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. 

THE SILENCE

THE SILENCE (aka Tystnaden/1963). Director: Ingmar Bergman.

Two women who appear to be sisters are traveling in Europe with the ten-year-old son of one of them when they stop in a rather dismal little town, Timoka, where one, Ester (Ingrid Thulin), becomes ill. As Ester becomes increasingly overwrought and fears dying alone, Anna (Gunnel Lindblom) goes out of the hotel and finds a man to have sex with, and little Johan (Jorgen Lindstrom) makes his own merriment with a friendly old man and some dwarfs. This is probably fraught with symbolism and deep meaning -- maybe -- but it comes off more as an almost comically underwritten mood piece and little else. Ester has been described as a "repressed lesbian" in several reviews, probably because of the scene where she seems to come on to her sister (similar to scenes in the later Cries and Whispers) but it comes off less as lesbianism or incest than just a kind of mock eroticism-without-a-point, thrown in because it turns Bergman on. Thanks to Sven Nykvist's photography, the film is full of a grim atmosphere, as well as arresting images and faces, as well as the usual fine acting -- if only Bergman had given the players a screenplay that was worthy of their mettle.

Verdict: Half-baked in Timoka. **.

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. 

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. 

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.

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.

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. **. 

BOULEVARD

Roberto Aguire and Robin Williams

BOULEVARD (2014). Director: Dito Montiel.

In an early scene in this study of a closeted married man, the main character, banker Nolan Mack (Robin Williams), talks pleasantly to two clients who have just taken out a loan: a gay male couple who have just bought a house and are looking forward to a future together. Nolan has much less to look forward to; he realized he was gay at 12 -- he is now 60 -- and has repressed it, marrying his wife, Joy (Kathy Baker), whom he sincerely loves but feels no true passion for. Driving along the boulevard one night he nearly runs over Leo (Roberto Aguire), a hustler who expects sex for cash but finds himself in the odd position of having a new friend who tries hard to help him. Meanwhile, Nolan's growing feelings for Leo begin to jeopardize not only his relationship with his wife, but his job and promotion at the bank. Boulevard is far from a perfect film -- we learn too little about Leo, and don't get enough of Joy's side of things -- but it is an absorbing look at the lives of homosexual men who make one choice in life and live to regret it with each new day and the ever-changing attitudes toward gay relationships. The performances are wonderful, not only from the three leads, but also from Henry Haggard as Nolan's boss; Bob Odenkirk as Nolan's understanding best friend; and Giles Matthey in an almost over-the-top turn as Leo's nasty and violent pimp. The film gets points for not having an unrealistic or cop-out ending, and it is also good that the hustler is a pleasant-looking individual but not a super-hot Hollywood-style hunk.

Verdict: Interesting look at the lives of older gay men who are nearly left behind. ***.

MOONLIGHT

Trevante Rhodes

MOONLIGHT (2016). Written and directed by Barry Jenkins.

Chiron (Alex R. Hibbert) is a little boy living in a depressed black neighborhood where his mother, Paula (Naomie Harris) is a "crack whore." Chiron is befriended by a local drug dealer, Juan (Mahershala Ali), and his girlfriend, Teresa (Janelle Monae). Shy, withdrawn and spindly, Chiron is thought to be gay and is bullied, although he is treated more kindly by his friend, Kevin (Jaden Piner). Later, when the boys are teenagers (now played by Ashton Sanders and Jharrel Jerome), they have a sexual encounter. After Chiron strikes back against a homophobic bully who forces Kevin to beat Chiron, the latter does a stretch in juvie. Ten years later, now a buff and handsome grown man (Trevante Rhodes), Chiron gets an unexpected call from Kevin (Andre Holland) ... Oh, how I wanted to love Moonlight, as I was delighted that a film whose lead character was both black and gay could win an Academy Award for Best Picture in today's climate. Unfortunately, an astute critic has to separate a film as political statement from a film as art. I realize the film's problem for me was not so much its subtlety -- as it's not that subtle -- but an overly low-key approach that almost completely strips it of dramatic intensity. Fully half the movie deals with Chiron as a boy (although the death of his father surrogate, Juan, is only mentioned in passing), with a good forty minutes showing Chiron as a teen. That doesn't leave much time for Chiron as an adult, and the film ends abruptly, making many in the audience wonder "is that all there is?"

