CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPORTS, GAMES & LEISURE › Television › Queer As Folk Retrospective
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Queer As Folk Retrospective

post #1 of 17
Thread Starter 
This thread is inspired by my pick of Brian Kinney as #181 on the list of The CHUD TV All-Stars: 250 Greatest Characters thread. That thread allows for conversation (as RathBandu very kindly made clear), but I just want a little more breathing room. I tried this before, in 2005, after QAF went off the air, before I had some perspective. I allowed that thread to blow away in the end (not that I had much of choice, CHUD is not the place for QAF fans), but hopefully this one will have a little more life to it.

When it first premiered 8 years ago, the American version of QAF purported itself to be an unflinching drama that took an honest look at the trials and tribulations of gay life, but that’s not what it was, not really. QAF was a highly entertaining, sexy, sweaty, sometimes poignant, sometimes glaringly stupid, well-acted soap opera. Despite my better judgment, I came to accept and appreciate this.

I’m not a big TV person, the number of shows that I’ve followed from beginning to end (all hour long dramas, I’m not all that interested in genre shows) can be counted on one hand, Queer as Folk is not the best of them, not by a long shot, but it is my favorite.

The actors, even when faced with some of the dumbest fucking plotlines ever, strutted in front of the camera, dignity intact. Peter Paige / Emmett Honeycutt, was king at this shit. As the “comic relief”, Paige’s Honeycutt repeatedly faced being undercut as an effective character with painfully dim arcs involving “chatroom addiction”, HIV scares, “conversion therapy”, Internet porn fame, television stardom, and love affairs with closeted multimillionaire geriatrics and professional football players. The writers almost never gave this character a break, and Paige was besieged with this kind of bullshit for five seasons, but he totally rose above it, he made it work.

Brian Kinney, if I may quote the Urban Dictionary: “Brian Kinney is God. That's all you need to know. He is one of the main characters from Showtime's hit series Queer As Folk. He's powerful, rich, a sex god, and he's the straightest gay guy you will ever meet at first impression, that is until you see him in Babylon one night... and that's just because he's having lots of sex in the back room. He's cold hearted and sarcastic, but everyone loves him for it”. The character’s narcissism, often cited as his most distinguishing feature second only to his libido, occasionally veered towards sociopathy.

A particular scene comes to mind (Season 3) where the above-mentioned Emmett Honeycutt appears at Kinney’s office to ask his help in keeping their mutual friend, Ted Schmidt, out of prison. Kinney coldly rebuffs this request, reducing Emmett to tears and begging for help. Kinney, often shown to make the wrong decisions before he makes the right ones, eventually decides to help Ted.

I guess I’m different from the writer’s assessment of human beings here, because while I’d be grateful for the help, as Emmett and Ted are, I would not mince words in letting Brian know that any and all ties from that moment forward would be severed, and that we’d never need to see or speak to one another ever again. This of course, does not happen. Michael Novotny is Brian’s best friend, as well as Ted and Emmett’s, the bond is never challenged by this should be deal-breaking situation. That made, and still makes, zero sense to me.

Ted Schmidt. Often paired with Emmett for comic effect, Schmidt was QAF’s piñata. He was older than his friends (33 or 34 at the start of the show), and as a nebbish accountant with exceedingly low self-esteem, he had almost no luck in getting laid (a fact Brian Kinney took vicious pleasure in reminding him of every chance he got). His flaws, inexperience, and trusting nature led him to a drug-induced coma in the 3rd episode of the 1st season, losing his job in the 2nd season, facing prison and financial ruin in the 3rd, and a nasty crystal meth addiction (the lowest point of which found him to being gang raped on video by a dozen junkies) that would dog him until the end of the 4th season. Ted Schmidt was a middle-aged Charlie Brown, and Emmett was his Snoopy.

That’s just a brief overview of some selected characters and actors, and some of the clichéd, soap opera material that they gamely contended with. If this thread picks up (with perhaps maybe the 3 or 4 people that will actually care to respond), I’ll throw in more stuff, likes and dislikes. I’ve just been watching the show on DVD for awhile and have been feeling the need to document my feelings on it and perhaps explain, mainly to myself, why I was so drawn to it. The final episode, which ends with Brian dancing at Babylon (the gay dance club of the series), camera swirling around him, worshipping him as it was wont to do, and then smashing to black, never fails to give me a little heart palpitation.

