Shazam 2: unnecessary gay character coming out storyline

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

The point is ideology. Gays are about 3% or so percent of the population, so in a movie with about 10 or so meaningful characters, one would not ordinarily expect to see a gay character just by the luck of the draw. It’s overrepresentation for political purposes where, if done clumsily, it can take you out of the story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't some films do it well, like the last of us. I felt like it was a big distraction, that didn't add anything to the film.

Perhaps a gay person watching it felt happy to see themselves represented on screen. Inclusivity is a good thing. Why that makes some people feel uncomfortable is the issue. If it "distracts" you then perhaps that's worth exploring why that might be...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m confused. When is it “necessary “ for a character to be gay?

That character was fat inclusive and they had the main as a disabled inclusive kid they also has the diverse family with one Asian parent and one Hispanic parent who adopted Asian Latino black and white kids. They made the movie as inclusive as could be to the point it was eye rolling.

You sound like a POS.

"I like hating people, and this movie gives respect and space to people I hate! Why can't we just HATE in peace anymore, guys? It's like hatred is pRoBlEmAtIc now. I miss the Nineties when I could bully gay/fat/disabled people and then walk away happily while they struggled with suicidal ideation. Now I have to watch them in my superhero movies!"

You literally need to be written into the story as the villain. Go f*** yourself, frankly.

[Anonymous]

OP, you've always seen yourself in film and TV characters -- in fact there are entire genres dedicated to hateful, selfish, mean people like you.

Some of us like seeing characters that reflect a part of our reality on the screen -- even if that part is not relevant to the plot in the same way the local bit@h you relate to is central to many chick flick stories.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

I get it, OP. I hate it when movies have unnecessary heterosexual relationships. Yuck.

Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with being straight, but if it’s not necessary to the plot, why do they have to shove straight couples in our faces? I don’t need to know what you do in the bedroom.

Right? All these superhero movies have some romantic subplot. Why is that necessary? It doesn't advance the story at all. Often, it's clumsy and poorly done. So unnecessary.

I actually agree with this. I don't care if the subplot is straight or gay; I am always annoyed with the need to insert some romance into superhero movies. Just stick with the action. When I want romance, I'll go watch a different type of movie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not coming out when it’s always been clear.

Patrick and sponge bob are gay too.

And Bert and Ernie

And Thelma

It’s not new to us who see.

No, Patrick and Spongebob are not gay lovers. They may be gay, but they are best friends first. Friendship is magic! If anything Spongebob is asexual and Patrick is gay.

Why do bigots immediately want to know what’s going on inside everybody’s bed. They’re gay live with it.

NP. Nope. You can argue about these relationships without being a bigot. Isn't that the point. That there can be an array of relationships? Why so limited in your thinking?

And I agree with the Ernie and Bert being best friends PP upthread. You don't believe in close friendship between males? If males live together, they must be gay?

Thelma, different story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

I get it, OP. I hate it when movies have unnecessary heterosexual relationships. Yuck.

Yeah, there’s nothing wrong with being straight, but if it’s not necessary to the plot, why do they have to shove straight couples in our faces? I don’t need to know what you do in the bedroom.

Right? All these superhero movies have some romantic subplot. Why is that necessary? It doesn't advance the story at all. Often, it's clumsy and poorly done. So unnecessary.

I actually agree with this. I don't care if the subplot is straight or gay; I am always annoyed with the need to insert some romance into superhero movies. Just stick with the action. When I want romance, I'll go watch a different type of movie.

Then you must love the Marvel movies. Lots of superheroes, very little upkeep romance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Netflix does this and it's so annoying. They always plug a gay character love story that has nothing to do with the plot. As a black woman I am all for organic diversity but if every dark skinned black female character has to have a white female lover, I have to think there is an agenda.

The representation of gays in TV shows and movies is greater than real life.

I don't think this is true at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

The point is ideology. Gays are about 3% or so percent of the population, so in a movie with about 10 or so meaningful characters, one would not ordinarily expect to see a gay character just by the luck of the draw. It’s overrepresentation for political purposes where, if done clumsily, it can take you out of the story.

From https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/percentage-lgbtq-adults-us-doubled-decade-gallup-finds-rcna16556

The percent of U.S. adults who identify as something other than heterosexual has doubled over the last 10 years, from 3.5 percent in 2012 to 7.1 percent, according to a Gallup poll released Thursday.

…

More than 1 in 5, or 21 percent, of Generation Z adults identify as LGBTQ, Gallup found. That’s almost double the proportion of millennials, who are 26 to 41, at 10.5 percent, and nearly five times the proportion of Generation X, who are 42 to 57, at 4.2 percent. Less than 3 percent of baby boomers, who are 58 to 76, identify as LGBTQ, compared to just 0.8 percent of traditionalists, who are 77 or older.

There is your answer, OP. 21% of Gen Z adults. They are not marketing to old people. They are marketing to Gen Z, and Gen Z is gay as heck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

The point is ideology. Gays are about 3% or so percent of the population, so in a movie with about 10 or so meaningful characters, one would not ordinarily expect to see a gay character just by the luck of the draw. It’s overrepresentation for political purposes where, if done clumsily, it can take you out of the story.

From https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/percentage-lgbtq-adults-us-doubled-decade-gallup-finds-rcna16556

The percent of U.S. adults who identify as something other than heterosexual has doubled over the last 10 years, from 3.5 percent in 2012 to 7.1 percent, according to a Gallup poll released Thursday.

