ABC Draws fire for new comedy.....

[Trekker4747]

http://www.thewrap.com/tv/article/abc-under-fire-cross-dressing-comedy-work-it-33736#cmts-block

You have seriously gotta be effin' kidding me! Where were these dim-witted morons when "Bosom Buddies" or "Tootsie" came out????
Just something to be god damn idiots, to draw attention to their cause yet again.

Wasn't "Tootsie" mostly hailed as funny and a classic comedy from the 80s?

Anyway, I think the reaction from the LGBT community is extreme, this show doesn't seem to be taking any shots at those groups and I would hope most Americans know the differences between two idiots taking jobs out of desperation and people with an actual medical condition or innate lifestyle preference.

Anyway, the show itself looks completely horrible on all levels and like it isn't even trying to be funny with the concept and is just going for... Well I've no idea what it is going for. It's a mid-season replacement show that won't be around for more than a few episodes.

 

[Professor Zoom]

Folks need to grow thicker skin. Frankly with gay kids committing suicide, and potential future presidential contenders making statements about gays that I find offensive and I'm not even gay, giving any concern to a sitcom that'll be cancelled in 6 episodes simply makes the activist groups look stupid and lessens the impact of other messaging that might actually save lives.

The only controversy here is the premise of the show sounds so much like Bosom Buddies that I wouldn't be surprised to see someone raise a stink about that. If nothing it proves there are no original ideas left in Hollywood.

Alex

I would think it'd be easier an any large group to take an attitude of zero-tolerance over this sort of thing, I mean who'd want to sit on the committee that had to decide whether an issue that they thought stepped over the line was worth commenting on or not?

Agreed

 

[BillJ]

I only find it offensive in the sense of "OMG, they're remaking Bosom Buddies".

This says it all.

My only question is what studio exec thought it was a good idea to remake Bosom Buddies?

 

[The Lensman]

If nothing it proves there are no original ideas left in Hollywood.

The only thing it "proves" is that concepts get used over and over.

I get a laugh out of this ridiculous notion that "Hollywood has run out of ideas", because this mindset is a recent mindset.

Back in the day they didn't complain about this stuff. "The Maltese Falcon" was made three times in the course of ten years, nobody opined that "Hollywood has run out of ideas!" then.

 

[Greg Cox]

Back in the day they didn't complain about this stuff. "The Maltese Falcon" was made three times in the course of ten years, nobody opined that "Hollywood has run out of ideas!" then.

Hell, "The Unholy Three" (which I mentioned earlier) was filmed twice in a few years, and there were multiple silent versions of "The Wizard of Oz," "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," etc. Sometimes even in the same year!

 

[doubleohfive]

I saw a promo for this show on TV yesterday evening, and I think that its biggest problem is not that it's making fun of transgenders or that it's treading ground already covered by Bosom Buddies, Tootsie, Charley's Aunt or even Two Gentlemen of Verona. No, the thing which is most likely going to sink this thing is that it looks dumb - painfully, awfully dumb. Unless the promo was completely off, the show has one stupid joke—men in dresses, portrayed with all the subtlety of a frat party burlesque—and that's all it's got.

This is pretty much the opinion shared by our entire office after screening the pilot last spring.

 

[ArcherFanForever]

I only find it offensive in the sense of "OMG, they're remaking Bosom Buddies".

ROTFLMAO !

 

[God Magnus]

I only find it offensive in the sense of "OMG, they're remaking Bosom Buddies".

Right there with ya.

 

[FordSVT]

You have seriously gotta be effin' kidding me! Where were these dim-witted morons when "Bosom Buddies" or "Tootsie" came out????

I don't care about this show one way or another, but let's not pretend that attitudes and sensitivities are the same today as they were 30 years ago.

You're right, Archie Bunker wouldn't be on the air today either.

Which is a shame. People have turned into a bunch of pussies with sticks up their asses. This show looks terrible, but not because it says anything negative about gay or transgendered people.

 

[IndyJones]

So we were better off in a time period where this wouldn't have been complained about because instead of being taken seriously the GLAAD members were too busy being kicked out of their homes, denied jobs, beaten in the streets, arrested, and dying of AIDS in alarming numbers?

