[little man]

Originally Posted by Sparkle

Thanks for the replies

I thought it was a very interesting article.

I don't, however, believe gay/trans/bi actors should have "first dibs" on gay/trans/bi roles. I do believe the best actor for the role should be given it. But, of course, we know that is not necessarily how the decisions are made.

I agree, Ender, that bringing in an LGBT actor for specific roles (like Boys Don't Cry or Transamerica) could have incredibly beneficial to the integrity of the film. Equally I understand the power of having a "name" (Hilary Swank, Felicity Huffman) to sell a film; and both actors were wonderful - yet there is no small amount of spectacle involved in Felicity Huffman playing a transwoman, and it bothers me that film tickets sell for that reason.

I also think it would be impossible to have any sort of 'equal opportunity' roles for LGBT actors, while so many of them remain in the closet.

I, do however, detest the fact that Hollywood (and other major film industry hubs and even their peers) encourage actors to remain in the closet. The idea that the general public can't identify with an actor playing a role if s/he is out - is utterly ridiculous to me.

the part in red...i wanted to mention that hilary swank's career was "made" when she got the oscar for boys don't cry. the only film i recall her starring in before that was one of the karate kid movies. as an additional side note to boys don't cry...in reading interviews done with kimberly peirce, she said the movie nearly didn't get made because she had such difficulty in casting the role of brandon teena. she auditioned butches, transmen, anyone who was willing to read for the part and that it wasn't until swank walked in to audition that she had any hope of casting the part.

granted, this is only one instance and one film...but opportunities do exist for "other" folks to get these roles. if they don't fit, their sexuality shouldn't be the reason anyone gets a part.