Star Wars VII: The Force Awakens
Director: J.J. Abrams
Writers: Lawrence Kasdan, J.J. Abrams, and Michael Arndt. Based on characters created by George Lucas.
Cast: Harrison Ford, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Adam Driver, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Lupita Nyong'o, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew
Overview
Watching the seventh installment of the Star Wars saga feels, in spite of the title, like we're watching the Force hit the snooze button as many times as it can before dragging it's sorry arse into the bathroom to drive away the hangover brought on by a night bar hoping through the more wretched and scummy hives of Mos Eisley.
Synopsis
Take scripts from previous episodes. Put in blender. Puree for three to five minutes. Make sure to use a lid to avoid being splattered with spoilers.
The Queering
Detractors of the Star Wars saga on the whole have cynically claimed that the films were little more than marketing gimmicks to sell toys and licensed merchandise. Unfortunately, while I have been a fan of the series up until this point, The Force Awakens pretty much lives up the more cynical criticism the earlier installments received.
Watching The Force Awakens feels like watching a mid-season episode of a TV series during sweeps week (back when sweeps were a thing before everyone just binge watched on Netflix). Everything's dialed up to eleven, everything getting thrown at the audience, and boy you better pay attention or you're going to get lost.
Which pretty much is the main problem I had, the plot moves too fast. Outside of the opening sequences, there really isn't any time to absorb background detail or to really get to know any of the characters.
This is probably best illustrated with how space travel now appears to work in this universe. The earlier films implied that even using hyperdrive, it still took hours, or even days to travel between planets. Now space travel appears to work like long range transporters on Star Trek. You just get in a ship, push a few buttons and arrive instantly at your destination.
The problem this endears is that there is no significant downtime between the frenetic action scenes. Everyone just keeps jumping and yelling and running and swinging their lightsabers at each other. New characters like Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) and Maz Kanata (Maz Kanata) are thrown against the wall in the hope that some part of them will stick in viewers mind. A whole village gets wiped out by the bad guys, a planet destroyed, and a major character killed off. But the constant rush to get to the next thing prevents any of these elements from having a significant impact beyond sheer exhaustion.
Remember the scenes on the Millenium Falcon in A New Hope where Obi Wan tries to teach Luke how to use a lightsaber? Remember the line, "it felt like a thousand voices cried out and were suddenly silenced"? Well there's nothing like that here. Turns out sometimes taking a breather is a good thing.
The strength of the Star Wars saga was always it's world building. In earlier episodes, the filmmakers were pretty adept at showing the audience a skeleton and allowing us to flesh out the details of this vast galaxy far away. That doesn't happen here and the lack of any kind of breathing room once the plot kicks into high gear, doesn't help. Why did Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) turn to the dark side besides super vague daddy issues? What is the resistance? And if they're working for the legitimate government of the Republic, why are they called the resistance and not just the military?
Then there are the borderline plot holes: Why is Luke Skywalker in hiding if he wants to be found? Why does no one in La Resistance have a complete map of the galaxy? What's the strategic advantage of having a device that can destroy all of the planets in an entire system for the First Order (besides the fact that the writers hadn't quite ripped off enough elements from the original trilogy at this point)?
Admittedly, it's not all bad. There are a few elements I liked. BB-8 works very well as comic relief and as a substitute for R2-D2. Rey (Daisy Riddle) and Finn (John Boyega) make nice additions to the cast and help to up the diversity quotient. Some of the earlier scenes with Rey exploring (or rather scavenging) through a desert planet littered the remnants of a great battle, with crashed space ships and broken transports littering the landscape, work on their own and promise a more interesting story that never actually gets told. The cast generally acquits itself well during the brief moments when they're actually allowed to act. There's even a fairly obvious queer subtext between Finn and X-wing pilot Poe Dameron. Watch the trailer if you don't believe me. Here's hoping that it becomes text in Episode VIII and that we actually get a fully fleshed out story next time around.
Recommendation
I would recommend The Force Awakens about as strongly as I would allowing ones kids to play Jedi and Sith near a Sarlacc pitt.
The Rating
Two Stars out of Four.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Showing posts with label queer subtext. Show all posts
Showing posts with label queer subtext. Show all posts
January 1, 2016
May 28, 2015
Queer Review: The Matrix (1999)
The Matrix
Directors: The Wachowskis (Credited at the time as The Wachowski Brothers)
Writers: The Wachowskis (Credited at the time as The Wachowski Brothers)
Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving, Gloria Foster, Joe Pantoliano, Marcus Chong, Julian Arahanga, Matt Doran, Belinda McClory, Anthony Ray Parker
Overview
What is The Matrix but the greatest science fiction film of all time? Few films can match what The Wachowskis accomplish here, in this tale that takes some of the densest metaphysical questions that have ever been asked and uses them as the basis for a high octane, adrenaline fueled action flick, which also happens to serve as a modern re-telling of Plato's Allegory of the Cave.
Synopsis
Thomas Anderson (Keanu Reeves) is a computer programer in search of the elusive Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne), who Neo (Thomas's hacker alias) believes holds the answer to the question: "What is the Matrix?" On his journey to see Morpheus, Neo manages to make contact with Trinity (Carrie-Ann Moss), a female hacker whom everyone thinks is a guy. When Neo finally manages to meet with Morpheus, he finds that the answer is more complicated then he imagined and that the reality he has believed in his whole life has been a lie.
The Queering
A the time The Matrix was first released, Lana Wachowski was still going by the name "Larry" Wachowski and the film was credited to "The Wachowski Brothers" rather than the moniker "The Wachowskis". Looking at the first Matrix movie now, it's possible to see a great many transgender subtexts that were not as obvious when it first came out. For starters, there is Trinity, a female hacker whom everyone thinks is a man (as commented on by Neo when the two first meet). The fact that people think Trinity is a man in the Matrix, is also brought up in The Animatrix short A Detective Story, where the titular detective assigned to track down Trinity, constantly refers to Trinity as a man. This essentially makes Trinity a women who is in the process of either escaping from or attempting to destroy an artificial reality where everyone thinks she is a guy.
Other examples are more subtle but definitely are there. Take Neo, a hero who -- outside of scenes where he is required to fire off endless rounds of ammo from a variety of firearms -- is not generally presented in overly macho terms, at least if one were to compare him to the mold created by 80's action heros like Stallone or Schwarzenegger. As it is, Neo has to deliberately reject his old, gendered name of Mr. Thomas Anderson and has to correct Mr. Smith (Hugo Weaving), who constantly insists on using the old name. Then there is Switch, who in earlier drafts of the script, was supposed to change gender upon leaving or entering the Matrix. In the version that made it to screen, the character is instead presented as androgynous in both worlds.
These trans subtexts I would argue, tie directly in with the films' main themes regarding the nature of reality. As the Oracle points out to Neo, all knowledge begins with knowledge of ones self. In order for Neo to be able to do anything as "The One", he must first know what he is and what he is capable of. As the story progresses, a key plot point revolves around Neo being unable to access his abilities until he has knowledge that he is the one. In other words, Neo becomes "The One" through self actualization and increasing his self awareness of who he is.
Of course by now, it has been pointed out by others that The Matrix is basically a modern day retelling of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. The story of Plato's cave is one where an entire group of people is kept prisoner for their entire lives, forced to stare at flickering shadows on a cave wall. Because these shadows are all these prisoners experience, they assume that the shadows are all that there is to reality. One day, a prisoner finds himself able to escape his chains, and makes his way up out of the cave. As he travels out of the cave, he becomes scared and disorientated by the new experiences he undergoes. Once outside, he is blinded by the bright light of the outside world. Eventually his eyes adjust and he sets out to explore the new world. Afterwards he returns to the cave and attempts to free the other prisoners, only for most of them to not understand his story about the outside world.
Many of the elements of that story are present here. Neo is the prisoner who manages to escape and like the Prisoner, he is blinded by the bright lights of the outside world. "Why does the light hurt my eyes," Neo asks Morpheus. "Because you've never used them before," Morpheus answers. Presumably, the reason the Washowskis use white transition shots so frequently is to reference this element of the story. Furthermore, as Morpheus mentions to Neo in the scene with the Women in the Red Dress, many people who are kept prisoner in the Matrix, will fight to stay a part of that system, rather than accept the truth.
While what The Matrix ultimately offers up is primarily a cerebral experience, it is also worth mentioning that the action scenes are pure visual spectacles, (the film is still famous for introducing the world to the Bullet Time technique). While the sequels were disappointing, the first film in The Matrix Franchise still holds up today.
Recommendation
It would be worth doing advanced math problems involving matrices, if the reward was being able to see The Matrix
The Rating
4 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Directors: The Wachowskis (Credited at the time as The Wachowski Brothers)
Writers: The Wachowskis (Credited at the time as The Wachowski Brothers)
Cast: Keanu Reeves, Laurence Fishburne, Carrie-Anne Moss, Hugo Weaving, Gloria Foster, Joe Pantoliano, Marcus Chong, Julian Arahanga, Matt Doran, Belinda McClory, Anthony Ray Parker
Overview
What is The Matrix but the greatest science fiction film of all time? Few films can match what The Wachowskis accomplish here, in this tale that takes some of the densest metaphysical questions that have ever been asked and uses them as the basis for a high octane, adrenaline fueled action flick, which also happens to serve as a modern re-telling of Plato's Allegory of the Cave.
Synopsis
Thomas Anderson (Keanu Reeves) is a computer programer in search of the elusive Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne), who Neo (Thomas's hacker alias) believes holds the answer to the question: "What is the Matrix?" On his journey to see Morpheus, Neo manages to make contact with Trinity (Carrie-Ann Moss), a female hacker whom everyone thinks is a guy. When Neo finally manages to meet with Morpheus, he finds that the answer is more complicated then he imagined and that the reality he has believed in his whole life has been a lie.
The Queering
A the time The Matrix was first released, Lana Wachowski was still going by the name "Larry" Wachowski and the film was credited to "The Wachowski Brothers" rather than the moniker "The Wachowskis". Looking at the first Matrix movie now, it's possible to see a great many transgender subtexts that were not as obvious when it first came out. For starters, there is Trinity, a female hacker whom everyone thinks is a man (as commented on by Neo when the two first meet). The fact that people think Trinity is a man in the Matrix, is also brought up in The Animatrix short A Detective Story, where the titular detective assigned to track down Trinity, constantly refers to Trinity as a man. This essentially makes Trinity a women who is in the process of either escaping from or attempting to destroy an artificial reality where everyone thinks she is a guy.
Other examples are more subtle but definitely are there. Take Neo, a hero who -- outside of scenes where he is required to fire off endless rounds of ammo from a variety of firearms -- is not generally presented in overly macho terms, at least if one were to compare him to the mold created by 80's action heros like Stallone or Schwarzenegger. As it is, Neo has to deliberately reject his old, gendered name of Mr. Thomas Anderson and has to correct Mr. Smith (Hugo Weaving), who constantly insists on using the old name. Then there is Switch, who in earlier drafts of the script, was supposed to change gender upon leaving or entering the Matrix. In the version that made it to screen, the character is instead presented as androgynous in both worlds.
These trans subtexts I would argue, tie directly in with the films' main themes regarding the nature of reality. As the Oracle points out to Neo, all knowledge begins with knowledge of ones self. In order for Neo to be able to do anything as "The One", he must first know what he is and what he is capable of. As the story progresses, a key plot point revolves around Neo being unable to access his abilities until he has knowledge that he is the one. In other words, Neo becomes "The One" through self actualization and increasing his self awareness of who he is.
Of course by now, it has been pointed out by others that The Matrix is basically a modern day retelling of Plato's Allegory of the Cave. The story of Plato's cave is one where an entire group of people is kept prisoner for their entire lives, forced to stare at flickering shadows on a cave wall. Because these shadows are all these prisoners experience, they assume that the shadows are all that there is to reality. One day, a prisoner finds himself able to escape his chains, and makes his way up out of the cave. As he travels out of the cave, he becomes scared and disorientated by the new experiences he undergoes. Once outside, he is blinded by the bright light of the outside world. Eventually his eyes adjust and he sets out to explore the new world. Afterwards he returns to the cave and attempts to free the other prisoners, only for most of them to not understand his story about the outside world.
