The Rocky Horror Picture Show is a 1975 British-American musical comedy horror film. Though the film was initially a relatively large failure, it has become one of the most financially successful films of all time and longest running movies shown in theaters. It has become iconic for its midnight performance showings, as well as for being atypically sexual while challenging traditional gender roles. Rocky Horror has created a social phenomenon and branches out from the traditional heteronormative matrixes often seen in popular culture. Despite being released forty years ago, the film still provides a rallying point in and outside of the queer community with its concepts of what it means to be a human and correct.
The film contains a number of queer characters. Dr. Frank-N-Furter, the film’s main antagonist, is who the audience immediately focuses in on. He is bi-sexual, trans*, promiscuous, as well as a mad scientist. While holding a convention to showcase his newest experiment, a recently engaged (and virgin) couple by the names of Brad and Janet arrive on the doorstep of his Transylvanian castle. After their unexpected arrival, Dr. Frank-N-Furter continues with his convention and eventually brings his experiment Rocky to life, as a naked Brad and Janet watch in terror. As the movie progresses, Frank-N-Furter has a number of sexual encounters with Rocky, Brad, and Janet. He performs a number of different songs, such as Sweet Transvestite, and even commits heinous and gruesome murders.
Link to the song Sweet Transvestite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bc80tFJpTuo
The Rocky Horror Picture Show supports Michael Warner’s definition of queer by protesting norms and the idea of norms and normal behavior (Warner xxvii). No only can this film be considered queer because of the sexuality of its characters, their dress, and their gender performance, but through their murderous and cannibalistic behaviors. The characters in Rocky Horror reinforce Marinucci’s argument that “far more of us are queer than not” (Marinucci 36). Even the respectful, virgin couple exhibit their queerness throughout the film as they explore their sexuality with Dr. Frank-N-Furter and each other. By applying a queer reading to The Rocky Horror Picture Show, we learn how the film offers the audience an opportunity to redefine categories and leaves the film open to interpretation and defining new categories.
Discussion Questions:
- In what ways other than gender and sexuality could Rocky Horror be read as queer? Could cannibalism and motherless procreation be seen as queer? Could you view this film as queer in multiple ways?
- The film has gained enormous commercial success and continues to live on in various forms. In what ways does this success alter the definitions of mainstream film? Can the film be read through Marinucci’s lens of redefining categories of success?
- The film is now 40 years old, and operates in an entirely different context from when it was created. With the evolution of social circumstances and beliefs, how does Rocky Horror fit in to our current society? Does the age and difference in language, dress, and action also make this show queer through Doty’s reading?
1. The dress and psychotic behaviors (murder and cannibalism) can be read as queer. I do see how cannibalism and motherless conception be considered as queer, as they are not considered to be inside of society “norms”. This film should be considered queer in multiple ways as it is queer in sexual, gender, and societal norm ways.
ReplyDelete2. This should change the definition of mainstream film as it makes mainstream film more “queer”. So the film should not be seen as queer now, as it should be part of the “norm”.
3. Rocky Horror fits into our society as our society has become more open to queerness and has been influenced by this film. I can’t see how the differences now can make the show queer through Doty’s reading.
Janet demonstrates a queer reading of the situation by explaining how the place and people seem out of the “norm.” She says “it seems unhealthy here” and tries to convince Brad that they need to leave now, only because the people look different. Brad suggests that because they look different they may be foreigners. Janet instantly begins to judge the people and even says that she’s scared, based solely from their queer/out of the “norm” appearance.
ReplyDeleteI did think it was interesting that the movie included characters that had similar responses to what was happening to them as the people that were probably attempting to view or hearing about the movie in the 50's and likely for many years after. It's almost as if they knew it would be received poorly and included relatable characters, but today we are able to analyze them as being inexperienced and closed-minded in terms of things outside of the norm.
DeleteThe representation of a transvestite in such a sexual manner in mainstream film, especially for the time, was very queer. This is not something one would expect to encounter in films from forty years ago. The storyline of the movie itself is rather abnormal, as one would not expect to walk into a house looking for a phone and finding a group of people laying on the floor, nor is the production of a man possible. There is a clear suspension of disbelief we are asked to participate in here. I find it interesting, if not comical, how Brad reacts so calmly at first, ignoring Dr. Frank-N-Furter's odd appearance and insisting on the phone.
