Is There Really a Gay Hutt in 'Star Wars: The Clone Wars'?
Filed under: Action, Animation, Gay & Lesbian, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, New Releases, Warner Brothers, Newsstand, Remakes and Sequels
Another day, another George Lucas related kerfluffle. There's an, um, interesting new character in Star Wars: The Clone Wars named Ok, I made that last one up, but only just barely. Because according to MTV, Jabba's uncle, Ziro the Hutt "is a gay stereotype that makes what Jar Jar Binks represented to the island of Jamaica look subtle by comparison." It's not his look, design, or movements that push him into iffy waters, but the voice: Ziro speaks like Truman Capote.
Why? Because Lucas insisted on it. Director Dave Filoni was one of many among the crew that was caught off guard by the request. "Ziro, Jabba's uncle, originally spoke in Hutt-ese, like Jabba and then he had a different sluggish voice just like Jabba, and then George one day was watching it and said 'I want him to sound like Truman Capote.' He actually said that and we were like 'Wow!' It's a hybrid of it but the inspiration is definitely there on Capote. It's one of those things that takes him from being an interesting character and I think really does put him over the top and does something. He's a favorite among the crew here."
That doesn't mean he's gay, insists Filoni. "He's of questionable [sexuality] at least as a slug. They tell me that these slugs can be either male or female depending. That's something I guess that slugs and snails do. I wasn't aware of that but I have continuity experts that tell me these things."
Obviously, I haven't seen the film yet, but I'm hearing a warning siren go off in my head. The prequels were rife with questionable ethnic stereotypes, particularly those Neimoidians. (I had to look that up so that those continuity experts wouldn't knock me for merely saying "those Trade Federation guys.") Why does Lucas find such things to be "interesting" characterization? Is he simply unaware of how loaded and offensive it can be, or are we getting a glimpse of how he views race and sexual orientation on a galaxy that's not so far away? I hope it's the former ....
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
8-13-2008 @ 12:50PM
Mike said...
lol wut
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 1:11PM
totoro said...
Zero surprise here. Lucas is totally oblivious about how his portrayals are perceived. I don't think there is malice or intent (hence his sincere bewilderment at the charges), just cluelessness.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 1:24PM
Kurt said...
More evidence that George Lucas, for the sake of his own beloved franchises, needs to stop making movies.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 1:32PM
Erik Davis said...
Yeah, this character was just too campy and over the top. I appreciate the fact that they tried to add a few more layers to the Hutt clan (apart from what we've seen so far), but they just kinda took a dump on the characters. I mean, Jabba's nickname for his son is "punky muffin." Really? Jabba was supposed to be somewhat badass to the bone -- I didn't want to see him using the term "punky muffin."
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:07PM
Matt said...
Oh jesus...really?? Punky Muffin??
I just threw up in my mouth a little.
DAMN YOU LUCAS(film)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
8-13-2008 @ 1:46PM
Rich said...
Another example how Lucas really is crazy and needs to get out of the movie making business and stop butchering some beloved series.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 1:53PM
King Zilch said...
Wow. Just...*sigh*
I knew the Lucas-bashers were desperate, but this...man, you guys have completely left reality at this point. I'll grant that some of you may have been somewhere close to having a point with your fixation on the orange frog, but Jesus, put down the spice and GTFO my internets.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 1:56PM
Mr. R said...
The only thing that is truly gay here is "Starwars: The Clone Wars"...
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:10PM
Petro1734 said...
Ah yes, the monthly Lucus bashing post. Thought we weren't gonna get one this month. Sweet.
How is this any different then what Disney, Pixar, etc....do in their stories ? Yet where's the spotlight on that ?
"Is he simply unaware of how loaded and offensive it can be, or are we getting a glimpse of how he views race and sexual orientation on a galaxy that's not so far away?"
Way to try and create/propagate paranoia and negativity out of nothing. Watchin' a lot of Fox News are we ?
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 3:56PM
Elisabeth said...
"How is this any different then what Disney, Pixar, etc....do in their stories ? Yet where's the spotlight on that ?"
It's a lot different -- when has Pixar *ever* created a character who was a lisping, gay stereotype? Or a stereotype of any kind? If the grasshoppers in "A Bug's Life" had spoke with Asian accents to clarify they were the bad guys, you might have a point.
And Disney has been called on their mishandling of race portrayals -- the flap over "The Princess and the Frog" has been quite vocal (and has been reported here), to say nothing of complaints they've received on films like "Aladdin."
I don't really understand how questioning the stereotypes in Lucas' work is engaging in paranoia or propaganda -- but then I'm not one for blindly following a cult of personality.
8-13-2008 @ 2:10PM
Paul Arnette said...
FYI, I believe the character's name is: Ziro the Hutt, not Zero. That's how it's listed on IMDB anyway.
I find it ironic that given all Lucas' hatred for studio involvement in the creative process he has really become one of the few pro arguments for it in my mind.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:12PM
Matt said...
Zilch...huh?
Left reality how, exactly?
Stereotype or not, a Hutt sounding like Truman Capote is like the seventh circle of dumb.