Many of the elements of that story are present here. Neo is the prisoner who manages to escape and like the Prisoner, he is blinded by the bright lights of the outside world. "Why does the light hurt my eyes," Neo asks Morpheus. "Because you've never used them before," Morpheus answers. Presumably, the reason the Washowskis use white transition shots so frequently is to reference this element of the story. Furthermore, as Morpheus mentions to Neo in the scene with the Women in the Red Dress, many people who are kept prisoner in the Matrix, will fight to stay a part of that system, rather than accept the truth.
While what The Matrix ultimately offers up is primarily a cerebral experience, it is also worth mentioning that the action scenes are pure visual spectacles, (the film is still famous for introducing the world to the Bullet Time technique). While the sequels were disappointing, the first film in The Matrix Franchise still holds up today.
Recommendation
It would be worth doing advanced math problems involving matrices, if the reward was being able to see The Matrix
The Rating
4 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
May 18, 2015
Queer Review: 50 Shades of Grey (2015)
50 Shades of Grey
Director: Sam Taylor-Johnson
Writer: Kelly Marcel. Based on the novel by E.L. James.
Cast: Dakota Johnson, Jamie Dornan, Jennifer Ehle, Eloise Mumford, Victor Rasuk, Marcia Gay Harden
Overview
In spite of what has been written about 50 Shades of Grey, it is difficult for me to argue that the final product that reached movie screens represents anything other than an anti-BDSM, pro-abuse propaganda piece. I have nothing against BDSM and although I don't consider myself a pro-BDSM advocate or anything, I support peoples right to engage in such activities. As it stands, there is nothing pro-BDSM about 50 Shades of Grey, which presents the activity as something that practitioners should be ashamed of.
Synopsis
Ana Steele (Dakota Johnson) is an ordinary college student about to graduate with a degree in English Literature, who ends up interviewing the mysterious Christian Grey (Jamie Dornan). In spite of her clumsiness, or perhaps because of it, Christian appears attracted to Ana during the interview, and afterwards, she finds herself thinking about him during quiet moments. Eventually, Mr. Grey starts to stalk Ana, showing up at her place of work, buying expensive gifts for her, and generally being a creep. Which Ana oddly enough finds attractive. After being mysterious, and vague about what he really wants with her, Christian eventually reveals that he is a BDSM Dom and proposes that Ana could be his sub. In spite of not being interested in BDSM, Ana naively continues to think that she and Christian can maintain a normal relationship. Unsurprisingly, what develops is about as unhealthy as unhealthy can be.
The Queering
50 Shades of Grey was originally developed as a fan fic based on The Twilight Saga before being published and released as it's own book series. Only rather than featuring vampires, 50 Shades of Grey has BDSM. While I have never read any of the books in either series, I did watch the first Twilight film and the similarities are striking. The female leads are both underdeveloped and both find themselves falling for mysterious man-childs. Stylistically speaking, both adaptions appear to have been influenced by the Chris Columbus School of Adaptation. This means remaining as faithful as possible to the source material, while including as much stilted camerawork, stilted dialog, and as many stilted action/sex/singing scenes as possible.
As for claims of 50 Shades of Grey being pro-BDSM, it's hard to reconcile such a view given what is on screen. Ana consistently seems repulsed at the thought of being a submissive to Christian. For his part, Christian expresses extreme self loathing because of his partaking and getting off on doing BDSM. There is no indication that this self loathing is caused by anti-BDSM stigma but rather appears to be the result of a writer who legitimately believes BDSM to be a bad thing.
This is a critical point to understanding if a work of art is for or against LGBTQ folks, when such a work shows us engaging in self loathing: What is the cause of the angst? If the work in question shows that the loathing is the result of societal prejudice, and the character has overcome the self-loathing to become confident with regards to their sexuality and/or gender identity, then the work should not be considered anti-queer. However, if the work shows the character needing to be "cured" or otherwise overcome their gender identity or sexuality, then it absolutely should be reviled for being a transphobic or homophobic crapfest.
Given the ending of 50 Shades of Grey (and having read what others have written about where the series ends up) I get the impression that this particular story is following the latter trajectory.
Otherwise, there are a few other parallels between BDSM and queer identity present in the film. For starters, the way Mr. Grey gradually builds up to the reveal of his sexual proclivities strongly suggests an individual who is coming out of the closet. In fact, that's where most of the BDSM activities take place in the story, in a locked closet (or rather dungeon as it's called by the characters).
Then there is the idea of sin and seduction that parallels ones anti-LGBTQ narratives are built upon. Specifically, the way sin, in the religious sense, is frequently shown to require a recruiter to lure people into engaging in a sinful activity. Once the victim has given into the temptation of a sinful lifestyle in question, the victim can thus be punished for their weakness and even start to engage in luring others in as well. Consider the ultimate fate of Eve in the story of Genesis or how in the 1961 film Boys Beware has the underage protagonist being punished for having sex with a pedophile, in spite of the fact he had been the victim of statutory rape. Note how the sin narrative erases the idea that anyone would have a natural inclination towards an activity that society has deemed as sin. Also note Ana's frequent incredulity at the idea that anyone would enjoy subbing for a dom.
For those interested, here is the film Boys Beware for you to... enjoy.
In 50 Shades of Grey, Christian is mentioned as having been seduced into the BDSM lifestyle by an older woman when he was all of 15. Of course, now that Christian has been seduced into the lifestyle he is now both a lurer and a sinner who should be ashamed of what he is. Again, the idea that anyone would be naturally inclined towards engaging in BDSM is all but assumed to be impossible.
Ultimately, given the way both films ignore actually abusive behavior -- be it stalking, sexual assault, or statutory rape -- in favor of condemning sexual activities frowned upon by society, 50 Shades of Grey becomes the equivalent of Boys Beware with regards to BDSM films.
Recommendation
If you ever have the misfortune to hear the line: "Mr. Grey will see you now." - take it as your cue to leave.
The Rating
0 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Sam Taylor-Johnson
Writer: Kelly Marcel. Based on the novel by E.L. James.
Cast: Dakota Johnson, Jamie Dornan, Jennifer Ehle, Eloise Mumford, Victor Rasuk, Marcia Gay Harden
Overview
In spite of what has been written about 50 Shades of Grey, it is difficult for me to argue that the final product that reached movie screens represents anything other than an anti-BDSM, pro-abuse propaganda piece. I have nothing against BDSM and although I don't consider myself a pro-BDSM advocate or anything, I support peoples right to engage in such activities. As it stands, there is nothing pro-BDSM about 50 Shades of Grey, which presents the activity as something that practitioners should be ashamed of.
Synopsis
Ana Steele (Dakota Johnson) is an ordinary college student about to graduate with a degree in English Literature, who ends up interviewing the mysterious Christian Grey (Jamie Dornan). In spite of her clumsiness, or perhaps because of it, Christian appears attracted to Ana during the interview, and afterwards, she finds herself thinking about him during quiet moments. Eventually, Mr. Grey starts to stalk Ana, showing up at her place of work, buying expensive gifts for her, and generally being a creep. Which Ana oddly enough finds attractive. After being mysterious, and vague about what he really wants with her, Christian eventually reveals that he is a BDSM Dom and proposes that Ana could be his sub. In spite of not being interested in BDSM, Ana naively continues to think that she and Christian can maintain a normal relationship. Unsurprisingly, what develops is about as unhealthy as unhealthy can be.
The Queering
50 Shades of Grey was originally developed as a fan fic based on The Twilight Saga before being published and released as it's own book series. Only rather than featuring vampires, 50 Shades of Grey has BDSM. While I have never read any of the books in either series, I did watch the first Twilight film and the similarities are striking. The female leads are both underdeveloped and both find themselves falling for mysterious man-childs. Stylistically speaking, both adaptions appear to have been influenced by the Chris Columbus School of Adaptation. This means remaining as faithful as possible to the source material, while including as much stilted camerawork, stilted dialog, and as many stilted action/sex/singing scenes as possible.
As for claims of 50 Shades of Grey being pro-BDSM, it's hard to reconcile such a view given what is on screen. Ana consistently seems repulsed at the thought of being a submissive to Christian. For his part, Christian expresses extreme self loathing because of his partaking and getting off on doing BDSM. There is no indication that this self loathing is caused by anti-BDSM stigma but rather appears to be the result of a writer who legitimately believes BDSM to be a bad thing.
This is a critical point to understanding if a work of art is for or against LGBTQ folks, when such a work shows us engaging in self loathing: What is the cause of the angst? If the work in question shows that the loathing is the result of societal prejudice, and the character has overcome the self-loathing to become confident with regards to their sexuality and/or gender identity, then the work should not be considered anti-queer. However, if the work shows the character needing to be "cured" or otherwise overcome their gender identity or sexuality, then it absolutely should be reviled for being a transphobic or homophobic crapfest.
Given the ending of 50 Shades of Grey (and having read what others have written about where the series ends up) I get the impression that this particular story is following the latter trajectory.
Otherwise, there are a few other parallels between BDSM and queer identity present in the film. For starters, the way Mr. Grey gradually builds up to the reveal of his sexual proclivities strongly suggests an individual who is coming out of the closet. In fact, that's where most of the BDSM activities take place in the story, in a locked closet (or rather dungeon as it's called by the characters).
Then there is the idea of sin and seduction that parallels ones anti-LGBTQ narratives are built upon. Specifically, the way sin, in the religious sense, is frequently shown to require a recruiter to lure people into engaging in a sinful activity. Once the victim has given into the temptation of a sinful lifestyle in question, the victim can thus be punished for their weakness and even start to engage in luring others in as well. Consider the ultimate fate of Eve in the story of Genesis or how in the 1961 film Boys Beware has the underage protagonist being punished for having sex with a pedophile, in spite of the fact he had been the victim of statutory rape. Note how the sin narrative erases the idea that anyone would have a natural inclination towards an activity that society has deemed as sin. Also note Ana's frequent incredulity at the idea that anyone would enjoy subbing for a dom.
For those interested, here is the film Boys Beware for you to... enjoy.
In 50 Shades of Grey, Christian is mentioned as having been seduced into the BDSM lifestyle by an older woman when he was all of 15. Of course, now that Christian has been seduced into the lifestyle he is now both a lurer and a sinner who should be ashamed of what he is. Again, the idea that anyone would be naturally inclined towards engaging in BDSM is all but assumed to be impossible.
Ultimately, given the way both films ignore actually abusive behavior -- be it stalking, sexual assault, or statutory rape -- in favor of condemning sexual activities frowned upon by society, 50 Shades of Grey becomes the equivalent of Boys Beware with regards to BDSM films.
Recommendation
If you ever have the misfortune to hear the line: "Mr. Grey will see you now." - take it as your cue to leave.
The Rating
0 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
August 16, 2014
Queer Review: Nymph()maniac Vol. 1 (2013)
Nymph()maniac Vol. 1
Director: Lars von Trier
Writer: Lars von Trier
Cast: Charlotte Gainsbourg, Stellan Skarsgård, Stacy Martin, Shia LaBeouf, Christian Slater, Uma Thurman, Sophie Kennedy Clark, Connie Nielsen
Overview
In Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 Lars von Trier examines the issue of female sexuality through the experiences of one woman, Joe. Volume 1 is a fascinating look at a myriad of subjects, ranging from nymphomania to fly fishing, and hopefully Volume 2 will continue what von Trier started here.
Synopsis
A battered and bruised woman, Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg/Stacy Martin), is discovered battered and bruised on a sidewalk by Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård), who takes her in. While recuperating in his house, Joe begins to tell Seligman about her life as a woman with a voracious sexual appetite. While she regales him with tales about the 7-8 men she slept with per night, he makes references to fly fishing and the Fibonacci Sequence. Key stories that Joe tells Seligman involve her participation in The Little Flock, a club Joe formed with her best friend B and whose purpose was the denial of the existence of love, as well as her losing her virginity to Jerôme (Shia LaBeouf).
