ANNOYING NEW MOVIE: TAR

TAR (2022). Written and directed by Todd Field. 

NOTE: This review gives away important plot points. 

Lydia Tar (Cate Blanchett) has risen far in the field of classical music as both composer and conductor, and now leads the Berlin Symphony. In that city she lives with her wife, Sharon (Nina Hoss), and their adorable daughter, Petra (Mila Bogojevic). Lydia at first seems to be an altogether admirable figure, but the film hints that she may have serious personality flaws or worse. Eventually she is accused of "grooming" young women, using her position for exploitation, and causing a student's suicide. Lydia's life begins to unravel as she's "canceled" ... 

Let's get one thing out of the way immediately. Although it may be wrong to judge a film on what it isn't as opposed to what it is, in this case it's impossible not to do so. Writer-director Todd Field, presumably a straight male, could have written a positive study of a gay woman who rises to the top of her profession against odds and is then unfairly singled out by those who are jealous of her or whom she's ticked off. But Tar -- although it tries unsuccessfully to be subtle about it --  pretty much makes it clear that Lydia is a sexual predator, a tiresome old and homophobic stereotype. The movie distances itself from her misdeeds in an attempt to create thought-provoking confusion in the viewer, which it certainly does. At one point Lydia refers to herself as a "u-haul lesbian" and Cate Blanchett deepens her voice to almost sound like a man, although she never quite comes off as "butch" as she may have intended. More stereotyping. 

Nina Hoss and Cate Blanchett

But let's look at other elements of the movie. The acting is quite good, and for much of the film's length it emerges as a compelling study of a fascinating person. Very late in the movie the accusations start, but the film never really deals with them head on. Perhaps Field did worry about turning his heroine into a predator who acts like many men do when they achieve or are handed power over others, but if that was the case (based on reaction to the film he shouldn't have worried) he simply should have adjusted the script. It is Blanchett who makes Lydia almost three-dimensional, not Field's script. The film is quite long, and although I was happily pulled along for quite awhile, eventually tedium began to set in as I realized Tar was going to sidestep issues and just focus on the heroine's utter debasement. 

Does Tar really deal with cancel culture? In one sense it does, as Lydia is stripped of her job, title, marriage before there's any trial (as far as we know, at least, as in the final quarter the film jumps from event to event with some scenes only lasting half a minute). There's also an early scene at Julliard when a student tells how he can't get behind white European male composers such as Bach because they don't fit into his 21st century ideologies, which is absurd. Lydia rightly challenges him, but in a contrived scene he storms off and calls her a bitch when her behavior is not nasty nor does she put the young man down in any concrete fashion. Later on someone edits this encounter at Julliard to make Lydia come off much worse than she really did, but this is just dropped in and then completely dropped. 

There are other interesting characters in the film such as cellist Olga (Sophie Kauer), whom Lydia seems attracted to; Lydia's assistant Francesca (Noemie Merlant), who ultimately betrays her; and Sebastian (Allan Corduner), Lydia's conducting associate who thinks he's being replaced by Francesca. I was intrigued by the fact that many reviewers of the film made Lydia seem much worse than she is actually portrayed. She is not nasty to the Julliard student; she is loving to her daughter; she does use her position to influence decisions regarding the orchestra, but that hardly makes her a villain. It's almost as if, being told by the filmmaker that Lydia is a bad girl, they have to see evil in everything she does. And let's face it, even nowadays there are people who will see Lydia as evil simply because she's an out and proud lesbian. 

Cate Blanchett also starred in a much more pro-lesbian movie entitled Carol, which scrupulously avoided stereotyping and was all the better for it. At that time Blanchett gave interviews in which she seemed almost contemptuous of gay people who "shout it from the rooftops." So I'm not surprised she had no trouble with this script. Tar presents its long, long end credits at the very beginning of the movie, backed up by some rather awful vocalizing. Most people will fast forward over that. Tar would probably benefit from re-editing, trimming, putting back some scenes that may have been left on the cutting room floor, and possibly rethinking the entire last quarter. I know that Field and company will argue that Lydia is just a study of one lesbian, not the entire gay community, but it's so ironic that just when Hollywood figures promised to present more positive depictions of minority characters, including gay people, Tar presents one of the most negative gay stereotypes to come along in quite a while. But then Hollywood recently has a history of championing "gay" movies such as Call Me By Your Name and Moonlight that are not that pro-gay if at all. 

Verdict: Initially interesting, this meanders too much and is shockingly reactionary when it comes to LGBT characters. **1/4. 

GET HAPPY: THE LIFE OF JUDY GARLAND

GET HAPPY: THE LIFE OF JUDY GARLAND. Gerald Clarke. Dell/Random House. 2000.  