Give it a go if you care.
post #2 of 17
As a gay man, I think the show is fun on a trashy guilty pleasure level, but it's certainly not worth analyzing beyond that. It's kind of disappointing that a series that could have been so progressive and powerful ended up so cliched and awful. Now that the show is over and done with, I kind of look back on it as an embarrassment that I wish had never existed. It probably gave countless straight people the wrong idea of what most gays are like.
post #3 of 17
One of my best friends, who happens to be gay, warned me to stay away from this show. He and his partner both said that it was an inaccurate (at best) representation of what the gay lifestyle is like. I don't know if he ever saw the British version.
post #4 of 17
From what I remember, the British version was a bit more gritty, and at least seemed more nuanced and realistic (I know quite a few gays, but am not well-versed enough in the so-called 'lifestyle' if there is any, to judge it's veracity). American remake was more 'Gay In The City', less in your face. I watched the first season of the original, thought it was okay, never sought out the second one though. Caught a few episodes of the American, I found it quite stupid to be honest. Glaring stereotypes and all that.
post #5 of 17
I was wondering if a thread was going to be started after what was discussed in the tv character thread.

I will say, of course it isn't meant to be realistic (A back room for sex? Guy getting sucked off right on the dance floor. Not in this decade. Or I've been going to the wrong clubs)

And you are right about Emmett who I figured was to be the comic relief. Along with Ted and you'd think Ted of all people would not get into the shit he got himself into. Although I figure Ted to be one of those older guys who missed their opportunity and try to get in where the "young" kids are. Now mind you I some time feel like this and I'm 25. Of course, I can buy booze.

Of course Justin was the ludicrious/melodramatic role. (How can you not crack up at the idea of that he and some other young gay kids form some kind of vigilante possee) I sure as hell laughed.

Also it seems odd you have the companion show The L Word but from what little I've seen they always protrayed gay guys to be kind of skeezy. Weird really.

Oh and some of those sex scenes ran way way way to long. But I do have to thank the show for introducing me to Matthew Good's "Weapon".

Now the important thing to remember especially about the british series was that it was never meant to be realistic and the characters are archetypes. In a sense, the American series fleshed that out since the British series is so short.

Oh and I could've sworn I once saw the kid who played Hunter (The HIV+ trick later adopted son of Michael) on the streets of Seattle. Guy had the same haircut and funky teeth.
post #6 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supremo View Post
Now that the show is over and done with, I kind of look back on it as an embarrassment that I wish had never existed. It probably gave countless straight people the wrong idea of what most gays are like.
There's the rub. I think it's special and worth analyzing because it was allowed to exist, period. I've said to my friends that had there been another show on the air geared towards a gay audience that approached the same material as QAF did, but with much better writing (which frankly wouldn't have been hard to do, Six Feet Under's treatment of David and Keith is a great example), I'd have likely watched that instead, but QAF, for American viewers, was the first and only one at the time. Plus it was very glamorous and you got to watch good looking guys fuck.

Straight women making up most of QAF's audience speaks to a sizeable portion of the gay community's rejection of it (Randy Harrison / Justin Taylor obviously felt the same way, he was always the least enthusiastic in interviews, and all but disowned the show before the 4th season), but mostly, I could care less about what straight people thought of the show, because it wasn't really for them.
QAF fomenting acceptance of the gay community was probably about as effective a cause as Angel's advocacy of vampirism (note: I've never actually watched that show), but just being allowed to be a show, any kind of show, for a certain segment of the population, a previously ignored one, is essentially QAF's greatest success, subpar writing or no.
post #7 of 17
The good thing out of it was that the show wasn't complete and utter crap like a lot of things that fall under "gay" cinema. And it was the first American drama that I can think of that pretty much had gay characters as the lead.

But Randy Harrison was no Charlie Hunnum, that's for damn sure.
post #8 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
The good thing out of it was that the show wasn't complete and utter crap like a lot of things that fall under "gay" cinema. And it was the first American drama that I can think of that pretty much had gay characters as the lead.

But Randy Harrison was no Charlie Hunnum, that's for damn sure.
This is true. For a film about the excesses of Michael Alig and the Club Kids, Party Monster is more comfortable depicting O.D.'s and murders than a simple kiss between two men, also I tried watching Noah's Arc, I'd have an easier time reading a 2600 page text book on the different ways in which grass grows. On Randy Harrison, who is apparently a very good theater actor, he did indeed have some trouble with Justin, a character I mostly tolerated through Brian. Then again, he had some appalling fucking dialogue in the first season: "I just saw the face of God, and his name is Brian Kinney". Really? Reeeaally? Fuuuuuck.

I watched the first couple of episodes of The L Word, but I quickly lost interest, it's about lesbians, so I don't give a shit.
post #9 of 17
I saw Noah's Ark for all ten seconds and turned it off. It was that freakin dull.

Which is a shame because of anything that could be depicted and provide illumination on the complexities of gay life. It would be taking a look at the even more difficult cross pressures that come from cultural and ethnicity compounded with sexuality.

As for the other point, after seeing Hunnum in the original* (And in Undeclared), it's a far far better performance. Especially for a character that isn't all that deep.