The Queering
Lars von Trier is a director who deliberately swerves between general pretentiousness and legitimate insight more frequently than a drunk driver trying to zig zag through an obstacle course. Naturally, he is a divisive filmmaker amongst critics. Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 tones down some of his more off putting qualities, creating a final product that is at least highly watchable.
Lars von Trier has a habit of focusing his lens on female characters who fall into the Broken Birds trope and Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 is no different. It's one of the reasons that von Trier has been accused of misogyny in the past. However, here he makes a clear effort to present Joe in a non-judgmental light. Seligman offers he up reassurances to Joe (who refers to herself as the worst human being ever) that her behavior is not as bad as it seems and her sexual appetite is not the result of some dark trauma in her childhood.
In Vol. 2, Seligman will "come out" as asexual (a first for a character in major motion picture I believe) and Joe will experiment with BDSM, along with engaging in a lesbian relationship. However, for part one, all of the relationships are hetero and there aren't any hints regarding Seligman's sexuality (unless you count that most of his interests and obsessions, like fly fishing, are completely non-sexual). That is, there really isn't anything *really* approaching a queer subtext in Vol. 1.
Performance wise, the most memorable one in Vol. 1 belongs to Stacy Martin, who plays young Joe's sexual awakening with a verve rarely seen from a performer of any age. As the older and more damaged Joe, Charlotte Gainsbourg is more subdued. Stellan Skarsgård doesn't have much to do besides listen and react non-judgmentally to Joe. Those who associate Shia LaBeouf solely with the Transformers films may be surprised at what he puts on display here (both bodily and acting wise). Uma Thurman has what amounts to an extended cameo, but she has fun with it in a scene dripping with gallows humor.
While Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 is a worthwhile endeavor, the more interesting (and problematic) content is contained in Nymphomaniac Vol. 2. However, it is possible to view Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 as a an almost complete motion picture, and it's non-judgemental take on female sexuality means it has enough virtues to stand on its own.
Recommendation
Nymphomaniacs and non-nymphomaniacs alike should be able to get something out of this film.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Lars von Trier
Writer: Lars von Trier
Cast: Charlotte Gainsbourg, Stellan Skarsgård, Stacy Martin, Shia LaBeouf, Christian Slater, Uma Thurman, Sophie Kennedy Clark, Connie Nielsen
Overview
In Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 Lars von Trier examines the issue of female sexuality through the experiences of one woman, Joe. Volume 1 is a fascinating look at a myriad of subjects, ranging from nymphomania to fly fishing, and hopefully Volume 2 will continue what von Trier started here.
Synopsis
A battered and bruised woman, Joe (Charlotte Gainsbourg/Stacy Martin), is discovered battered and bruised on a sidewalk by Seligman (Stellan Skarsgård), who takes her in. While recuperating in his house, Joe begins to tell Seligman about her life as a woman with a voracious sexual appetite. While she regales him with tales about the 7-8 men she slept with per night, he makes references to fly fishing and the Fibonacci Sequence. Key stories that Joe tells Seligman involve her participation in The Little Flock, a club Joe formed with her best friend B and whose purpose was the denial of the existence of love, as well as her losing her virginity to Jerôme (Shia LaBeouf).
The Queering
Lars von Trier is a director who deliberately swerves between general pretentiousness and legitimate insight more frequently than a drunk driver trying to zig zag through an obstacle course. Naturally, he is a divisive filmmaker amongst critics. Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 tones down some of his more off putting qualities, creating a final product that is at least highly watchable.
Lars von Trier has a habit of focusing his lens on female characters who fall into the Broken Birds trope and Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 is no different. It's one of the reasons that von Trier has been accused of misogyny in the past. However, here he makes a clear effort to present Joe in a non-judgmental light. Seligman offers he up reassurances to Joe (who refers to herself as the worst human being ever) that her behavior is not as bad as it seems and her sexual appetite is not the result of some dark trauma in her childhood.
In Vol. 2, Seligman will "come out" as asexual (a first for a character in major motion picture I believe) and Joe will experiment with BDSM, along with engaging in a lesbian relationship. However, for part one, all of the relationships are hetero and there aren't any hints regarding Seligman's sexuality (unless you count that most of his interests and obsessions, like fly fishing, are completely non-sexual). That is, there really isn't anything *really* approaching a queer subtext in Vol. 1.
Performance wise, the most memorable one in Vol. 1 belongs to Stacy Martin, who plays young Joe's sexual awakening with a verve rarely seen from a performer of any age. As the older and more damaged Joe, Charlotte Gainsbourg is more subdued. Stellan Skarsgård doesn't have much to do besides listen and react non-judgmentally to Joe. Those who associate Shia LaBeouf solely with the Transformers films may be surprised at what he puts on display here (both bodily and acting wise). Uma Thurman has what amounts to an extended cameo, but she has fun with it in a scene dripping with gallows humor.
While Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 is a worthwhile endeavor, the more interesting (and problematic) content is contained in Nymphomaniac Vol. 2. However, it is possible to view Nymphomaniac Vol. 1 as a an almost complete motion picture, and it's non-judgemental take on female sexuality means it has enough virtues to stand on its own.
Recommendation
Nymphomaniacs and non-nymphomaniacs alike should be able to get something out of this film.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
August 13, 2014
Queer Review: Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014)
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Writer: Josh Appelbaum, André Nemec, and Evan Daugherty. Based on the Teenage Mutant Ninja Tutle characters created by Peter Laird and Kevin Eastman.
Cast: Megan Fox, Will Arnett, William Fichtner, Alan Ritchson, Noel Fisher, Johnny Knoxville, Jeremy Howard, Danny Woodburn, Tony Shalhoub, Tohoru Masamune, Whoopi Goldberg, Minae Noji, Abby Elliott
Overview
This most recent incarnation of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles franchise manages to capture some of the fun one expects from a film bearing the title Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Synopsis
Intrepid reporter Apri O'Neil (Megan Fox) is desperate to land a big story about a vigilante group fighting against the dreaded Foot Clan but finds herself being relegated to covering puff pieces by her employer. However, during her investigation into the Foot Clan and the vigilantes pays off, and April manages to snap a few key photos of the vigilantes, who turn out to be the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and are led by the anthropomorphic rat, Splinter (Tony Shalhoub). The four turtles it turns out, were once Aprils' pets and she had named after famous Renaissance Artists: Leonardo (Johnny Knoxville), Raphael (Donatello), Michelangelo (Noel Fisher), and Donatello (Jeremy Howard). Unfortunately, Aprils' involvement with the group leads The Shredder (Tohoru Masamune) and Eric Sacks (William Fichtner) directly to the Turtles liar. After suffering a devastating attack, the turtles must regroup to save Splinter and stop Sacks and The Shredder from releasing a deadly toxin that will kill thousands.
The Queering
I grew up in a home without a television, as my mom refused to pay for that unnecessary contraption. What I do remember though, is watching the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles at my babysitters and I visited my Dad on weekends, who did not share my mom's Luddite views on the boob tube. I was, back in the day, a bit of an obsessed fan. I owned the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle action toys and a punching bag with one of the characters emblazoned on it -- I think it was Michelangelo as he was my favorite Turtle. I also remember watching the first two movies repeatedly when I was visiting my Grandma Gladstone. As it was, she owned a TV, which since she lived in the country, only got one channel through one of the biggest satellite dishes ever, which sat out in the middle of the field across the street. Thus, one of the primary activities I engaged in at Grandma Gladstone's being watching movies on VHS.
In any event, the current movie holds up pretty well. The role of the Shredder and the foot clan has been reduced to being Sacks' henchmen, which is a disappointment. On the other hand, April O'Neil has been given an expanded role, including playing a key part of the Turtle's origins. Megan Fox is not the strongest of performers, but does a good job in presenting April O'Neils' determination in becoming a crack reporter. Michelangelo spends a fair amount of the movie trying to convince her to be his beard. In a sense, the key appeal of the Turtles is the ridiculousness of the premise. There isn't much for the filmmakers to do, other than to make sure the goofiness and humor are translated to the big screen. Personally, I thought this at least was done well enough.
The four Turtles are named after Renaissance artists. Three of them, Michelangelo, Leonardo, and Rapheal, are thought by historians to have been gay or bi. Michelangelo engaged in numerous same-sex affairs, primarily with the male models he based his work on. Donatello once chased a thief with the intention of killing the criminal, but ended up being seduced by him instead. Leonardo made a self portrait of himself in drag into one of the most recognizable paintings of all time (if analysis of the bone structure in the Mona Lisa's face is correct). (Source: Queers in History by Keith Stern)
Meanwhile, the one turtle who is not named after a Renaissance artist who was as queer as a 3 dollar bill, was Rafeal, who is presented as a perpetually angry warrior who rebels against Leo. What else could Rafael represent, but a warning against all of the dangers and negative aspects inherent to the Heterosexual Lifestyle?
All things considered, the conclusion is obvious. Given all the hours I spent watching the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles growing up combined with their queer inspirations, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles made me gay. Clearly, the LGBTQ activist looking to lead fresh, young youthful members into the homosexual lifestyle could not a find a better recruiting tool and the Gay Agenda has no better weapon in it's arsenal, than Leo, Mikey, Raf, and Donnie.
Recommendation
There is enough Turtle Power in this film to be worth it for fans to check out. And be sure to bring a few potential recruits along as well!
The Rating
3 pink shells out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Writer: Josh Appelbaum, André Nemec, and Evan Daugherty. Based on the Teenage Mutant Ninja Tutle characters created by Peter Laird and Kevin Eastman.
Cast: Megan Fox, Will Arnett, William Fichtner, Alan Ritchson, Noel Fisher, Johnny Knoxville, Jeremy Howard, Danny Woodburn, Tony Shalhoub, Tohoru Masamune, Whoopi Goldberg, Minae Noji, Abby Elliott
Overview
This most recent incarnation of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles franchise manages to capture some of the fun one expects from a film bearing the title Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Synopsis
Intrepid reporter Apri O'Neil (Megan Fox) is desperate to land a big story about a vigilante group fighting against the dreaded Foot Clan but finds herself being relegated to covering puff pieces by her employer. However, during her investigation into the Foot Clan and the vigilantes pays off, and April manages to snap a few key photos of the vigilantes, who turn out to be the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles and are led by the anthropomorphic rat, Splinter (Tony Shalhoub). The four turtles it turns out, were once Aprils' pets and she had named after famous Renaissance Artists: Leonardo (Johnny Knoxville), Raphael (Donatello), Michelangelo (Noel Fisher), and Donatello (Jeremy Howard). Unfortunately, Aprils' involvement with the group leads The Shredder (Tohoru Masamune) and Eric Sacks (William Fichtner) directly to the Turtles liar. After suffering a devastating attack, the turtles must regroup to save Splinter and stop Sacks and The Shredder from releasing a deadly toxin that will kill thousands.
The Queering
I grew up in a home without a television, as my mom refused to pay for that unnecessary contraption. What I do remember though, is watching the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles at my babysitters and I visited my Dad on weekends, who did not share my mom's Luddite views on the boob tube. I was, back in the day, a bit of an obsessed fan. I owned the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle action toys and a punching bag with one of the characters emblazoned on it -- I think it was Michelangelo as he was my favorite Turtle. I also remember watching the first two movies repeatedly when I was visiting my Grandma Gladstone. As it was, she owned a TV, which since she lived in the country, only got one channel through one of the biggest satellite dishes ever, which sat out in the middle of the field across the street. Thus, one of the primary activities I engaged in at Grandma Gladstone's being watching movies on VHS.
In any event, the current movie holds up pretty well. The role of the Shredder and the foot clan has been reduced to being Sacks' henchmen, which is a disappointment. On the other hand, April O'Neil has been given an expanded role, including playing a key part of the Turtle's origins. Megan Fox is not the strongest of performers, but does a good job in presenting April O'Neils' determination in becoming a crack reporter. Michelangelo spends a fair amount of the movie trying to convince her to be his beard. In a sense, the key appeal of the Turtles is the ridiculousness of the premise. There isn't much for the filmmakers to do, other than to make sure the goofiness and humor are translated to the big screen. Personally, I thought this at least was done well enough.
