Stay at Home where possible - Wear a Mask - Get vaccinated x


twitter

support the forums by visiting these sites

support the forums by visiting this site

shortcuts

Gossip
Poofery
Showbiz
Back Page

support the forums by visiting these sites

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

support the forums by visiting this site

Queer As Folk
tv reboot
#1
Looks like there is going to be a 3rd Queer As Folk.


https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a3608...s-peacock/
[+] 1 user Likes Hugh's post
Reply
#2
I'll give it a shot but if it's too mainstream due to the distributor it'll be a failure. We've had a lot of boundary pushing gay shoes flash up and down the last 20 years. Not sure what a successful take would entail today. Maybe the age disparities of dating.
Reply
#3
I thought it was being shifted to Chicago?? Why would you remake the British QAF in America, when they already made a homegrown version??
Reply
#4
The US was set in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Reply
#5
Is there even a place for the show now? At the time of original broadcast it was pushing boundaries and asking questions that reflected political discourse of the time. Now we’re in a world where high schoolers are openly LGBTQ and all the taboos the show burst open are incredibly mainstream. What boundaries does the show (and it’s core story arc) have to push against now?
[+] 1 user Likes chabang's post
Reply
#6
(13-04-2021, 08:47 PM)chabang Wrote: Is there even a place for the show now? At the time of original broadcast it was pushing boundaries and asking questions that reflected political discourse of the time. Now we’re in a world where high schoolers are openly LGBTQ and all the taboos the show burst open are incredibly mainstream. What boundaries does the show (and it’s core story arc) have to push against now?

From what we’ve seen of revivals of titles, productions aren’t compelled to stick faithfully to previous versions.  For the reasons you’ve pointed out, it makes more sense for the new production’s storylines to deal with  issues more relevant to its audience’s LGBTQ experience now.  It’s probably just the value in a recognized title with established ‘good will’ that’s in play here.  It guarantees more viewers will give it a try, than if it were unknown, and it just costs payment to the current owner of the intellectual property.
Reply
#7
Hmmmmm.
(13-04-2021, 09:04 PM)jdcyl Wrote:
(13-04-2021, 08:47 PM)chabang Wrote: Is there even a place for the show now? At the time of original broadcast it was pushing boundaries and asking questions that reflected political discourse of the time. Now we’re in a world where high schoolers are openly LGBTQ and all the taboos the show burst open are incredibly mainstream. What boundaries does the show (and it’s core story arc) have to push against now?
From what we’ve seen of revivals of titles, productions aren’t compelled to stick faithfully to previous versions.  For the reasons you’ve pointed out, it makes more sense for the new production’s storylines to deal with issues more relevant to its audience’s LGBTQ experience now.  It’s probably just the value in a recognized title with established ‘good will’ that’s in play here.  It guarantees more viewers will give it a try, than if it were unknown, and it just costs payment to the current owner of the intellectual property.
In other words, it will focus on trans, trans and trans issues. Not gay, not bi, not asexual or whatever. But trans.

Without wishing to descend into a rant, it should still be acknowledged that LGB people are still subjected to violence and prejudice in some areas (though I personally feel that self-filtering and censorship, and not wishing to attract attention to oneself also hold people back from expressing their sexuality).

Being bi is probably the biggest hurdle still to be overcome. Yes, bi people won’t face (a lot of) overt prejudice and discrimination, but there is still quite a limited acceptance that people can be attracted to men and women, it isn’t “being greedy” or unfaithful, or “a phase”.

If gay people can be accepted, welcomed, and valued as members of the community, then so should bi people. I genuinely can’t think of many openly bi people who are accepted for who they are. Most likely they’re pigeonholed as straight but dabbling, or gay and fluid.
[+] 1 user Likes jumbler's post
Reply
#8
Times have somewhat moved on. When the UK version came out, it was shocking. Now 20 odd years later, there's still some arseholes out who still have an issue with non straight life.

Now we've got trans, fluid, binary issues to deal with.
Reply
#9
I'm just glad we got rid of the weird idea that "Bisexual people are literally imaginary".
[+] 1 user Likes Jwb52z's post
Reply
#10
How old was Nathan in the first one when he was getting a good bumming from Stuart ?
I remember he was still at school.

Although times have moved on gay-acceptance wise.. I think if this was to first-air now, it would still cause a massive stink.. maybe even more so.. in the Mail and the like.
[+] 1 user Likes ladsnet's post
Reply
#11
Yeah, he was 15 and there was rowing on *all* sides.
The Mail, Express and Sun on one side and Stonewall and some gay rights groups on the other. IIRC this was going out in the run-up to a vote on equalising age of consent to 16, so this was seen as muddying the issue.
Probably the last big tabloid "moral outrage" row over a sexy tv drama (though I think Fingersmith had a bit).
It went on for weeks and the show lost its sponsor with Becks beer pulling its sponsorship after a few weeks. At least C4 held its nerve, kept the show in its slot and requested a second series and a spin-off, of which only a slower-paced 2-part finale materialised.
I remember the reception for Shameless and Skins a few years later was much tamer, just enthusiasm and little criticism over "tv filth".
[+] 1 user Likes Joe Rimbaud's post
Reply
#12
Good thing with Channel 4, they committed itself to providing an alternative to the existing channels, an agenda in part set out by its remit which required the provision of programming to minority groups.
With Brookside often had storylines, which were controversial.
So with QAF, C4 did provide an alternative to the other channel.
[+] 1 user Likes Hugh's post
Reply
#13
True, but that was 20 years ago. Are gays so normal now we’re invisible??

Most of the time, I guess so, but you keep hearing tales of people who’ve met homophobic abuse.

So we still need to be normalised, and if there’s any doubt, portrayed in a positive light.

Which is why I’m very anti old-school, self-loathing, “struggling with sexuality” tropes.

Being “too afraid” to hold hands in public, to out oneself, and so on.

If people face issues in their life, they either have to sort them, or come to terms with them - in a socially acceptable way. This is what normal people do. Not bottle things up for decades.

If you’re born in the 70s, 80s, 90s, or later, there really is no excuse for being closeted, if you live in a country where being gay is not only tolerated, but valued and celebrated.

If that means you have to leave your homophobic mates or family behind, so be it.
[+] 1 user Likes jumbler's post
Reply
#14
Not looking forward to it. We have all seen how the 2nd one went.
[+] 1 user Likes EthanE's post
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

important

Please read the rules and blacklist BEFORE posting

No porn, fakes, models, leaked sex/nudes, personal ads, spam, petitions or selling on the board. Pictures should be of famous male celebrities over 18.
We reserve the right to ban you from the service if the rules are broken.
No images are hosted on this site. All are hosted on individual members webspace. We do not claim any rights over images posted and assume the poster has permission to do so.
If you believe an image should not be displayed here please contact us to request removal.

By posting on the forums, you agree that you remain solely responsible for the content of your messages, and you agree to indemnify and hold us harmless with respect to any claim based upon transmission of your messages. We reserve the right to reveal your identity (or whatever information we know about you) in the event of a complaint or legal action arising from any message posted by you.

links

famousmalesfamousmales.com
twitter@famousmales
facebookfamousmales
instagram@famousmales_com
britishmade in the UK

 

contactcontact us
teamthe staff
cybersocket