why 'gay' has to be equivalent to 'feminine'
Gay guys are still "guys", why do movies tend to depict them as "feminine". Can't men be gay without acting feminine, looking feminine and sounding feminine?
sharePeople just read too much on it, the film wouldn't have been as hilarious if Albert wasn't feminine. If only for the scream when he "pierced the toast", his performance was perfect. There is a time for drama and another for comedy, if Tom Hanks had played Andy Becket like Lane did Albert, "Philadelphia" would have been a disaster, but in "The Birdcage", it works.
And by the way, he wasn't feminine, he was over-the-top, he was the stereotype of the guy who so wants to be a woman so much, he exaggerates the traits, like in this episode of "South Park" when Garrison becomes a woman. Albert was just acting like a sort of capricious diva, and it's plausible that he kept so many over-the-top mannerisms, isn't he an actor, after all?
So why 'gay' has to be equivalent to 'feminine'? In fact, why not? It is relevant to the story, it's a source of gags, and the best ones. And there are so many movies featuring 'gay' characters that viewers should be intelligent enough to understand that "The Birdcage" isn't "Philadelphia".
And in my opinion, the whole debate about stereotypes is pointless, because people tend to only get offended by the stereotypes that hurt their community. Even those who criticize the portrayal of Blacks in American movies, wouldn't give a damn about Arabs being always labeled as dirty, screaming and potential terrorists.
"Darth Vader is scary and I The Godfather"
By today's standards this movie is definitely problematic - politically speaking. Lane and Hank Azaria's portrayals are kind of mocking and clownish, the son's request to closet his parents for a night to impress his future in-laws and their going along with the ruse is all insulting by 2014 standards. However, in 1996 this was actually a step forward and the conversation this movie sparked was actually needed and nudged things forward, as far as people talking about acceptance. Actually a lot of the scenes between Williams' character and his son are kind of heartbreaking in hindsight if you think about how much things have progressed since then. Also, Lane, who is gay in real life, really brings a lot of subversive energy to his role, and refuses to allow the movie to be full of a bunch of straight people doing gay-man drag. Instead, he plays into the stereotype and kind of steals the show by exposing the audience's own discomfort with the subject matter. I'm sure as a closeted actor a lot of those scenes were both exciting and painful for him to play. It's worth taking a look at but yes, in a post-Glee, post-marriage equality time it dates a little in it's overall perception of things. ...Also, the ending's a little rushed and unearned, but that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
"some movie quote"