Irreverent humor is fine. I'd never argue for censorship, but let's not make the mistake of thinking that times were somehow better before. The reason there wasn't an uproar 30 years ago was because it wasn't tenable in our society. And the way we prevent a slide back in that direction - and there are large numbers of people who want that to happen - is letting these groups make a little noise when they want to. And it's very little noise, I haven't seen this issue raised anywhere else.

 

[Morpheus 02]

Irreverent humor is fine. I'd never argue for censorship, but let's not make the mistake of thinking that times were somehow better before. The reason there wasn't an uproar 30 years ago was because it wasn't tenable in our society. And the way we prevent a slide back in that direction - and there are large numbers of people who want that to happen - is letting these groups make a little noise when they want to. And it's very little noise, I haven't seen this issue raised anywhere else.

i strongly disagree on the point about preventing a "slide"... going off clearly trivial things makes whatever group it is look like "Nazis" trying to take away "our freedoms."

The group in question looks petty, and its fuel for the "other side" to say "See, look at the proof that The Other Side wants to control society."

It'd be the same thing if a conservative group went off about boycotting a company because of small issue that most people would think is not a big deal.


Now, this is TrekBBS. So there should have been someone protesting a remake of one of their favorite shows by now.

 

[Trekker4747]

My understanding was that Archie Bunker wasn't funny because the things he said were true but rather because the things he said were absurd and out-of-touch with reality and modern society, everyone else in his life was changing with the times and being more open minded. Bunker was the crotchety old man who refused to go with the new flow.

I think if, done right, a show very much like All in the Family with an Archie Bunker-like character could be done today if it's done in the same vain. That we realize the character's claims and rants were out of touch with reality and what everyone else around him is doing and saying.

Less "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. He's right! Living next door to black people DOES suck!"

and more "Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. That mean old man is so out of touch with living in society, it's sad to watch."

Now, this new show is hardly making any claims about those with a Gender Dysphoria. Our main characters are not Transsexuals or Transvestites they're straight, non-dysphoric, men who've taken a rather extreme approach to dealing with a hiring bigotry. Rather than lawyering up against this company for hiring only women, they decide to pose as women to get the job. (We'll ignore how it's possible to do this, considering they'd have to fake IDs, social security numbers, urine and other medical tests.)

The "comedy" in the show is less against GD and more about the "manly men" trying to pose as women. This has nothing at all to do with Transgendered persons who are "a man's/woman's mind in a woman's/man's body." It's a documented, accepted, medical condition carrying with it years of therapy and medical testing and living dressed as the opposite gender before they see the inside of an operating room. Granted most people will not realize the differences between real GD and this show, but what this comedy proposes is hardly that much different than what any other comedy supposes about any other group or activity.

Offense in the LGBT community shouldn't be taken. It's a shitty-looking mid-season replacement sitcom that's going to get canned probably inside of a month. Based on the preview alone the show won't have the material to sustain one season. Which is what gets me about the show. Good sitcoms tend to last as long as 10 years. Do they really think they have enough story and material to last even half that?

And I think a sitcom of this nature could be done well in a mostly "funny" way. But it'd have to take its own premise a bit more seriously, namely by having the male leads at least look and act somewhat believable while en fem. From the preview it looks like everyone around them will have to be a complete idiot to not see through the disguise. Further more it seems to want to perpetuate stereotypes (It's so shocking to see a woman eat anything more than a salad for lunch!)

The show just looks plain shitty, regardless of any problems it may or may not cause LGBT persons. Which, really, do you really care what a person thinks who gets their understanding of the world through sitcoms?

As an avid lover of Friends, Seinfeld, Cheers and Frasier I would not propose to say I know how twenty-something New Yorkers behave, how selfish thirty-something New Yorkers behave, how bar flies behave or how psychologists behave.

No one should watch this show and assume it's trying to make any sort of connection between two idiot men looking shitty dressed as and act as women, and people with a genuine medical condition where they actually are a woman (or man) and just have the wrong physical appearance.

 

[Trekker4747]

Okay, I just watched the pilot for this show on ABC's OnDemand service.

Oy!

It's... a mess.

