We all knew the captain was a whoopsie!

Nope, when I say fairy tales I mean old European fairy tales, I.e. hansel and gretel, red riding hood, the boy who cried wolf, etc.not modern day adaptations alternating from the norm
Not sure I agree since most of these tales never really included any kind of sexuality, straight or otherwise so by your standards, the depiction of straight love in Stardust is also inaccurate.
Regardless, this isn't an adaptation of any traditional fairy tale, it's a story with supernatural and magical elements that depicts love, lust for power, the quest for identity and many other human struggles. I think Captain Shakespeare's story fit perfectly in its midst.
As for the poster who thinks it makes no sense that Humphrey would be interested in a guy when he's actively pursuing Victoria, well, bisexuality is not a fairy tale to scare gay people straight (or vice versa), and maybe Humphrey was just pursuing Victoria the way Tristan was: because she's the "desirable" girl in the village, the pretty one, the one all the guys want, a trophy to whoever wins her.
For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

One of the messages of the movie was the importance of being yourself.
European fairy tales may not have had many (if any) explicitly "whoopsie" characters but of course we know they have existed throughout all of human history.
It's spelled Raymond Luxury Yacht, but it's pronounced '
Throat-Warbler Mangrove
'

Nope, when I say fairy tales I mean old European fairy tales, I.e. hansel and gretel, red riding hood, the boy who cried wolf, etc.not modern day adaptations alternating from the norm

19th century England also didn't have flying boats.
And Neil Gaiman is European, and this is his fairy tale, so you're wrong there too.

While de niro's character was interesting, it was inaccurate for 19th century England or any European fairy tale.

De Niro was excellent in this and despite what some people say his character was a positive role model.
Kind, honest, intelligent and possessed of a great and kind heart. He just happened to be in the closet because of prejudice. An all too common occurrence.

I loved how overtly and obviously gay DeNiro's character was, even though one of his ship's crew called it "being whoopsie" instead of actually saying "gay." He stole the show here, and I loved the bit at the end with Humphrey as well. The reason why they did that is because just like Shakespeare's tough guy acts on the ship, Humphrey was overcompensating by always fighting with Tristan and not being his true self. That was their connection and I don't know how anybody could misinterpret this. I guess some people do need to see full on sex acts to get it.

Well it is a fairy tale.
What did you expect?
But Robert De Queero was shocking.
I'm surprised Richard Queer didn't appear.
"Welcome to Pandora. Welcome to fairyland."

This thread is fecked up. The administrators had to slash and burn because of flame wars about homosexuality - and grammer. LOL

Lol people are blowing this completely out of proportion. It was a wink, yes a gay wink but seriously get over it. It's not like they jumped on each other and welly'know.

Yes, that's exactly what that little scene was about. Does it matter? It was mocking Victoria's poor choice of husband.

No he had something in his eye. What the hell did you think it meant?
Oh and yes how shockingjeez

it was hilarious. don't know what the beep peoples problem was.

I think it was a nod to Humphrey being so full of himself that he thought "Why wouldn't EVERYONE want to be attracted to me?"

yeah because gay men never get married

I don't think objections have to come from a homophobic stance. First, Victoria's suffering enough just knowing that she could have been with a king and instead she's stuck with Humphrey. Second, it doesn't make sense with Humphrey trying so hard to win Victoria's hand when he's gay. I suppose you could argue it was just a marriage of convenience and power for him, but that's not really necessary to complete Victoria's humiliation.

yeah, it was grosse, totally unnececery.

The only thing in the film that ruined it for me was Sienna Millers "acting", my god she stinks to high heaven, even cast as pinocchio she would appear too wooden.

You were SURPRISED that Humphrey may not be the straightest man on earth? Well I don't know x]
I thought the whole Captain Shakespeare parts were absolutely hilarious. De Niro was plain awesome :]

Yes! Perfectly said, exactly what I thought as well in the scene, and I found it hilarious!

Okay, this get my vote for most accurate answer. It's exactly what I was thinking too. It seemed like Horace realised that anything is possible.

I thought that was hilarious. Did u guys see Victoria's face? It was like, "Damn I could of married the king! Now I'm stuck with this loser. WTF!? Now he's gay too???"
I mean LOL talking about adding insult to injury. HAHAHA!!

regardless as to the "height" of homophobia here, no one has adressed the original question (tho i stopped reading answers after half a dozen since no one seems interested in the question or how it was presented but rather far more interested in blathering about what they want to
the original poster did not express any homophobia whatsoever in their original request rather, he said he loved the character in question he said it was only 'a surprise', much like the twists or what-have-you included in most any film frankly, every poster SINCE the original poster have been typing their little fingers off about what they think about all the homophobia on the board or how the ending was different or other aspects of the book were different than the movie or how something or other was an "outrage" when i don't see the word "outrage" in any post prior to its usage in the poster's post that asked how something could be an outrage (tho I suppose it could have been included in a prio post that was deleted by an admin before I happened upon this thread looking for informaion about the movie)
but god forbid anyone answer poor Firebender17's original question as to whether any other viewers of the movie thought that a chacater's wink toward another was a lean toward homosexuality or if it was simply a wink no one has seemed interested in that question since it was posted (or at least since i stopped reading in annoyance)
well, i haven't decided whether to watch the movie so I can only hope, Firebender17, that somehow, some way, you received some answer or opinions or a bit of discusson on your original question my level of tolerance with people ignoring whatever the thread has been created for so they can jibber and jabber about something other than the point, something they find lends tenor to their writing far better than the original question
best of luck, Firebender17 and if i ever watch the movie, i'll drop you a note and let you know what impression i was left with