The four Turtles are named after Renaissance artists. Three of them, Michelangelo, Leonardo, and Rapheal, are thought by historians to have been gay or bi. Michelangelo engaged in numerous same-sex affairs, primarily with the male models he based his work on. Donatello once chased a thief with the intention of killing the criminal, but ended up being seduced by him instead. Leonardo made a self portrait of himself in drag into one of the most recognizable paintings of all time (if analysis of the bone structure in the Mona Lisa's face is correct). (Source: Queers in History by Keith Stern)
Meanwhile, the one turtle who is not named after a Renaissance artist who was as queer as a 3 dollar bill, was Rafeal, who is presented as a perpetually angry warrior who rebels against Leo. What else could Rafael represent, but a warning against all of the dangers and negative aspects inherent to the Heterosexual Lifestyle?
All things considered, the conclusion is obvious. Given all the hours I spent watching the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles growing up combined with their queer inspirations, the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles made me gay. Clearly, the LGBTQ activist looking to lead fresh, young youthful members into the homosexual lifestyle could not a find a better recruiting tool and the Gay Agenda has no better weapon in it's arsenal, than Leo, Mikey, Raf, and Donnie.
Recommendation
There is enough Turtle Power in this film to be worth it for fans to check out. And be sure to bring a few potential recruits along as well!
The Rating
3 pink shells out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
August 5, 2014
Queer Review: The Trial (1962)
The Trial
Director: Orson Welles
Writer: Pierre Cholot and Orson Welles. Based on the novel The Trial by Franz Kafka.
Cast: Anthony Perkins, Jeanne Moreau, Elsa Martinelli, Suzanne Flon, Madeleine Robinson, Romy Schneider, Orson Welles, Akim Tamiroff, Max Haufler
Overview
A surreal tale about a man accused of an unknown crime, The Trial represents the best kind of cinematic absurdity to be directed by Orson Welles.
Synopsis
Josef K. (Anthony Perkins) awakens one morning to find his apartment being searched by police officers, who demand that he bribe him to make his life easier. He is told that he is under arrest but not that the crime he is being charged for. Not knowing what to do, Josef seeks the advice of L'avocat (Orson Welles) but finds his council less than useful. As he goes about trying to clear his name, the surreal experiences he undergo increase in their bizarreness. L'avocat all but tries to seduce him and after Joseph files a complaint about the police officers, he walks into a room to find them about to be whipped. As his ordeal becomes increasingly absurd, Josef becomes desperate enough to seek the advice of the painter of the courtroom judges. But for all his efforts to avoid it, Joseph K. is drawn inevitably to his ultimate fate.
The Queering
While I was working towards obtaining a criminology degree from Wilkes University (which I am still working on), I participated in an internship which involved observing court cases. Many of the people who found themselves in court, of course were poor and lacking in eduction. In most cases, it was obvious to me, that many individuals, victim and accused alike, must have found the entire experience with it's multiple hearings, appeals and counter-appeals, and adherence to technical overwhelming. In any case, I can imagine that there are many people out there who would identify quite strongly with the experiences of Joseph K.
The casting of Anthony Perkins in the role of Joseph K. was a deliberate push by Welles to add a queer subtext to the film. As Roger Ebert wrote in his review of The Trial:
There are other ways that The Trial suggests that Josef is not entirely straight, although these primarily boil down to him being seduced by a series of woman and having Josef fail to return any kind of affection back to them. A late scene has him being chased down a long corridor by a gaggle of female teenagers. However, a more interesting subtext emerges though, when L'avocate comments that being accused makes men more attractive, right before requesting that one of Josef K.s' fellow accused kiss his ring.
Generally speaking, I am not a fan of surrealist motion pictures, but for me The Trial works. There is a bit of writing advice that goes that it is important for characters to want something, even if it is simply a glass of water. The problem I find with surrealist films (or absurdist narratives in general) is that such stories tend to forget this advice and present characters who lack the most rudimentary of motivation. Josef K. at least, clearly wants something, to prove his innocence. It is just unfortunate that he is forced to do so under the most absurd of circumstances. It helps in no small measure, that Orson Welles with his astounding visual storytelling abilities is at the helm. Visually, this is almost as impressive an achievement as Citizen Kane. Welles was clearly willing to push the envelope as far as he can with each picture he made (and retained control over) and this is evident in every shot of The Trial.
Recommendation
Would be worth being tried in the most Kafkaesque of trials in order to see.
The Rating
3 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Orson Welles
Writer: Pierre Cholot and Orson Welles. Based on the novel The Trial by Franz Kafka.
Cast: Anthony Perkins, Jeanne Moreau, Elsa Martinelli, Suzanne Flon, Madeleine Robinson, Romy Schneider, Orson Welles, Akim Tamiroff, Max Haufler
Overview
A surreal tale about a man accused of an unknown crime, The Trial represents the best kind of cinematic absurdity to be directed by Orson Welles.
Synopsis
Josef K. (Anthony Perkins) awakens one morning to find his apartment being searched by police officers, who demand that he bribe him to make his life easier. He is told that he is under arrest but not that the crime he is being charged for. Not knowing what to do, Josef seeks the advice of L'avocat (Orson Welles) but finds his council less than useful. As he goes about trying to clear his name, the surreal experiences he undergo increase in their bizarreness. L'avocat all but tries to seduce him and after Joseph files a complaint about the police officers, he walks into a room to find them about to be whipped. As his ordeal becomes increasingly absurd, Josef becomes desperate enough to seek the advice of the painter of the courtroom judges. But for all his efforts to avoid it, Joseph K. is drawn inevitably to his ultimate fate.
The Queering
While I was working towards obtaining a criminology degree from Wilkes University (which I am still working on), I participated in an internship which involved observing court cases. Many of the people who found themselves in court, of course were poor and lacking in eduction. In most cases, it was obvious to me, that many individuals, victim and accused alike, must have found the entire experience with it's multiple hearings, appeals and counter-appeals, and adherence to technical overwhelming. In any case, I can imagine that there are many people out there who would identify quite strongly with the experiences of Joseph K.
The casting of Anthony Perkins in the role of Joseph K. was a deliberate push by Welles to add a queer subtext to the film. As Roger Ebert wrote in his review of The Trial:
Perkins was one of those actors everyone thought was gay. He kept his sexuality private, and used his nervous style of speech and movement to suggest inner disconnects. From an article by Edward Guthmann in the San Francisco Chronicle, I learn that Welles confided to his friend Henry Jaglom that he knew Perkins was a homosexual, "and used that quality in Perkins to suggest another texture in Josef K, a fear of exposure."
There are other ways that The Trial suggests that Josef is not entirely straight, although these primarily boil down to him being seduced by a series of woman and having Josef fail to return any kind of affection back to them. A late scene has him being chased down a long corridor by a gaggle of female teenagers. However, a more interesting subtext emerges though, when L'avocate comments that being accused makes men more attractive, right before requesting that one of Josef K.s' fellow accused kiss his ring.
Generally speaking, I am not a fan of surrealist motion pictures, but for me The Trial works. There is a bit of writing advice that goes that it is important for characters to want something, even if it is simply a glass of water. The problem I find with surrealist films (or absurdist narratives in general) is that such stories tend to forget this advice and present characters who lack the most rudimentary of motivation. Josef K. at least, clearly wants something, to prove his innocence. It is just unfortunate that he is forced to do so under the most absurd of circumstances. It helps in no small measure, that Orson Welles with his astounding visual storytelling abilities is at the helm. Visually, this is almost as impressive an achievement as Citizen Kane. Welles was clearly willing to push the envelope as far as he can with each picture he made (and retained control over) and this is evident in every shot of The Trial.
Recommendation
Would be worth being tried in the most Kafkaesque of trials in order to see.
The Rating
3 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
June 1, 2014
Queer Review: The Matador (2005)
The Matador
Director: Richard Shepard
Writer: Richard Shepard
Cast: Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinnear, Hope Davis, Philip Baker Hall, Israel Tellez
Overview
A fun romantic comedy between about two men falling in love, one of whom happens to be a hitman who is finds his ability to kill failing him at critical times. Also, there are random shots of a matador inserted for no apparent reason other than to justify the title.
Synopsis
Aging hitman Julian Noble (Pierce Brosnan) is starting to lose his nerve when it comes to doing his job. He hides it well enough, but there are times, such as when he sashes through a hotel lobby wearing nothing but a tight pair of speedos, when it becomes painfully clear that he is losing his mind. Then he meets Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear) and the two have a brief fling before Julian is forced back into doing his job. When Julian fails to kill a critical target, his life is put in danger from his employeers and thus he turns to Danny and his wife Bean (Hope Davis), hoping that the sparks the two shared for each other will be enough to get him out his predicament.
The Queering
Most of the humor in The Matador is low key but generally effective. Brosnan and Kinnear display a fair amount of chemistry with each other as their characters flirt with each other in a hotel bar and bond over drinks. This is their meet cute scene. Eventually the two go on a date where Julian shows Danny the best method for killing a person. Also, it happens to be at a bullfighting tournament where we get the aforementioned shots of a matador and bull fighting. Before the two had met, Julian had been trying to deal with his issues by having empty sex with woman. It's only when he meets Danny that Julian opens up at all and is able to find any meaning to his life.
The first half of the film is better than the second, which is where the pacing starts to drag. In fact, I started to wonder if the project had originally been conceived of as a stage play, given the way the latter scenes focus increasingly on dialog and character over plot. There's a lengthy sequence which is set entirely in Danny and Beans' house and has the feel of a stage production due to the way it focuses entirely on dialog and character revelations, while the plot comes to a virtual standstill. The climax is equally low key and a few plot twists simply do not work in the context of the film due to them being poorly set up.
When The Matador was first released, it received favorable reviews but failed to find an audience. This is something of a shame although the film lacks the panache to go in for the killing blow that might have elevated it to a higher level. As it is, this is an enjoyable diversion but failed to become a classic for obvious reasons.
Recommendation
It would definitely be worth getting in a fight with a bull with only a flimsy cloth as your weapon in order to see The Matador.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Richard Shepard
Writer: Richard Shepard
Cast: Pierce Brosnan, Greg Kinnear, Hope Davis, Philip Baker Hall, Israel Tellez
Overview
A fun romantic comedy between about two men falling in love, one of whom happens to be a hitman who is finds his ability to kill failing him at critical times. Also, there are random shots of a matador inserted for no apparent reason other than to justify the title.
Synopsis
Aging hitman Julian Noble (Pierce Brosnan) is starting to lose his nerve when it comes to doing his job. He hides it well enough, but there are times, such as when he sashes through a hotel lobby wearing nothing but a tight pair of speedos, when it becomes painfully clear that he is losing his mind. Then he meets Danny Wright (Greg Kinnear) and the two have a brief fling before Julian is forced back into doing his job. When Julian fails to kill a critical target, his life is put in danger from his employeers and thus he turns to Danny and his wife Bean (Hope Davis), hoping that the sparks the two shared for each other will be enough to get him out his predicament.
The Queering
Most of the humor in The Matador is low key but generally effective. Brosnan and Kinnear display a fair amount of chemistry with each other as their characters flirt with each other in a hotel bar and bond over drinks. This is their meet cute scene. Eventually the two go on a date where Julian shows Danny the best method for killing a person. Also, it happens to be at a bullfighting tournament where we get the aforementioned shots of a matador and bull fighting. Before the two had met, Julian had been trying to deal with his issues by having empty sex with woman. It's only when he meets Danny that Julian opens up at all and is able to find any meaning to his life.
The first half of the film is better than the second, which is where the pacing starts to drag. In fact, I started to wonder if the project had originally been conceived of as a stage play, given the way the latter scenes focus increasingly on dialog and character over plot. There's a lengthy sequence which is set entirely in Danny and Beans' house and has the feel of a stage production due to the way it focuses entirely on dialog and character revelations, while the plot comes to a virtual standstill. The climax is equally low key and a few plot twists simply do not work in the context of the film due to them being poorly set up.
When The Matador was first released, it received favorable reviews but failed to find an audience. This is something of a shame although the film lacks the panache to go in for the killing blow that might have elevated it to a higher level. As it is, this is an enjoyable diversion but failed to become a classic for obvious reasons.
