Andrew Garfield is very much a 21st century actor.
That’s not a commentary on his skill set or place in the current film landscape. It’s acknowledging the “Hacksaw Ridge” star’s grasp of modern speech codes.
Garfield knows which topics to address with extreme care, as well as which groups he must appease when speaking on certain subjects.
Case in point: Garfield’s oh, so cautious comments July 3 surrounding his work in Tony Kushner’s “Angels in America.” The actor recently discussed the London-based revival, and his responses caught fire with liberal-leaning outlets … meaning the mainstream press.
First, the actor confessed he wasn’t sure he was supposed to play a gay man in the first place.
Why?
He didn’t fully explain. He didn’t have to. In 2017, actors aren’t always allowed to play certain roles. Cisgender stars, for example, often draw fire for portraying trans characters.
“What right did I have to play this wonderful gay role?” the straight star said, trying to pre-emptively answer those critics. “I had to trust that it was the right thing and Tony [Kushner] had asked me and maybe if he’d asked me, it was the right thing … it was as about doing honor, doing justice and knowing my herstory.”
He even used the woke term “herstory,” which means seeing a subject through a feminist lens.
So far, so politically correct.
He later felt compelled to apologize for his heterosexuality. His preferences are no secret. He famously dated, and later broke up with, Oscar-winner Emma Stone.
“As far as I know, I am not a gay man … maybe I’ll have an awakening later in my life, which I’m sure will be wonderful and I’ll get to explore that part of the garden [as a gay man], but right now I’m secluded to my area, which is wonderful as well. I adore it.”
So Garfield isn’t gay, but he’s savvy enough to embrace a gender fluid future. He’s clearly done his homework … so far.
Then, the actor stepped in it.
“I am a gay man right now, just without the physical act” he said, referring to his preparation for the “Angels in America” role. That involved binge-watching “RuPaul’s Drag Race.”
Uh, oh.
Twitter exploded with predictable outrage. Gay users decried his “cultural appropriation.” The media piled on, too. Sites like People.com, Marie Claire UK and CNN.com published both Garfield’s comments and the fallout. Some of the reportage focused on select angry tweets. Others mentioned criticism from minor gay celebrities.
CNN, being CNN, went one step further. The outlet requested comment on the imbroglio from Garfield’s press representative.
Here’s an actor trying oh so hard to appease progressive culture, all but pleading to one day discover his inner gay man. And yet because he followed that up with a clunky comment, the Social Justice Warriors (and the press) pounced.
You cannot win this fight. Why bother?
An important note. CNN’s attempt to get reaction from Garfield apparently fell on deaf ears. The initial story didn’t get updated, and a good faith Google search found no subsequent stories with Garfield’s response to the furor.
Garfield apparently did the right thing. He ignored the press request and let the “story” die.
Even The Daily Beast, an increasingly liberal outlet, deemed the affair a true nothingburger.
The ‘Angels in America’ star said he’s ‘a gay man right now just without the physical act.’ It was a stupid, misguided joke. So why are we taking it so seriously?
Actually, it’s more than that. It’s another example of clickbait journalism and Twitter users who demand celebrities say precisely what they’re thinking on any given issue.
If Garfield takes away any lesson from this silliness, it’s that he shouldn’t try so hard to appease the SJW crowd. They’ll always find something to complain about.
Christian Toto is the editor of HollywoodInToto.com