True, the lead character -- who has been so uncommunicative and disaffected for most of his life -- finally reaches out to someone, revealing the sensitivity that remains under the surface, in the last few minutes of the film, but while this has internal importance, it is not exactly "dramatic." The ending hints at things for Chiron and Kevin that may never materialize. Frankly, there are quite a few gay independent films (which have never gotten the attention that Moonlight has) that have much stronger story lines. In fact, it could be argued that Moonlight doesn't so much have a plot as a premise, and one that is never fully realized.

While a film should be judged by what it is and not what it isn't, one can't help but notice that the movie, aside from the bullying aspects which are universal, never really deals with homophobia within the African-American community -- even Juan seems nominally pro-gay. (In fact, it never really deals with Chiron's feelings about being gay or if he even identifies as such.) Aside from the adult Kevin registering disapproval over the adult Chiron's criminal career choice, the film doesn't even deal with black attitudes towards drug dealers who help decimate their own communities. In fact, it troubles me that drug dealers are portrayed sympathetically in this picture. And that there are so many black stereotypes. (To judge from Hollywood movies, including those made by black filmmakers, 90% of the black community consists of drug dealers and crack whores.)  Then there's the fact that the ending, with its intimate but non-sexual encounter, could be considered a cop-out. But far worse is the fact that virtually every character, including Chiron, is basically one-dimensional.

This last may not be apparent to the casual viewer because the acting in the film is uniformly excellent. There isn't a bad performance, and there's especially notable work from Sanders and Rhodes, and young Hibbert is amazing. While it's not at all unrealistic that a spindly gay kid could reinvent himself as a burly, macho-type, the casting of drop-dead gorgeous Rhodes could be considered pure Hollywood. Rhodes is great, but did the character have to be a kind of fantasy hunk -- as if Billy Batson had transformed himself into Captain Marvel?  And while kids do still, unfortunately, call each other, including straight kids, "faggot," everyone's insistence that Chiron is gay seems strange as he is not blatantly effeminate in his deportment. Of course a movie about a "queen" would have been a very different movie.

The low-key, "minimalist" approach of the movie obviously worked for a great many people, but I wonder if as the years pass, when the political climate may have changed, if Moonlight will still be held in quite such high regard. I have a feeling that people who normally wouldn't be caught dead seeing such a film, but who went because of its Oscar, have seen few if any LGBT movies and have little to compare it to.

Verdict: Not a bad movie by any means, with some lovely things in it and excellent performances, but for me a major disappointment. **1/2.

PRICK UP YOUR EARS

Alfred Molina and Gary Oldman

PRICK UP YOUR EARS (1987). Director: Stephen Frears.

Midway through Prick Up Your Ears, biographer John Lahr (Wallace Shawn) talks to some of the late Joe Orton's relatives, wiggles his hand, and says, "did you know he was 'that way.'" This sort of sets the tone for this condescending biopic of the playwright Orton (Gary Oldman of Criminal Law), who was murdered by his longtime companion, Kenneth Halliwell (Alfred Molina of The Hoax), before the latter committed suicide. The whole tone of the movie is off-putting, starting with the decision to make John Lahr (upon whose biography this is based and who was co-producer of the film), and his wife, unnecessary characters in the film and even having them and an agent played by Vanessa Redgrave providing non-illuminating commentary throughout. Was Lahr's ego so big that he needed to put himself into the movie? Prick Up Your Ears bounces back and forth in time and never seems cohesive, nor does it make the characters come alive the way they should, focusing more on Orton's sexual escapades than his life and work. The performances are only okay. Oldman somewhat resembles Orton, but the real Halliwell was much better-looking than Molina. Orton's plays were erotic black comedies, and it may be that the filmmakers wanted this picture to reflect that -- Orton and Halliwell had many good times in spite of their horrible ending -- but making a nominal black comedy out of their ultimately tragic lives still seems in poor taste, as if it's "who cares what these funny fags did to each other?" Whatever these two men were really like -- and this film doesn't let us know -- they deserved better than this. Worse was to come: Orton, a campy musical comedy about the two men that played in London. Stephen Frears also directed the equally poor Florence Foster Jenkins.