Here is another book that traces the life of the famous singer-actress in generally sympathetic fashion. Clarke looks at Garland's early life and her parents, her emergence as an MGM star, her struggles with diet and pills and more pills, her numerous affairs, marriages and divorces, and even her movies and concerts. There are some things in the tome that give one pause, however. The notion that Judy's mother, the homely Ethel Gumm, was trading sexual favors for consideration for her daughter, seems ludicrous, but to be fair Clarke says whether this is true or not "is impossible to say." Clarke is largely sympathetic to Judy's father, a theater owner, but there is a big difference between a man who is simply gay or bi and a married man who hits on teenage boys -- Clarke doesn't seem to get that if this was true the man was a predator. Clarke also seems too credible when presented with alleged evidence -- a letter -- that Tyrone Power was madly in love [!] with Garland. In those days (and even today) actors would have done anything to cover up even an inference of homosexuality. Clarke also states that Garland "occasionally enjoyed a frolic with another woman" but refuses to label her as bisexual -- huh? Still, Get Happy is well-written, and has some solid information to go with the more suspect material.

Verdict: Generally worthwhile if imperfect Garland bio. ***. 

A LIFE OF WILLIAM INGE: THE STRAINS OF TRIUMPH

A LIFE OF WILLIAM INGE: The Strains of Triumph. Ralph F. Voss. 1989; University Press of Kansas.

William Inge wrote several noteworthy plays -- Come Back, Little Sheba; Picnic; Bus Stop -- which were also made into excellent motion pictures. He also did an original screenplay for Splendor in the Grass, for which he won an Oscar, as well as the screenplay for All Fall Down. The Stripper was based on his unsuccessful play A Loss of Roses, and one of his one-acts was turned into Bus Riley's Back in Town, a film he later discredited. This in-depth biography looks at Inges' early years growing up in Kansas, his relationships with other family members, his struggles to find success as first an actor and then a playwright, his early Broadway successes, his friendship and rivalry with Tennessee Williams. his negative feelings about his homosexuality, and the post-success periods of the sixties and seventies in which nothing he wrote seemed to work and he tried much too hard to be hip and trendy. Inge's problem wasn't that he was gay, but that he couldn't accept it. He attended AA meanings with the writer Charles Jackson, a fellow self-hater and alcoholic, which was like the blind leading the blind. Inge's internalized homophobia probably reached its nadir in his 1965 play Where's Daddy? which was put out of its misery after only 21 performances. In this the main character, "Pinky Pinkerton," is a gay man who seduces teenage boys and tries to convince one of them to, in essence, go straight with a wife and kid! Inge lived to see Stonewall, but author Voss does not record Inge's reaction to it, if indeed he had one. Despite Inge's negative feelings about himself, he was a gifted playwright who managed to craft works that still resonate and that are still being produced today. This biography, while not without flaws and perhaps with too much (and conversely too little) preoccupation with his sexuality, gives Inge his due as both a man and an artist.

Verdict:  Insightful and absorbing biography of a great playwright. ***1/2. 

STUPID RECENT MOVIE: THE FAVOURITE

Emma Stone as Abigail Hill

THE FAVOURITE (2018). Director: Yorgos Lanthimos.

Queen Anne (Olivia Colman) supposedly rules England but most of her decisions of state are made by her confidante and lover, Lady Sarah Churchill (Rachel Weisz). Into this household comes Sarah's cousin, Abigail (Emma Stone of La La Land), who once was a lady herself, but thanks to her now-dead alcoholic father, has become a mere servant subject to Sarah's patronizing attitude. But Abigail has her own ambitions, and manages to draw the attention and favor of the queen, eventually replacing Sarah in Anne's bed. But Sarah is not about to take that, uh, lying down, and Abigail may have to take drastic steps to remain "The Favourite."

Olivia Coleman as the queen 

The Favourite takes actual historical characters, uses some of the bare facts of their inter-relationships, then pretty much invents everything else -- The Favourite is the very epitome of "dramatic license." Thrown out of the queen's favor, Sarah did intimate that there might have been a sexual relationship between Anne and Abigail, and presented a very negative portrait of  the queen in her memoirs. However, later biographers, who were much more objective, say that Anne was not the dunderhead she was portrayed as in both the memoirs and this movie. While there is no doubt that history has often been subjected to LGBT erasure, there is no real substantiation that a lesbian love triangle existed in the palace in the first place (Anne's husband, Prince George, is never even mentioned let alone depicted, not that would necessarily have meant that she was strictly heterosexual.) But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

