Matt Smith doesnt think an actors sexual orientation matters when playing gay icons
I feel like the average American probably knows Matt Smith from The Crown, or possibly his turn on Doctor Who. He’s made some attempts, here and there, to become a bigger thing in America, but I do think he’s happy mostly working on British film and TV projects. He did score one lead role as a famous American though: he plays Robert Mapplethorpe in the Mapplethorpe bio-pic. Mapplethorpe was a famous American photographer known for imagery that was both mundane (flowers, portrait work) and controversial (BDSM imagery, sexually provocative imagery). Here’s the trailer for the film:
I think this looks interesting, but I do wonder why filmmakers insist on outsourcing these great American roles to British actors? Why couldn’t an American actor play Mapplethorpe again? But that’s not the controversy. The controversy – albeit, a minor one at this moment – is that Matt Smith is a heterosexual man playing a gay man, an LGBTQ+ icon, who died of AIDS. Matt Smith was taking part in a Q&A session about the film and he was asked about that issue:
Eliza Dushku and Matt Smith spent their Valentine’s Day evening at the 92nd Street Y in New York discussing their new biopic Mapplethorpe, which tells the life story of photographer Robert Mapplethorpe (played by Smith), in front of a room full of fans. Asked by Dushku, a producer on the film, whether Mapplethorpe, who was gay, should have been played by a gay actor, Smith said, “I think your sexual orientation, or your sex and your choices outside of work, shouldn’t influence — in either way, positive or negative — what happens. So, to me, it doesn’t matter if you’re gay or straight. That has no bearing on whether you should get the part.”
Smith is not the first straight actor to portray a gay historical figure in film. Just last year, we had Rami Malek’s Frankie Mercury in Bohemian Rhapsody, Keira Knightley’s Gabrielle Colette in Colette, and Olivia Colman’s Queen Anne in The Favourite. Darren Criss made headlines recently after announcing that he would no longer play gay characters, sparking a conversation about the ethics of such portrayals.
But, as Smith pointed out to Dushku, acting is meant to be a transformation into someone different. “Where does it stop?” he said. “Like, do we then say, do we apply that logic to going, “Okay, I’ve got a part, and it’s playing a brother, and he’s addicted to heroin.” Do we then go to people that have only taken heroin?”
“It’s an important discussion,” Dushku responded. Smith agreed, saying “It’s good that it’s being had.”
My thought on straight actors playing gay characters is that… it’s tricky at this point, and I think it’s good that we’re having those conversations, because they’re part of larger conversations about LGBTQ visibility and representation on camera and off-camera. Of course it’s not the case that “straight actors should never play gay” or that “gay actors should never play straight.” That being said, I’m unsettled by Matt’s answer a bit. The comparison of being LGBTQ to being a heroin addict is… not great. But where do we draw these lines? Should a British actor never play an American? Should a straight guy never play a gay man? Should a sober actor never play a drunk? At what point is it just ACTING? But then again, at what point are straight cisgendered white dudes just taking all the roles because they’re always going to be “the default”?
Photos courtesy of WENN.
ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7pLHLnpmirJOdxm%2BvzqZmb2lgZn5ze8yaq62Xo6K2tbS%2Bnaaeq56prLW0yKeimJmelK6kwM6rqpirla3Cori%2BqKminZ6prrW1zqeWppmkqbKzv76wn56mj6W5osXIp56Yn5GurKqvzqeqaA%3D%3D