Rumor Patrol: Laverne Cox to star in Rocky Horror Reboot? *UPDATED

October 21, 2015

laverne cox rocky horror

Transgender forums are abuzz with the rumor that Laverne Cox has signed to play Frank N. Furter in the FOX television remake of the Rocky Horror Picture Show, after the rumor was posted as fact by CBS News Las Vegas and picked up by gossip Perez Hilton.

CBS News Report

CBS News Report

GenderTrender has tracked down the original source of the story, which consists solely of the following Facebook post from SROMedia:

Source of rumor

Source of rumor

Cox as the “sweet transvestite from Transylvania” is plausible: Cox started out as a dancer, and earned a bachelor’s degree in dance. Cox also attempted to launch a music career consisting of sexually explicit songs based on the theme of “sexual objectification and exploitation”, particularly sexual “self-objectification”. You can read Cox’s original musical thesis here:

laverne cox music

However, reports of Laverne’s singing abilities have not been unanimously positive.

The upcoming FOX Television remake will follow the original script, and will be released to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the film.

*UPDATED: Billboard Magazine has CONFIRMED the rumor. Laverne Cox will star as the iconic transvestite in the upcoming production.*

images

85 Responses to “Rumor Patrol: Laverne Cox to star in Rocky Horror Reboot? *UPDATED”

  1. dejavublonde Says:

    the name won’t be triggering for cox? o wait, that ship would have sailed already.

    from wiki : Frank is something of a mad scientist, bent on creating the perfect life form to serve as his sexual plaything. He seems to be the leader of the Transylvanians on Earth. Frank is mainly concerned with himself and lacks the ability to see the consequences of his behaviour.

    sounds like perfect casting

  2. GallusMag Says:

    RUMOR CONFIRMED by Billboard. Post updated.

  3. GallusMag Says:

    Fantastic opportunity for Laverne!

  4. dejavublonde Says:

    but seriously, aren’t they always screeching about trans are unicorn angels who just want to ignore their shameful penises and would never ever EVER do anything wrong AND the media portrayals that show any of that are literally killing 24 million trans a day? isn’t frank a trans SEXUAL, a cross dressing pervert who revels in his perversion and loves his penis? is a murderer and deviant? and… a man? the cognitive dissonance is disturbing.

    or, will they totally rewrite the role to fit the current ‘scientifically proven’ agenda?

  5. Susan Nunes Says:

    At least he isn’t miscast in the part.

  6. Bea Says:

    He’s a homosexual transgender not an autogynephile, so obviously he can laugh at himself and play the part of a sweet transvestite! The white, autogynephile, military/IT, lolicon “T-girls” are gonna crucify their little TWOC token for this internalized transmisogyny!

    • dbrvnk Says:

      Basically.

      The trans people at my city’s main trans/qu**r youth group are pretty much divided between the ones who dress up and do the callbacks and whatever at the annual rocky horror showing, and the ones who write incoherent angry editorials on facebook about how transphobic and problematic the other ones are.

      I’ve never seen the thing so I can’t comment, lol

  7. CisWomanPrivilege Says:

    Waiting for the media to call them out on the use of the word transvestite and how is it “different” from transgender in 3…2…

    • GallusMag Says:

      Not single LGBT website has posted on this yet. LOLOL. They are SPEECHLESS. lolololololinfinity

      • Bea Says:

        Seriously? Go Laverne! Stick it to the fetishists with your lady-boy self! He’s really just a lifestyle gay drama enthusiast. Laverne is always talking about how he used to be a boy, bla bla bla…I bet the transactivists will turn on him.

    • Susan Nunes Says:

      “Transvestite” needs to make a comeback because the vast majority of these trans are men with crossdressing fetishes, regardless of whether they have had their bodies mutilated. Everybody knows what a transvestite is but the public is still confused about what a “transgender” person is. Transvestites are men with a sexual kink. Bruce Jenner is the classic case. So is Edward D. Wood, Jr. “Transgenderism” just muddies it all up and on purpose. There is with the male trans no meaningful difference anymore between what used to be called transsexuals and what were called transvestites. A few might be self-loathing gays who were pressured to “transition” and a few have body image disorders, but the rest are just average Joes with a sexual fetish.

      • prozac Says:

        Actually I believe they both fall under the transgender umbrella. Yes, cross dressers are transgender, and therefore men who have a sexual fetish dressing as women must be allowed in women’s change rooms. Most people don’t realise that transvestites can lay claim to this, btw. It’s a good way to get people to listen when you are discussing transgender issues with people.

      • wildwomyn Says:

        “Transgender” is used to describe anyone who doesn’t conform to gender standards. Transvestite is a sexual fetish, and putting it under the transgender umbrella doesn’t erase the meaning of transvestite. It’s all Orwellian wordsmithing.

  8. nemesister Says:

    Cox claimed it was too triggering to play his pre-transition character on Orange, but he’s going to show his penis in the standard rhps panties Frank wears? Really? And either bind down the breast implants or play Frank as an autogynephile who went as far as to get moobs? Wow.

    If he really does this I’ll applaud him for finally getting a sense of humor. But Tim Curry’s platforms will be hard shoes to fill.

    • Akira Says:

      Yeah. Does Cox think he’s a woman playing a male transvestite, or does he identify with the character more than he’d ever make public?

  9. GallusMag Says:

  10. GallusMag Says:

    Genius casting. I wonder if the suits at FOX sat around and said “Is there anyone we can get that the vocal transgender community can’t complain about?” BINGO.

    • michelle Says:

      oh I am sure the tranny brigade will soon be up in arms at a tranny having been tabbed to play a “sweet transvestite from Transexual Transylvia.”

      Hopefully this becomes the Hollywood peak trans moment where they realize that nothing is ever going to satisfy the cocks in frocks…

  11. silverside Says:

    As a performer, Cox always struck me as kind of wooden and one-dimensional. This particularly stands out in “Orange” as the other actors are so amazing, and play their characters as such complex human beings. Cox just comes across as tightly controlled and unemotional. So not having high expectations.

