Cody Smith-McPhee closes Sam Elliott’s “Dog Power” dig

Entertainment News / By /

Elliot had previously called the Oscar-nominated film “crap” due to the “homosexual allusions” in the western.

The Dog Power debate continues as star Cody Smith-McPhee weighs in on Sam Elliott’s homophobic criticism of the Academy Award-nominated film.

This was stated by Smith-McPhee, who was nominated for an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor. Diversity that he had “nothing” to say to Elliott’s previous claims about Marc Maron’s “WTF Podcast” that the film was “a piece of crap.”

“Because I’m a mature being and I’m passionate about what I do and I don’t really give energy to anything other than that,” Smith-McPhee said of ignoring the 1883 star’s comments. “Good luck to him.”

Elliott compared Jane Campion’s Western in Montana to the Chippendales show, saying the cowboys “are all running around in pants and no shirts”. The drama also includes a main storyline of fictional character Phil Burbank (Benedict Cumberbatch) coming to terms with his repressed sexual identity.

“This damn movie has all these hints of homosexuality,” Elliott said.

Connected

Connected

Elliott continued that Campion was out of her element by adapting the 1967 Thomas Savage novel.

“What the fuck is this woman – she’s a brilliant director by the way, I love her work, previous work – but what the fuck does this New Zealand woman know about the American West? And why the hell is she filming this movie in New Zealand, calling it Montana and saying, “That’s how it was,” Elliott said. “That fucking hit me, mate. The myth is that they were macho with cattle.”

Lead actor Cumberbatch previously addressed Elliott’s rant, stating during a recent BAFTA film session, “There is also a massive intolerance in the world for homosexuality and acceptance of others and all differences. No more than in this prism of conformity with what is expected of a man in the Western archetype of masculinity. Breaking it down through Phil is not a history lesson.”

Cumberbatch concluded, “This is a very specific case of repression, but also of intolerance for the true identity that Phil is, which he cannot be fully. The more we look under the hood of toxic masculinity and try to uncover its root causes, the more likely we are to deal with it when it occurs in our children.”

Register: Stay up to date with the latest film and television news! Subscribe to our email newsletter here.