(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] ethrosdemon.livejournal.com at 05:09pm on 03/08/2010
Yes, of course. There is a liminal area there when talking about intention and perception and how much of X character's Xness is canon and how much it's about the projected views of the audience.

Part of what I'm saying is that I've seen the film a couple times and while I do see the gender queerness (which I think is direct and obvious), I didn't even think that the flirting with Arthur (which I assume was what people saw as gay? Maybe I'm wrong there) was anything beyond him fucking with the guy in a playful way. Like kitten with yarn rather than with actual invitation.

Often enough, I do tend to fall in the more conservative area wrt to textually interpretation than most of fandom, though.
[parent entry] [link] [parent] [reply]
poisontaster: (Boykiss)

(no subject)

posted by [personal profile] poisontaster at 05:13pm on 03/08/2010
I do tend to fall in the more conservative area wrt to textually interpretation than most of fandom, though.
I do, too and I interpreted Eames, I think, the same way you did...but at the same time, my interpretation isn't locked in stone so deeply that I couldn't ALSO interpret him as textually gay. I think it's ambiguous. There's nothing there that screams to me "OMG THIS GUY IS *SO* GAY!" and there's nothing that says to me "This man could NEVER be gay, OMG."

(This may come from the fact that neither my father nor his partner read as 'textally gay' to anyone who doesn't know them; I've been fluid on sexuality expression for much longer than I've been in fandom.)
[link] [parent] [reply]
 

(no subject)

posted by [identity profile] ethrosdemon.livejournal.com at 05:18pm on 03/08/2010
Oh! Maybe I phrased that badly. I didn't mean "does he come across to you as a big nelly?" but more "did you think the actor/director/writer intended him to be this way?"

And the expectations of gender normativity and how that plays into stereotyping is a preoccupation of Mr. Hardy. Which is why this topic struck me as so interesting. I suppose I need to step away from his interviews going on about being feminine inside and so on.

Anyway, in light of the actor's views, I think the character is meant to be ambiguous. But I didn't read that while watching the movie.
[link] [parent] [reply]
poisontaster: (Cate Glamour)

(no subject)

posted by [personal profile] poisontaster at 05:33pm on 03/08/2010
Mmm, yes. I'm picking up what you're laying down. Honestly? I think that Nolan and Co wanted EVERYTHING to be as ambiguous as possible. I think the entire linchpin of the movie is ambiguity, so I would personally see Eames' sexuality as part and parcel of that.
[link] [parent] [reply]

June

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  1
 
 2
 
 3
 
 4
 
 5
 
 6
 
7
 
 8
 
 9
 
 10
 
 11
 
 12
 
 13
 
14
 
 15
 
 16
 
 17
 
 18
 
 19
 
 20
 
21
 
 22
 
 23
 
 24
1
 25
 
 26
 
 27
 
28
 
 29
 
 30