  12. Magdalena Z. Says:

    I’m surprised they haven’t condemned “Rocky Horror” as transphobic, to be honest. Doesn’t Frankenfurter get it on with Janet and Brad? Yuk, I feel sorry for whoever gets cast in those roles. While Mr. Laverne is every bit as womanly as Tim Curry, (snicker) he’ll never match Tim’s charm, persona, or creepy cuteness. I for one wish they’d gone with Bruce Jenner as I am a fan or horror movies.

    • kesher Says:

      Occasionally I’ll see rumblings, some upstart trans kid or humorless straight transitioner trying to claim Rocky Horror is “transmisogynistic”, but the author/creator being “genderqueer” and male tends to shut down any criticism real quick.

    • Meg Says:

      This comment for the win.

      “Yuk, I feel sorry for whoever gets cast in those roles.”

      I was just thinking the same thing.

  13. Imelda_66 Says:

    One of my trans students tried to convince me that transvestite was a slur, and not only that, but that it was equivalent to the n-word. I don’t think so, honey. This was a few years ago, and my first encounter with the trans language police. I did not back down (though the topic did not come up again in the course).

  14. dejavublonde Says:

    I AM LAUGHING SO HARD at the comments on the articles I’ve seen on this- when there’s not complete *crickets* and people (the usual cheerleading SJW’s) actually comment (about 1/3 as many as on any other cox article where I’m reading) if you close your eyes for a moment you can LITERALLY picture the commenters scrambling.

    You can picture a record-scratch moment in their minds as they desperately try to put the usual catch-phrases of political- correctness bullshit together in the EXACT right order- so that when/if the trans come out of the woodwork with a decisive opinion on the matter the commenters (cheerleading SJW’s) earlier statements sound like they are lining up with the majority decision.

    Because they are so wrapped up in being told what to do/say/think that can’t come out and say what they are trying so hard to tiptoe around by stuttering things like they have a big question mark balloon over their heads.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Day two and total crickets in the LGBT press. The biggest name trans activist (after Bruce) on the planet has been signed to play the lead in an iconic role, the LEAD, mind you, and…….crickets. hahahha!

      • dejavublonde Says:

        a bit earlier today i saw it on pink news, one comment. on jbel, maybe 150 at the time. usually at that time tjere would be 5000 ‘yaaaassssss’, ‘my world’, ‘goddess’ comments. but, the poor dears seem befuddled

  15. SaraClue Says:

    Laverne is really more of a Janet than a Frank N. Furter.

  16. sellmaeth Says:

    I, for one, really like the decision to cast a transvestite as a transvestite.

    The Hobbit movies caused me so much cognitive dissonance what with casting a man who tells rape jokes as a cute little hobbit. (Besides, I really wanted to see the movies. But not give any money to an asshole.)

    For easily confused people like me, it makes life much easier if people are just cast as what they are.

    • GallusMag Says:

      “Cast trans people in trans roles!”They scream for years. Then when they get what they want: “Not THAT role!” lololol

      • Oceans Says:

        Lol!! I love that.

        No doubt it will be society’s fault if this doesn’t make billions of dollars. Not like a lot of reboots have been super-profitable.

  17. stchauvinism Says:

    FOX television is making a made for TV remake of Rocky Horror? If it’s not god awful, I will be pleasantly surprised.

    • michelle Says:

      Personally, I do not believe it will do well, not because of the casting but because it was a movie that BECAME a cult classic due to midnight movie screenings and the audience participation. The few times I have seen the guide listing it aired on the small screen, I just didn’t see the allure and damned sure didn’t care to sit through it…

      • wildwomyn Says:

        The “theater” of RHPS can’t be duplicated through the small screen. Toast, water, and recitation of lines is all part of the experience. It played at the Key Theater in Georgetown for years, midnight show.

        I think it ridiculous that LC is playing Dr. Frank. LC considers himself a woman, not a transvestite, so the casting is suspect.

        RHPS is a cult classic, and it’s no wonder it’s never been remade.

  18. shediogenes Says:

    Social outing. Go to theatre. Buy ticket. Tske your seat in theatre. Throw weiners at image of Laverne Cox as he portrays Frank N. Furter on the large screen. Also, bring rice (to throw), water pistol, newspaper, rolls of toilet paper (to throw). Don’t judge me, but, I think I’ma hafta go.

  19. GallusMag Says:

    FIRST TRANSGENDER ACTOR IN THE LEAD ROLE IN A MAINSTREAM PRODUCTION.
    What? No congrats tweet from Jenny Boylan?
    From Bruce?
    From Christine Kahrl?
    Janet Mock?
    Paris Lees?
    Fallon Fox?
    Amnesia Dawn?
    Stalker Sandeen?
    Chad Molloy?
    Mark Keisling?

  20. stchauvinism Says:

    Comments on Pink News are pretty funny.

    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/10/22/laverne-cox-cast-as-dr-frank-n-furter-in-rocky-horror-remake/comments/#disqus_thread

    “Kat • 4 hours ago
    strange choice, trans woman playing a transvestite with junk on show…. just to confuse society even more at what a trans woman is/was!

    Mikey • 4 hours ago
    I don’t understand.
    Why use a woman to play the role of a male transvestite?”

    • GallusMag Says:

      Queerty just posted something. They used the same video I linked to in my post.

      • stchauvinism Says:

        I wonder who will play Rocky? Maybe they will cast a transgender female actor. Regardless of casting, a made for TV remake of Rocky Horror is just wrong, wrong, wrong in all directions.

      • OldPolarBear Says:

        Melissa McEwan at Shakesville is THRILLED. She is a huge LC fan and totally all in with the whole queer/trans movement. Her commenters, not that there are many, are kind of mixed in their reactions. You could even say some of them are a little confused.

      • GallusMag Says:

        LOL> “As a cis woman, it is 100% not my job to decide what is or isn’t okay in portrayal of trans women in pop culture, but…”

      • Meg Says:

        The fawning and seriousness at Shakesville is beyond pretentious. They’re kidding me, right? This blast from the past was never meant to be an awareness campaign. They do realize that incredibly stupid movies have been made since forever? Right? Right. Now they’re hoping it will CHANGE to meet their criteria of acceptability? Someone correct me if I’m wrong but RHPS was never meant to be acceptable. And no, I didn’t walk away from it feeling that bi people are predatory. It’s like they pull these bizarre arguments out of thin air to placate the transwomen. FFS.

