Jonathan Demme’s Philadelphia (1993) earned Tom Hanks his first Academy Award as the best actor in a leading role but not without receiving some backlash from the audience. Reason – Hanks is a straight man who played a gay guy in the movie. Worse, the movie showed little intimacy between Hanks and his romantic partner (played by Antonio Banderas) in the movie. Much of this criticism came from the gay (or queer) community. Did Hanks commit a sin in taking up a role against his off-screen sexuality?
Many years later, Hanks addressed this question in an interview with The New York Times Magazine, as cited in a 2023 article in FandomWire. He defended his decision to play that role despite being straight and then opined that “a straight actor should not portray a gay character in contemporary cinema.” His reason behind this verdict – “audiences now demand authenticity.”
Two key points arise out of this discussion. First, in cinematic history, Hanks’ role of a gay man wasn’t the breakthrough. That credit remains with Michael Ontkean for his leading role in Making Love (1982). While released a decade before Philadelphia, it showed way greater intimacy between Ontkean’s character – a married man who decides to come out – and that of Harry Hamlin who plays an author in the movie. Ontkean initially turned down the role like many other famous actors had done before him out of concerns over its potential impact on his career or questions over his sexuality. But then he had second thoughts and accepted it as he shared in an interview many years later.
Ontkean answered the question of working as an actor versus selecting roles based on fears or concerns over the reaction to one’s acting choices. He spoke as a true artist by putting art over audience – the opposite of what Hanks did in his interview. This second point about audience’s demand for authenticity, which Hanks spoke of, runs counter to the spirit of acting talent. You don’t have to be in real life what you are portraying on screen. Should only Christian people in their personal lives play Christian characters on screen? Should the audience mind if an advocate of ban on guns in real life play a trigger-happy gangster or cop in a movie or TV show? There could be any number of such questions.
Hollywood’s history is full of cases where actors played radically different characters than real-life self. In fact many gay and bisexual people have played straight roles for years on the screen. And it wasn’t an issue until certain political entities decided it was time to throw a wrench in this business. It was seemingly done on purpose as part of a political agenda, which would explain why such a sanitized role as Hanks played in Philadelphia led to headlines over a straight-vs-gay issue.
It’ll be safe to say that the acting business needs solid insulation against people’s ideologies and politics in the theatre. Comfort zone acting is not a friend of the artistic spirit. Ontkean knew it and gave it his personal voice. It rings true today and will be in future as well.