Verdict: The movie may have seemed progressive thirty years ago, but it doesn't really work today. **.

HALLOWEEN HORROR 2016

Scream for Your Life!

HALLOWEEN HORROR 2016

Well, we've got a huge crop of horror movies for this year's installment of Halloween Horror. There are movies from the forties, fifties, sixties, seventies, and eighties, as well as a couple of more recent vintage. Jason Voorhees is back in two installments of Friday the 13th, and we've even got the 2009 gay slasher flick, Hellbent. Plus two movies about Jack the Ripper, one British, one German, and two films about The Town that Dreaded Sundown. You'll also meet The Creeper and the people of Haunts and The House of Seven Corpses. And news about my latest horror epub!

Have fun!

HELLBENT

Dylan Fergus

HELLBENT (2004). Writer/director: Paul Etheredge.

"Why wouldn't you want to kill us -- we're fuckin ' fabulous!" -- Tobey

Eddie (Dylan Fergus) works for the LAPD, but only in an administrative capacity due to the loss of an eye in an accident. He wears his father's old cop uniform for a Halloween carnival, which he attends with some of his fellow gay male friends. His buddies include his apparently bisexual roomie, Chaz (Andrew Levitas); slightly geeky Joey (Hank Harris), who is wearing leather for the evening and isn't certain how it'll go over; and Tobey (Matt Phillips), who decides to go in drag, then wonders why no one is hitting on him. Two others attend the festivities: Jake (Bryan Kirkwood), a brooding bad boy type with attitude; and a masked killer who excites the others but prefers beheading people to making love. Just what the world needs: a gay slasher flick. Hellbent can at least be differentiated from Al Pacino's homoerotic serial killer movie Cruising, because both the hero and the major supporting characters are all  gay men, but their brutal slaughter might still make some viewers rather uncomfortable. Typical of slasher flicks, there's little pity for the victims, and just a slight attempt at pathos. The gruesome murder scenes are generally well-handled, with a standout being a slashing and decapitation that takes place amid the flashing lights of a crowded dance floor. The actors and characters are likable although not that well-developed, another slasher flick staple. One does have to ponder, considering the number of gay cops that there are nowadays (there's even a Gay Officers Action League or GOAL) why they couldn't have made the hero an actual cop on a night off. And must they have included the guy in drag and a few other stereotypes? On the plus side, the film does generate some suspense and eeriness, and it has a tense and exciting climax. The ending, however, may leave some viewers up in the air. Kirkwood is a standout as Jake, but the others are all pretty good. There is one especially nice touch dealing with a character who can't quite bring himself to actually kiss  another man until something helps him get over his hang-ups.

Verdict: If we must have gay slasher flicks ... ***.

A VERY NATURAL THING

An iconic image from Very Natural Thing

A VERY NATURAL THING (1974). Director: Christopher Larkin.

David (Robert McLane aka Robert Joel) is a fairly conservative gay teacher who used to be in the seminary. He falls hard for a guy named Mark (Curt Gareth), who tells him right off the bat that he isn't much for romance. In spite of this David moves in with Mark, and tries to follow his lead by having a more open relationship. It's not a surprise when things don't work out, but it is a surprise as to which man moves out first ... When David meets a nice new fellow, he's somewhat gun-shy. A Very Natural Thing was, to my knowledge, the very first theatrical gay-themed movie (after The Boys in the Band) that was not a porn film. There are erotic scenes in the movie, and some quick glimpses of full frontal nudity, but nothing out and out pornographic. Christopher Larkin's goal in making the film was to present homosexuality unapologetically, and to show how gay couples could be very similar to straight couples, what with issues of monogamy and such, and yet also different in some ways. Of course, it is a little off-base in suggesting that a gay man must be conservative and/or religious in wanting to be monogamous. The film is very low-budget, and the appealing cast consists of talented amateurs who lack spontaneity and are overly earnest at times. Jay Pierce makes a nice professional impression as David's sophisticated friend, Alan. David is apolitical, but scenes from the actual Gay Pride March are incorporated into the film when he meets up with Jason (Bo White), who gently argues with David on gay politics and turns out to be separated from his wife (Deborah Trowbridge). In one interesting scene Jason's cast-off spouse wants him to visit her family but he tells her he's spending the weekend with David, and the pain and disappointment is etched tellingly in her face as she bravely wishes him well. It could be argued that there ultimately isn't that much to A Very Natural Thing  -- one critic stated that it proved that homosexuals could be just as boring as heterosexuals -- but there's something compelling about the movie in spite of it. I found the ending extremely moving, but whether it was because of the music, memories of my youth, the fact that so many in this period would die of AIDS (just when so many, as in this film, were feeling good about being gay), or everything put together, I don't know.