      • kesher Says:

        “I didn’t walk away from it feeling that bi people are predatory.”

        I don’t think it says bi people are predatory; I think it says men are. And I agree with that. I also agree that a man “identifying” as a woman won’t make him any less predatory, which is supported by evidence. Transphobic, transmisogynistic evidence.


  21. I’ve heard from Rocky Horror Show, but I never went. Below is the plot from Wikipedia. Dr. Frank N. Furter creates Rocky in his laboratory.

    “A criminologist narrates the tale of the newly engaged couple Brad Majors and Janet Weiss who find themselves lost and with a flat tire on a cold and rainy late November evening. Seeking a telephone, the couple walk to a nearby castle where they discover a group of strange and outlandish people who are holding an Annual Transylvanian Convention. They are soon swept into the world of Dr. Frank N. Furter, a self-proclaimed “sweet transvestite from Transsexual, Transylvania”. The ensemble of convention attendees also includes servants Riff Raff, his sister Magenta, and a groupie named Columbia.

    In his lab, Frank claims to have discovered the “secret to life itself”. His creation, Rocky, is brought to life. The ensuing celebration is soon interrupted by Eddie (an ex-delivery boy, both Frank and Columbia’s ex-lover, as well as partial brain donor to Rocky) who rides out of a deep freeze on a motorcycle. In a jealous rage, Frank corners him and kills him with an ice axe. He then departs with Rocky to a bridal suite.

    Brad and Janet are shown to separate bedrooms where each is visited and seduced by Frank, who poses as Brad (when visiting Janet) and then as Janet (when visiting Brad). Janet, upset and emotional, wanders off to look for Brad, who she discovers, via a television monitor, is in bed with Frank. She then discovers Rocky, cowering in his birth tank, hiding from Riff Raff, who has been tormenting him. While tending to his wounds, Janet becomes intimate with Rocky, as Magenta and Columbia watch from their bedroom monitor.

    After discovering that his creation is missing, Frank returns to the lab with Brad and Riff Raff, where Frank learns that an intruder has entered the building. Brad and Janet’s old high school science teacher, Dr. Everett Scott, has come looking for his nephew, Eddie. Frank suspects that Dr. Scott investigates UFOs for the government. Upon learning of Brad and Janet’s connection to Dr. Scott, Frank suspects them of working for him. Frank, Dr. Scott, Brad, and Riff Raff then discover Janet and Rocky together under the sheets in Rocky’s birth tank, upsetting Frank and Brad. Magenta interrupts the reunion by sounding a massive gong and stating that dinner is prepared.

    Rocky and the guests share an uncomfortable dinner, which they soon realize has been prepared from Eddie’s mutilated remains. Janet runs screaming into Rocky’s arms and is slapped and chased through the halls of the castle by a jealous Frank. Janet, Brad, Dr. Scott, Rocky, and Columbia all meet in Frank’s lab, where Frank captures them with the Medusa Transducer, transforming them into nude statues. They are then forced to perform a live cabaret floor show with Frank as the leader.

    Riff Raff and Magenta interrupt the performance, revealing themselves and Frank to be aliens from the planet Transsexual in the galaxy of Transylvania. They stage a coup and announce a plan to return to their home world. In the process, they kill Columbia, Rocky, and Frank, who has “failed his mission.” They release Brad, Janet, and Dr. Scott, then depart by lifting off in the castle itself. The survivors are then left crawling in the dirt, and the narrator concludes that the human race is equivalent to insects crawling on the planet’s surface.”

    All the creepy crawly things being created in Dr. Frank N. Furter’s lab kind of reminds me of all the ghastly “transitioning” of children, “facial feminization” for men, and the True Trans Titanium. Seriously, drilling holes in the pelvis of women to attach a titanium whatever. Now, that is true horror.

    https://gendertrender.wordpress.com/2015/06/22/true-trans-titanium/

  22. belinda Says:

    Could be worse–she could be playing Janet.