ReplyDeleteI feel the "queer" aspects are mostly in Dr. Frank-N-Furter's actions and the use of costume. The setting of the castle is meant to be odd and he directly plays with Brad and Janet, a couple who appears straight and naive and much in the norm of society. It is throughout the film as Janet and Brad become acquainted with the oddities, murder, cannibalism, etc that changes them. I think it is important to note how in the end their behaviors become like that of Dr. Frank-N-Furter, I am mostly thinking of the scene at the end of the film, where they are in the pool and wearing the corsets and makeup and engaged in sexuality with one another. In terms of question 3, this could represent how the conservative nature of American society has slowly and continues to shift to acceptance of "queer" activity and identities.
ReplyDeleteWhat I found most interesting about this film was the time it was created. Back then it must have been shocking that a film like this came out because it was so rare, so this film would especially be seen as “queer” back then. This just wasn’t the common film being produced at that time. The way Rocky Horror dresses can also be seen as queer along with his sexuality and gender. Rocky is wearing makeup and a pearl necklace, things that are known to be typically associated with a woman. Also Rocky is wearing shoes that have heels on them and tight fitting clothes. When Rocky sits in the chair it’s in more of a way a woman would sit because Rocky is showing off his legs, holding them up in the air. Rocky’s actions can also be perceived as “queer” because of the way he struts around and seems to show off his body. Depending on which definition of queer you’re considering then cannibalism and motherless could be seen as queer because those things are seen as “out of the norm” and not a normal thing in society. In the video I also found it interesting that Brad had referred to them as “foreigners” because they are “way different than their own.”
ReplyDeleteFrank can be read as queer because initially identifies himself as male in the song “Sweet Transvestite” but he is not simply imitating the female gender in applying makeup and wearing female clothes. He goes a step further in acting out the roles of women in heteronormative societies while acting as a mother figure to characters within the film. But he also is very dominant which tends to be a stereotypical male characteristic. Through relations within the film, we learn that Frank has had many lovers and does not seem to have much trouble finding them. Again, giving reinforcing his “male dominance” characteristic.
ReplyDeleteFor the time that this film was originally made, it's remarkable that it became so popular even though it had a trans* character. That was something that was largely ignored as a reality at the time, so having it as a major theme in a mainstream film is pretty cool. Today, even though trans* folks are nowhere near the societal norm of sexuality, it is much more widely seen and somewhat accepted. I think when people watch this film today they might be more caught off guard by the motherless procreation and canibalism, because these aren't seen as often in mainstream films today.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIn response to question one, I do believe that the film can be read as queer in multiple ways. The most obvious way it could be read as queer is the homosexuality, bisexuality, and transvestism in the film. But I also believe that the cannibalism can be read as queer as well. Cannibalism is an often ignored topic in films, so I think that the cannibalism could be read as more queer than the homosexuality and bisexuality in the film.
Rocky Horror can be read as queer through its form. The movie is a musical, however, it uses film to produce that musical. Generally, a musical is performed on stage in front of an audience, but, Rocky Horror mocks the typical musical through its eccentric characters and pauses for audience engagement (although in a movie there should be no audience). Also, Rocky Horror proves queer in form because it is often acted out while shown in theaters and it encourages a great deal of audience participation – both of which are activities not typically associated with movies.
ReplyDelete1. Like others, I would argue that cannibalism and motherless procreation can be considered queer. There are numerous jabs at gender roles as well through the movie, (I forget the circumstances, but Brad does something and FNF says something to the effect of 'being forceful is being a man', yet later Brad is obviously dressed differently his roles are very much changed), that I think play with gender and "what it means to be a [man/woman]".
ReplyDelete2. When a movie does play with social norms and is a massive hit, I think it does open the door for other forms of media to follow. Given the initial lack of success though, I'm not sure how many "edge-y" movies in the 70's accredited their themes to Rocky Horror. Meh.