…

More than 1 in 5, or 21 percent, of Generation Z adults identify as LGBTQ, Gallup found. That’s almost double the proportion of millennials, who are 26 to 41, at 10.5 percent, and nearly five times the proportion of Generation X, who are 42 to 57, at 4.2 percent. Less than 3 percent of baby boomers, who are 58 to 76, identify as LGBTQ, compared to just 0.8 percent of traditionalists, who are 77 or older.

There is your answer, OP. 21% of Gen Z adults. They are not marketing to old people. They are marketing to Gen Z, and Gen Z is gay as heck.

Give me a break. That's just pure mania and a bunch of young naive people riding trends. They need to make sure they have some kind of identity that's in the oppressed camp, because you better make sure you aren't an oppressor. Gotta make sure you check a DEI box in your college application these days no matter what.

If 20% of people were truly not straight, the human population on Earth would be declining, yet here we are facing an over population crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't some films do it well, like the last of us. I felt like it was a big distraction, that didn't add anything to the film.

Perhaps a gay person watching it felt happy to see themselves represented on screen. Inclusivity is a good thing. Why that makes some people feel uncomfortable is the issue. If it "distracts" you then perhaps that's worth exploring why that might be...

NP. The reason it’s noticeable is because it’s being done for political reasons. It’s completely obvious and inauthentic. It’s distracting and annoying. You’re welcome to think I’m a bad person, btw. I don’t care. I think people that have to check every diversity box are mindless clowns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the deal with TV and movies needing to check every single DEI box? It's gotten preposterous and such a distraction from the basic storytelling.

Shazam 2 was a mediocre movie, but made even more so by the totally unnecessary gay character coming out storyline. It was so clumsy and poorly done, and didn't advance the story at all. C'mon. this is a dumb superhero movie for kids. what is the point?

The point is ideology. Gays are about 3% or so percent of the population, so in a movie with about 10 or so meaningful characters, one would not ordinarily expect to see a gay character just by the luck of the draw. It’s overrepresentation for political purposes where, if done clumsily, it can take you out of the story.

From https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/percentage-lgbtq-adults-us-doubled-decade-gallup-finds-rcna16556

The percent of U.S. adults who identify as something other than heterosexual has doubled over the last 10 years, from 3.5 percent in 2012 to 7.1 percent, according to a Gallup poll released Thursday.

…

More than 1 in 5, or 21 percent, of Generation Z adults identify as LGBTQ, Gallup found. That’s almost double the proportion of millennials, who are 26 to 41, at 10.5 percent, and nearly five times the proportion of Generation X, who are 42 to 57, at 4.2 percent. Less than 3 percent of baby boomers, who are 58 to 76, identify as LGBTQ, compared to just 0.8 percent of traditionalists, who are 77 or older.

There is your answer, OP. 21% of Gen Z adults. They are not marketing to old people. They are marketing to Gen Z, and Gen Z is gay as heck.

Give me a break. That's just pure mania and a bunch of young naive people riding trends. They need to make sure they have some kind of identity that's in the oppressed camp, because you better make sure you aren't an oppressor. Gotta make sure you check a DEI box in your college application these days no matter what.

If 20% of people were truly not straight, the human population on Earth would be declining, yet here we are facing an over population crisis.

So what’s your argument here, sunshine? 21% of Gen Z identify as gay, but you don’t think they’re really gay, and therefore movies shouldn’t market to them as if it’s true? Because movie marketing is all about divining the true essence of people’s souls?

Newsflash: marketing departments market to young people (which includes more gay content than you personally think is warranted), because they think that is what will make them money. They do not care that your straight old self finds it annoying. They do not care if those young people are actually really gay.

And no, there wouldn’t necessarily be a human population problem if 20% of people were not straight. A huge percentage of bisexuals eventually end up having children from a heterosexual relationship. And gay people have kids, too. And for what it’s worth, 60% of countries are currently experiencing a population decline (though I don’t for a second think that this is because of The Gays). This has less than nothing to do with the current argument, but I can’t resist pointing out how profoundly illogical it is.

No matter how dumb or wrong you personally think it is, it is a fact that over 20% of Gen Z identifies as not straight. That is the entire answer as to why you see gay people “overrepresented”. They are actually being shown in proportion to the identification of the target demographic, which is not you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't some films do it well, like the last of us. I felt like it was a big distraction, that didn't add anything to the film.

Perhaps a gay person watching it felt happy to see themselves represented on screen. Inclusivity is a good thing. Why that makes some people feel uncomfortable is the issue. If it "distracts" you then perhaps that's worth exploring why that might be...

NP. The reason it’s noticeable is because it’s being done for political reasons. It’s completely obvious and inauthentic. It’s distracting and annoying. You’re welcome to think I’m a bad person, btw. I don’t care. I think people that have to check every diversity box are mindless clowns.

That’s charming that you think that major movie studios do things for “political” reasons. In fact, they do things for financial reasons and only for financial reasons. If you don’t like their determination about what they think will make them more money, I really don’t know what you can do about that. Go into market research maybe, and fake your results? Good luck!

[Anonymous]

I’ll cross this movie off the list of ones to take my kids to. Thanks for the warning.

[Anonymous]

There are more gay characters on TV now than gay people in real life.