Rachel Weisz as Sarah Churchill

Not that The Favourite necessarily has a good story. Everything is presented in very contemporary terms, vulgarized and dumbed-down, as if the film were a campy black comedy. The acting is professional but not especially memorable (even if Colman managed to net a Best Actress Oscar). The movie seems directed at a young, immature audience who wants their slice of history with lots of sex and a liberal sprinkling of "f" and "c--t" words. Because of the lesbian interplay, I'm also afraid some viewers will see this as some sort of progressive LGBT movie when it is anything but. While I'm not saying the film is homophobic as such, it's hard not to notice that the gay or bisexual ladies in it are pretty much presented as grotesque and not at all sympathetic. The director did not want to really deal with the sexuality of the characters or their attitude towards same, but then the characters are fairly one-dimensional to begin with. (Let me make it clear that I completely disassociate myself from viewers who hated the film simply because it presented LGBT characters.)

Queen Anne's court

Incredibly, The Favourite garnered Oscars and nominations and dozens and dozens of awards (GLAAD even nominated it as "Best Picture," although it didn't win.) What on earth has happened to people's critical faculties these days? The only award the film really deserved was for the cinematography by Robbie Ryan. As with the equally over-rated Moonlight or Call Me By Your Name this is an example of the Academy and Hollywood in general being overly impressed with a film because it is seen as progressive when it really isn't. The historical inaccuracies alone are enough to make this a sham of a production, and I can only imagine that poor Queen Anne, gay or not, is spinning in her grave.

Verdict: This is hardly history -- or herstory. **. 

SPECIAL EDITION -- ANNUAL LGBT ROUND-UP

This year is the 50th anniversary of Stonewall, what is considered the start of the modern-day Gay Rights/LGBT pride movement. I couldn't let it pass without compiling reviews of some interesting LGBT motion pictures. Not all of these are "gay" movies, as such, but they all deal with LGBT elements in one way or another. Sadly, not all of these are especially memorable, but they do have a place in cinematic and LGBT history in spite of that.  

PARTING GLANCES

John Bolger and Richard Ganoung 

PARTING GLANCES (1986). Written and directed by Bill Sherwood.

Michael: "At fifty or sixty impending death doesn't freak you out so much."

Joan: "I bet it does. I bet it's a fuckin' drag even if you're eighty."

Michael (Richard Ganoung) and Robert (John Bolger) have been a couple for some time, but now the latter decides he finds the relationship "predictable"  and has taken an assignment in Africa for two years. Michael is upset over this, and gets mixed signals from Robert, but he also has time to visit and help care for Nick (Steve Buscemi), who has AIDS. During Robert's last night in town, they have dinner with his closeted boss and his wife, and attend a party for Robert given by friend Joan (Kathy Kinney), while a cute store clerk named Peter (Adam Nathan) sets his sights on Michael. But there's an unexpected development, and Michael finds he may have to make a choice.

Steve Buscemi and Adam Nathan

Parting Glances is not the typical boy meets boy romance, but one almost wishes that it had been. The characters and their motivations are not as well-developed as they need to be, the film is slow-paced and simply meanders instead of ever becoming really dramatic, and the attempts at humor are fairly pitiful. On the plus side there are some good dialogue and performances, especially by the two leads and the ever-weird Buscemi. Kathy Kinney, who is also good, later played the obnoxious and wildly attired secretary on The Drew Carey Show. A party scene shows what purports to be a cross-section of downtown types but New Yorkers are more interesting than that! You want to like the two leads and root for their romance to work, but after awhile you just want the darn thing to be over. Buscemi and Bolger -- two straight cast members, of course -- both went on to have many credits afterward.

Verdict:  There's some good potential here but it just isn't realized. **. 

AKRON

Edmund Donovan  and Matthew Frias

AKRON (2015). Directed by Brian O'Donnell and Sasha King.

Interested in athletics and each other, college students Benny (Matthew Frias) and Christopher (Edmund Donovan) begin dating. All goes swimmingly for a while until Chris takes Benny down to Florida to hang out and meet his mother, Carol (Amy da Luz). Unfortunately, Carol feels compelled to tell Benny that she was the woman driving the car -- with a much younger Chris in the back seat -- when she accidentally hit and killed Benny's brother years ago.

Matthew Frias and Joseph Melendez

Things begin to unravel, with Benny's parents, who had liked Christopher, objecting to the relationship because Chris' presence will be a constant reminder of the tragedy. Benny, for his part, reacts in an immature fashion. But will the two boys be able to overcome what seems like an insurmountable difficulty in their relationship? Akron sets up an interesting situation, but doesn't do that much with it, coming off at times like a lightweight "after- school special." Benny's mother seems completely unforgiving of Carol, even though she was apparently neither criminally nor legally liable for what happened. Akron can at least boast some excellent performances from the two men in the leads, as well as da Luz and especially Joseph Melendez and Andrea Burns as Benny's parents. Akron is a step in the right direction, but it's too low-key and non-dramatic to make much more than a minor impression. The film's depiction of a loving family that is fully supportive of its gay son is refreshing and admirable, however.