  23. GallusMag Says:

    Archiving:
    ———————————————-

    LaVerne Cox to play Dr. Frank N. Furter in Fox’s “Rocky Horror Picture Show” Reboot (lasvegas.cbslocal.com)
    submitted 1 day ago by schererer
    80 commentsshare
    all 80 comments
    sorted by: best
    [–]schererer[S] 76 points 1 day ago
    IMO, I think this role belongs to a man. Casting a trans woman as an over the top “Sweet Transvestite” only equates trans women to being men in drag, which could potentially undo some of the progress trans people have made in the last few years.
    Thoughts?
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]tgjer 46 points 1 day ago
    I don’t know. My first reaction is serious discomfort with the idea of casting a trans woman as Frankie, but this is Laverne Cox. Her work as an actress has been admirable, as has her work as a public advocate for the rights and dignity of trans people.
    I don’t think Laverne would take this role unless she thought it had merit, or if she thought it would equate trans women with men in drag. While I’m still uneasy with the idea I’ll trust her judgment for now.
    This also doesn’t sound like it’s a straight remake of RHPS. It’s a two hour television reboot, the Rocky Horror Picture Show Event, a special in honor of the 40th anniversary of the movie. It will be interesting to see it differs from and reflects upon the original.
    **Edit: took out unnecessary capitalization of the V in Laverne’s name. The article capitalizes it, but nothing else I can find about her does.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]schererer[S] 11 points 1 day ago
    That’s a very good point! I’ll try to hold judgement until we see more of this reboot. It’s really hard to shake the feeling of uneasiness but like you said, she is a very admirable public transgender advocate and probably has pretty good judgement. We’ll see.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]burnedblackbear 10 points 1 day ago
    Initially I am uncomfortable with it. She is making the choice to do this, and who knows, maybe she’s taking the role cause it would be fun. Or she likes how the director is planning on handling the film. Maybe she’s taking the role for empowerment reasons, which imo would be pretty awesome.
    I guess we gotta wait. I think she’s going to be trailblazing.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]dryerchapstick 8 points 1 day ago
    Yeah I’m not sure how to feel about this.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]2Weird2Live2Rare2DieThere’s 10 types of folk; those who’re binary & those who aren’t 13 points 1 day ago
    There is absolutely no way this can be done in a way that isn’t a slow fat pitch right down the middle to every transmisogynist on the planet. The best case scenario is that they rewrite it until it isn’t fucking Rocky Horror so as to avoid being problematic about Laverne being trans. Frank isn’t a man, isn’t a transvestite, isn’t an alien, isn’t a cannibal, isn’t a murderer, isn’t a Caligulan deviant of the highest order. Such egregious steps would serve only to heighten discomfort around and hostility toward trans women. “She ruined Rocky Horror! This is all transgenders want; to make the world fit their whims no matter how much damage it causes!”
    Or! They don’t change a thing, and the most visible woman in a community trying desperately to get “actors should play their own gender and trans history” taken seriously will strut around onscreen as a man. Not only as a man, for all the damage it does to the aforementioned position: a man in a dress. You know, that thing people accuse us of being every fucking day of our fucking lives. Not only a man in a dress: a man in a dress who literally eats human beings, commits brutal axe murders, rapes his houseguests, and is — in more ways than one — utterly inhuman. You know, the sort of representation we’ve received ubiquitously in mass media since we had a fucking term for it. Either way she’s tacitly approving of the Rocky Horror of old by signing on to the project, let alone being “excited to be a part of” its legacy.
    I feel sick.
    Looking forward to Laverne’s future film career as Buffalo Bill in the remake of Silence of the Lambs, Norman Bates in another remake of Psycho, and Ray Finkle in the remake of Ace Ventura.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]friendlyskeletongirl 5 points 17 hours ago
    I wouldn’t be so hard on Laverne, but this whole scenario really does seem very questionable, especially when you point out the only two ways it can really go.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]IsleyOnAisTranssexual? So fetch. 0 points 13 hours ago
    Why? She’s educated and she chose to put on this ambassador role as a leader of the transgender community. She’s been a key part of the transgender visibility movement, and she just took a gigantic shit on it.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]friendlyskeletongirl 4 points 13 hours ago
    I don’t often say this, but I really think we should wait to see at least something about the film other than this casting. It’s a reboot, a lot could change.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]aspiringtobeme 4 points 14 hours ago
    Looking forward to Laverne’s future film career as Buffalo Bill in the remake of Silence of the Lambs, Norman Bates in another remake of Psycho, and Ray Finkle in the remake of Ace Ventura.
    Boom.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]averygirlygirl 7 points 1 day ago
    I agree. A transvestite is a cross dresser. Why would any trans female even remotely want to play the role of a cross dresser???
    That said, it is acting so I guess we can suspend reality for a bit… And we DO whine when cis people play trans people so a trans person playing a cis person shouldn’t be an issue for us…
    But it feels wrong. Maybe a trans MAN playing the role would be good, but A woman playing a cross dressing man doesn’t work in my mind
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]selornBi n Trans 7 points 23 hours ago
    I think there’s a difference between a trans woman playing a cis woman or man, and playing a ‘sweet transvestite from Transsexual Transylvania’ who embodies a TON of typical tropes(hypersexual, violent, insane, etc).
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]averygirlygirl 2 points 17 hours ago
    See, a transvestite is a crossdresser. So if a woman plays the role, unless it is rewritten and gender bent (which would be really cool), she becomes a sweet ordinary girl for ordinary ordinaria.
    The whole point to the character was the taboo of the crossdressing and the surrounding kink and flexible sexuality.
    A woman playing the role doesn’t have the same ‘taboo’ when it comes to Rocky…
    Granted, times have changed. The naughtiness of the bisexuality is normal life today.. But that was all part of the central theme of the film.
    If Frank is played by a woman, wearing lingerie is sexy, but not taboo, she is certainly not a transvestite as she isn’t cross dressing- she’s wearing her own damn clothes! – and the ‘twisted’ desire of Frank towards Rocky becomes a straight relationship.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]averygirlygirl 7 points 1 day ago
    I’d far sooner be Magenta or Janet. I have never fantasized about playing a man in any form, cross dressed or not.
    I guess I’m weird that way.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]averygirlygirl 0 points 1 day ago
    Dressing up as a man, yes. Dressing up as a man dressed up as a woman is twisted. I just polled 10 cis friends and all agreed that having a woman play frank is dumb. I didn’t mention anything about trans or about Laverne… Just the concept of a woman playing the role defeats the entire point of the character.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]A_Sexy_Muffin -1 points 1 day ago
    Are hormones supposed to make you more accepting of non-binary gender identities? Funny…I didn’t see that listed as a side effect anywhere. I don’t think they need your forgiveness to feel validated in anyway.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]bro_before_ho 4 points 1 day ago
    While I haven’t seen the movie, it seems silly. Nonetheless I can’t see Laverne Cox doing any acting that would do disserve to trans people. So before calling the whole thing “silly and ridiculous” I’ll see what she does.
    But on first impression, it does seem… questionable.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]TooLateForMeTFtrans-lesbian 8 points 1 day ago
    Gandhi said:
    First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
    We were ignored for ages.
    The free-love hippie era in the ’60s started to change that, opening up society’s awareness to the existence of LGBT people. Result? Mockery. Rocky Horror’s Dr. Frankenfurter is clear mockery. Being the first mass-culture representation of a trans person available to our society, it kicks off the ridicule phase. (It was also clearly confused on the distinction between gender identity and sexual orientation, though that’s to be expected within a cultural context that barely understood homosexuality either.)
    Today, we’re in the middle of the third stage. We’re being fought by cultural conservatives who now feel free to be open with their bigotry, fought by legal and organizational structures that discriminate against us, et cetera.
    On the one hand, we’re almost there! If they’re fighting us, then we’re about to win!
    But viewed in this framing, rebooting Rocky Horror at all is to hearken back to the beginnings of the ridicule stage. So yes. It could potentially undo some progress.
    However, I have to say that I’m not at all surprised, Fox being what it is, that it would be Fox to do the reboot. If ever there was a media machine that was invested in trying to drag society backwards, it’s those small-minded, atavistic little shits over at Fox.
    It’s always possible that Fox will give a more sensitive treatment today than the original Rocky Horror gave in 1975. Shouldn’t judge without seeing it, I suppose. But nothing in that press release indicates that they’re attempting to update the messaging along with the production values, so I can’t say I’m really hopeful.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]inpuMAAB KS:5 BSRI:M30F70A64 2 points 19 hours ago
    Fox being what it is,
    Is Fox in general right-leaning, or just Fox News? I mean, The Simpsons is made by Fox.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Wubbledaddy [score hidden] 10 hours ago
    I agree that this reboot is a step in the wrong direction for LGBT equality but for a different reason. Casting a trans woman as a cross-dressing man leaves a really bad taste in my mouth for obvious reasons.
    However, despite agreeing you on that, basically everything you said about the original movie is objectively wrong. For starters, Frank is not a trans-woman, he’s a flamboyant bisexual man that wears feminine clothing (and fun fact: the author of Rocky Horror was a flamboyant bisexual man who recently came out as nb/trans). And even so, Frank’s rampant sexuality is clearly portrayed as a positive thing in the movie.
    Also, even if the original movie was anti-trans (which it isn’t) it didn’t become popular at all until the late 70’s/early 80’s, and even then the only people who had heard of it were liberal high school/college students and the LGBT community (who were not the people discriminating). It didn’t become a well known thing until the late 90’s and it didn’t become “mainstream” until the that Glee episode in like 2012. So even if it was transphobic, it would not have had any sort of strong negative impact until pretty recently. And the impact Rocky Horror has had is literally the opposite of negative. It’s provided an accepting environment for LGBT (and anyone else) for 40 years.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Kurridevilwing 6 points 1 day ago
    The free-love hippie era in the ’60s started to change that, opening up society’s awareness to the existence of LGBT people. Result? Mockery. Rocky Horror’s Dr. Frankenfurter is clear mockery.
    wat?
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]hazzard66 8 points 1 day ago
    THANK YOU! People love ignoring that RHPS was CREATED by a nonbinary trans person.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]TooLateForMeTFtrans-lesbian 8 points 1 day ago
    I know it was created by a nonbinary trans person. I don’t care who it was created by. That’s completely irrelevant. The portrayal, regardless of its creator, is a mockery of transfolk.
    I can’t speculate on Richard O’Brien’s motives in writing that character the way he did. I’m not him. What I can do is evaluate the character on its own merits, in the broader social context of its creation. When I do, I find it to be a deeply problematic portrayal.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]TooLateForMeTFtrans-lesbian 5 points 1 day ago
    What I mean is that the free love thing in the 60s allowed LGBT people to start coming out of the closet, where they had previously hidden since forever.
    That, in turn, made society aware, for the first time, of LGBT people in a way that it hadn’t been before. Prior to that, the awareness didn’t go much beyond hushed statements “oh, hey, that guy’s a fairy, don’t hire him” and whatever. It wasn’t an open acknowledgment. But after the 60s, society couldn’t really pretend that LGBT-ism wasn’t a real thing anymore. Society had to actually look at it.
    So we passed from being ignored, to being ridiculed, because that’s society’s first reaction. Ha ha ha ha. Look at those fucked-up people who aren’t doing it right.
    Rocky Horror, in the way it presents same-sex orientation and transsexuality, is a direct product of that transition from ignoring to ridiculing. As such, yeah, it’s straight-up mockery.
    Dr. Frankenfurter is the worst caricature of what it means to be trans. /u/Wubbledaddy put it quite well:
    Frank is a psychotic pansexual (with gay preference) cis man who likes to wear make-up and lingerie but is still very much a man. He’s literally what transphobic people think trans women are.
    It’s ridicule, plain and simple. I defy anyone to watch that movie, either in its original context or in the context of the cult-film it has become, and come away from it thinking that Dr. F is in any way a sensitive, nuanced, realistic, or serious portrayal of the trans experience.
    He’s not. He’s a caricature. Caricatures are exaggerations that exist to highlight the “distinctive elements” of their source material, nearly always for the purpose of poking fun at it.
    I don’t know how else to put it. It’s ridicule, plain and simple. This seems so obvious to me on the face of it that I’m a little surprised I have to spend so many words explaining why it’s that way.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Wubbledaddy 5 points 1 day ago
    Wow that’s taking my quote out of context. In my full comment I tall about how the movie makes it very clear that Frank is not trans at all and shouldn’t be thought of as such. Have you actually seen Rocky Horror? And if you have, did you see it at a midnight showing? Because Rocky Horror fans are the most accepting and open-minded people I’ve ever met. Also, why don’t you do yourself a favor and look up the writer of Rocky Horror (spoiler alert: he’s trans).
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]SpaceVioletta 3 points 1 day ago
    I don’t agree that it’s equating it. Some people might well perceive it that way, but that doesn’t mean that was the intent. If they haven’t stated that they’re casting her as that because they think being transgender is the same as being a man in drag, I’m inclined not to assume ill intent.
    Besides, though I don’t know much about Laverne Cox, from what I do know I don’t think she would take a role if she thought it was being given as an insult.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Justice_Prince 4 points 1 day ago
    My guess is that they were afraid that a crossdresser would be problematic so they’re trying to get ahead if it by rewriting the character as an actual trans-woman. IDK if that’s the best call, but I’m guessing that’s their logic.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]VolcanicVaranus 2 points 22 hours ago
    That’s seems fairly believable – that the cultural climate toward trans women has taken such a turn that we are now “more acceptable” than a man in drag.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]schererer[S] 2 points 1 day ago
    When I use the word equate, I’m not necessarily implying that there’s any ill intent. It’s just my way of saying “because of this decision, transgender women will be equal to men in drag”. I don’t think that a decision like this would made from anything other than ignorance — UNLESS they handle this with tact and it turns out to be very respectful of trans women! It’s hard to tell what it’s going to be like.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]SpaceVioletta -2 points 1 day ago