Recommendation
It would definitely be worth getting in a fight with a bull with only a flimsy cloth as your weapon in order to see The Matador.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
May 24, 2014
Queer Review: X-Men - Days of Future Past (2014)
X-Men - Days of Future Past
Director: Bryan Singer
Writers: Simon Kinberg, Jane Goldman, and Matthew Vaughn
Cast: Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Halle Berry, Nicholas Hoult, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Peter Dinklage, Shawn Ashmore, Omar Sy, Evan Peters, Josh Helman, Daniel Cudmore, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart
Overview
With a glimpse into a grim future filled with holocaust-esque imagery, Days of Future Past can be said to open in a similar fashion to the first X-Men film. Following that grim opening though, is the best film in the series since X2 - X-Men United.
Synopsis
In the year 2023, the last surviving mutants of a war to eliminate their species find hatch a desperate plan to avert that war. They decide to send back on of their own, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) to alter the past. This means inserting his future conscience into his past body. Once Wolverine goes back, his job becomes reuniting Charles Xavier (James McAvoy, Patrick Stewart) with Magneto (Michael Fassbender, Ian McKellen) in order to prevent Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from setting in motion the events that could potentially lead to the extinction of all mutant kind.
The Queering
The opening of Days of Future Past is the rockiest part of the film, particularly in an exposition heavy scene where Charles Xavier lays out the backstory and explains key details primarily for the benefit of the audience. Fortunately the film improves dramatically after that. While a story featuring centered around a post-apocalyptic future might seem rather entirely grim, there is plenty of fun to be had in the 70's timeline. The best parts include a brilliant sequence set to Jim Croces' Time in a Bottle and a clever reference to John F. Kennedy being a mutant whom Magneto tried to save (which is why the "magic" bullet curved).
X-Men - First Class ended with the break up of Professor Xavier and Magneto. While Professor Xavier believed that peaceful coexistence between humans and mutants was possible, Magneto instead held to a hard line anti-assimilationist stance. Mutants like Mystique whose blue skinned appearance fail to endear her to mainstream society are drawn to Magneto because he advocates being able to live as a mutant openly without persecution. On the flip side, mutants like Beast and Xavier live in the closet, covering up their appearance in order to avoid being detected. Xavier even went so far as to sacrifice his powers in order to be able to walk. These differences of opinion leads to their relationships' inevitable split. This means that in addition to bringing out the mutant abilities of Beast and Xavier, Wolverine spends the middle section of the movie acting like a couples counselor in order to get Magneto and Xavier to reconcile their irreconcilable differences.
On the queer subtext front, this may have the strongest LGBTQ political subtext of any of the movies. The sentinels that lead to the future war, are robots that are designed to hunt down, detect, and kill mutants. The scene where the Sentinels designer Dr. Trask (Peter Dinklage) demonstrates their abilities evokes the U.S. government programs of the 50's and 60's to eradicate gays and lesbians from civil service jobs. This parallel is made particularly clear in the scene reveals that there is already a mutant in the room where Dr. Trask is making his presentation.
Many people were disappointed back when X-Men III - The Last Stand and it was viewed as a less than desirable send off for characters. Here Bryan Singer takes full advantage of the opportunity to give many of the characters from that trilogy a better wrap. However, many of them, such as Storm (Halle Barry), are given little more than extended cameos. For the most part however, the action is more epic than anything we've seen before in this series and many of the primary characters are given a bigger chance to shine.
In particular the characters of Magneto, Professor X, and Mystique are all given much better development here than in past efforts. I found the development of Xavier to be the most interesting. In the original movies, Professor Xavier is pretty much the all knowing, wise old mentor without a flaw. There's nothing wrong with such character but it's one we've seen in many other movies. First Class showed Xavier as an immature frat boy, who was willing to play around in the minds of others without a thought to the consequences or ethics of such behavior. Not to mention his inability to acknowledge his privilege as a mutant who could easily pass in public as a non-mutant. This time around he is shown to be a broken man who has given up his telepathic abilities along with all hope for the human race. While 1973 Magneto is still pretty much the angry mutant leader we were shown in past efforts, the one who was willing to kill anyone (including his fellow mutants) in order to protect all of mutant kind, future Magneto is shown to be more reflective and introspective.
As for Mystique, here she is shown to be a women driven by the murder and torture of her fellow mutants into taking extreme actions. What makes her interesting is that she believes absolutely in the righteousness of her actions, which are shown to be entirely justified, even if the consequences will be devastating. However, the queer/trans subtext regarding Mystiques' character is downplayed here compared to First Class (there is no utterance of "Mutant and Proud"), although it is still possible to see it given a broad enough reading.
Recommendation
This is one superhero film that would be worth skipping a few days into the future in order to see.
The Rating
3 and 1/2 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Bryan Singer
Writers: Simon Kinberg, Jane Goldman, and Matthew Vaughn
Cast: Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Halle Berry, Nicholas Hoult, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Peter Dinklage, Shawn Ashmore, Omar Sy, Evan Peters, Josh Helman, Daniel Cudmore, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart
Overview
With a glimpse into a grim future filled with holocaust-esque imagery, Days of Future Past can be said to open in a similar fashion to the first X-Men film. Following that grim opening though, is the best film in the series since X2 - X-Men United.
Synopsis
In the year 2023, the last surviving mutants of a war to eliminate their species find hatch a desperate plan to avert that war. They decide to send back on of their own, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) to alter the past. This means inserting his future conscience into his past body. Once Wolverine goes back, his job becomes reuniting Charles Xavier (James McAvoy, Patrick Stewart) with Magneto (Michael Fassbender, Ian McKellen) in order to prevent Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from setting in motion the events that could potentially lead to the extinction of all mutant kind.
The Queering
The opening of Days of Future Past is the rockiest part of the film, particularly in an exposition heavy scene where Charles Xavier lays out the backstory and explains key details primarily for the benefit of the audience. Fortunately the film improves dramatically after that. While a story featuring centered around a post-apocalyptic future might seem rather entirely grim, there is plenty of fun to be had in the 70's timeline. The best parts include a brilliant sequence set to Jim Croces' Time in a Bottle and a clever reference to John F. Kennedy being a mutant whom Magneto tried to save (which is why the "magic" bullet curved).
X-Men - First Class ended with the break up of Professor Xavier and Magneto. While Professor Xavier believed that peaceful coexistence between humans and mutants was possible, Magneto instead held to a hard line anti-assimilationist stance. Mutants like Mystique whose blue skinned appearance fail to endear her to mainstream society are drawn to Magneto because he advocates being able to live as a mutant openly without persecution. On the flip side, mutants like Beast and Xavier live in the closet, covering up their appearance in order to avoid being detected. Xavier even went so far as to sacrifice his powers in order to be able to walk. These differences of opinion leads to their relationships' inevitable split. This means that in addition to bringing out the mutant abilities of Beast and Xavier, Wolverine spends the middle section of the movie acting like a couples counselor in order to get Magneto and Xavier to reconcile their irreconcilable differences.
On the queer subtext front, this may have the strongest LGBTQ political subtext of any of the movies. The sentinels that lead to the future war, are robots that are designed to hunt down, detect, and kill mutants. The scene where the Sentinels designer Dr. Trask (Peter Dinklage) demonstrates their abilities evokes the U.S. government programs of the 50's and 60's to eradicate gays and lesbians from civil service jobs. This parallel is made particularly clear in the scene reveals that there is already a mutant in the room where Dr. Trask is making his presentation.
Many people were disappointed back when X-Men III - The Last Stand and it was viewed as a less than desirable send off for characters. Here Bryan Singer takes full advantage of the opportunity to give many of the characters from that trilogy a better wrap. However, many of them, such as Storm (Halle Barry), are given little more than extended cameos. For the most part however, the action is more epic than anything we've seen before in this series and many of the primary characters are given a bigger chance to shine.
In particular the characters of Magneto, Professor X, and Mystique are all given much better development here than in past efforts. I found the development of Xavier to be the most interesting. In the original movies, Professor Xavier is pretty much the all knowing, wise old mentor without a flaw. There's nothing wrong with such character but it's one we've seen in many other movies. First Class showed Xavier as an immature frat boy, who was willing to play around in the minds of others without a thought to the consequences or ethics of such behavior. Not to mention his inability to acknowledge his privilege as a mutant who could easily pass in public as a non-mutant. This time around he is shown to be a broken man who has given up his telepathic abilities along with all hope for the human race. While 1973 Magneto is still pretty much the angry mutant leader we were shown in past efforts, the one who was willing to kill anyone (including his fellow mutants) in order to protect all of mutant kind, future Magneto is shown to be more reflective and introspective.
As for Mystique, here she is shown to be a women driven by the murder and torture of her fellow mutants into taking extreme actions. What makes her interesting is that she believes absolutely in the righteousness of her actions, which are shown to be entirely justified, even if the consequences will be devastating. However, the queer/trans subtext regarding Mystiques' character is downplayed here compared to First Class (there is no utterance of "Mutant and Proud"), although it is still possible to see it given a broad enough reading.
Recommendation
This is one superhero film that would be worth skipping a few days into the future in order to see.
The Rating
3 and 1/2 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
May 13, 2014
Queer Review: Phantom of the Opera (1943)
Phantom of the Opera
Director: Arthur Lubin
Writers: Eric Taylor, Samuel Hoffenstein, John Jacoby, and Hans Jacoby. Based on "Le Fantôme de L'Opéra" by Gaston Leroux.
Cast: Nelson Eddy, Susanna Foster, Claude Rains, Edgar Barrier, Leo Carrillo, Jane Farrar
Overview
An awkward take on the tale first told by Gaston Leroux, the 1943 version of the Phantom of the Opera mixes comedy, romance, and horror to poor effect. At least there is a same sex romance to keep things interesting.
Synopsis
Moved by the voice of Christine DuBois (Susanna Foster), Erique Claudin (Claude Rains) secretly funds her singing lessons using his income as violinist while nearly going broke in the process. Desperate for money, Claudin attempts to sell one of his compositions to a publisher but when that fails and he believe that his work is being stolen, he snaps. During the following struggle, Claudin kills a man and has his face disfigured with acid. Hiding in the shadows of the Opera House where he once worked, he attempts to pave Christine a path to stardom. Meanwhile, she is being courted by two men - police officer Raoul (Edgar Barrier) and Anatole Garron (Nelson Eddy) - although they both appear to be more into each other than Christine.
The Queering
What is the 1943 version of the Phantom of the Opera? Is it a romance? A horror film? A comedy? All of the above apparently. None of the elements really gel very well. Throw in some bad pacing (it feels like it takes forever to get through any of the opera sequences) and you have what I can only imagine to be (as I have not seen any of the others) one of the weaker versions of the Phantom of the Opera to make it onto the silver screen.
However, there is the romance between Anatole and Raoul, who pretend to be courting the actress Christine so they can spend more time with each other, which helps keep things interesting. The two make every effort, including developing a ritual around who will walk through a door together. However, Christine eventually chooses a life with the theater. Clearly relieved that they no longer have to continue the charade, Raoul and Anatole walk out arm in arm as the camera fades to black.
There is something very strange about a film version of the Phantom of the Opera being filmed in technicolor. It doesn't feel right. Director Lubin tries to add a sense of dread to proceedings by showing shots of The Phantoms' shadow against walls but the framing is too stagy and awkward to be effective. The infamous chandler crashing scene is ineptly shot and way too drawn out.
Tonally the film is all over the place. The original story is a classic of gothic horror but the 1943 version tries to turn it into a romantic comedy. This causes the entire production to feel as off key as an opera singer after inhaling an entire balloon of helium. If you really want to be entertained, watch out for the floating rocks during the climax.
Recommendation
Not worth learning opera nor becoming a phantom of in order to see this movie, not unless one really digs older movies.
The Rating
2 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Arthur Lubin
Writers: Eric Taylor, Samuel Hoffenstein, John Jacoby, and Hans Jacoby. Based on "Le Fantôme de L'Opéra" by Gaston Leroux.
Cast: Nelson Eddy, Susanna Foster, Claude Rains, Edgar Barrier, Leo Carrillo, Jane Farrar
Overview
An awkward take on the tale first told by Gaston Leroux, the 1943 version of the Phantom of the Opera mixes comedy, romance, and horror to poor effect. At least there is a same sex romance to keep things interesting.