Verdict: Imperfect but groundbreaking and in its attitudes towards gay men a quantum leap forward from The Boys in the Band. ***.

SCORE

Casey Donovan (Cal Culver) and Gerald Grant 

SCORE (1974). Director: Radley Metzger.

Elvira (Claire Wilbur) and Jack (Gerald Grant) are a pair of married swingers who like to invite other couples over for some sexual fun and games. As both spouses are "bisexual," Elvira tries to score with the wife while Jack goes after the husband. The two have turned this into a competition to see who can get the highest "score." Elvira and Jack's latest party-goers are Eddie (Calvin Culver) and his wife, Betsy (Lynn Lowry), who are much less sophisticated than their hosts. As the evening progresses towards a midnight deadline, Elvira and Jack both make strong attempts to get it on with their opposite number and win some points. Score actually works up some suspense as to whether or not the couple will "score," and the major set piece of the film -- not that this will surprise anyone -- is that they do, in a protracted hardcore sequence that jumps back and forth from the two women to the two men.

Based on an off-Broadway show by Jerry Douglas, who also wrote the screenplay, Score is typical of seventies "porn" in that there is at least an attempt to develop real characters and storylines -- there are some witty lines and the acting is good -- although this could not exactly be called a bisexual Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (Like the infamous The Devil in Miss Jones, this picture also played in "legitimate" moviehouses.) Due to the rise of the modern gay rights movement, bisexuality (both real and imagined) also came out of the closet, albeit of the self-conscious, somewhat phony variety demonstrated in Score -- it might be called a gay movie with bisexual pretensions. (There is one straight sex scene in the movie, but most of it is homosexual in nature.) Jack tells his wife regarding Eddie, "you wouldn't appreciate him half as much as I do, and worse than that, he won't appreciate you half as much as me." The film more than suggests that the two gentlemen, at least, are far, far more interested in men than they are in their wives or women in general. While Score is meant to be a fun-loving, open-minded, free love free-for-all in which one's full sexuality is encouraged, one can't escape the suggestion that Jack is basically a gay man living with and off a wealthy lesbian, which actually makes the movie seem dated in these days of gay marriage.

Aside from a few genuine bisexuals or the bi-curious, the movie seems to defeat itself because the gay male viewers will be bored by the lesbian scenes and vice versa -- it's a question of the filmmakers wanting to have their cake and eat it, too. Hetero men may enjoy the "girl-on-girl" action but as for the rest ... ? Jerry Douglas (who is not to be confused with The Young and the Restless actor of the same name), also wrote and directed a film entitled Both Ways, in which Gerald Grant again plays a bisexual husband who has an affair with a gay man (Dean Tait) and, in a regressive twist, murders him. Neither film successfully ushered in a new genre of bisexual porn. Calvin Culver was better known as erotic film star Casey Donovan and was the boyfriend of actor-writer Thomas Tryon for several years. Grant and Wilbur had only a few film credits, but Lynn Lowry had a long list of credits, frequently in horror films. Radley Metzger also directed the non-exploitation The Cat and the Canary and did a slick editing job on The Flesh Eaters.

Verdict: If the description gets you excited, than by all means watch it! **1/2 out of 4.

BEFORE STONEWALL

BEFORE STONEWALL (1984). Directors: Greta Schiller; Robert Rosenberg.

