Leave a comment

Comments 10

ladies_of_time March 12 2011, 12:42:15 UTC
I've seen "Christopher and his kind" and I don't think showing Matt's behind would have done any bad to the film. (: Anyway, no need to get restrictive.

Reply

clayworshippers March 12 2011, 16:50:57 UTC
Ooh, question - where? Has it already aired? Are there DL links available, do you know?

Reply

ladies_of_time March 12 2011, 22:55:54 UTC
Ooh, I'm sorry, I saw it on German TV a few weeks ago so I can't give you any links. :(
That's quite odd, normally we have to wait at least a year to see new stuff from the BBC.. (if it's shown at all *thinks of DW*)

Reply


sensiblecat March 12 2011, 17:19:30 UTC
I find the Christopher And His Kind prohibition rather disturbing and possibly homophobic. I don't remember there being any similar ruling when Tennant raped his wife in a very disturbing scene in "Recovery". He played a man suffering from brain damage who swore copiously, made inappropriate sexual comments and appeared stark naked in front of strangers. People seemed to survive that, so why the prudishness regarding a bit of gay sex?

Reply

ladies_of_time March 12 2011, 23:06:15 UTC
I completely agree!
I don't know anything about the book, but Matt's film has a much lighter tone, compared to Recovery (which was truly disturbing). It's a story about love.. I honestly can't see the problem they're having.
Perhaps DT already had a more "established" image at that time, so he was allowed to do other things? I have no idea.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up