    Well, is she a woman or is she not? For most transgender people, as far as I have ever read, the goal is to be as much the same as anyone else of their target gender as they can possibly be. If that is the case, then isn’t making it into a transgender thing here going against that? If it were any other women being cast as a man in drag, would it still be a problem?
    Maybe it sounds like unfortunate implications if you linger on transgenderism, but it seems to me like if she’s treated like any other woman there’s not a problem..do you know what I mean? I’m not sure if I’m being clear enough.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]tgjer 17 points 1 day ago
    Cisgender women don’t generally have to worry about having their status as women denied. If a RHPS production cast a cisgender woman as Frankie, the show might get complaints of playing RHPS as “straight” because the role originated as a homosexual icon from an era when that was extremely transgressive, but there’s no real risk that people watching the show will become confused as to the difference between as cisgender woman and a homosexual man in heels.
    Trans women don’t have that luxury. The audience won’t treat Laverne Cox as if she were any other woman. Casting a trans woman in a role originally written as a homosexual man in lacy lingerie does carry a significant risk that the audience will react by conflating trans women and homosexual men in drag. This is already a widely believed misconception, and casting a well known trans woman as such an iconic and popular homosexual male drag character carries serious risk of encouraging and spreading that misconception.
    That said, I trust Laverne Cox’s judgment. If she thinks this is a role worth taking, hopefully that means they are doing something different with this production that highlights the difference between trans women and gay men in drag. But I’m still very hesitant about the whole idea.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]SpaceVioletta 2 points 1 day ago
    Hmm..that’s true. But like you say, if she thinks it’s worth taking, it’s probably fine. Although I have to ask, if the character is a gay man in drag, why would they cast a woman? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to cast a man and then dress him up?
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]tgjer 2 points 1 day ago
    Do you mean why would they cast Laverne as a character originally written as a gay man in drag, or why a RHPS production would cast a cisgender woman as that character?
    For the former, I don’t know. I’m hoping they have a good reason.
    For the latter, my college RHPS production cast a cis woman as Frankie because she really really wanted the part, and was really good at it. We didn’t have any cisgender men trying out for the role who could dance or sing half as well as her.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]selornBi n Trans 2 points 23 hours ago
    That’s the issue, isn’t it? It’s either that they see no problem with this, or that they’re reworking RHPS to make the character a woman. I’m not sure which is more troubling though: not having a problem with such a frankly confusing casting choice which risks reigniting old stereotypes of trans women being a man in a dress, or presenting a trans woman as a depraved lunatic(which isn’t exactly a rare trope).
    Maybe though…maybe she’s playing a female transvestite? E.g. This is the drag king version of the character? I guess I could see it working in a way…
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Almafeta 0 points 1 day ago
    Considering the network that approved this show, that was probably the intended effect.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]FlorencePantsTransfeminine 14 points 1 day ago
    I am… quite torn on this.
    On one hand it does seem to send the message that transgender = transvestite…
    BUT on the other hand, I am heavily in favor of seeing Laverne Cox in pretty much anything because she is amazing and wonderful…
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]X-pert74Transgender woman 7 points 1 day ago
    This seems… very unbelievable. I kinda wanna wait until I hear more info to see if this is actually true or not.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]Yadzil 2 points 1 day ago
    I agree. I feel like this is something she wouldn’t do.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]hoping4rein 10 points 1 day ago
    This seems like the sort of thing that will get her(and other trans women by extension) put into the RuPaul category in most peoples’ minds.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]VolcanicVaranus 1 point 22 hours ago
    Unless (as another commenter pointed out) her character is re-written to be a trans woman instead of a transvestite. I dunno, just a thought.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Maddicakes 7 points 1 day ago
    I don’t get why “we” are still nominating leaders.
    Over and over these kinds of people have betrayed and backstabbed the community. One trans person can’t represent even half of the community.
    “We” can’t just nominate one person with one perspective and pretend they speak for an entire spectrum of people from a huge range of situations and ideals.
    This absurd idea of standing behind Cox is just terrible. Stop pretending like Cox is the end-all-be-all trans spokesperson and call her out for her bullshit (eg: this).
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]cheese93007 [score hidden] 9 hours ago
    So many people in the LGBT community who are otherwise not afraid of calling out bullshit suddenly claim up (and even endorse) when it’s one of their sacred cows at issue. Saw this a lot in the bi community when Azealia Banks was in the news recently. If some gay dude was doing this he would rightfully be pilloried in the wider community for it. Just because you personally like Laverne and are a fan doesn’t mean this isn’t problematic. And it’s problematic. Full stop
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Heyitskristin918 6 points 1 day ago
    I’m glad to see I’m not alone in feeling a lot of transphobia from RHPS.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]CountBale 0 points 16 hours ago
    I think you have to be aware of the time at which it was created. The writer was after all transgender. A lot of people take issue with the use of the word transsexual but at the time, that was the accepted vocabulary even with the trans community.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Heyitskristin918 2 points 15 hours ago
    That doesn’t make it okay in our modern day and age.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]CountBale 0 points 15 hours ago
    Sure, and a modern remake would have to be careful with the way it addresses the issues while staying as true as possible to the source material. However, calling the original work transphobic when it was written by a trans woman is pretty culturally tone deaf.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Heyitskristin918 3 points 14 hours ago
    If they have realized the issues then I’m all for new RHPS. However, equating tranvestites with trans folk is a definite misstep, and we don’t need public association with that
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]dr_jkl 4 points 1 day ago
    Oh jesus christ no.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]Wubbledaddy 10 points 1 day ago*
    I disagree. Frank is a psychotic pansexual (with gay preference) cis man who likes to wear make-up and lingerie but is still very much a man. He’s literally what transphobic people think trans women are. Casting one of the most famous trans woman actresses of all time (if not the most famous) to play Frank will just reaffirm the belief some people have that trans people are just crazy cross-dressers. Casting her as Frank will do far more harm than good.
    Also, just as a huge fan of Rocky Horror, she’s a terrible choice. Casting any woman to play Frank would be a terrible choice. The character of Frank is supposed to very clearly be masculine (baritone voice, hairy chest, etc) despite the flamboyant of the character. I would definitely be extremely supportive of casting a trans man as Frank or casting Laverne as Columbia or Magenta (holy shit just thinking about it she would be make such a good Magenta) but not the other way around. I feel like this will just end up like when Amber Riley played Frank on Glee… shudder.