It's just terrible pretty much in every conceivable way, as is probably indicated by the preview, and man is it filled with pretty shitty views on women, men and the world in general.

I'm pretty sure that the audience members were all held at gun point to laugh at the "jokes." (Or more likely is canned laughter.)

Ugh, this show.

It's going to be like watching a train wreck happen on the same spot as a plane wreck.

 

[the G-man]

My understanding was that Archie Bunker wasn't funny because the things he said were true but rather because the things he said were absurd and out-of-touch with reality and modern society...

That was the intent. But, somewhat to Norman Lear's horror, a lot of people loved the way Archie was (in their minds) telling off "the meathead."

 

[Trekker4747]

My understanding was that Archie Bunker wasn't funny because the things he said were true but rather because the things he said were absurd and out-of-touch with reality and modern society...

That was the intent. But, somewhat to Norman Lear's horror, a lot of people loved the way Archie was (in their minds) telling off "the meathead."

Sort of how some people don't get the "joke" that Steven Colbert is playing a "role" as an extreme partisan talking-head for the Right Wing?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Am I the only one who actually watched the show when it aired? Yeah, it was bad, but oddly, I wasn't offended. I guess I expect sitcoms to be idiotic.

I like the main guy, he's a very charismatic lead actor. Since the ratings suck, he will soon be free to find himself a better gig. Also, I think we should move this thread to SF/F, since the notion that anyone buys these guys as actual women certainly qualifies as fantasy.

 

[Gary Mitchell]

Also, I think we should move this thread to SF/F, since the notion that anyone buys these guys as actual women certainly qualifies as fantasy.

Not that the show is funny anyway, but if the guys actually looked like women how would that be funny?

One of the funny scenes I remember from Bosom Buddies was when Kip (Tom Hanks) got dressed up and asked Henry (Peter Scolari) how he looked. Henry told him that he looked like Stockard Channing. (he really did). He also got compared once to Bea Arthur.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Tom Hanks is Scarlett Johannson compared with the two guys on this show.

It's one thing for a guy to be able to pass as an ugly woman, like Tony Curtis and Jack Lemmon. But these guys can't pass at all. When they walked into the office of the woman hiring them, she must have been thinking, "okay what does HR say about hiring practices for transvestites?" It's so far outside the realm of the possible that it's a distraction and I just spent 10 minutes more on this dumb show than it deserves.

 

[Mysterion]

I watched this show the other night, and did not like or enjoy the experience. But, I decided I could not criticize it until I had watched it. I will admit, tough, to being biased going in as i am transgendered.


The biggest sin of Work it isn't the misogyny, transphobia, or racism. No, it commits the biggest sin of a Sitcom - it is not funny. Period. Unfunny.


Has the LGBT community overreacted to this show? I can't speak for the whole community, but I think that might be the case. Not to say that the LGBT community isn't justifiably wary of media portrayals at this point in history. But, I do not believe Work It is going to ever have a large enough audience to exert any sort of measurable impact on the rest of society, or the way it treats LGBT people.


Work It, of course, is not about people who are transgendered. It is about a couple of guys trying to scam a job. I have faith that most people in this country are smarter than they are given credit for by television, and will see this for the idiocy it is. Or at least I hope that this is the case, as someone who intends to transition in the workplace at some point in the relatively near future.


Work It is just badly written. All Puerto Ricans are drug dealers. Hilarious. And all women are apparently to stupid to notice two very obvious men in skirts. Really? I have gone out in public looking way more put together than either of the characters on this show and still gotten stared at, laughed at, and worse. But, according to this show, not only are women trying to subjugate all men, they are also apparently too stupid to live. Or notice very badly crossdressed men in a close knit office environment.


I would love to see transgendered people honestly portrayed in the media as the real people we are just trying to live our lives day-to-day like anyone else is. But, we will probably continue to be the punchline, the twist-ending, prostitutes, predators, freaks, serial killers and clowns that television and movies feed the public.

Just my two cents.

 

[Guy Gardener]

horrible but by the numbers.

I've actually been watching a couple episodes of Bosom buddies this week, which is a much better comedy, but the lads only spend about 2 minutes an episode in drag, since they're already introduced their (twin?) brother's into the cast, who count up as Tom and Peter's male alteregos