GO GIRLS!!!

If you didn't catch the premier of Showtime's new show about Lesbian life in L.A., make plans to catch a rerun.

The writing is pretty good, the acting is heads and shoulder's above Queer as Folk's, and the balanced portrayal of a cross section of the Lesbian community is welcomed and refreshing. Needs some work: like some butch representation and some "ethnic" Lesbian representation, but altogether, this one is a definite victory for LGBT visibility and positivity, it seems!!! QAF had damned well better shape up or suffer getting dwarfed.

...Makes a brotha proud!
[This message was edited Mon Jan 19 8:34:46 PST 2004 by Lammastide]

cool lamm and all but...not a single ugly fat one in the bunch?

that aint true representation..


j/k

sosgemini said:

I agree with that one. Hopefully, it'll be worked on.

Lammastide said:

Not too difficult.

Glad it's good, though. Missed it last night.

That show sucks. It's just more "In your face TV."

EvilWhiteMale said:

What was "in your face" about The L Word? Any more so than any other cable show?

Lammastide said:

I think anything that is not specifically straight white male programming would be In Your Face TV to some people.

Lammastide said:

It's just that every producer out there is trying to come up with the next wild and outrageous TV show to get people's attention. Plus they're all trying to jump on the gay bandwagon since it's so marketable these days.

rdhull said:

I think you're correct, rd.

And to think -- I used to care about such things.

EvilWhiteMale said:

You're right, EWM. Yet while I think the show may be somewhat exploitative (as is all commercial TV), I think it was pretty tactful, actually... especially compared to other minstrel-show GLBT depictions we've seen.
[This message was edited Mon Jan 19 11:47:05 PST 2004 by Lammastide]

I'm actually a bit surprised you weren't turned on by beautiful women making out with one-another, EWM.

Lammastide said:

It's okay, but I'd rather see the hardcore version on an actual porno.

They should call it "The L L Words" for "Lipstick Lesbians". There ain't a butch in the bunch!

EvilWhiteMale does have a point with the exploitation of homosexuals with this new type of shock television. It's is not much different from the old jive talking blacksploitation of the 60's and 70's. Now where's Pam Grier to get in with them lesbians? That's some action I'd like to see!

TheRhythmTheRebel said:

:LOL: RIGHT UP IN THAT PICTURE... :LOL:

Lesbians?!

I used to think "why are they only using pretty boys and pretty girls" in the gay/lesbian themed programming. Because that is not the true makeup of the G/L society. But then I thought..they use the same criteria on every show dman near..so why would The L or any other gay themed show be different? The dont use realistic standards etc in the other programming so why would they do it on that programming? They wouldn't and they don't.

rdhull said:

I agree. How many people would tune in weekly to see a circle of truck driver-looking Lesbians sit around drinking brews in mullets and flannel and debating the merits of veganism? It just wouldn't happen, folks. The cross-section of Lesbians depicted was absolutely made more pallatable for a wider audience, but that's totally status quo... and we've only seen a single episode, for Christ's sake. Loosen up.

And as exploitation goes, The L Word may arrive amid a tide of LGBT popularity in the mainstream, but it's among the best conceived and executed depictions of this community that I've seen on TV. It's a damned far cry from Good Times and that bullshit Queer as Folk -- that's for sure! And if anything last night was particularly "shocking" given some of the BS they put on TV these days, some of us just need to click back to PBS.

I'm happy.
[This message was edited Mon Jan 19 16:57:52 PST 2004 by Lammastide]

I know a good deal of lesbians (my mom, her partner and their friends) and not one of them look a thing like those girls on 'the L word'. They're just not a bunch of glamy chicks, of course they're not a bunch of mullet having truck drivers either.

You mean Lleena?

jessyMD32781 said:

Good point, jessy. And my Lesbian cousin, for example, is a lot like your mom, her partner, etc. My point, though, is that from a marketing standpoint, those unassuming, everyday archetypes just aren't gonna pull in the critical mass of viewers necessary to sustain a show. And as hyperbole goes, the L Word gals are pretty subtle, I thought. I don't think any of these women look magazine cover-worthy except maybe Jennifer Beals (whom, incidentally, I'd suspend my sexual orientation for, if she too were game. )

bad reviews.

AaronAlmighty said:

I figured as much. Where'd you see them?

Lammastide said:

http://washblade.com/2004...ion/tv.cfm

http://www.houstonvoice.c...l/wish.cfm


to be fair, it's gotten some good reviews. but the tone of most of the good ones are from super-gays who sound like they're settling for being happy to have anything gay on TV.

there are others. i had a link that had a whole list of reviews, but i can't find it.

AaronAlmighty said:

I can imagine. I'm, in fact, considerably more discriminating, but I actually was pretty impresed. Maybe I'm comparing it with that QAF sh*t too much.

Lammastide said:

So... Jennifer Beals isn't "ethnic" enough for you? They covered the issue of having a black baby in the first episode

Lammastide said:

SORRY SORRY!!!

but the lesbians I know do not look like that!!

what an unrelistic show this must be.

Janfriend said:

Sure she is. I just get tired of seeing one lone token in ensemble shows. I can only imagine that along with fat, ugly lesbians and ones that altogether just fade into the background, there's got to be more minority representation than just one biracial Lesbian in all of L.A.

And the only fully non-white character, Pam Grier, is an alcoholic who thwarts legal trouble.

Still, I'll let that stuff slide. It'll be interesting to see where they take it.
[This message was edited Mon Jan 19 18:51:22 PST 2004 by Lammastide]

Milty said:

I know some gorgeous lipstick types.

But to clarify, Pam Grier's character is straight, and the brunette being hugged by the guy is cast as "straight," but the suggestion is that she's curious about women.

Lammastide said:

btw, Pam's character is not gay
Maybe because I only hang out with the pretty lipstick lesbians, I didn't see a problem with the show. Shane was pretty butch though, no?