    And Richard O’Brien is not trans and does not identify as trans. Here’s a direct quote from him: “I don’t want to pretend to be something that I’m not. Anton Rodgers, the actor, said ‘you’re the third sex’. And I thought that’s quite nice. I quite like that position. It’s my belief that we are on a continuum between male and female. There are people who are hardwired male and there are people who are hardwired female, but most of us are on that continuum and I believe myself probably to be about 70% male, 30% female.”
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]FlorencePantsTransfeminine 7 points 1 day ago
    Technically ‘third sex’, assuming its referring to gender identity, the way it seems to be, does count as trans.
    Trans doesn’t exclusively refer to 100% trans female or 100% trans male.
    I consider myself sort of the reverse of his situation, 70% female, 30% male.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Wubbledaddy 2 points 1 day ago
    My mistake. I just found a newer interview than the one I linked to where he said he thought about it and he now officially considers himself trans.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]Wubbledaddy 6 points 1 day ago
    I have no problem with changing the gender of a role in a play. Honestly, a man as Columbia or Magenta would work if done right, as could a woman as Dr. Scott, The Narrator/Criminologist, Eddie (and I believe it actually was cast as a woman on Broadway for a while), or Riff Raff. But, when appearance and gender/sexuality is integral to the identity of the character (as it is with Frank.), then it is important to cast someone who can convincingly appear to be that gender so justice can be done to the role.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]Wubbledaddy 8 points 1 day ago
    Even if she does do a good job (despite her feminine body and voice, which just really don’t fit the role) I still firmly believe that this casting will seriously encourage transphobic stereotypes.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–] 1 day ago
    [deleted]
    [–]Wubbledaddy 3 points 1 day ago
    What? Just because someone isn’t cis doesn’t automatically give them a free pass to play roles that aren’t right for them. I would be just as opposed to any other woman playing Frank, cis or trans. And can you please point out what exactly I said was transphobic? My only objection to the casting relating to her being trans is that I think it would help transphobes justify negative stereotypes.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]2Weird2Live2Rare2DieThere’s 10 types of folk; those who’re binary & those who aren’t 2 points 1 day ago
    Don’t sweat it. This is all she seems to do; state her opinion and then call every trans woman with a different one some degree of transphobic traitor.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Wubbledaddy 2 points 1 day ago
    I’m actually not trans but I feel like telling her that would just piss her off more.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    continue this thread
    [–]SpaceVioletta -2 points 1 day ago
    How so?
    Skin colour or gender identity is irrelevant when it comes to skill. Nothing is going to necessarily be better by having more or less of any particular group, unless you’re trying to represent that specific group, in which case getting people from it is the surest way to achieve accuracy, but that still doesn’t fill in for skill.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]IrockzMostly Pan with a little Lesbian 2 points 16 hours ago
    This doesn’t bode well. I actually enjoyed Rocky Horror but… he was a transvestite, not transsexual. This reeks of being an incredibly uncomfortable remake.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]lisa_lionheartmtf suberbabe 2 points 14 hours ago
    Rocky horror only works as a kitsch guilty pleasure and cult phenomenon. I cannot fathom anyway they could remake it without making it either a completely different film or complete train-wreck.
    It was a product of its time, it doesn’t translate well to 2015. When it came out it was outrageous as it deliberately offended conservative views of sexuality. Now it would be considered offensive for stereo typing trans people and queer culture which is a lot less fun.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]brainsaysgirl 3 points 1 day ago
    I don’t think I like this idea. It seems like it will be bad for media representation, and will make it more likely that people will pigeonhole transgender people as transvestites. That is not a good thing.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]Insert_Witty_Words 6 points 1 day ago
    I have some seriously mixed feels about this…
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]maleiaThe ‘F’ is for Futa 3 points 1 day ago
    I am incredibly uncomfortable with all of this. I have a history of abuse tied to this movie though…. so that doesn’t help😦
    I trust Cox to only take work that she thinks is good for our image…. but I still hate Rocky Horror.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]YouDumbZombie 1 point 15 hours ago
    This seems weird, honestly rebooting something this classic is destined to fail imho no different than remaking The Goonies or other classics we’ve seen ruined lately.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]neutronstarnekoTransgender 1 point 14 hours ago
    So she is playing a dude? ok I guess it’s acting and many people gender bend. I do find it a little odd, is she gonna fuck Janet and Brad? with what? a strap on?!
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]lisa_lionheartmtf suberbabe 2 points 13 hours ago
    Who knows? I suspect that they are going to ditch the idea of Frank-N-Furter as a cross-dressing gender queer in favor of a more PC binary identified trans woman.
    I think that’s kinda sad, the whole point of RHPS was to blur the lines. Trans women have found a degree of acceptance but the idea of anyone in the middle is still to much for people to accept.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]rethebear [score hidden] 7 hours ago
    The traditional casting is a man, but if they do a gender swapped version (which is common for a lot of troupes to do) then Frank(ie) N. Furter in men’s clothing and the like might be an interesting approach.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]pinkdaria [score hidden] 4 hours ago
    A great excuse for people to see trans women as nothing but men in dresses. So many trans people are asking for trans actors to be in trans roles and this is what we get. Something to confuse the masses.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]Cass_Griffin22 | MTF 1 point 1 day ago*
    And like the movie, I won’t watch this.
    EDIT: ie I’m not interested in movies that mock transgender people, and I’m especially not fond of things that don’t differentiate between crossdressing, sexual perversion and being trans, because those are three very different classes of thing.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]FullMetalChef 1 point 1 day ago
    Not a good idea. Pretty sure some leading male actor would jump at a chance for that role. Plus, not so good for her to portrait a transvestite.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]IsleyOnAisTranssexual? So fetch. 1 point 18 hours ago
    What a sellout.
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]CharlotteTen -2 points 1 day ago
    Since the good doctor considered themselves trans, I’m okay with this. Instead of a trans character being played by a cis male, we get the awesome of goddess Laverne!!!
    permalinksavereportgive goldreply
    [–]FlorencePantsTransfeminine 6 points 1 day ago
    Its been a while since I watched it, but wasn’t Frank N Furter more of a transvestite than transgender?
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]CharlotteTen -2 points 1 day ago
    IIRC they call themselves transsexual
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]FlorencePantsTransfeminine 6 points 1 day ago
    I just recall the lyrics from the song Sweet Transvestite, which says explicitly “I’m just a sweet transvestite from Transexual, Transylvania.”
    That said, maybe that’s contradicted elsewhere, I don’t recall.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]Maddicakes 7 points 1 day ago
    No, it isn’t.
    Dr. Frank N-Furter is a transvestite from Planet Transsexual in the Transylvania Galaxy. He is an alien.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply
    [–]2Weird2Live2Rare2DieThere’s 10 types of folk; those who’re binary & those who aren’t 3 points 1 day ago
    No he didn’t.
    permalinksaveparentreportgive goldreply

