The Man, the Milk, the Legend
Milk is a biographical drama film about Harvey Milk, the first openly gay elected official in California and one of the first in the United States. The film follows his move to San Francisco, his political career, and his ultimate assassination by fellow supervisor Dan White. While some have criticized the film for sanitizing Milk’s life and making him out to be a martyr, many view the film as a wide success. As someone who only knew the baseline information about Milk and his work, I thought the film was interesting and educational. It’s clear that a lot of thought and care was put into this film, from the time it took to actually begin production to the thought-out set design. It was intriguing reading about and then seeing how the producers of the film created a time machine back to when the events of the film occurred. I can’t imagine what it was like for those, like B. Ruby Rich, who were alive during Milk’s work to walk onto set and be transported back to that time.
Even though I enjoyed the film, I think there is room to criticize it; my biggest criticism would be that this film, like many others, has a straight actor playing a gay character. And in this case, a straight actor playing an important gay historical figure. It’s ironic to me that even though the filmmakers spent so much time making an era-appropriate Castro Street (to the point where background actors had to follow a strict era-appropriate dress code), they didn’t feel the need to be accurate in who played the film's main focus. I was irked about this while watching the film, and even as I’m writing this, I’m getting more and more irked, especially since Sean Penn won an Oscar for his role as Harvey Milk. Penn even doubled down on his role, saying in an interview that straight actors being barred from queer roles is an “artless policy.” (Parkel, 2024) What I think is “artless” is having straight actors win awards for playing queer characters when there are plenty of queer actors who are able to play these roles but have historically been barred from doing so.
Now that I’ve watched Milk, I’m interested in watching The Times of Harvey Milk and comparing the two. Just from reading the synopsis of The Times of Harvey Milk, it looks like that documentary goes more into the aftermath of Milk’s assassination and the trial of Dan White. While I enjoyed Milk, I will say it was disappointing that they didn’t discuss the aftermath or the general public’s reaction to the assassination. I think they could have done something with Dan White’s trial and less than adequate sentencing, highlighting the injustice of the situation and maybe even using that to highlight current-day queer issues. Speaking of which, it was interesting reading about the film's release coinciding with Prop 8. While reading about Rich’s reaction to the passing of Prop 8 and the reactions of others, I had the same question as Milk’s screenwriter Dustin Black: “They were able to win in a far more homophobic time, so why aren’t we winning now?” (Jones 2009) The difference is obvious: they had Harvey Milk.
Citations:
Parkel, Inga. “Sean Penn Says Straight Actors Being Barred from Queer Roles Is an ‘Artless Policy.’” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 25 June 2024, www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/sean-penn-milk-lgbt-films-b2568721.html.
Jones, Oliver. “Inside Story: Forces behind Milk Reflect on ‘Devastating Year’ for Gay Rights.” People.Com, PEOPLE, 9 Feb. 2009, people.com/awards/inside-story-forces-behind-milk-reflect-on-devastating-year-for-gay-rights/.
Rich, B. Ruby. New Queer Cinema: The Director's Cut. 1 ed. Duke University Press, 2013.
First of all, your titles do not miss. I'm very interested that Penn described "barring" straight actors from playing queer characters as "artless." That's an interesting take, because it's all in the name of art at the end of the day, but a demographic that's been so heavily persecuted should be represented by that demographic. The phrase "oscar-baiting" comes to mind. This sounds really cynical, but queer people make great protagonists because of the inherent difficulties associated with living in the closet, coming out, and navigating hate crimes and discrimination. A queer hero is a sympathetic hero (as long as they're gay in a sanitary, monogamous, tasteful way), and their sufferings depicted on screen likely earns the actor an oscar, like it did here.
ReplyDeleteAnother title that made me giggle, and another phenomenal post! I agree with everything Nicole said above about straight actors portraying queer characters and all the caveats and problems thereof. Additionally, I am also interested in watching the documentary "The Times of Harvey Milk," for much of the same reasons. It felt like "Milk" ended on such a strange, awkward note by cutting off so abruptly after Milk's death, and its themes could have been expanded if it continued its narrative.
ReplyDeleteHi! I enjoyed the creativity you have in your blogs, especially in the titles. I agree the film was well made but there is room for criticism. I am glad you looked at the actors involved and brought up this point because the directors creating the film put a lot of time and effort into creating an accurate film of Milk that they did not take the aspect of the actors into in-depth analysis as well. Great blog post!
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your blog post, and I agree with your main point! I did not focus on the actors who played gay characters, but what you mentioned makes sense. There are so many queer actors who can play these gay characters, and there is a possibility that they can play better since they know what it is like to be queer or LGBTQIA+ in this society. What you pointed out reminded me of the Dallas Buyers Club, where Rayon was played by a straight actor even though Rayon was transgender. Queer people are still not represented right, and I also think this movie could have done better. Overall, I think you did a great job and thank you so much for your insight!
ReplyDeleteSaki
Milo, I think your criticisms are valid. I also wrote about the straight actors portraying gay roles. And I feel like it's a slippery topic. On one hand, I think having real gay representation would have made the film better. But on the other hand, I feel like the goal of making the film is less about maintaining complete historical accuracy and more so about bringing the story to mainstream. Especially back in 2008, having gay actors probably would have prevented the film from being acknowledged within the mainstream. Ordinarily, I'd prefer real representation, but I think having well-known, straight actors does its job at getting more straight people to see the movie (and to finally learn Milk's story or gay history). I also agree that the film should focus more on the ending. I feel like without doing the research myself, there are a lot of details, like the injustice of receiving 6 years on a MANSLAUGHTER charge, that the film misses. I really enjoyed your takes for this movie (and LOVE your title)!
ReplyDeleteWhile I also hate Sean Penn's opinions towards straight people playing queer roles, I unfortunately really liked him in the role of Harvey Milk. Maybe it was just the writers and the overall tone of the movie, but I found myself rooting for Milk more than I ever did for Ron Woodroof's character in "Dallas Buyers Club." I also enjoyed your mention of the correlation between voting for Prop 8 and the release of this movie, as the ties between the two are obvious. The loss of Prop 8 only cements how important gay figureheads are, and how important Harvey Milk was to California.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with the masses and compliment your title. "The Man, The Milk, The Legend" encapsulates exactly the feelings that the film has towards Milk and his legacy in the queer community and the gay liberation movement. I always believe that casting a queer actor to play a queer role is the best option, and while I enjoyed Sean Penn's performance, that does not mean that a gay person would not have done a better job, as someone who can fully understand the emotions that the real Harvey Milk would have gone through.
ReplyDeleteI do love your title. I do think though, and perhaps this is an unpopular opinion, that the director and writer being gay matters more than the actor himself being gay. While I don't love Sean Penn's comment, I also am inclined to wonder how many openly gay actors would have fit the role in 2008. I also don't think gay actors should be confined to playing gay characters, and as such, I think that might sometimes mean straight actors will play gay characters. This feels starkly different to me than cis actors playing trans characters, especially when it's a cis man playing a trans woman, or a cis woman playing a trans man.
ReplyDelete