Posted 11 November 2003 - 11:39 AM
Chef,
I like the way QUEER EYE works to dispel the usual stereotypes, how it doesn't just say that gay peple have culture sense and straight guys all just like to sit around and watch tv. Oh wait, it doesn't do that at all; it reinforces that nonsense. Hmm. And all the guys mince about all the time, often dressing like fools and fake flirting with everyone. Oh well, I guess this parody show will take the shine off that, pointing out that even gay guys can be fashion and pop-culture victims, that perhaps there's something a little embarrassing about Liza Minelli, CABARET be damned. Oh wait; no. The article implies that the "parody" show will just do the exaxct same thing as the show itself.
Curses.
(Jesus, that first paragraph reads terrible. If only there were some way to delete it! I'm just not so good with the sarcasm.) Anyway, I agree that QUEER EYE is the dumbest idea for a show ever. There are some fantastic cooking shows; Nigella Lawson's and Jamie Oliver's are among the best (we'll see about Jamie's foray into reality television, JAMIE'S KITCHEN, but so far, so good). The British CHANGING ROOMS and DEBBIE TRAVIS' MAKEOVER, as well as Canada's DESIGNER GUYS and DEVINE DESIGN are really good and often helpful. WHAT NOT TO WEAR is a genuine makeover show, even if its hosts are often too urban for their own good (the hostess always wants the women to show more cleavage, even on dresses they plan to wear to church). So QUEER EYE seems to me to fill no programming niche (at least not in Canada), and yet it is popular because of its gimmick. And the advice the guys give is often hard to defend. They just don't so much seem like pros to me. It's like the producers cast for "gay and kitschy" first, talent second.
Mike.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).