Synopsis
Moved by the voice of Christine DuBois (Susanna Foster), Erique Claudin (Claude Rains) secretly funds her singing lessons using his income as violinist while nearly going broke in the process. Desperate for money, Claudin attempts to sell one of his compositions to a publisher but when that fails and he believe that his work is being stolen, he snaps. During the following struggle, Claudin kills a man and has his face disfigured with acid. Hiding in the shadows of the Opera House where he once worked, he attempts to pave Christine a path to stardom. Meanwhile, she is being courted by two men - police officer Raoul (Edgar Barrier) and Anatole Garron (Nelson Eddy) - although they both appear to be more into each other than Christine.
The Queering
What is the 1943 version of the Phantom of the Opera? Is it a romance? A horror film? A comedy? All of the above apparently. None of the elements really gel very well. Throw in some bad pacing (it feels like it takes forever to get through any of the opera sequences) and you have what I can only imagine to be (as I have not seen any of the others) one of the weaker versions of the Phantom of the Opera to make it onto the silver screen.
However, there is the romance between Anatole and Raoul, who pretend to be courting the actress Christine so they can spend more time with each other, which helps keep things interesting. The two make every effort, including developing a ritual around who will walk through a door together. However, Christine eventually chooses a life with the theater. Clearly relieved that they no longer have to continue the charade, Raoul and Anatole walk out arm in arm as the camera fades to black.
There is something very strange about a film version of the Phantom of the Opera being filmed in technicolor. It doesn't feel right. Director Lubin tries to add a sense of dread to proceedings by showing shots of The Phantoms' shadow against walls but the framing is too stagy and awkward to be effective. The infamous chandler crashing scene is ineptly shot and way too drawn out.
Tonally the film is all over the place. The original story is a classic of gothic horror but the 1943 version tries to turn it into a romantic comedy. This causes the entire production to feel as off key as an opera singer after inhaling an entire balloon of helium. If you really want to be entertained, watch out for the floating rocks during the climax.
Recommendation
Not worth learning opera nor becoming a phantom of in order to see this movie, not unless one really digs older movies.
The Rating
2 out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
May 9, 2014
Queer Review: The Shining (1980)
The Shining
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Writers: Stanley Kubrick and Diane Johnson. Based on the novel by The Shining by Stephen King.
Cast: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, Scatman Crothers, Barry Nelson, Philip Stone, Joe Turkel
Overview
Analysis of Stanley Kubrick films are typically awash in obtuse interpretations and The Shining is certainly no exception. An entire documentary, Room 237, was made with commentators offering up a variety of bizarre explanations, including the possibility that The Shining contains proof that Kubrick was part of the vast government conspiracy that faked the moon landing.
All of this gives The Shining an air of being an high end, elite work of art by one of the great auteurs of the 20th century. However, all of this analysis simply causes people to miss the obvious, namely that The Shining is little more then a typical Hollywood horror film, many of which feature characters wrestling with same sex desires or gender identity issues before turning into deranged killers.
Synopsis
Jack (Jack Nicholson) is the newest caretaker for the Overlook Hotel, an isolated resort which lies abandoned every winter thanks to the difficult to ploy road leading up to it. Thus Jack and his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall) and child Danny (Danny Lloyd) are stuck in isolation for the entire winter. Since this is a ghostly horror story, it's only natural that the location was once the site of diabolical murders, whereby the previous caretaker went mad and killed the rest of his family. Over time of course, ghostly apparitions start to intrude on their solitude and Jack gradually loses any semblance of sanity, causing him to represent an increasing danger to his family.
The Queering
Evidence of what is actually going on appear early and often. During an interview with the managers of The Overlook, Jack can be seen reading a Playgirl magazine. Furthermore, we never see Jack and Wendy in bed together or otherwise engaging in physical intimacy. In fact, Jack makes it perfectly clear to her that he does not want her around when he's working. In a scene ripe with Freudian overtones, Jack finds himself embracing a naked woman, only to have her turn into a rotting corpse. However, Jack has no problems getting along with the male apparitions he encounters. He converses with ease with a mysterious bartender named Lloyd and there is even a strange scene where a ghostly attendant spends a lot of time cleaning a mess off of Jack's jacket in a brightly lit red bathroom.
This is before we get delve into all the hints that Jack sexually molested Danny, either in the past or as an ongoing issue. For starters, Danny's condition more closely resembles a kid suffering from PTSD, than one experiencing a psychic condition. In the book, the fact that Danny had psychic abilities was less ambiguous and more relevant to the overall story. Here, the ambiguity only makes Danny come across as a tortured victim. When Danny talks about his imaginary friend Tony, he says that Tony lives in his mouth.
In one creepy scene, Danny and Wendy start out watching television in a room of the hotel, when Danny asks if he can go and get a toy from the shared bedroom. Wendy allows him on the condition that he make no noise. What we are supposed to think is that Jack will wake up angry and lash out at Danny, given that it was earlier revealed that Jack had explicitly physically abused Danny. When Danny arrives at the room however, Jack only asks that Danny sit on his lap. The possibility that Wendy was actually worried about Jack molesting Danny is illuminated in a scene late in the movie, once all hell has broken lose, Wendy comes upon a man in a bear suit clearly performing oral sex on another man. Clearly this bit indicates that she saw something in the past and buried it in her memory.
There are subtler elements as well, that also point towards Jack having issues with masculinity. For one, he is an alcoholic, and this would not be the first time that alcoholism has been used as a stand in for queerness. See the film version of The Lost Weekend for an example of this. Also, Jack is a man who is clearly unable to provide for his family. Not only is Wendy the one who is shown performing his care-taking duties (on top of the housework that she also performs) but when we see the manuscript for the book Jack is working on, it ironically only consists of the lines "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy"
So where does this all leave us? For all the analysis dedicated to it, for all the symbols that Kubrick allegedly left behind, there can be no doubt that this is a story of a man destroying his family by succumbing to queer desires. It is an age old tale, one that existed well before The Shining made it's way to the big screen. Because queer peeps are evulz.
Artistically speaking, The Shining is very well made and there is no reason to question Kubricks' status as an auteur. The heavily stylized cinematography where his trademark meticulousness is showcased in every frame only helps to cement it. The finale, with Jack desperately pursuing Danny through the hotel's outdoor maze, is particularly eery and evocative thanks to the long tracking shots Kubrick utilizes. And what would a review of The Shining be without mentioning Jack Nicholsons' "Here's Johnny!" performance? Now that I have mentioned it, I can now end this review.
Recommendation
Only the most devoted horror buffs who don't mind a side dish of homophobia should take a shining to this film.
The Rating
2 stars out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Stanley Kubrick
Writers: Stanley Kubrick and Diane Johnson. Based on the novel by The Shining by Stephen King.
Cast: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall, Danny Lloyd, Scatman Crothers, Barry Nelson, Philip Stone, Joe Turkel
Overview
Analysis of Stanley Kubrick films are typically awash in obtuse interpretations and The Shining is certainly no exception. An entire documentary, Room 237, was made with commentators offering up a variety of bizarre explanations, including the possibility that The Shining contains proof that Kubrick was part of the vast government conspiracy that faked the moon landing.
All of this gives The Shining an air of being an high end, elite work of art by one of the great auteurs of the 20th century. However, all of this analysis simply causes people to miss the obvious, namely that The Shining is little more then a typical Hollywood horror film, many of which feature characters wrestling with same sex desires or gender identity issues before turning into deranged killers.
Synopsis
Jack (Jack Nicholson) is the newest caretaker for the Overlook Hotel, an isolated resort which lies abandoned every winter thanks to the difficult to ploy road leading up to it. Thus Jack and his wife Wendy (Shelley Duvall) and child Danny (Danny Lloyd) are stuck in isolation for the entire winter. Since this is a ghostly horror story, it's only natural that the location was once the site of diabolical murders, whereby the previous caretaker went mad and killed the rest of his family. Over time of course, ghostly apparitions start to intrude on their solitude and Jack gradually loses any semblance of sanity, causing him to represent an increasing danger to his family.
The Queering
Evidence of what is actually going on appear early and often. During an interview with the managers of The Overlook, Jack can be seen reading a Playgirl magazine. Furthermore, we never see Jack and Wendy in bed together or otherwise engaging in physical intimacy. In fact, Jack makes it perfectly clear to her that he does not want her around when he's working. In a scene ripe with Freudian overtones, Jack finds himself embracing a naked woman, only to have her turn into a rotting corpse. However, Jack has no problems getting along with the male apparitions he encounters. He converses with ease with a mysterious bartender named Lloyd and there is even a strange scene where a ghostly attendant spends a lot of time cleaning a mess off of Jack's jacket in a brightly lit red bathroom.
This is before we get delve into all the hints that Jack sexually molested Danny, either in the past or as an ongoing issue. For starters, Danny's condition more closely resembles a kid suffering from PTSD, than one experiencing a psychic condition. In the book, the fact that Danny had psychic abilities was less ambiguous and more relevant to the overall story. Here, the ambiguity only makes Danny come across as a tortured victim. When Danny talks about his imaginary friend Tony, he says that Tony lives in his mouth.
In one creepy scene, Danny and Wendy start out watching television in a room of the hotel, when Danny asks if he can go and get a toy from the shared bedroom. Wendy allows him on the condition that he make no noise. What we are supposed to think is that Jack will wake up angry and lash out at Danny, given that it was earlier revealed that Jack had explicitly physically abused Danny. When Danny arrives at the room however, Jack only asks that Danny sit on his lap. The possibility that Wendy was actually worried about Jack molesting Danny is illuminated in a scene late in the movie, once all hell has broken lose, Wendy comes upon a man in a bear suit clearly performing oral sex on another man. Clearly this bit indicates that she saw something in the past and buried it in her memory.
There are subtler elements as well, that also point towards Jack having issues with masculinity. For one, he is an alcoholic, and this would not be the first time that alcoholism has been used as a stand in for queerness. See the film version of The Lost Weekend for an example of this. Also, Jack is a man who is clearly unable to provide for his family. Not only is Wendy the one who is shown performing his care-taking duties (on top of the housework that she also performs) but when we see the manuscript for the book Jack is working on, it ironically only consists of the lines "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy"
So where does this all leave us? For all the analysis dedicated to it, for all the symbols that Kubrick allegedly left behind, there can be no doubt that this is a story of a man destroying his family by succumbing to queer desires. It is an age old tale, one that existed well before The Shining made it's way to the big screen. Because queer peeps are evulz.
Artistically speaking, The Shining is very well made and there is no reason to question Kubricks' status as an auteur. The heavily stylized cinematography where his trademark meticulousness is showcased in every frame only helps to cement it. The finale, with Jack desperately pursuing Danny through the hotel's outdoor maze, is particularly eery and evocative thanks to the long tracking shots Kubrick utilizes. And what would a review of The Shining be without mentioning Jack Nicholsons' "Here's Johnny!" performance? Now that I have mentioned it, I can now end this review.
Recommendation
Only the most devoted horror buffs who don't mind a side dish of homophobia should take a shining to this film.
The Rating
2 stars out of 4 stars.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
February 11, 2014
Queer Review: Casablanca (1942)
Casablanca
Director: Michael Curtiz
Writers: Julius J. Epstein, Philip G. Epstein, Howard Koch, and Casey Robinson. Based on the play by Murray Burnett and Joan Alison.
Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, Paul Henreid, Claude Rains, Conrad Veidt, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, S.Z. Sakall, Dooley Wilson
Overview
Casablanca is an extraordinary film. Not only is it Hollywood's greatest tale of romantic love set against the stormy backdrop of the World War II but it has the most memorable happy ending ever shown on the silver screen.
Synopsis
Rick (Humphrey Bogart) is the owner of Rick's Café Américain, which caters to a wide clientele. When Nazi resistance leader Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid) and his wife Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman) show up at Rick's cafe, the two not only are in desperate need of transit papers, but Ilsa forces Rick to remember his brief experimentation with heterosexuality. Coincidentally, Rick has recently managed to obtain a set of valuable transit papers, thereby forcing Rick to choose between his current lover, Police Chief Louie Renault (Claude Rains) and aiding Ilsa and her husband escape the Nazis.
The Queering
Had Casablanca been released in a more recent times, perhaps in the form of a serialized novel aimed at the teenage crowd, it would not be difficult to see it's fandom quickly dividing itself into Team Ilsa and Team Renault. I say that as it's hard not to empathize with the difficult decision Rick is forced to make. On one hand he clearly loves Ilsa and deeply cherishes the brief period of time they shared in Paris in spite of the abrupt way she dumped him at the end. On the other, making her happy by giving Laszlo and her the transit papers would damage the political standing of Chief Renault once the escape of Victor and Ilsa was discovered by Nazis. What more difficult decision could there be than to have to choose between the two people you love the most?
Chief Renault, for his part, attempts to dissuade Ilsa when she shows up from attempting to rekindle the romance she once had with Rick by stating "Well, Rick is the kind of man that... well, if I were a woman, and I were not around, I should be in love with Rick." When that fails, Renault tries to make Rick jealous, by tricking Rick into thinking that he is planning on accepting sexual favors from a woman who is in need of transit papers for her and her husband. The ruse works and Rick makes sure that the husband is able to win at the roulette tables in order to prevent Renault from straying.
While the racist standards of the time prevented him from presenting as a sexual creature, Sam (Dooley Wilson) too also demonstrates affections for Rick. Like Renault, Sam displays extreme jealousy towards Ilsa when he tries to dissuade her from making contact from Rick. He apparently did not want to have to comfort Rick again, as he obviously once did after Ilsas' brutal breakup with Rick in Paris. Note the way Sam gently caresses Ricks' shoulder on the train during their escape from Paris. Rick, for his part, returns Sams' affections by attempting to negotiate a higher salary for Sam from Signor Ferrari (Sydney Greenstreet), when Rick goes to Ferrari to sell the Café Américain. Apparently when Rick said, "I stick my neck out for nobody" he was only referring to individuals he didn't deeply care for.
Of course there is the ending, where Rick selflessly decides to risk his relationship with Renault and give Ilsa the exit papers so she and Laszlo can escape to continue fighting against the Germans. It is a no win situation for him. While it means that Laszlo will be able to continue to his resistance work against the Axis powers, the unenviable consequences mean that Rick not only ending his relationship with Renault, but sacrificing the possibility of companionship with Ilsa at the same time. It's a noble risk but one that Rick is ultimately rewarded for when Renault, clearly happy that Ilsa is out of the picture, forgives Rick for his decision. Note that he does this in spite of the fact that Rick had just taken him hostage in order to allow Ilsa and Laszlo to escape. The two then walk off into the mists, happy to begin a new and more beautiful relationship. Has Hollywood ever created a romance as deeply affecting as this? I am sure many have wept gallons of tears at this moment, so overwhelmed with joy they must have been.
Ultimately, Casablanca is pure Hollywood cornball. But it's beautiful cornball. While the romantic elements are the films strongest, this is ultimately a World War II propaganda film. As such, I cannot help but wonder if the reason for the films' initial success had to do with a brief line few people remember today. After Rick gives him the transit papers, Laszlo says, "Thanks. I appreciate it. Welcome back to the fight. This time I *know* our side will win." It's a small moment but one that I cannot help but think would have resonated with audiences during the dark days of the time. It's a moment of subtle hope, one whose message is soon underscored by the breathtaking ending.
Yes, this time our side won.
Recommendation
Casablanca would be worth walking in (and out) of all the gin joints in the world while searching for one that happens to be showing this movie.
The Rating
3 and 1/2 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Michael Curtiz
Writers: Julius J. Epstein, Philip G. Epstein, Howard Koch, and Casey Robinson. Based on the play by Murray Burnett and Joan Alison.
Cast: Humphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman, Paul Henreid, Claude Rains, Conrad Veidt, Sydney Greenstreet, Peter Lorre, S.Z. Sakall, Dooley Wilson
Overview
Casablanca is an extraordinary film. Not only is it Hollywood's greatest tale of romantic love set against the stormy backdrop of the World War II but it has the most memorable happy ending ever shown on the silver screen.
Synopsis
Rick (Humphrey Bogart) is the owner of Rick's Café Américain, which caters to a wide clientele. When Nazi resistance leader Victor Laszlo (Paul Henreid) and his wife Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman) show up at Rick's cafe, the two not only are in desperate need of transit papers, but Ilsa forces Rick to remember his brief experimentation with heterosexuality. Coincidentally, Rick has recently managed to obtain a set of valuable transit papers, thereby forcing Rick to choose between his current lover, Police Chief Louie Renault (Claude Rains) and aiding Ilsa and her husband escape the Nazis.
The Queering
Had Casablanca been released in a more recent times, perhaps in the form of a serialized novel aimed at the teenage crowd, it would not be difficult to see it's fandom quickly dividing itself into Team Ilsa and Team Renault. I say that as it's hard not to empathize with the difficult decision Rick is forced to make. On one hand he clearly loves Ilsa and deeply cherishes the brief period of time they shared in Paris in spite of the abrupt way she dumped him at the end. On the other, making her happy by giving Laszlo and her the transit papers would damage the political standing of Chief Renault once the escape of Victor and Ilsa was discovered by Nazis. What more difficult decision could there be than to have to choose between the two people you love the most?
Chief Renault, for his part, attempts to dissuade Ilsa when she shows up from attempting to rekindle the romance she once had with Rick by stating "Well, Rick is the kind of man that... well, if I were a woman, and I were not around, I should be in love with Rick." When that fails, Renault tries to make Rick jealous, by tricking Rick into thinking that he is planning on accepting sexual favors from a woman who is in need of transit papers for her and her husband. The ruse works and Rick makes sure that the husband is able to win at the roulette tables in order to prevent Renault from straying.
While the racist standards of the time prevented him from presenting as a sexual creature, Sam (Dooley Wilson) too also demonstrates affections for Rick. Like Renault, Sam displays extreme jealousy towards Ilsa when he tries to dissuade her from making contact from Rick. He apparently did not want to have to comfort Rick again, as he obviously once did after Ilsas' brutal breakup with Rick in Paris. Note the way Sam gently caresses Ricks' shoulder on the train during their escape from Paris. Rick, for his part, returns Sams' affections by attempting to negotiate a higher salary for Sam from Signor Ferrari (Sydney Greenstreet), when Rick goes to Ferrari to sell the Café Américain. Apparently when Rick said, "I stick my neck out for nobody" he was only referring to individuals he didn't deeply care for.
Of course there is the ending, where Rick selflessly decides to risk his relationship with Renault and give Ilsa the exit papers so she and Laszlo can escape to continue fighting against the Germans. It is a no win situation for him. While it means that Laszlo will be able to continue to his resistance work against the Axis powers, the unenviable consequences mean that Rick not only ending his relationship with Renault, but sacrificing the possibility of companionship with Ilsa at the same time. It's a noble risk but one that Rick is ultimately rewarded for when Renault, clearly happy that Ilsa is out of the picture, forgives Rick for his decision. Note that he does this in spite of the fact that Rick had just taken him hostage in order to allow Ilsa and Laszlo to escape. The two then walk off into the mists, happy to begin a new and more beautiful relationship. Has Hollywood ever created a romance as deeply affecting as this? I am sure many have wept gallons of tears at this moment, so overwhelmed with joy they must have been.
Ultimately, Casablanca is pure Hollywood cornball. But it's beautiful cornball. While the romantic elements are the films strongest, this is ultimately a World War II propaganda film. As such, I cannot help but wonder if the reason for the films' initial success had to do with a brief line few people remember today. After Rick gives him the transit papers, Laszlo says, "Thanks. I appreciate it. Welcome back to the fight. This time I *know* our side will win." It's a small moment but one that I cannot help but think would have resonated with audiences during the dark days of the time. It's a moment of subtle hope, one whose message is soon underscored by the breathtaking ending.
Yes, this time our side won.
Recommendation
Casablanca would be worth walking in (and out) of all the gin joints in the world while searching for one that happens to be showing this movie.
The Rating
3 and 1/2 stars out of 4.
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
February 9, 2014
Queer Review: Rope (1948)
Rope
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Hume Cronyn, Arthur Laurents, and Ben Hecht. Based on the play by Patrick Hamilton.
Cast: Dick Hogan, John Dall, Farley Granger, Edith Evanson, Douglas Dick, Joan Chandler, Cedric Hardwicke, Constance Collier, James Stewart
Overview
Loosely based on real life story of "Leopold and Loeb", two gay lovers who killed a 14 year old Bobby Franks, Rope tells the story of two upper class college students who strangle one of their fellow classmates. In short, another example of Alfred Hitchcock's fetisation of queer killers.
Synopsis
Two college students, the reluctant Philip (John Dall) and the daring Brandon (Farley Granger) strangle one of their former classmates David (Dick Hogan). Then they invite members of his family, mutual friends, as well as their former school headmaster Rupert (James Stewart), to a party in order to increase the thrill of the kill. However, Philips' obvious nervousness piques Ruperts' suspicions. When Brandons' repeating of Ruperts' interpretation of Nietzche, that superior individuals have a moral right to kill their inferiors, further draws attention to Davids' absence.
The Queering
The presentation of Rope was somewhat experimental. The entire story is set in "real" time, with Hitchcock attempting to use as few edits as possible and hide a couple of cuts by zooming in close to a couple of objects. However, this backfires, as the efforts to disguise said cuts are clumsy and draw attention to themselves and unfortunately an uncharismatic Jimmy Stewart addslittle to the attempts at verisimilitude.
There is a pattern that I have noticed, where real life individuals who were gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or transexual, did something "evil", then movies are infinitely more likely to accurately depict characters based on those historical figures sexual orientation or gender identity. On the other hand if the real life person did something heroic or good, then the pattern is reversed. Gay or lesbian individuals become bi and bi characters become straight, while effeminate queens will inevitably get butched up.
The only thing that prevented Hitchcock from following this pattern was, ironically, the Hays Code. Since depictions homosexuality was banned outright, the director was forced to limit the characters sexuality to mere subtext. However, offscreen the filmmakers and particular Hitchcock made it clear that they wanted to make a film about queer sexuality. The final product was even banned by some theaters due to the fact that it had gone so far as to include coded gay characters, even if said characters were depicted as evil murderers. Honestly, I never thought I would see the day when I would find myself mildly thankful for Hollywoods' infamous production code.
On the philosophical side of things, the character of Brandon attempts to justify the murder by quoting Rupert, who in turn had been riffing on Nietzche. Unfortunately, the message ends up being garbled. Perhaps it's because Nietzch is a difficult writer to "get" that any superficial analysis is doomed to failure. Ruperts' eventual condemnation of the ideas he had (apparently) originally endorsed doesn't help matters very much. A more recent film to be based on the Leopold and Loeb case, Swoon managed to avoid this problem by focusing more on the psychological forces driving the characters rather than any philosophical justifications they tried to come up with.
Recommendation
No true ubermensch would allow themselves to be roped into seeing this movie, unless they had a strong interest in Hitchcock or the history of queer cinema.
The Rating
2 stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Alfred Hitchcock
Writers: Hume Cronyn, Arthur Laurents, and Ben Hecht. Based on the play by Patrick Hamilton.
Cast: Dick Hogan, John Dall, Farley Granger, Edith Evanson, Douglas Dick, Joan Chandler, Cedric Hardwicke, Constance Collier, James Stewart
Overview
Loosely based on real life story of "Leopold and Loeb", two gay lovers who killed a 14 year old Bobby Franks, Rope tells the story of two upper class college students who strangle one of their fellow classmates. In short, another example of Alfred Hitchcock's fetisation of queer killers.
Synopsis
Two college students, the reluctant Philip (John Dall) and the daring Brandon (Farley Granger) strangle one of their former classmates David (Dick Hogan). Then they invite members of his family, mutual friends, as well as their former school headmaster Rupert (James Stewart), to a party in order to increase the thrill of the kill. However, Philips' obvious nervousness piques Ruperts' suspicions. When Brandons' repeating of Ruperts' interpretation of Nietzche, that superior individuals have a moral right to kill their inferiors, further draws attention to Davids' absence.