Verdict: Nice try, but ...  **1/4. 

BREAKING THE CODE

Derek Jacobi and Julian Kerridge

BREAKING THE CODE (1996). Director: Herbert Wise.

Brilliant mathematician Alan Turing (Derek Jacobi of The King's Speech) knows his knowledge of cyphers and science can help the British war effort during WW2, and he's chosen to find a way to break the code of the German's Enigma machine. His genius also eventually brings about the creation of digital computers, but his work and worth are diminished in his later years simply because he is gay and apparently unapologetic about it. He pays a hard price for his indiscretion.

Prunella Scales and Derek Jacxobi

Breaking the Code is based on the successful and heralded 1986 play by Hugh Whitemore, and Jacobi reprises his acclaimed stage performance in this TV adaptation. Despite Jacobi's being nearly sixty at the time (Turing died at age 42), Jacobi's performance is excellent, although some may feel his frequent deliberate stuttering (not employed by Benedict Cumberbatch, who later played the same role in Imitation Game) is a bit of a distraction. There is also fine work from Prunella Scales [The Wicked Lady] as Turing's concerned mother; Richard Johnson [Zombie] as Knox, who interviews and hires him; Julian Kerridge as a man with whom Turing dallies; and Amanda Root as a colleague who falls in love with him in spite of his orientation. While Jacobi shows the feisty and slightly arrogant side to Turing's nature, he also lets his amiability and sweetness come through as well.

Verdict: Despite some technical explanations that go on a little too long, this is altogether admirable. ***.

THE IMITATION GAME

Benedict Cumberbatch

THE IMITATION GAME (2014). Director: Morten Tyldum.

Genius mathematician Alan Turing (Benedict Cumberbatch of Star Trek Into Darkness) joins, and eventually takes over, a group of crypto-experts who are trying to crack Germany's Enigma Code. At first Turing is disliked because of his rather obnoxious, superior personality, but eventually he wins the respect of his peers, not only cracking the code but building technology that will eventually lead to the creation of modern-day computers. Unfortunately, he doesn't get his due until long after his death due to his conviction on a homosexual morals charge ...

The Imitation Game is the second film about Turing after the superior Breaking the Code (which also has the much better title with its double meaning), which came out nearly twenty years earlier. This is a splashier, longer, opened-up and bigger-budgeted version but it does not at all improve on the earlier picture. Benedict Cumberbatch gives a good enough performance, but perhaps makes his character more repellent -- especially in the earlier sequences -- than he needs to be; he almost plays it like an old-fashioned "bitchy queen." He is not as good as Derek Jacobi was in the earlier film. A bigger problem with this fictionalized biopic is that it not only tries to deal with his orientation as little as possible -- there are absolutely no sequences showing him even having conversations with other gay men -- but strips the film of true drama (his conviction, trial, etc.) and substitutes some events that I found very suspicious. Dramatic license is one thing, but Imitation just makes up sequences out of whole cloth (like the one when Turing and the others decide not to warn a convoy that is about to be bombed because then the Germans will know they've cracked the code. Sounds reasonable, until you really think about it. )

Like the earlier telefilm, this movie goes back and forth in time when a linear narrative might have been more compelling. There are some good supporting performances from Charles Dance [Victor Frankenstein] as Commander Denniston, and young Alex Lawther as Alan at school (he has a wonderful scene trying not to show how devastated he is by a loving friend's death), among others, but on the whole the picture is a big disappointment and somewhat on the dull side. Perhaps the worst thing is that this film simply accepts that Turing was a suicide when the first film, and some biographies, have suggested that he might have died by accident or even been killed off as a security risk. Who knows? The film was highly acclaimed and made a great deal of money, but since then many people have noted its glaring inaccuracies.

Verdict: Stick to Breaking the Code. **. 

KANOPY VIDEO

The Watch List on Kanopy

KANOPY VIDEO.

There's a new free streaming video service available, and all you need is a library card (U.S.) and to belong to a library that is linked to the Kanopy service. Kanopy has literally thousands of films available for watching on line, and it includes everything from gory grind house zombie movies to classy and well-known foreign films by famous international directors and everything in between. Movies I've recently watched on Kanopy include Mario Bava's Five Dolls for an August Moon, the Israeli LGBT short Summer Vacation, a documentary on Debra Paget and Sudden Fear with Joan Crawford, among others. The service is free, but you are only allowed to look at ten movies per month

The next time you go to your library's web site, or go there in person, you can either look for or ask about the link to Kanopy. When you search for a movie, you may also see "e-video" and an arrow, which generally indicates that you can watch the movie online.

