I have not seen Vicious, of course, being an isolated American.  I certainly do know who McKellan and Jacobi are.  I can't imagine them being poor ambassadors for the gay community.

The big danger in political correctness is that it could kill the gay movement before acceptance is more widespread.  The PC Nazis need to be drowned out by a chorus of affirmation for all things gay.  Infighting over rules dictated by a few is a damning distraction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, I'm trying to ensure that I understand this new definition of "dope" to which you have exposed me.  It's not stupid or illicit drugs.  It's something good, right?

Personally, if the critics dislike something that's pretty much the best endorsement for it IMO. If they hate a movie I find I usually enjoy it!

I agree! Vicious is great for a quick laugh and Frances de la Tour and "Ramsay Bolton" are just as awesome as the two main queens in it! 

BTW there are two more grey haired "Gay" ambassadors - Martin Sheen and Sam Waterston kiss and hug a lot in the Netflix's Grace and Frankie! Wholeheartedly recommended! ;-)

I love Vicious. It's one of my personal favourites

The criticism reminds of that placed on Downton Abbey concerning the portrayal of Thomas. Usually along the lines of "The shows Homophobic" or "How dare they portray a gay man as a villain!"

Look, I get it, early shows and cinema had that gay character be the villain and die in the end, so I understand. But I say: "put a sock in it!"

To the point about both shows: I want there to be a time and point when people just don't give a damn about a character's sexuality or whether they are the hero or villain!

Sorry for the rant, but I have strong views on this.

I have not seen Vicious, of course, being an isolated American.  I certainly do know who McKellan and Jacobi are.  I can't imagine them being poor ambassadors for the gay community.

 

The big danger in political correctness is that it could kill the gay movement before acceptance is more widespread.  The PC Nazis need to be drowned out by a chorus of affirmation for all things gay.  Infighting over rules dictated by a few is a damning distraction.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Oh, I'm trying to ensure that I understand this new definition of "dope" to which you have exposed me.  It's not stupid or illicit drugs.  It's something good, right?

I probably shouldn't use the word "dope," but yes, it was reinterpreted by rap artists to mean satisfactory, acceptable. I started using the word once I became aware that so many rap artists have a favorable opinion of cannabis. The original meaning of the word "dope" meant, specifically, cannabis. I am for the legalization of cannabis and find that it is a useful food and medicine.

Personally, if the critics dislike something that's pretty much the best endorsement for it IMO. If they hate a movie I find I usually enjoy it!

And, strangely, I tend to dislike a lot of critically acclaimed movies, usually the "chick flicks," but maybe because they tend to be so heterosexual, and I've become jaded from watching so many heterosexual-themed television shows.

The criticism reminds of that placed on Downton Abbey concerning the portrayal of Thomas. Usually along the lines of "The shows Homophobic" or "How dare they portray a gay man as a villain!"

 

Look, I get it, early shows and cinema had that gay character be the villain and die in the end, so I understand. But I say: "put a sock in it!"

 

To the point about both shows: I want there to be a time and point when people just don't give a damn about a character's sexuality or whether they are the hero or villain!

 

Sorry for the rant, but I have strong views on this.

I do like how Downton Abbey humanized Thomas and made the audience understand better what made him tick. There was a reason for his villainy and it had to do with his alienation.