Pixie Trix Comix & Hiveworks Community

themacnut wrote:It isn't about whether the actor is gay or not, it's whether said actor would be willing to do Nathan, like wiseguy said. Which is why Nathan offered the role to Dillon.

However, Nathan seemed to think it was worth trailing the fact that the crime-fighter was gay past Dillon. And he was, apparently, correct; Dillon jumped on the idea.

JoybuzzerX wrote:Dillion would likely want the role whether it was a gay crime fighter or not. The fact that the crime is gay may just make Dillion want the role more (or at least think he deserves the role more).

I think that you accidentally skipped a word in the second sentence there. But strictly speaking, you could be correct; it could be the crime that's gay, not the crime fighter. And I'm now taking an unkind and illiberal pleasure in the mental image of Dillon finding himself cast as a macho heterosexual vigilante, coming down hard on gay criminals...

JoybuzzerX wrote:As for the implications...I'd say that's standard Hollywood and possibly even fandom thinking. Matt Bohmer wasn't cast as Mr Grey in 50 Shades because he's gay. They (those in charge of casting) didn't think audiences would buy that Matt was Mr Grey because of this fact. I thought this was terrible thinking until I happened across a Robot Chicken skit where they have Sulu implying he's gay because George is gay and then started to wonder if it was things like this why they didn't cast Matt.

One gathers that this stuff does still happen, though things are supposed to be getting better, slowly. But should a gay actor like Dillon be encouraging that mind-set by jumping so enthusiastically onto gay parts, when he's proved that he can play a hetero romantic lead?

What with this and all the drag parts he gets, I suspect that Dillon is a lot more attached to his own comfort zone than he'd want to admit.

*To the tune of the old Batman TV theme.*

Nananananananana Nananananananana CAMP MAN!

Watch, dear viewers, as Camp Man faces off against such threats like The Closeted Creeper, Angel Androgynous, and his greatest foe of all, his own libido! With the reluctant help of his yaoi obsessed sidekick, Ruby Red Robin, will Camp Man be able to save the gay....err day?

Good Job Mr. Bee!

Dillon has shown restraint and has fended off Nathan... (after a few minutes of BSOD) Dillon might have been one step away from giving in, but still good for him.

Now that Nathan is introduced in SDB I have a feeling that the creep will be around for some time. <shivers>

Abraxas wrote:Why do I imagine little Dillion with this helium high voice

"Don't fight it, Give into the PASSION YAAAAAAAAAAYYYY!!!'

LOL! I could literally hear that. XD

I really hope Li' Dil's sudden perkiness was more at the idea of a massage from Jean Guy and not the idea of spending time with Nathan at what is no doubt a luxurious resort.

I never got the idea that Dillon found Nathan very sexually attractive for himself. Remember, the very first time we saw them having sex, Nathan was promising to make Dillon a big star, and there were literally stars in Dillon's eyes.

I'm sure that Dillon found some way to convince himself that there was some kind of emotional connection, but really, even then, he was having sex with Nathan to get on in the business. I doubt he's much turned on by the idea of spending more time with Nathan in itself; the luxury resort, Jean-Guy's skills, and subconsciously, the idea of securing himself that starring role, would be enough to perk up Li'l Dilly.

Well, well, well! ^^ Dillon is racking up more and more respect, even if Little Dillon is being rebellious.

Hey, Spidrift? Don't you think Suzi looks like a little kid in that page you linked to?

It kind of emphasised her very slimline figure, especially in that shirt. And she was in a bit of a kid sister/big brother situation there. And that was how the art was back then.

It's probably the foreshortening caused by the viewpoint being from her feet level.

Well, Dillon already played in a crime fighting play, so it's not that new to him. But I think they are making a movie version of The Young protectors http://webcomics.yaoi911.com/archive/ete-page-1/ and Dillon's playing Annihilator (mouahaha, who am I kidding, he'd be Flyboy.)

But aren't there some unfortunate implications in this strip, with the idea that Dillon would be especially interested in playing a gay role, and that gay roles should be played by gay actors? After all, we saw in strip #1 that Dillon can play straight guys - and why should straight actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's sexual tastes?

Should white actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's race?

Should male actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's gender?

"Fun" trivia: John Barrowman (who is openly gay) was passed over for the part of Will (an openly gay character) on "Will and Grace" for acting "too straight", in favor of Eric McCormack, who is actually straight.

Spidrift wrote:I never got the idea that Dillon found Nathan very sexually attractive for himself. Remember, the very first time we saw them having sex, Nathan was promising to make Dillon a big star, and there were literally stars in Dillon's eyes.

You sure Dillon was only in it for the career perks?

Unless there is some other guy we've never seen, it's implied that he considered what he and Nathan had was a relationship; seeing as the outfit he chose for Ruby to wear on her date was his last serious boyfriend's favorite.

And Dillon seems to only be attracted to good looking men; so I really don't see why Nathan (sleaze that he is) would be any different.

tanonev wrote:

But aren't there some unfortunate implications in this strip, with the idea that Dillon would be especially interested in playing a gay role, and that gay roles should be played by gay actors? After all, we saw in strip #1 that Dillon can play straight guys - and why should straight actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's sexual tastes?

Should white actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's race?

Should male actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's gender?

"Fun" trivia: John Barrowman (who is openly gay) was passed over for the part of Will (an openly gay character) on "Will and Grace" for acting "too straight", in favor of Eric McCormack, who is actually straight.

It's actually a very tricky and very delicate situation.

Should a gay actor automatically get a gay role? My answer to that is 'no'. I can name two gay actors who have played straight characters without issue- Neil Patrick Harris and Kristen Vangeness. For that matter, I can name a straight actor who played a gay character- Mark Allen Shepard. Oh wait...amend that to two- William Morgan Shepard also played a gay man. Same character for that matter.

The bigger issue is actually the tendency to cast men as trans women; though that has gone well in some cases. Peter Capaldi's Vera Reynolds in Prime Suspect was quite good. Right now, I think the bigger issue is good representation instead of actors playing particular roles.

Seriously, I said it when Ruby told Dillon he should have been a cop and I'll say it again: I'd totally watch that.

Imagine the character's potential: gayer than Starsky and Hutch, and campier than Huggy Bear!

tanonev wrote:Should white actors be at an implied disadvantage in casting against someone who happens to share the character's race?

Ask some opera directors. But there's a rather obvious difference between ethnicity (or gender) and sexuality; the one is generally highly visible, the other generally isn't.

"Fun" trivia: John Barrowman (who is openly gay) was passed over for the part of Will (an openly gay character) on "Will and Grace" for acting "too straight", in favor of Eric McCormack, who is actually straight.

You know, that could count as evidence against the idea that Dillon should be jumping at gay roles.

Fluffy wrote:You sure Dillon was only in it for the career perks?

I'm sure that Dillon is very good at self-delusion, so he might well have said not. And I really wouldn't want to try poking around in Dillon's brain to establish exactly what was going on. But somehow, I just got the impression that there was a lot less of an emotional bond there than in some of Dillon's relationships. And like I said, when the very first thing we see of their affair is Nathan promising a very happy Dillon stardom, I get the sense that the writers aren't telling us that this is any sort of great romance.