I think I'm the only queer person I know who doesn't like Rocky Horror (or maybe even actively dislikes). I'm all for classics, I'm all for queer stuff and fucking with 'straight' people, just not really my cup of tea despite several viewings.
In response to question 1, I believe that the clothes worn by Dr. Frank-N-Futer and his friends during the party in seen in the Sweet Transvestite music video can be considered queer. Not only do choices in clothing not comply with cis-gender norms of fashion, they also are just strange choices in clothing that do not comply with fashion norms. We don't know if this is a costume party or if all of these people dress like this on a daily basis. Would it make any difference for a queer reading if it was just a costume party? Just a thought!
ReplyDeleteCannibalism is also an act that can be considered queer. Cannibalism is considered criminal, morally wrong, and extremely taboo within mainstream American culture. Homosexuality was thought of in a similar way in the past (and even now still): being criminal, extremely taboo, and morally wrong. I just found that connect to be extremely interesting.
Rocky Horror Picture Show can definitely be read as queer in a number of ways. For example, this movie can be read as queer through analysis of the character Dr. Frank-N-Furter. Especially for the time at which this movie was made, Dr. Frank-N-Furter’s identities of both bisexual and trans* can certainly be considered queer for going against the cinematic norms of the time. I would say that cannibalism and motherless procreation could also be considered queer by the same definition; of going against norms. Cannibalism especially is very much looked down upon in our society and is far, far outside of our cultural and societal norms.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to question 3, Rocky Horror is considered a "cult classic" nowadays and the continuing practice of consuming and enjoying the film speaks to its popularity. I feel that from the time film originated in to now, it's been working against the grain and conservative nature. It still works towards acceptance of queer identities as that is still an ongoing struggle today. I think it could be read as queer through Doty's reading as one of Doty's definitions include "anyone on the spectrum of alternative sexual desires or gender conformity/performance."
ReplyDeleteSome other things that make the film even more queer:
ReplyDelete1. Riff Raff and Magenta are siblings yet their interactions with each other can be read as romantic/incestuous
2. The writer of RHPS, Richard O'Brien, describes himself as transgender and as "70% male and 30% female" - thus giving the film legitimacy as a trans film, not just a transphobic representation
3. Since Dr. Frank-n-Furter blurs the lines between man and woman, all of his sexual encounters are queer (as in non-heterosexual) regardless of the sex/gender of his partner.
4. Meatloaf represents an ideal of masculinity in his macho presentation and performance. The murder of Meatloaf by Dr Frank thus represents a literal rejection of masculinity.
When looking at question 2, the film's mainstream success seems to be a direct result of its queerness as defined by Warner. If queer is something that exists outside of current cultural norms, then even the most notable and very popular midnight interactive screenings of the film make it queer when looking at the way that most mainstream films are screened. Going further, the cannibalistic tendencies would also fall well within Warner's definition. The young couple may be a stereotype of the cultural norms that the rest of the film seems to be rallying against.
ReplyDeleteThis movie reads as queer in multiple ways, not simply just the "gay" normative meaning of it. In the case of dress, the dress in general has choices not fitting to social norms, ie males in fishnets. Also, the setting itself. How common are these castles? Gender role norms, of course, are not acted out. Also, it was queer for a movie of this time to star a bisexual/trans lead. Cannibalism is against the law, so that should state how queer that is right there. Also, Riff and Magenta are oddly close, sometimes more romantic than brother and sister.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, how many babies do you hear about being born without a mother?
ReplyDeleteI think the fact of this film not being popular when it was released compared to the cult status it has now can be attributed to the fact that our society as progressed in some ways and therefore this clearly queer film is more acceptable to view than it was in the 50's. As far as the characters, plot and presentation of the movie go, I do not refute that this film not only has queer aspects but is queer as a whole although at this point in time it is considerably mainstream. In addition, queer coverage in media and news since the 50's has increased relatively (not that there aren't still drastic improvements to be made today) so I also think that contributes to the heightened viewing of these types of films as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie's popularity has to do with the progressiveness of society's views on queers and queers in the media. During the song, Dr. Frank-N-Furter even says, "Don't get strung out by the way I look,
DeleteDon't judge a book by its cover." This is a signal that what Brad, Janet, and the audience are about to experience goes against the norms, but to keep an open mind. If the movie was made today I feel that Brad and Janet might have a different, more excepting view of all the characters in the film as society has been more excepting of queers.