Yeah I admit the character Hunnum plays is 15 (Played at 19) so to admit he's undeniably hot is pervy if not downright criminal. If so, then I back the fuck off. Thankfully I have Undeclared to fall back. I mean Goddamn!
post #10 of 17
Thread Starter 
Hunnam is a great looking guy, but as a twinkophile Randy Harrison is just about my ideal, another reason I tolerated him.

Also, you mentioned Novotny being a better character, or at least a more relatable character than Kinney, I certainly see that (although any comic fan worth his salt would know that The Joker didn't rape Barbara Gordon as Michael had once mentioned in passing), but while I don't have Kinney's talent for fucking anything that he wants, I do have his attitude. I enjoy the company of both men and women and I have zero conflict with this, not internally, not with family, not with friends, their acceptance is not a necessary thing for me to function. His being the model for the overarching premise and tone of the show is clear, through Kinney the show says: This is not about you, this is about me, sit back in disgust, or sit back and jerk off.

The fact that, in 2008, something like gay marriage requires a dialogue to be opened, is something that annoys me to no end. It shouldn't be like this, there shouldn't be a need to appeal to the progressive side of people who are somehow on the fence between bigotry and common sense. I have the good mind to tell them to fuck off, so would Brian Kinney, I liked that about him.
post #11 of 17
Noah's Arc is hilariously awful. It's almost worth watching simply to mock.

I agree that having a show filled with gays is progressive in its own way, but as you said, the show managed to alienate much of its intended audience. For examples of gay characters I'd actually like America to see, I'd turn to Brothers & Sisters, Six Feet Under or maybe even True Blood. Gays are portrayed much more realistically on those shows.

All that being said, even I can't resist the greatness of Brian Kinney. He's the one tolerable character on a show full of drama queens.
post #12 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdHocken View Post
I will say, of course it isn't meant to be realistic (A back room for sex? Guy getting sucked off right on the dance floor. Not in this decade. Or I've been going to the wrong clubs)
You've been going to the wrong clubs. Or maybe I've just been around too long and have seen it all? Odd, considering I'm only 35.
post #13 of 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by JacknifeJohnny View Post
The fact that, in 2008, something like gay marriage requires a dialogue to be opened, is something that annoys me to no end. It shouldn't be like this, there shouldn't be a need to appeal to the progressive side of people who are somehow on the fence between bigotry and common sense. I have the good mind to tell them to fuck off, so would Brian Kinney, I liked that about him.
Which comes back to what I posted in that 250 thread, about Kinney being honest. He doesn't hold back. Easily the most relatable character for me.

While at times unrealistic and if a tad over dramatic, QAF was at the very least a fun show to watch.

I don't think we'll ever see a realistic portrayal of gay life on TV. Why? Boring/everyday doesn't sell.
post #14 of 17
Pretty much. I think what also notes Kinney is that here you have a gay lead character who is not a queen nor some kind of guy going through the typical kinds of gay crisis whether it would be being closeted or coming to terms. He knows who he is and doesn't care what people think. But I wouldn't say he's rubbing it in people's face for just shock value. I guess only for some kind of comuppence on the part of some bigot or closed-minded individual.

Funny how this show started at the beginning of the decade and those cell phones are huge to what we have now.

Speaking of interesting projects. I know the guy who came up with "Swingtown" is doing a show called "Bi-Coastal" in which some guy has a wife and kids on the west coast and a guy on the east coast. Seems interesting enough. Hopefully it'll be better than Huff.
post #15 of 17
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HBarr View Post
While at times unrealistic and if a tad over dramatic, QAF was at the very least a fun show to watch.

I don't think we'll ever see a realistic portrayal of gay life on TV. Why? Boring/everyday doesn't sell.
Exactly. If I had a choice between QAF and a gay version of Tell Me You Love Me, I'm choosing QAF without a second of hesitation.
By the by, to salve my wounds left by the departure of QAF, I read William J Mann's "Massachusetts trilogy", The Men From the Boys, Where The Boys Are, and Men Who Love Men.

The first book was published two years before the original British QAF aired (the second in 2004), but I still sort of consider it an ersatz-QAF except without relatable or even likable characters. It matches QAF in the amount of histrionics, noisome dialogue, and trashy fuck-happy characters, but the books are even more of an acquired taste than my beloved soap opera. Not entirely recommended.
post #16 of 17
Funny you mention books as there were QAF tie-in novels. I bought a couple of them (At like $1.50 used through Amazon) they're set in the early 90s and they're alright. Just alright.
post #17 of 17
Thread Starter 
Yeah, I'm aware of those, I just could never muster up the interest to buy them, I figured I wouldn't be missing out on anything.

Also, look upon the Lord:

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Television
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPORTS, GAMES & LEISURE › Television › Queer As Folk Retrospective