This highly interesting documentary looks at aspects of the gay community before the start of the modern-day Gay Rights Movement. It looks at the large number of gay men and lesbians who fought in WW2, chronicles the harassment of homosexuals during the McCarthy era, and examines the change in attitudes towards gay people both within and without the diverse community. Back in those days, gay couples would often mimic straight couples, with, say, the "butcher" of the two women trying to come off like a man so they wouldn't be hassled as "queer" if they went out on a date. Some gay men deliberately overdid the "camping" as a way of declaring themselves and expressing their independence, although there is little outrageous camping in gay bars today. The Civil Rights Movement for black people influenced the Gay Rights movement with its increasing (non-violent) militancy, leading to the Stonewall rebellion. People interviewed for this film include activist Frank Kameny; Allen Ginsberg (who recounts how his famous poem "Howl" was considered obscene); historian Martin Duberman; Harry Hay of the Mattachine Society, an earlier Gay Rights group; Barbara Gittings; Craig Rodwell of the Oscar Wilde bookstore, and many others. There are perhaps too many clips of alleged drag queens from old movies, but many people will find this an eye-opener.

NOTE: It's become obligatory today to say that Stonewall and the whole modern-gay rights movement was started by drag queens of color. If this was true, no problem, but the Stonewall was not exclusively a drag bar. Yes, drag queens would patronize the place, and there were certainly some drag queens there and fighting against the police the night of the riot, but the crowd was an ethnically diverse group -- Black, White, Hispanic etc. -- and the majority were not in drag; everyone played a part.

Verdict: How things have changed! ***.

AFTER STONEWALL

AFTER STONEWALL (1999). Director: John Scagliotti.

This documentary looks at all the developments, both positive and negative, that overtook the gay community and gay rights advocacy after the Stonewall riots of 1969. After Stonewall traces the formation of the Gay Liberation Front, which fell apart from too much divisiveness; the Gay Activists Alliance, which brought a new (non-violent) militancy to the fight for acceptance and gay rights; the scourge of AIDS, unfairly deemed a "gay" disease and which almost took the gay male community back into a figurative stone age; the rise of groups such as the National Gay Task Force, Queer Nation and Act Up (an AIDS Rights group); and the emergence of Anita Bryant and her anti-gay hate group, Save the Children, which served to galvanize many members of both the gay and straight community to organize and fight back. Along the way we meet Out politician Barney Frank; lesbian congresswoman Sheila James Kuehl (who played Zelda on Dobie Gillis); writers Armistad Maupin, Larry Kramer and Craig Lucas; black historian Barbara Smith; and many others. You'll also learn that Betty Friedan wanted lesbians out of the National organization of Women because she saw them as the "lavender menace" that would topple women's rights; watch Out Army officer Sgt. Malkovich get on the cover of Time; revisit the tragic death of young Matthew Shephard; and listen to some activists deplore the media exploitation of gay rights and its increasing commercialization.

Verdict: Excellent documentary which explores the very wide diversity of the gay and lesbian community. ***1/2.

STONEWALL (2015)

Danny gets his first view of Manhattan

STONEWALL (2015). Director: Roland Emmerich.