So check and see if your library offers Kanopy. If it does, all you need do is enter your card number and start an account with your email and password. And then you can watch Purple Noon, The 400 Blows, Ashes and Diamonds and The Bicycle Thieves, not to mention Italian giallo films, weird exploitation movies, Hollywood star documentaries, and much, more more. 

GAY PRIDE SPECIAL: GAY-THEMED MOTION PICTURES

Dirk Bogarde in Victim

SEVERAL GAY-THEMED MOVIES FOR GAY PRIDE WEEK.

New York City celebrates Gay/LGBT pride this coming weekend, and in honor of that, Great Old Movies looks at several gay-themed movies and documentaries from different time periods and countries. First we have Victim, the classic 1961 drama about a British lawyer victimized by a blackmail ring (back when it was a crime just to be gay); the more recent film, Jonathan, a German drama in which a young man deals with the fact that his dying father once had a loving relationship with another man; the Israeli short Summer Vacation, in which a closeted man with a wife and children is confronted with his gay past at the beach; the 1974 Butley, with Alan Bates as a teacher who learns that both his estranged wife and boyfriend are moving on to other men; and the documentaries A Bit of Scarlet (gay depictions in British film), Uncle Bob (about the gay activist who streaked the Oscars), and Do I Sound Gay?, which kind of deals with gay stereotyping.

For more gay-themed films just type "gay" or "LGBT" into the search bar on the upper left hand corner of the blog. Thanks for reading!

BUTLEY

Michael Byrne, Richard O Callaghan, Alan Bates

BUTLEY (1974). Director: Harold Pinter. Screenplay by Simon Gray, based on his stage play.  American Film Theater.

"Is there a sub-text to that or can I take it as straight abuse?" -- Joey to Butley.

Ben Butley (Alan Bates of An Unmarried Woman) is a university professor and T. S. Eliot scholar who shares an office, an apartment, and -- until recently -- his life with a young assistant and former student, Joey (Richard O Callaghan). Apparently Butley left Joey at one point to marry Anne (Susan Engel) -- their marriage lasted only a year and resulted in one child. They are now separated and Ben is back with Joey, but the latter wants to move in with gay friend, Reg (Michael Byrne), if only to get away from Butley. For Butley is truly an obnoxious character, a bitter heavy drinker who seems to care little about his students, resents that a colleague, Edna (Jessica Tandy), will have a book published, and plays nasty mind games with everyone, Reg, Joey, and Anne included. Ben discovers that Anne wants a divorce because she wants to marry a man that he thinks is the dullest fellow in England. Neither Anne nor Joey seem to be truly in love with their prospective partners, but both want to get away from Butley ... Butley was a success for playwright Simon Gray and for Alan Bates, who played the role in London and on Broadway, but the play itself is problematic. Not only is Butley completely odious on all levels, but Bates plays him in such a shrill, off-putting style -- strictly in the key of arch -- that he gets on one's nerves almost from the start. You can't understand what any man or woman would see in him! The other performers are fine, however, with especially good work from a likable and sympathetic O'Callaghan. Byrne and Tandy are also notable, and there are nice bits from Georgina Hale and Simon Rouse as students. Gray leaves a lot to the imagination,  however, so we never really learn (although we can guess) how Joey feels about Butley leaving him for Anne, and how Anne feels about his homosexuality (she thinks Joey is creepy, however, which may be jealousy and homophobia on her part), or if the marriage was due to internalized homophobia on Butley's part of if he was genuinely bisexual (the term is never used). A scene between Butley and Reg illustrates how "queers" who have relationships with women can act superior to men who are strictly gay in their behavior. One suspects Gray based much of this on characters he encountered in the halls of academia, as there have certainly been plenty of professors who have both wives and boyfriends. Butley has some very good and funny dialogue but you can't quite call it a comedy, although I imagine when Nathan Lane played the role in 2006 he brought out all the humor in the loathsome character.

Verdict: Interesting enough, but it doesn't quite grip or move you. **1/2.

UNCLE BOB

Bob Opel

UNCLE BOB (2010). Director: Robert Oppel.

Bob Opel was the man was streaked the academy awards in front of 70 million viewers. He was also an advocate for sexual freedom, a gay activist, a performance artist in the counter-culture San Francisco art scene, and a murder victim at the age of forty. Shortly before his death, he put on a show called "The Execution of Dan White" after the murderer of Harvey Milk and George Moscone got off with only five years due to the infamous "twinkie" defense. An interesting documentary could have been made about Opel (who dropped one "p" from his last name), but instead the director -- Opel's nephew, Robert Oppel -- seems more interested in putting himself in the limelight. Interspersed with some file footage are reenactments starring the younger Oppel standing in for his uncle. Whatever his commitment to sexual freedom or gay rights, Opel was certainly an exhibitionist, not in the sense of someone who exposes himself to schoolgirls, but in his obvious need for attention (a need certainly provided by his streaking stunt). Uncle Bob explores but doesn't confirm the notion that the academy was in on the joke (with David Niven's famous line about the streaker's "shortcomings" being written before the show), and it never even makes clear if Opel was gay, bisexual or what. A woman who is interviewed is referred to as Opel's "girlfriend," but whether this was romantic or if she was merely a "fag Hag" bff is never made clear, and Opel's boyfriends are never mentioned. In any case, Opel opened a gallery of male homoerotic art featuring the work of Tom of Finland and Mapplethorpe, and published a homoerotic magazine as well. Opel is shown talking to Divine, John Waters, and others, as well as appearing on the Mike Douglas show, where the bland host sings a medley of songs putting the word "streak" in the lyrics. Opel was apparently killed by robbers who entered his shop looking for drugs and money, but young Oppel tries to make a case for a conspiracy theory that falls flat.

Verdict: If you can take a colorful subject like this and still make a dull documentary, you're not doing it right. This film probably should not have been made by a relative. *1/2.

SUMMER VACATION

Yiftach Klein

SUMMER VACATION (2012). Directed by Tal Granit and Sharon Maymon. Short.

In this short Isreali drama, Yuval (Yiftach Klein) is vacationing with his pretty wife, Michaela (Hilla Vidor), and their two children, at the beach. After being playfully buried in the sand up to his neck by his offspring, Yuval finds himself trapped as the tide comes rushing in. His rescuer, who pulls him out of the sand, (in both the literal and figurative sense) is Iftach (Odad Leopold), who is at the resort with his casual flame (Ido Bartal). Although Yuval keeps this from his wife, he and Iftach are already acquainted -- in fact, they were lovers for quite awhile and Iftach keeps hoping he can get Yuval back. Things of a sexual nature occur between the two men, and Iftach decides to tell Michaela the truth, almost leading to a tragedy and an unresolved finale. The trouble with this too-short film (23 minutes) is that there isn't enough time for character development nor to answer some important questions. A bigger problem is that Yuval -- be he gay or bisexual -- is clearly dealing with self-hatred issues and is essentially a complete dickhead. At one point he even accuses Iftach of molesting his teenage son. One also loses sympathy for Iftach, who should certainly leave his ex to his closeted life and move on with another, more agreeable man, and he is rather unkind to the man he came to the resort with. Many of the developments in the story are cliched, and have been related often in movies where the lover is female. However, the acting is good, and Shai (Shay) Peleg's cinematography is first-rate.

Verdict: Absorbing but ultimately ho hum tale of closet case trapped in wet sand. **1/4.

DO I SOUND GAY?

David Thorpe

DO I SOUND GAY? (2014). Director: David Thorpe.

David Thorpe, who is -- for lack of a better term -- kind of, shall we say, "queeny," (not that that makes him a bad person) asks people if he "sounds gay" and is pretty much told by everyone that he does. Although he may or may not be dealing with some degree of internalized homophobia, Thorpe is appalled by his "gay"- sounding voice. Thorpe and  his equally "queeny" friends do not seem to know or acknowledge that the gay "bear" community exists, or that there are many different types of gay men; they just assume that most homosexual males have that certain "gay" speech pattern -- overly sibilant "s" sounds, a sing song style, ending each sentence on an "up" note, talking too fast (actually this last is not covered in the film but should have been), and so on -- when most of the gay men I've encountered don't talk that way at all.  Thorpe goes to more than one speech therapist to learn how to talk less "gay", including a man who works with gay actors who are afraid of losing jobs due to their obvious sexual orientation. (Effeminate mannerisms and behavior are largely ignored, which makes this speech therapy seem a bit pointless.)  As the documentary progresses the point finally gets made -- barely -- that not all gay men sound gay and sometimes straight guys do. There are some interesting conclusions made, especially when we meet a masculine gay friend of Thorpe's who spent most of his time with his car-loving brothers, when other gay men were surrounded by women and adapted some of their speech patterns. It is also true that there have been many cases of gay men consciously or unconsciously mimicking the speech and mannerisms of gay "femmes," which might not have happened had they hung out with the average bear.  Thorpe discovers from old friends and relatives that he started acting and sounding (stereotypically) gay after he came out, as if he needed to make a statement. Do I Sound Gay? makes some interesting points, and ultimately comes to the conclusion that if a man sounds gay, he should just own it, because there's nothing wrong in being gay, and therefore nothing wrong in sounding gay or being obviously gay. The film briefly addresses some gay men's disdain for "queens," with columnist Dan Savage wrongly stating that it's due to misogyny (what?) then stating, rather preciously, that it you "take a piece of man cake and put a female gloss on it, it's sexy" -- most gay men would probably disagree, but apparently Savage can sometimes be a little dizzy in his thinking. The most interesting person to be interviewed is Star Trek actor George Takei, who does not sound gay and makes some astute points as well. Included in the documentary is a clip of now-disgraced comic Louis CK doing a riff on "faggots" -- basically saying he can deal with gay men unless they're annoying queens -- but it's one thing for a gay man to criticize his own community and quite another for someone to do it who hasn't paid his dues.

Verdict: There's some interesting stuff in this, and Thorpe is likable, but this documentary might have been better had someone else tackled the subject. **1/2.

JONATHAN

Jannis Niewohner

JONATHAN (2016). Director: Piotr J. Lewandowski.

Jonathan (Jannis Niewohner) lives on a farm in Germany where he takes care of his father, Burghardt (Andre Hennicke), who is dying of skin cancer. Jonathan gets little help from his Aunt Martha (Barbara Auer), a bitter woman who has had something against her brother for years. Then the cause of this tension appears in the form of Ron (Thomas Sarbacher), a handsome old friend of Burghardt's who moves in with the family. Now what's going on here? Yes, this is yet another movie in which a "self-hating homo" makes a decision to marry a woman and it has negative consequences for virtually everyone. Jonathan won't be satisfied until he gets answers from his father about his mother, whom he barely knew before she died, but when he finds out Ron was Burghardt's lover (apparently Martha had a thing for Ron as well), he isn't at all pleased. Jonathan is well-acted and handsomely produced, with excellent photography and a sensitive score, but it is also slow and rather contrived, and the script seems twenty years old. It's another movie in which the characters avoid confrontations and really talking to one another because the filmmakers fear the movie will come off like a soap opera. Frankly, a little dramatic soap opera-ing might have helped this picture, which is a little too low-key. Some viewers were mightily disappointed that Niewohmer, the sexiest German actor to come down the pike since Horst Buchhollz, only gets to do love scenes with the lady caregiver (their relationship is another contrived development); however, the two gay lovers do get it on in a hospital bed at one point.

Verdict: Comes so close to being special but misses the boat. **1/2.

CALL ME BY YOUR NAME

Armie Hammer

CALL ME BY YOUR NAME (2017). Director: Luca Gaudagnino.

In 1983 Italy, 17-year-old Elio (Timothee Chalamet) lives with his parents in a small village. His father (Michael Stuhlbarg) is a professor of archeology, and each summer a graduate student spends time with the family and assists him. This summer it's 24-year-old Oliver (Armie Hammer of The Man from U.N.C.L.E.), who on the surface at least seems sunny and confident. Elio has a sometime girlfriend, but while initially standoffish to Oliver, he eventually seems to focus much more on him than the girl. Elio and Oliver eventually begin a romantic and sexual relationship, but (alleged) true love doesn't always run smoothly. Coll Me By Your Name is based on the novel by Andre Aciman, a middle-aged family man who thinks there's no such thing as "gay, straight or bi" and is possibly not the best person to write a supposed gay love story. The film version is similarly confused when it isn't being tedious. Chalamet, who was actually 20 during filming and could pass for fifteen, gives a very good performance (he is especially good at the very end, when a long take focused just on his face shows the conflicting emotions Elio feels -- from heartbreak to anger to wry understanding of sorts) but Hammer is more problematic. At 31 he is too old and too tall and his very awkward and unconvincing love scenes with the boyish Chalamet are less erotic than they are discomfiting. (While not effeminate, Hammer does seem to play the role at times like a borderline languid queen as if he thought that's how he should play a gay guy.) Others have noted that Oliver is not a child molester -- that Elio is of legal age in Italy -- but the sex scenes still look like ads for NAMBLA. (We do have to remember, however, the innumerable movies that have had adult men involved with 16 or 17-year-old girls without anyone raising an eyebrow.) Others have also noted that Call Me By Your Name comes off less as a love story between equals as it does the story of an older man who gets off on a boy's adoration of him and pretty much takes advantage of it, especially when one considers what he does at the finale. A bigger problem is that Elio and Oliver are simply not that interesting. Perhaps the best scene in the movie is when father and son have a very frank talk without ever quite coming "out" with what they're talking about (pun intended), but which they manage to get across in spite of it. Still, one might wonder if the sequence is really that believable. Call Me By Your Name also has a dated quality, as if it came out in the seventies instead of 2017, and there have certainly been many -- too many -- tales of boys who fall for older men only to have the older guy go off and get married. While I've no doubt many conservatives will see this film as a Gay Lib movie -- not to mention prettified Chickenhawk crap -- the fact is that Call Me By Your Name is not as gay-friendly -- nor as gay --as it may seem, in some ways suggesting (intended or not) that homosexuality is just a phase. Another "minimalist" movie that has no really great or memorable dramatic sequences. 