I'm still going to see this (I can't help it) but Lucas has made a lot of decisions over the past 10 years...and right now I'd say 80% of them have been BAD, so I think maybe you are the one who needs to get off of MY internets...
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 7:14PM
King Zilch said...
"Left reality how, exactly?"
Because at this point, you Lucas-bashers have become this mindless cult; you're a legion of Ignatius J. Reillys who are so addicted to your reflexive hatred of George Lucas and anything he's involved with that you obsessively pore over every frame of every release in search of fresh material, so you can go on the internets and proclaim your manufactured outrage from the (virtual) mountaintops, each attempting to outdo everyone else with how much Lucas sucks, how bad your childhood was raped, how he should be banned from making movies/sued/killed.
It wouldn't be so bad if you ever seemed to have a point of view, or a valid, specific objection. This is just a bunch of sad, whiny obsessives who bitch just to bitch, lest they be accused of *gasp* LIKING any aspect of something with Lucasfilm's name on it, which has become the ultimate albatross of internet-unhipness. All it does is contribute to the image of geeks as a bunch of whiny nerds out of touch with reality. For the sake of our people, man, STOP IT.
"I'm still going to see this (I can't help it)"
You know what? Don't bother. As you people are so fond of pointing out, Lucas has enough money, and I would like to see and enjoy the movie without having to deal with a bunch of posers who think saying "nuke the fridge" makes them clever.
"so I think maybe you are the one who needs to get off of MY internets..."
Really? You're finishing with a "NO U?" What is this, 4chan?
8-13-2008 @ 2:14PM
Mike B said...
Jar-Jar was just annoying, and it sound like Zero will be too. While every artist and writer should be aware of how their work will be perceived, it is also unfair that they should pander to the extremely sensitive. True racism and bigotry should be rejected forcefully, but mild and unintentional offensiveness should be tolerated and forgiven. Those quick to judge merely draw negative criticism to themselves as being intolerant.
Lucas does not always make the best story and character decisions, but he has earned to right to make them and tell the stories he wants to.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 4:08PM
Elisabeth said...
I don't believe in pandering to the overly sensitive either -- and usually, if there's a protest by a special interest group, it incites me to SEE the movie rather than boycott it. But I think Lucas' tendency towards this kind of "Hee hee, it's funny that he talks gay!" character is worthy of discussion, since it's something he keeps returning to.
I'm not going to scream that I'm offended or anything -- I'm a straight white woman and that would just be lame. But I'm disappointed with what Lucas' idea of "deep characterization" is which seems to consist of creating a really stereotypical voice. I *know* he's better than that -- the original Star Wars trilogy, despite the Nazi imagery, didn't stoop to that kind of silliness. There HAS to be a way to make a Hutt uncle interesting without making him sound like Truman Capote. I don't even have a problem with making him sexually ambiguous. Maybe instead of having chained slave girls, he has slave guys, or lives with another male Hutt. Why not?
Just because Lucas has "earned" the right doesn't mean he *should*...
8-15-2008 @ 7:30PM
Ramone said...
"Lucas does not always make the best story and character decisions, but he has earned to right to make them and tell the stories he wants to."
How has George Lucas earned that right? He has made two good movies (American Grafitti and Empire Strikes Back) and a lot of crap. The only other good movies that he has made is when he collaborates with talented people (Indiana Jones Series in particular). Its ridiculous that this chinless zero gets this kind of devotion when he has only made a handful of movies. The only reason that Lucas gets to make anything at all is because the first two Star Wars movies proved the studios wrong and he has been riding that success for thirty years.
8-13-2008 @ 2:15PM
Matt said...
ah yes, Petro's weekly comment defending Lucas.
None of you (unless you are a member of the 501st or something) is a bigger fan of SW than I am. I mean that.
That's why it BOTHERS me so much when Lucas and co., butcher these stories.
I could care less about the stereotype stuff, really. It just sounds like parody...and i was hoping for a serious, cool, animated Star Wars story. Not Jar Jar part deux.
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:55PM
Petro1734 said...
Monthly, Matt, monthly. I'd never get anything done if it were weekly : )
My intent is really not so much to defend him, but just to represent the other side of it.
I love Star Wars, but I don't love EVERYTHING Lucus has done with it. I'm not one of those "he-can-do-no-wrong" kinda people....cuz yo, Han shot first, no doubt......but damn man, most of the criticism nowadays comes off as just some baseless pile-on bashing.
8-13-2008 @ 2:31PM
Erik Davis said...
I'm not allowed to review it till the end of the week, but I will defend the film in that the battle scenes are pretty cool. There are some nice POV shots and OTS shots of Clones running into battle that, honestly, were pretty intense. One thing Filoni and crew got right was less political talk and more fighting. Definitely LOTS of fighting.
The rest ....
Reply
8-13-2008 @ 2:55PM
Mr. R said...
that's what I think about the new video games, they have cool stuff. I would have sat over a two hour CGI full story of The Force Unleashed way over yet another Clone Wars story with those ridiculous cardboard characters. George Lucas comes across to his audience as someone who is funny for a while, then makes a joke that bombs and continues to want them to laugh with an on going, get it? Get it? Clone Wars, get it? It's annoying.