After he is discovered having sex with another man, Danny Winters (Jeremy Irvine) leaves his small town and his coach-father's rejection and comes to Manhattan. There he meets an excitable drag queen named Ray (Jonny Beauchamp), who befriends him and falls for him unrequitedly. Ray is part of a group of gay hustlers, street people and "queens" who congregate on and around the Stonewall bar in Sheridan Square, a mafia-run dive that caters to different elements of the gay community. Danny, who is masculine and very handsome, has no sexual feelings for the effeminate Ray, but winds up in a brief relationship with Trevor (Jonathan Rhys Meyers), who works for the early gay rights group, the Mattachine Society. After a series of misadventures, Danny winds up in the Stonewall during a police raid, but this time the angry patrons fight back and a riot ensues ... One would hope that a movie based on this seminal event in Gay Liberation would be better than this, but Stonewall seems overrun with cliches and caricatures. Many people objected to the fictional character of Danny -- white, masculine and good-looking (as if there are no white, masculine, good-looking gay guys!) -- because he doesn't typify the more outre customer of the Stonewall, but considering the fact that a great many white gay guys traveled from their small towns to make their way to Greenwich Village (including the Stonewall), this seems unfair. (And there have certainly been plenty of movies about queens and transvestites so why not equal time?) A bigger problem is that this fictional character takes center stage, throwing the first brick and shouting "gay power!" Worse is that Danny's misadventures in New York with pathetic old johns and sometimes obnoxious drag queens with attitude -- Ray's hopeless crush on Danny, for instance, although, oddly, I almost found myself hoping this unlikely couple would make it -- have been done so often that you think you're seeing something made twenty years ago. (Sheesh, we've even got the bit about the gay guy coming home to discover the man he loved has gotten married!)  Films have been made in which gay characters wind up at the Stonewall riots, and that's what this should have been -- but it shouldn't have been called Stonewall. Jon Robin Baitz' screenplay tries to touch all bases, but with so much time given over to Danny's less interesting and over-familiar life story, there's not much room left for the event itself. If Ed Murphy (Ron Perlman) -- who was involved in the bar, was said to be a criminal, and later became a gay activist -- were alive today he would undoubtedly file a lawsuit. Of the actors Beauchamp does a pretty fine job with Ray, and the British Irvine is credible as Danny, although at times he over-acts when his character over-reacts. He's another English actor who sounds perfectly American (a gift that doesn't always work the other way around.) Meyers is good as Trevor and successfully disguises his Irish origins. Perlman is certainly vivid as Murphy, and there are other effective performances among the large supporting cast. While this is not a terribly good picture -- a shame, considering its honorable intentions -- there are some good scenes, such as when white leather guys come to the defense of a black drag queen that Murphy is about to beat (although Keller's, where the scene takes place, was not a leather bar, and this is more of a "feel-good" moment than a real one). This is not the first fictionalized movie about the Stonewall Rebellion.

Verdict: For a movie based on a real event and certain real characters, this seems rather unreal at times. But some viewers may well find it inspiring and powerful although it, unfortunately, seems to catalog a variety of stereotypes. **1/2.

JUDAS KISS

2 sides of the same coin: Richard Harmon; Charlie David

JUDAS KISS (2011). Director: J. P. Tepnapa.

"My Hollywood career has consisted of parties and rehab."

"I even masturbate cinematically!"

Failed screenwriter Zachary Wells (Charlie David) goes back to his old film school, the scene of his first and last triumph, to help judge a competition. He has a one-night stand with a student who turns out to be in this same competition. But a bigger surprise comes when this student reveals his name as Danny Reyes (Richard Harmon) and his film as "Judas Kiss." The trouble is that Danny Reyes is Zachary's real name, and "Judas Kiss" is the film he made that won the competition fifteen years earlier. This is already an intriguing situation but it turns into the Twilight Zone when it develops that Danny Reyes is Zachary's younger self, and he is told by an old man, who is still another version of Danny Reyes, that his life will turn out much better if he actually loses the competition. Naturally younger Danny objects to this idea ... This could have been a gay variation on a whimsical, fantasy film, but the tone is too heavy (without being profound) and the characters don't seem the slightest bit surprised or perplexed by this odd situation. Zach makes love to his younger self -- a bizarre situation in of itself -- but doesn't recognize him or even think he looks familiar. Judas Kiss isn't the first film in which characters are given second chances by going back in time (although it's never made quite clear that this has happened, even when Zach tells a teacher that she "doesn't look a day older"), but its main problem, perhaps, is that it tries to tackle a little too much in one movie. In spite of its overly complicated plot and surplus of characters, the film is well-produced for an independent and is often strangely arresting, although it drags in the final quarter. Many of the actors could be described as talented amateurs, but the leads in this have had a significant body of work, especially Harmon, who has definite presence and is effectively intense, and David (who looks even better without his beard), although he doesn't quite bother to get across his character's desperation, although that may be due to the generally superficial tone of the movie (despite some serious elements). Former (?) porn star Sean Paul Lockhart* certainly makes an impression as a young man, Chris, who wants a relationship with Danny; there's no reason he can't have a solid legitimate acting career. Julia Morizawa, among others, is also notable as Abbey. The entire cast sings the catchy closing credit number, "If I Fall." Some of the male actors overdo the "girlishness" at times.

* Lockhart (also known as Brent Corrigan for his adult films) is the subject of a 2016 James Franco movie entitled King Cobra, which the former disavows.

Verdict: Well, at least it's certainly different .,. **1/2.