Verdict: If it doesn't put you to sleep you may find some of it interesting, but otherwise, this is a MAJOR disappointment. **. 

ANNUAL LGBT ROUND UP

Something rotten's in this "Lake"

ANNUAL LGBT ROUND-UP.

Well, in honor of Gay Pride, here is Great Old Movies' annual round-up of LGBT films. There's not as many this year, because I spent too much time on my B Movie Series and Round Up of Movie Bad Guys  -- even I  have only so much time to watch movies -- but I may have a fresh crop of gay flicks later in the year.

Anyway, we've got The Christine Jorgensen Story from 1970, and more recent flicks such as Robin Williams in Boulevard; the kind of sleazy crime drama King Cobra; the disappointing and rather regressive Stranger By the Lake from France; and the excellent Jeffrey Schwarz-directed documentary, Vito, about gay writer and activist Vito Russo.

THE CHRISTINE JORGENSEN STORY

John Hansen 

THE CHRISTINE JORGENSEN STORY (1970). Director: Irving Rapper.

From his early childhood on, George Jorgensen (John Hansen) has felt like he was different, and identified much more as a girl than as a boy. Mistaken for being gay, he decides to discover more on his "condition" and is told that he has an excess of estrogen. George travels to Denmark where he is given permission to have what today we would call sexual realignment surgery. His story makes headlines in the New York Daily News ("Ex-GI Becomes Beautiful Blonde") and both he and his family have to deal with the fall-out of the disclosure. Christine Jorgensen was a true pioneer, and this fictionalized version of her story is interesting, but not all that well done, with a cheap look and tedious exposition. John Hansen is an effective lead, portraying both George and Christine equally well, although at times he's somewhat amateurish. Quinn K. Redeker (of The Young and the Restless) plays a reporter who falls for Christine and gives her her first kiss (which is actually a male-male kiss since Hansen was only playing a woman); Pamelyn Ferdin [The Beguiled] is George's sympathetic sister as a child; Elaine Joyce is a bitchy, homophobic model; Joyce Meadows [The Girl in Lovers Lane] is another, friendlier model; Joan Tompkins is George's ahead-of-her time Aunt Thora; and Will Kuluva [To Trap a Spy] is Professor Estabrook, who sets George on the correct path.

Another character is George's boss, Jess (Rod McCary), who turns out to be gay and gets angry when George denies his homosexuality. Jess nearly winds up assaulting George. A scene that could have been positive, showing a bond between two sexual minorities (however different), is instead thrown away for a bit of ugly, almost homophobic sensationalism. It's especially egregious because Jess is a likable character who tells George of many well-known gay men throughout history.

Irving Rapper also directed another famous movie about an amazing transformation: Bette Davis' Now, Voyager.

NOTE: Chistine Jorgensen's operation was not the first of its kind, but the first that was heavily publicized. There were some differences from earlier operations, and I've no doubt attitudes towards transsexualism and its origins have changed since this film was made nearly fifty years ago.

Verdict: Compelling at first, with a sensitive lead performance, but it drags a bit and, surprisingly, lacks dramatic intensity. **1/2.

VITO

Vito Russo

VITO (2011). Directed by Jeffrey Schwarz.

This superb documentary looks at the life, activism and career of Vito Russo [1946 - 1990], who fought for gay rights for years and also wrote the book The Celluloid Closet, which looked at gay images in films. Vito also worked for the AIDS organization, ACT UP, and co-founded GLAAD, the organization that monitors LGBT images in the media. The film also looks into Vito's personal life, his relationships with his family,and his boyfriend, Jeffrey Sevcik, who died of AIDS,

Vito watched the action the night of the Stonewall riots, but just thought "it was a bunch of crazy queens." He didn't become political until sometime later, but he never suffered from Catholic guilt over his homosexuality nor thought there was anything wrong in being gay. Vito eventually got his own cable TV show, and became friends with Lily Tomlin, and was instrumental in getting her to appear at a Gay Pride rally. Tomlin and various activists, friends and relatives are all interviewed, and there are loads of clips of Vito himself, who seems like an intelligent and sensitive man.

Although I chaired the media committee of the Gay Activists Alliance for several years (in a later period) I did not get to work with Vito, although I met him, and it's a shame we never had a chance to become good friends or co-workers as our interests certainly coincided.

Verdict: Moving, beautifully-done portrait of a gay activist who deserves to be remembered, ****.