    • Ashland Avenue Says:

    • morag99 Says:

      Goodness. Somebody, quick, make a pot of camomile tea!

      So much anxiety and hand-wringing under the trans umbrella. B-b-b-but, Frank is a man! A-a-a-and Laverne is a woman! A woman, I say, a real woman; Laverne is always, all the time, past and present, forever and ever, a capital-W Woman, amen. So how, how can she play a man named Frank?

      They are so very afraid that the audience is going to notice that the male character, Dr. Frank-N-Furter, is being played by a male actor, Laverne Cox.

      Dear, loyal, obedient trans activists and allies — tsk tsk. Where’s your faith in Cox’s true-blue womanhood, people? Will Cox’s renowned, stunning, courageous, painted, shellacked, painful-looking femininity dissolve on contact with lines about manly transvestism? What’s to be so scared?

      Poor things. This is all because they know as well — or better — as anyone else that Laverne is a man.

      • Magdalena Z. Says:

        Laverne’s womanhood is made out of sugar and it will melt if you get him a little wet. Also, don’t feed after midnight.

      • morag99 Says:

        “Laverne’s womanhood is made out of sugar and it will melt if you get him a little wet.”

        But, if his womanhood melts away, what will be left? Answer: an ordinary naked man. Oh, my!

      • Janetwo Says:

        Lol. Beside the fact that remaking the RHPS is stupid, I think LC has the perfect resume to nail the part.

    • Bea Says:

      “When it came out it was outrageous as it deliberately offended conservative views of sexuality. Now it would be considered offensive for stereo typing trans people and queer culture which is a lot less fun.”

      Haha, look at that. The new Rocky Horror will be deliberately offending conservative views of sexuality… LOL

    • FreeFromSexPozzies Says:

      No sense of humor at all.
      These comments are…telling.
      And disturbing.
      I think LC is the perfect person to cast.

    • shonagh Says:

      Oh! *gasp*
      So many lols.
      Thank you Gallus😀

    • nemesister Says:

      Moar humorless straights trying to police the LGB. If they have ever been to RHPS they must have been terrified. VIRGINS!!!

    • nemesister Says:

      “Richard O’Brien is a trans woman!”
      “What do you mean Cox still has a cock?”
      “Who is Laverne Cox… that’s some kind of joke name, right?”
      …munch crunch…

    • gaydude50 Says:

      That was seriously some funny shit. Loved this:

      “I’m not interested in movies that mock transgender people, and I’m especially not fond of things that don’t differentiate between crossdressing, sexual perversion and being trans, because those are three very different classes of thing.”

      Really, because I pretty much view them as interchangeable.

  24. stchauvinism Says:

    “Looking forward to Laverne’s future film career as Buffalo Bill in the remake of Silence of the Lambs, Norman Bates in another remake of Psycho, and Ray Finkle in the remake of Ace Ventura.”

    HAHAHA, me too, gawd these people are no fun. Im looking forward to Cox’s role as Babs Johnson in the remake of Pink Flamingos. It will be terrible and not in a fun way, but Water’s is at retirement age and it would be a good way for him to scam a few bucks off of Fox.

  25. shediogenes Says:

    Wait. It’s gonna be on tv? No fun. Without a theatre release, where will all the protesters gather? Damn it Janet.

  26. keeva99 Says:

    can he even sing?

  27. liberalsareinsane Says:

    Why doesn’t Larry play the girl part in a slasher movie? Go Jason.

  28. Shalashaska Says:

    The part that gets me the most about the linked video is the difference in the audience between Williams and Cox. The audience is cheering and having a good time while Williams sings and then, cut to Cox… dead silence.

  29. Margie Says:

    Earlier this year, a pride event in Scotland banned drag at the insistence of trans activists. A few weeks ago, a UK trans activist actually called the police on a children’s hospice which was having a “Fun Run” in which the dads of the sick children would put on heels and dresses and run a race to raise money for the hospice. And now Roderick Cox is playing Frank N Furter, a transvestite from a place called Transsexual. So when are the trans activists going to start their boycott, commit vandalism and call the police?

  30. K Says:

    This makes me sad. :c

  31. stchauvinism Says:

    I think a made for TV remake of RHPS is just stupid, but if they were going to do it, they should’ve casted Eddie Izzard as Frank, he would’ve had a blast with that, not sure he could pull it off, but it’s always fun to watch an actor having a good time. Cox is going to want to be pretty not scary hilarious and that will just ruin an already bad idea.

  32. Larichus Says:

    So, what’s the early odds on whether or not they’ll put one of those disclaimers like they do on some of the old Warner Bros cartoons, something like “Transphobia is wrong now and it was wrong then….”

  33. WTF Is This Nonsense? Says:

    Bruce Jenner should do a reboot of Glen or Glenda. Make it a trilogy.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: