to do with the part he is playing. No-one seems to complain when supposedly straight women play lesbians, but when a man plays a gay part people can’t stop talking about it. Where David was concerned it seemed like the media used him to delve deep into their internalized homophobia and come up with the goods. The way the movie and David were handled shows why male actors prefer to shy away from gay parts and why closeted actors think when someone comes out: “Rather You Than Me”.
--------------------------------------------------
Dirt
2008
For weeks I was looking forward to Dirt being shown on Dutch TV. I had always loved Courteney Cox since Friends and the format of her new series sounded amazing.
I even had to wait longer then I expected, instead of September the show started in January. I found the pilot exciting, but then it all went downhill from there.
Though modern looking, the series could have been set in the 1940’s. The way the show deals with homosexuality, lesbianism, race, schizophrenia and vegetarianism makes it seem as if Cox and co are out to confirm every stereotype in the book.
Gay
Cox who plays Lucy Spiller has a brother, Leo. He is gay, but is afraid of this, so calls himself bi. Thinking he might find a girl one day. He falls in love with an actor, who is married and in the closet. Isn’t this story done to death? Why can’t we have an out gay actor for a change? And why is being gay so bad in this series that the characters say he’ll never be able to do action movies again?
Lesbian
A young heterosexual actress Julia Mallory has a brilliant career but declines after a series of events. She gets more and more instable and turns to drugs. She gets these drugs from Garbo a criminal lesbian, who uses said actress’ confusion to seduce her. That evil lesbian seducing a confused little girl … Ooh, isn’t she bad? Hadn’t we moved on from these sort of storylines since the 1990’s? What’s wrong here people?
Blaxploitation
Yes people, this series brings back blaxploitation. Most of characters of colour in this series appear dressed as pimps, are criminals, use drugs and are in a real life mafia like gang. The boss of the gang has murdered someone and keeps this persons head in a jar. The one other main coloured character is an adulterer who gives info of the murder to keep the pictures out of the press. Most of them speak in old fashioned ghetto language.
Now here is what blaxploitation was said to be: “Blaxploitation films tend to take place in the ghetto, dealing with pimps, drug dealers, and hit men.” Hmm, coincidence?
Schizophrenia
The second lead in the series is a photographer suffering from schizophrenia. He is portrayed as a confused man with no will of his own. He hallucinates and even lives with a ghost for some time. His behaviour is extremely bizarre, but he refuses to take medicine. In the end he becomes so delirious that he hears voices whom persist in urging him to kill Lucy and he wanders off into the desert. When found he is forced to take medicines.
Vegetarianism
Cox forces an actor to eat meat, even though he is a vegetarian. She has all sorts of reasons to explain why it is not bad to eat meat. In the end the actor gives in. He couldn’t be an action hero and not eat meat could he??
The series made me very depressed and just proves how serotypes just never go away. The derogatory way in which was spoken about the gay, coloured, mentally ill and vegetarians showed a complete lack of respect and insight of the makers. The way Cox played a working woman also shows another stereotype: woman at the top? A cold hearted bitch with no feelings, of course. Without a partner, alone with a dildo, of course. Sex with people? Businesslike, of course. Steal a man from an unstable little actress? Of course.
Wow, what an insight, fantastic. Really makes the 21st century come alive.
Dirt is to good a name for it.
Talking about stereotypes, just another short one for you:
Oh look, there’s Elton John, with his wife and children… Oh look, there’s Dusty Springfield, with her hubby and the kids. Ah, and see, that’s Lionel Richie and … oh yes, he’s white …
A parallel universe? A scene from Dr. Who? No, no, it’s a TV show: The One and Only, where all the contestants are straight, and only one of them is of colour. What, a rerun from a 1950’s show is it? No, it’s on live every Saturday on the BBC. A TV show called: “The One and Only”. A show where all contestants are straight, married with children. Except for Diana Ross whom was left to raise her children on her own, and whom is also the only contestant of colour.
“We hope that they are able to see beyond the colour.” Graham Norton said in his voice over about the white Lionel Richie.
If so, then where are the black Britney’s and the Asian Madonna’s, the Afro Robbie, the Asian Timberlake?
--------------------------------------------------
A Christmas "Carol"
December 2007
How nice is Christmas really?
Come on be honest …What are they so het up about? Are they afraid of him because he challenges other peoples sexuality?
Peace and goodwill, the season to be jolly, all nice and sweet. Yes, especially as all the Christmas shows show animals being killed so people can be all nice and medieval once again.
Or as Rik Mayall said about cooking a turkey in a Christmas episode of Bottom, “
Well, it’s the season of goodwill and peace on Earth, so I thought I’d chop both its feet off, rip out its innards, strip it, shove an onion up its arse and bung it in a very hot place for four hours until its completely burnt.”
Alan Tichmarch had a 5 day show about the spirit of Christmas. He found it on the first day, by miming wringing a ducks neck. Jamie Oliver saw nothing wrong with posing with the birds he was about to slaughter. Well, some Muslims kiss the animal they’re about to chop the head off from, so …
Neither the general public or the media seems very much into the Christmas spirit either. At least not where gay and camp artists are concerned. People seem to find it necessary to vilify poor David Walliams for his short appearance on the “Paul O’Grady Show” and still bash him for his appearance on the “Big Fat Quiz” of LAST Year. They keep going on about him being “strange“, “creepy” and “weird“. Keep bashing his campness, his flirtyness with both sexes. Wanting him to disclose what he really is. On the other team are people that say that he is gay and are just extremely homophobic about him. It is not just with David, though, a lot of gay and especially camp artists are in for an extreme bashing these days. It seems as if we’re back in the fifties where homophobia and racism roamed freely. But with David it seems as if it’s on the level of being demonising. Almost as if he is becoming some sort of Michael Jackson of comedy.
As Prince sang: “
I just can’t believe all the things people say — Controversy
Am I black or white? Am I straight or gay? — Controversy
Do I believe in God? Do I believe in me? — Controversy
Controversy Controversy
I can’t understand human curiosity — Controversy”
It seems odd for a kind person like David to provoke such extreme reactions in people. His children’s book is criticized already in some media, and he hasn’t even finished it.
Concerning his behaviour towards Patsy Kensit, according to people that were at the recording, we might not have seen the full picture.
It is said that some bits were cut out and that a lot happened that we will never get to see. Most of it happened when the clip of Little Britain was played.Personally here, we find television appearances of David an event. In the same way as some years ago appearances of Kenneth Williams and Frankie Howerd must have been to others. It is a breath of fresh air to see someone like him in a time of artists that seem terribly bland and samey. Perhaps people of this generation just can’t handle people that are different and special. This is seen in how people treat Amy Winehouse, in who “won” the X-Factor, how “straight” most TV shows are becoming again.
David seemed shocked by what she said and didn’t really answer anymore. He did say he missed Matt and that he’d actually wanted to come at Friday’s show with Ronnie Corbett.
It’s all in the editing, isn’t it.
Most people are afraid of anything that’s different and prefer things that are “safe” unthreatening and unchallenging.
Hopefully they won’t “slaughter” David the same way as they slaughter animals at Christmas. We need people like him, the world is boring without them.
Merry Christmas, Mr. Walliams
--------------------------------------------------
Reasons, what reasons?
2007
They say that everything happens for a reason. But I don’t realy believe that.
If it’s true, if there is a reason for everything, then explain to me:
The reason why Britney Spears was given two children. She isn’t capable of raising them, and I have no faith in her husband either.
Obviously one of them, the straight one, will become a criminal and a rapist. He will end up in jail.
The other one, the gay one, will commit suicide after a depression and a decline into drugs and alcohol.
The reason why is Amy Winehouse given an immense talent only to have it taken away from her by her husband? Why aren’t we allowed to enjoy her?
The reason why a teacher has been put in jail for giving a name to a teddy bear?
The reason why there is more homo and lesbo phobia then ever.
The reason why racism and anti-Semitism is becoming more prominent again?
The reason why children are gunned down in the streets in countries without war?
The reason why little girls (and some boys) as young as six want plastic surgery and have eating disorders?
The reason why girls below fourteen are having sex and boys as young as nine go about raping?
The reason why George Bush is still president and Arnold Terminator is still governor?
The reason why the Islam continues their old patterns for decade after decade. Why can’t they try to see that they should move forward a bit?
The reason why in so many countries young girls still have their genitals damaged in the name of religion?
