The tweet with the BC/RuPaul video seems to suggests, probably in jest, that he is homophobic. Of course, I don’t believe that! But he seems to relish his performance of the “innocent”/dumb kid in presence of sophisticated older actors.
He probably is insecure because he’s been thrust up so high in the acting world so young, and he’s adopted that as a defense mechanism because of course everyone else is going to know more than him. Also, he works really hard and in whatever down time he gets he likes to spend it (literally) bouncing around his house and hanging out with his friends, like all young people do. He’s so young he doesn’t even know what he doesn’t know. At least he’s got a sense of humor about it, and perhaps the “olds” actors are teaching him about things now.
I wonder what kind of education he had when he was young. Did he go to regular school or was it a tutor kind of situation?
Also, I don’t see how his ignorance of RuPaul means he could be thought of as homophobic. He’s a theater kid! He’s been around gay people his whole life, probably. He even did that gender bending/cross dressing lip sync battle.
I think the poster was joking but TBF the “cross dressing” doesn’t mean he is a champion of gay issues. I mean a lot of Machos like to do thing like that as a way of making fun of feminine men or feminine stuff. I remember when that happened a lot of his fans defended him saying of course he knows RuPaul and he is pretty pro-LGBT issues because he once dressed like a woman but it doesn’t work like that!
The tweet guy later joked that he probably would do a Mark Wahlberg film next which he is indeed doing it! But that is an interesting and very offensive comparison. I don’t think if Wahlberg has been accused of homophobia. I don’t think so (he has criminal records because a racist aggression he committed when he was a kid and those are frequently mentioned, tho.) but he is the poster boy of the hyper macho Conservative Hollywood actor. Of course, he is far away of Tom Holland image but, and I think they were linking them together, apart of the fake machismo (not present in Holland at all!) because the anti-intellectualism. But his breakthrough role was the lead in a film by Paul Thomas Anderson (not exactly an important queer filmmaker like Almodóvar but an important filmmaker!) called Boogie Nights and the “issue” was that he was playing a porn star whose major attribute was his huge male member. This is repeatedly mentioned during the film and you see it at the end of it. It’s very clear that isn’t Wahlberg himself. You don’t see his face during that particular shot but the issue is that it’s not a “good”, in a moralistic way, film, according to Wahlberg and he said it was his biggest regret in his career and hoped God forgives him! He has kids and was worry about what they would think of him! Lol
Of course, Holland is nothing like that and yeah, he is theatre kid but that’s the perplexing thing: why he says things like that? And it’s not insecurity because you normally shut up when you are insecure. It seems to me he wants the world to know his ignorance and, especially the RuPaul one, looks very perfomative so I tend to think that yeah, he is playing the role of the dumb kid like you all out there kids and there is indeed something of anti-intellectualism on it. Anyway, I feel for him because if that was considered cute some years ago, he is now a joke to the Film Society of Lincoln Center!
He is gaining a lot of money so he probably doesn’t care and even morons like Wahlberg are hired by filmmakers like Scorsese and Ridley Scott instead of intelligent cultured and more talented actors like BC or Gyllenhaal because Hollywood actually prefer dumb machos so…
Post by sorcerersupreme on Dec 29, 2021 16:52:27 GMT
I don't believe that Hollywood prefers dumb machos per se honestly. The issue is with certain high profile directors like Scorsese, Nolan etc. who only work with certain actors all the time. They deserve criticism for that. DiCaprio is a fine actor but there are better ones out there (yes including Benedict imo) but why do they always go with the same 4-5 actors ? They are allowed to do that but it goes a bit against their own criticism. And it takes away from their films for me at least when I see the same actors again and again in their films. I really HATE when directors show this level of elitism and favoritism. I understand WHY they do it, I suppose, but I also think it takes away from their own art.
I also don't believe Tom Holland is homophobic based on that little exchange hah, that's a bit much even in jest. I do agree with you though that just because you performed as a cross dresser doesn't make you not homophobic. You can actually do that and still be homophobic.Sadly a lot of people still laugh at these things as a joke and do it as a joke to entertain people. I am fairly cynical though and I do not believe any man or woman working in Hollywood for years is naive/innocent etc If you're 25 you're no longer a child especially if you've been in the biz for years and years. Tom is a man and his whole persona comes off as fake to me. That's just me, I might be wrong, but it feels like a Disney fabricated and maintained product. Good for him I suppose, he's living his life and making an obscene amount of money and is getting a lot of roles because of 1 role so why not ? Even if I believe he is a subpar actor at best, I respect his hustle. And he is allowed to not know who Al Pacino is etc. I just wish people wouldn't comment on topics they aren't very informed in. Hate when anti-vaxxers scream the loudest when they should shut up the most. If you're going to compare blockbuster films to artsy films at least know what you're talking about and if you don't then just shut up is my motto.
Of course, press would ask! Sometimes the funny/sad part are the reactions on social media and not necessarily the answers per se. And that’s why they would continue to ask them! But again, Scorsese had a HUGE point when he talked about the monopoly of these kind of films and here is actually the answer of why he frequently works with DiCaprio: Scorsese is one of the very few gritty filmmakers from the 1970s that continued being strong in the box office for decades and, in recent times, that’s thanks to DiCaprio. I remember some box office analysis that concluded that his films are a hit in the Box Office but only when DiCaprio is in them. He is the last real movie star!
But that also means that studios wouldn’t pay for a very expensive film without DiCaprio and that’s what happened with The Irishman and how he needed working for Netflix and why he publicly resented franchise films. That was his criticism and he is one of the less affected auteurs out there but he still knows the issue and it was more real this year than ever.
I just read this new quote by Holland about Scorsese and wow! I’m glad he didn’t say it to an English speaking journalist!
¿Cómo vive la contradicción de ser a la vez la figura más destacada de un género que según algunos como Scorsese o el mismo Spielberg está acabando con el cine y según otros es su salvación? Le pregunto por las películas de superhéroes.
Lo que tengo claro es que todo el mundo tiene derecho a tener una opinión. Pero yo sólo puedo hablar de lo que he visto desde Marvel y la propia Sony. Ni unos ni otros habían visto jamás una reacción similar a la que ha provocado Spider-Man: No Way Home. Y eso es irrefutable. Respeto a Scorsese, pero el cine es entretenimiento y la gente se mete en la sala de cine para pasárselo bien. Soy joven y me siento perfectamente identificado con este modo de entender el cine, como una forma de pasárselo bien y como una vía de escape...