The TV producer and his colleagues at Evolution Film & Tape in Los Angeles had just had a brainstorming meeting with executives from Bravo. The arts- and lifestyle-oriented cable network had come to the company because they’d seen “Bug Juice,” a reality series about summer camp that Evolution had created for Disney. Bravo asked Evolution to dream up some new ideas for a reality series for their channel, too–only they wanted the show to be for adults, and they wanted it to be gay.
It didn’t take Marcolina long. “I had just attended a friend’s gay wedding,” he says. “My friends had put a lot of work into it, and there had been a lot of drama.” He wondered, why not? “There’s never been a reflection on TV of what I’m trying to do in my life, with my commitment to my boyfriend,” he says. “I wanted to see that reflected out there.” So did Bravo; of the six ideas Evolution presented, that’s the one Bravo picked.
Over four nights beginning Sept. 2, Bravo will broadcast all eight episodes of “Gay Weddings,” which follows four real-life couples–two gay, two lesbian–as they prepare for four very different commitment ceremonies. Though the documentary has been scheduled for months, “Gay Weddings” is benefiting hugely from this week’s controversial announcement by The New York Times that beginning shortly the newspaper will run notices of gay and lesbian unions alongside traditional heterosexual marriages in its Sunday editions. NEWSWEEK’s B. J. Sigesmund spoke with Marcolina about both the Times’ announcement and what he and his colleagues are hoping to achieve with the reality series.
NEWSWEEK: The New York Times agreed to publish announcements of same-sex weddings this week. Pretty good timing for your series, right?
Kirk Marcolina: Yes, I was very excited when I heard that.
For years, when asked why they didn’t run gay wedding announcements, the Times and other papers said they only ran notices of weddings that were “legally recognized.” Nothing’s different legally, but the Times has now changed its tune. Why do you think that happened?
It’s a sign of the times. There are so many gay and lesbian people having very visible commitment ceremonies right now. Whether the government chooses to sanctify the relationships or not, it’s what people are doing, it’s the reality. Newspapers, if they choose to ignore it, are ignoring something that’s happening out there in their communities.
The Family Research Council was one of the first organizations to publicly disagree with the Times’ decision. One of the group’s members was quoted this week saying the Times was “serving a radical social political agenda.” Any response?
That’s ridiculous. What these gay and lesbian people are choosing to do isn’t radical at all. It’s a basic human need to want to become a partner and to form a commitment with someone in front of friends and family. Nothing radical about it. In fact, none of the couples in the documentary saw the act of getting married as political. It’s simply an act of love.
OK, enough politics. Let’s talk about the series. Talk about the casting process.
There were two big restrictions. One, we needed to stay within Southern California. And two, we started casting in November 2001 and the weddings had to be done by the end of May 2002. We put ads in the local gay press, sent out tons of e-mails, put ads up in coffee shops in gay areas. We asked friends of friends.
You had 75 couples apply.
I talked to all of them over the phone. We narrowed it to 20 or 25, and I met in person with those. We were looking for diversity, and for people who’d be comfortable in front of the camera. We were looking for different kinds of wedding ceremonies, too. We paid attention to different obstacles. Some of the couples had parents who were homophobic, some had logistical challenges, some had challenges in their own relationships. We had about 10 very strong contenders. It was tough, but I’m very happy with the four we chose.
Watching the show, you clearly wanted to give Americans a fly-on-the-wall look at gay relationships.
I really wanted a show that validated and showed our commitment and our relationships. These are people who want to get married for the same reasons straight people want to get married. As a gay man, it was important for me to make this.
What surprised you most while filming?
I was most surprised by the amount of homophobia these people faced, as well as the homophobia I faced as a producer going through the process. When people found out it was a gay wedding we were following, they freaked out. A number of times, we weren’t allowed to shoot in their establishments. Or they put restrictions on what we were doing. For instance, one bridal store told us, “Well, they can come in, but they can’t hold hands or kiss in the store.” I said, “It’s a documentary, we can’t tell them not to hold hands or kiss.” They said, “Well, that might freak out other customers.” And that was in Beverly Hills!
Your cameras witness discrimination pretty much head-on. I’m thinking of the scene when Sonja and Lupe get the cold shoulder from the manager at a hotel where they’re considering having their ceremony.
I was there that day in the hotel. They knew we were coming in to film. They had said it was OK to shoot. But when we got there, and they saw it was two women, you could see their faces just fall. It was amazing. That being said, there were many more places that were warm and welcoming to us. Sometimes, in fact, they were even more warm when they learned it was a gay wedding.
Reality shows these days can be pretty awful and exploitive–like “The Anna Nicole Show.” How did you get the tone right on “Gay Weddings”? Did you ever worry about exploiting these people?
Definitely. As a producer, I entered into the show trying to get all the couples to be storytellers with us. Unlike other reality shows, we weren’t there shooting 24/7. But I encouraged them, when things got stressful, to use videocameras we gave them to journal. That’s some of the most compelling footage in the series. They talk to the camera about what they’re feeling.
There are definitely times in the series when you can see they’d rather the cameras not be around. How did you deal with those moments?
We told the couples in advance that there would be moments like that. We encouraged them to trust us, and allow us to be there through the tough times. I felt the audience would empathize and want to see the moments that were stressful and hard. The couples could always tell us, “Please put down the cameras.” We gave them the option.
You also shot a lot of footage of the couples dealing with their families. In fact, one of the series’ running themes is family. Some mothers are really involved, others are distant. There are sisters, there’s even a grandfather. What’s the significance?
For all the couples, one of the reasons to have a commitment ceremony is to have the relationship validated by friends and family. You want to show your mom and dad, “Hey, I’m in love.” That’s why it was so hurtful when Dan’s mom decides not to come to the wedding. It’s very hard for him to have this day without his mom. The flip side is Scott’s mom and dad. In episode 6, his dad says “it’s not normal,” but by episode 8, he kisses his son and says, it’s the most touching thing he’s ever experienced.