The reason why a lot of artists, male and female still prefer to stay in the closet to coming out?
The reason why millions of children are raped and abused every day?
Yes, explain this to me. Explain the reason.
I can guess one though, POWER.
The feeling of power in general and:
The power of one group over another.
The power of one religion over another.
The power of the media on the self image.
The power of men over women.
And the power of rich white heterosexual men over most.
I think that this could be the answer. But the reason why people would want to have such a power is beyond me.
So explain to me:
The reason why people are so desperate for power that they would rather harm people and break them then give it up?
--------------------------------------------------
Aware Lez
December 2007
Aware Lez? What a joke … I thought.
How wrong …
“Where are they? Please tell me, where are they?”
“Who?”There are no real, true lesbians in comedies anymore … Not ones that aren’t fat, butch, pretending or bi in the end anyway.
“Lesbians …”
“Go to a bar …”
“No, TV lesbians, especially in comedy …”
“Oh … no idea …”
Thought so …
A non stereotypical lesbian in a comedy series … After Friends, Ellen and Little Britain I can’t think of anything and I have been thinking for a few days, actually making me miss my deadline …
For the most part, besides the series I just mentioned, there haven’t been many true to life lesbians out there on TV.
Most of what was seen was created by the stereotypical view everyone and sundry except by real lesbians.
And from what I’ve noticed: we might have ourselves to blame for this …
When I started this article to launch the “Aware Lez” campaign, I thought it all a bit nonsensical. Why would we need a comedy action? What’s the use?
Then I thought about it, and it hit me. We do, we lesbians have never caught the train of lesbian revolution and we are really missing out.
For many years, comedy has been a great way of creating awareness for gays, from Kenneth Williams to Little Britain. Comedy is the easiest pathway for acceptance. You can laugh while kicking at the stereotypes. Making it easier to be accepted then through boring dramas and endless debates. Gay men have always been aware of this and grabbed any chance given to use it. We have never taken this chance. Have we been ignored or just been stupid?
A bit of both. Yes. I mean, we can sit about whining on about how much the men (straight or gay) are ignoring us. But have we done enough to actually make a difference.
If we look at how the black community was treated and what they have done to raise their profile, we should be ashamed. If we look at what gay men have done we should be even more ashamed. Why can’t we get organised and get something done?
It seems as if most lesbians are contend in their little bubble, their little group and just tag along with some gay men, hoping they do it for us.
They will take us along sometimes, of course. But naturally they fight their own battles first.
I’ve always been a feminist, but it pains me to say that … perhaps … gay men are cleverer then us …
Where are our Elton’s, Barrowman’s and Little Britain’s? It can’t just be that the world isn’t ready for them, it is because we make the world think they aren’t ready.
The male gay community didn’t wait for someone to open the door and say: “come on in (or out) we’re ready“. They just kicked that bloody door open and marched in. The male gay community is very vocal, they make their wishes known. They make the media see there is a market for something, and they act accordingly.
We make the world think that the only think marketable for lesbians is Abi Titmuss or “The L. Word”, a series without much storyline, but a lot of sex. (Aka. Things to turn straight men on.) Our lack of vocality might have something to do with the “you’re very good, but …” snub of TV stations to the -very good- script of one of our colleagues. Of course TV channels think there is nothing they can do with it. They think that there aren’t that many lesbians out there and that the general public doesn’t really care about lesbians. Well, damn it girls, get up and make them care!! If we stay quiet and just sit about watching our low budget films the mainstream audience will never see us properly.
There is an endless stereotype out there saying: “lesbians aren’t funny” and we never disagreed with that. So, they think: “well, if they don’t say anything, I guess they really aren’t …” Why do we put up with this? Are we scared, lazy, just not bothered? Well, I am bothered, really, really bothered. I’ve had enough!! I want a lesbian comedy writer, now!! I’ll settle for just one if I must, but there must be one!!
Don’t say that there is no place out there in the sit-com world for women, there is. There are many important female comediennes -writers and actresses- but non of them is lesbian. One should be the first and make her mark. Pave the way for women old and young that always thought they were unwanted.
We may not be as unwanted as we think, we might just be as unwanted as we make ourselves.
I’m thinking: petitions.
I’m thinking writing clubs …
I’m thinking we should get out there and BE SEEN!!
Get out there, NOW!!