I have never seen this film but just from reading this blog post I would have to agree with other classmates, it sounds like this film could be read as queer in many different ways but basically because nothing about it is conforms to what society define as “normal”. Everything from the clothing, the sexualities, the cannibalism, and the man creating man without a female involved. However I would have to agree with a couple other students when they say that this film’s queer factor would probably be more focused on the cannibalism and motherless procreation over the trans* and bisexuals aspects because they are becoming somewhat more acceptable than it would have been in the seventies. While cannibalism and motherless procreation, esp. the former would be highly frowned upon. In response to question #2: I do not really feel the film altered mainstream film because that was 40 years ago and most (not all, but most) films since then to now are still created around societal norms like submitting to the male gaze and along with that male dominance. So in my opinion I did not really recognize any sudden liberal changes but I feel like it was just kind of skipped over and seen as that “crazy, weird ass” movie. However, there might be a gradual change in mainstreams films regarding annoying social norms but I do not believe this film can take any credit for that.
ReplyDeleteIn response to discussion 2, the commercial success of Rocky's Horror is mostly because it is a musical form movie and also the presentation of queerness which is challenging the mainstream "norms".It is very original and to combine all of those elements together within a horror movie so I have to say this is why it make its commercial profits for
ReplyDeleteI think the insanely popular film, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, is queer in many ways. I think the cannibalism, motherless procreation, along with many other things like costumes and makeup, make the film very queer. Its very unique, "out of the norm" story and characters make for a very queer film, both in content and form.
ReplyDeleteI think the insanely popular film, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, is queer in many ways. I think the cannibalism, motherless procreation, along with many other things like costumes and makeup, make the film very queer. Its very unique, "out of the norm" story and characters make for a very queer film, both in content and form.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 1, and according to Michael Warner’s definition in that queerness is the protest of the idea of norms and normal behavior, cannibalism and motherless procreation could easily be seen as queer since both clearly stray from what is considered “normal” by the majority of society. Motherless procreation contradicts the entire concept of motherhood as being a key role in procreation, and the absence of that challenges societal norms especially in relation to the time the film was produced. Additionally, in response to question 3, I think that the film would have been regarded as sufficiently more groundbreaking during the time it was produced compared to how it is viewed now. I would argue that the entire context surrounding the film would fit more easily into mainstream media today since society is continuously challenging what has been considered “normal” in the past. Although I still believe the film would be viewed as queer today, I also think that overall weight in that lens has shifted with the times making it less of a protest in current media.
ReplyDeleteIn response to question 1, I think that this movie could be read as queer very easily, even without considering the fact that the main character is trans. Using Cohen’s definition of queer (anything outside the norm), this movie could be read as queer in the sense that many of the things that take place in it (cannibalism, motherless procreation, and murder) fall outside of society’s definition of “normal.”
ReplyDeleteI am not sure how I feel about this piece. Against the attempts of many close family members trying to set me up to watch this film (unfortunately none of them have worked out) I cannot help but think (possibly due to my limited knowledge on the movie) about how trans* people in movies are always given the appearance in movies to be evil. Trans* or questioning individuals are usually villianized when found in movies, especially older ones such as this film. I can only use some bigger examples like pedophiles in episodes of Law and Order and Buffalo Bill of Silence of the Lambs as proof. Perhaps I am over reacting to something I have just seen too many times, and never really in the inverse where a trans* man was seen in a favorable light, especially in popular media. Without seeing the rest of the movie it is hard to tell much outside of what I have read including to not limited to murdering, promiscuity, and a portrayal of possibly the antagonist? (hard to say) Really, if anything it is just something to consider as we have discussed in class. We also all have our guilty pleasures and are perfectly capable of being scholar fans of popular forms of media.
ReplyDelete