Rupert Everett's Advice To Gay Actors: Stay In The Closet

[IndianaGreen]

It saddens that this is still true today.

Rupert Everett's Advice To Gay Actors: Stay In The Closet

Rupert Everett has been openly gay since he came out 20 years ago, but he doesn't recommend that route for other actors.

"It's not that advisable to be honest. It's not very easy," he told UK's Guardian. "And, honestly, I would not advise any actor necessarily, if he was really thinking of his career, to come out."

At 50, the 'My Best Friend's Wedding' star says that homophobia in Hollywood has kept him from becoming a leading man. He says that heterosexuals are cast as gays (pointing to 'Brokeback Mountain' and 'Transamerica') but gay men are denied the plum straight roles and often reduced to drag.

"The fact is that you could not be, and still cannot be, a 25-year-old homosexual trying to make it in the British film business or the American film business or even the Italian film business," he said. "It just doesn't work and you're going to hit a brick wall at some point. You're going to manage to make it roll for a certain amount of time, but at the first sign of failure they'll cut you right off. And I'm sick of saying, 'Yes, it's probably my own fault.' Because I've always tried to make it work and when it stops working somewhere, I try to make it work somewhere else. But the fact of the matter is, and I don't care who disagrees, it doesn't work if you're gay."

Everett does admit that his openness about his sexuality has afforded him personal happiness if not professional success. He's glad he's not one of the "plenty" of gay Hollywood stars still stuck in the closet.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/02/rupert-everetts-advice-to_n_377010.html

[TlalocW]

1. Rupert shouldn't be complaining

He's been in 2 of the 3 Shrek movies!!! Even if I were homophobic, that would still make him all right in my book.

TlalocW

[racaulk]

2. Poor, poor Rupert.

He's suffering from the terrible, insufferable condition of having once been hot. :eyes:

I remember a time in the not-so-distant past that when an actor considered portraying a gay role in film (whether or not the actor himself was gay), it was considered career suicide. That is largely no longer the case thanks to actors (and gay people in general) having the courage to live their lives openly and honestly and to not be afraid to take on gay roles. I don't think many would disagree that today's gay actors can much more easily make a successful career for themselves than gay actors in the past. The argument that Rupert seems to be making, that public reaction to the film industry will be less homophobic if actors stay closeted, is just absurd.

I think he's probably right that it would be difficult today for an openly gay actor to secure the romantic lead role in a Hollywood blockbuster film, but I think that can be a reality in the forseeable future. However, actors remaining closeted isn't going to help get us to that point.

The truth of the matter is that Rupert Everett comes from a background of privilege, was considered by most to be quite handsome (before he jacked up his face with plastic surgery), and has enjoyed a career and a life that most actors can only dream of. It sure is tough to feel sorry for the guy.

[imdjh]

4. I always confuse him with Hugh Grant, and my experience is that that is never a good thing....

... for one of the two. There are a couple of pairings out there and have been throughout Hollywood history. A sort of "we already have one of those" mentality both in the gods and the public's mind.

I'm sure Rupert knows more about it than I do. As for the leading man parts, a straight (yeah right ((see))...) man playing gay is hotter than a gay man playing straight. The former is man bites dog, the latter is dog bites man.

The leading man in an heterosexual role is a delicate balancing act. The problem is that women, especially girls, don't really like heterosexual men all that much, and the things they do like in a man are more often found in a gay man. So you're going to essentially have a gay man playing straight regardless of the sexual orientation of the actor, which means that to gild the illusion, it helps if he has a heterosexual rep in real life. Take James Bond for example.

Sean Connery was the guys' James Bond- all the guys' James Bond. Then we had Roger Moore, who was more of a ladies' James Bond, but still managed to hold on until he made it with Grace Jones and then it was all over. He might as well have put on a jump suit and sang a disco tune himself. From then on we have the ladies' James Bond actors. I can't even name them other than the Remington Steele guy. Like I said, it's a delicate thing. A gay James Bond I would pay to see. A gay guy doing the British giggly kind of adolescent heterosexual humor thing is sketch comedy, not major motion picture.

Something he touched on but didn't run with is the straight guys playing gay. Enough already. Sure, if there is some role that only (pick a straight actor, I can't think of any that I believe) will be right for- but to routinely case straight actors in what few gay roles there are, just doesn't make sense to me. Give the gay people some work.

[IndianaGreen]

5. Two of the greatest leading actors ever were gay: Rock Hudson and Montgomery Cliff

Consider this: it takes great acting for a gay actor like Rock Hudson to portray being sexually aroused by the likes of Doris Day.

[Roosesvelte]

6. Hilarious!

That aside, Rock Hudson stayed in the closet.

[joeybee12]

3. He's right...having worked in Hollywood, the homophobia is rampant...

...liberal Hollywood my ass.

[Raster]

7. Two words: Tom Cruise

[soleft]

8. Not just actors

I was making some headway as a writer - when I came out to my agent she stopped sending out my stuff.