The Queering
The presentation of Rope was somewhat experimental. The entire story is set in "real" time, with Hitchcock attempting to use as few edits as possible and hide a couple of cuts by zooming in close to a couple of objects. However, this backfires, as the efforts to disguise said cuts are clumsy and draw attention to themselves and unfortunately an uncharismatic Jimmy Stewart addslittle to the attempts at verisimilitude.
There is a pattern that I have noticed, where real life individuals who were gay, lesbian, bi, transgender, or transexual, did something "evil", then movies are infinitely more likely to accurately depict characters based on those historical figures sexual orientation or gender identity. On the other hand if the real life person did something heroic or good, then the pattern is reversed. Gay or lesbian individuals become bi and bi characters become straight, while effeminate queens will inevitably get butched up.
The only thing that prevented Hitchcock from following this pattern was, ironically, the Hays Code. Since depictions homosexuality was banned outright, the director was forced to limit the characters sexuality to mere subtext. However, offscreen the filmmakers and particular Hitchcock made it clear that they wanted to make a film about queer sexuality. The final product was even banned by some theaters due to the fact that it had gone so far as to include coded gay characters, even if said characters were depicted as evil murderers. Honestly, I never thought I would see the day when I would find myself mildly thankful for Hollywoods' infamous production code.
On the philosophical side of things, the character of Brandon attempts to justify the murder by quoting Rupert, who in turn had been riffing on Nietzche. Unfortunately, the message ends up being garbled. Perhaps it's because Nietzch is a difficult writer to "get" that any superficial analysis is doomed to failure. Ruperts' eventual condemnation of the ideas he had (apparently) originally endorsed doesn't help matters very much. A more recent film to be based on the Leopold and Loeb case, Swoon managed to avoid this problem by focusing more on the psychological forces driving the characters rather than any philosophical justifications they tried to come up with.
Recommendation
No true ubermensch would allow themselves to be roped into seeing this movie, unless they had a strong interest in Hitchcock or the history of queer cinema.
The Rating
2 stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
February 5, 2014
Added Against Me! "I was a Teenage Anarchist" to Queer Friendly Music
After a bit of thought, I've decided to add I was a Teenage Anarchist by Against Me! to Queer Friendly Music. I was hesitant to do so for a couple of reasons, namely that the queer content is entirely subtext.
However, given that I was unable to find any music videos from YouTube that I could embed here from the recently released Transgender Dysphoria Blues, I decided to include I was a Teenage Anarchist as the subtext is rather strong and the entire concept of the video revolves around Laura Jane Grace being rejected by the anarchist community due to transphobia on the part of bigoted anarchists.
Or at least, that is how I read the third verse, which goes:
Obviously though, you have to know that Laura Jane Grace is a transgender woman - who transitioned after the song was released - in order to "get it" but I think meaning is pretty clear in retrospective.
In any case, I downloaded and listened to the entirety of Transgender Dysphoria Blues and I will say that I thought it was a pretty good listen.
Against Me - I was a Teenage Anarchist
However, given that I was unable to find any music videos from YouTube that I could embed here from the recently released Transgender Dysphoria Blues, I decided to include I was a Teenage Anarchist as the subtext is rather strong and the entire concept of the video revolves around Laura Jane Grace being rejected by the anarchist community due to transphobia on the part of bigoted anarchists.
Or at least, that is how I read the third verse, which goes:
I was a teenage anarchist, but then the scene got too rigid.(Emphasis my own)
It was a mob mentality, they set their rifle sights on me.
Narrow visions of autonomy, you want me to surrender my identity.
I was a teenage anarchist, the revolution was a lie.
Obviously though, you have to know that Laura Jane Grace is a transgender woman - who transitioned after the song was released - in order to "get it" but I think meaning is pretty clear in retrospective.
In any case, I downloaded and listened to the entirety of Transgender Dysphoria Blues and I will say that I thought it was a pretty good listen.
Against Me - I was a Teenage Anarchist
December 6, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi
Director: Richard Marquand
Writers: Lawrence Kasdan and George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, Ian McDiarmid, Sebastian Shaw, Frank Oz, James Earl Jones, David Prowse, Alec Guinness, Kenny Baker
Overview
The weakest of the Star Wars movies, Return of the Jedi sends the saga on a note as as fuzzy and awkward as an Ewoks' pelt.
Synopsis
After rescuing Han Solo (Harrison Ford) from the clutches of the evil Jabba the Hutt, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) and the rest of the gang head back to Rebel Alliance's fleet to discover that the evil Emperor had secretly begun construction on a new Death Star. This time around, the Death Star is being protected by an impenetrable shield that must be destroyed. Luke is selected to lead a strike team to destroy the shield, but after arriving on Endor, he abandons them to pursue a more dangerous mission: to convert Darth Vader back to the light side of the force.
The Queering
I would like to open up this review by asking the same questions every one else always asks about Return of the Jedi. Why do the stormtroopers wear armor that fails to provide any kind of obvious protection from blasters, arrows, or even bloody rocks? Given their inability to hit any of the heroes, it presumably is doing nothing to improve their aim... Also, why are there Ewoks? I said WHY?!
I mean, I sometimes find myself surprised at people who claim that the original trilogy is unquestionably better than the prequels. What I want to know is how exactly such people managed to block Return of the Jedi from their minds. Does the Ewok line "yub, yub" contain subliminal messaging for such a purpose? You will forget this scene! You will scrub our misbegotten existence from every corner of your mind!. The Star Wars films have never shied away from commercial appeal, but the Ewoks unfortunately function as little more than walking merchandise opportunities.
Now old movie serials are an obvious inspiration for the Star Wars saga and recently, my partner and I watched The Phantom serials but had to stop after only a few episodes. I would like to pretend to be all noble and say it was because of the really, really racist manner in which the Native allies of the Phantom were presented, but the real reason was because of the awful overall quality of that series. In any event, I bring this up due to the fact that the manor in which the "Native/Indigenous" characters were presented there, is exactly the same way the Ewoks are developed in Return of the Jedi.
Allow me to explain. In The Phantom serials, the Native characters are what could probably be categorized as "generic Hollywood primitives". The story is set in Asia, but their visual elements (clothing, homes, weaponry) are drawn from a much wider variety of sources, primarily African and Native American, with a few Amazonian elements thrown in for good measure. None of the characters look Asian themselves, nor does anything they wear, live in, or use. Of particular interest is the fact that the Phantom uses the Natives characters superstitions as a means of controlling them.
I bring this up, only because it's a recent example that's stuck in my mind but really, probably the presentation of any indigenous group from any serial would work just as well. This is after all, how the concept of genericness works. In any event, it's just a really obvious example for the template that the Ewoks were clearly based on. The use of superstition being a means to control the Natives being a particular important element. In any case, the point I want to make is that I don't think that using racist tropes to develop an alien culture makes those tropes any less racist.
Okay, onto the queer subtexts. They really are thin this time around, if they can be said to exist at all. We learn for example this time around that Han Solo can only say "I love you" to Princess Leia if she's holding a phallic-esque blaster near her crotch. I know, I know, I'm stretching things out here. Sorry.
Overall, Return of the Jedi manages to do some things right. The opening sequences where the gang rescues Han from Jabba the Hut are well executed, with the creepiness of Jabba's fortress oozing from every frame. Also, the three way climax between Darth Vader, Luke, and the Emperor are as intense and dramatic as one could hope. Now if only those scenes hadn't constantly been interrupted by Ewok action porn....
Recommendation
This Jedi film thingie is worth returning to the Star Wars saga in order to see, but only kind of.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Richard Marquand
Writers: Lawrence Kasdan and George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Anthony Daniels, Peter Mayhew, Ian McDiarmid, Sebastian Shaw, Frank Oz, James Earl Jones, David Prowse, Alec Guinness, Kenny Baker
Overview
The weakest of the Star Wars movies, Return of the Jedi sends the saga on a note as as fuzzy and awkward as an Ewoks' pelt.
Synopsis
After rescuing Han Solo (Harrison Ford) from the clutches of the evil Jabba the Hutt, Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) and the rest of the gang head back to Rebel Alliance's fleet to discover that the evil Emperor had secretly begun construction on a new Death Star. This time around, the Death Star is being protected by an impenetrable shield that must be destroyed. Luke is selected to lead a strike team to destroy the shield, but after arriving on Endor, he abandons them to pursue a more dangerous mission: to convert Darth Vader back to the light side of the force.
The Queering
I would like to open up this review by asking the same questions every one else always asks about Return of the Jedi. Why do the stormtroopers wear armor that fails to provide any kind of obvious protection from blasters, arrows, or even bloody rocks? Given their inability to hit any of the heroes, it presumably is doing nothing to improve their aim... Also, why are there Ewoks? I said WHY?!
I mean, I sometimes find myself surprised at people who claim that the original trilogy is unquestionably better than the prequels. What I want to know is how exactly such people managed to block Return of the Jedi from their minds. Does the Ewok line "yub, yub" contain subliminal messaging for such a purpose? You will forget this scene! You will scrub our misbegotten existence from every corner of your mind!. The Star Wars films have never shied away from commercial appeal, but the Ewoks unfortunately function as little more than walking merchandise opportunities.
Now old movie serials are an obvious inspiration for the Star Wars saga and recently, my partner and I watched The Phantom serials but had to stop after only a few episodes. I would like to pretend to be all noble and say it was because of the really, really racist manner in which the Native allies of the Phantom were presented, but the real reason was because of the awful overall quality of that series. In any event, I bring this up due to the fact that the manor in which the "Native/Indigenous" characters were presented there, is exactly the same way the Ewoks are developed in Return of the Jedi.
Allow me to explain. In The Phantom serials, the Native characters are what could probably be categorized as "generic Hollywood primitives". The story is set in Asia, but their visual elements (clothing, homes, weaponry) are drawn from a much wider variety of sources, primarily African and Native American, with a few Amazonian elements thrown in for good measure. None of the characters look Asian themselves, nor does anything they wear, live in, or use. Of particular interest is the fact that the Phantom uses the Natives characters superstitions as a means of controlling them.
I bring this up, only because it's a recent example that's stuck in my mind but really, probably the presentation of any indigenous group from any serial would work just as well. This is after all, how the concept of genericness works. In any event, it's just a really obvious example for the template that the Ewoks were clearly based on. The use of superstition being a means to control the Natives being a particular important element. In any case, the point I want to make is that I don't think that using racist tropes to develop an alien culture makes those tropes any less racist.
Okay, onto the queer subtexts. They really are thin this time around, if they can be said to exist at all. We learn for example this time around that Han Solo can only say "I love you" to Princess Leia if she's holding a phallic-esque blaster near her crotch. I know, I know, I'm stretching things out here. Sorry.
Overall, Return of the Jedi manages to do some things right. The opening sequences where the gang rescues Han from Jabba the Hut are well executed, with the creepiness of Jabba's fortress oozing from every frame. Also, the three way climax between Darth Vader, Luke, and the Emperor are as intense and dramatic as one could hope. Now if only those scenes hadn't constantly been interrupted by Ewok action porn....
Recommendation
This Jedi film thingie is worth returning to the Star Wars saga in order to see, but only kind of.
The Rating
3 out of 4 stars
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 24, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode VI - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Star Wars: Episode IV - The Empire Strikes Back
Director: Irvin Kershner
Writers: Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan, and George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Anthony Daniels, David Prowse, Peter Mayhew, Kenny Baker, Frank Oz, Alec Guinness, Jeremy Bulloch, James Earl Jones
Overview
Continuing the adventure started with A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back takes the saga in a very different, and much darker direction. A shocking twist (now ruined for anybody who watches the films in chronological order) elevates this entry onto a much higher level.
Synopsis
Following the destruction of the Death Star, the evil Empire is desperate to capture the leaders of the Rebel Alliance. While Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) heads to Degobah to be trained by the ancient Jedi Master Yoda (Frank OZ), Han Sol (Harrison Ford) and Leia (Carrie Fisher) find themselves in desperate flight from Darth Vader (David Prowse, James Earl Jones). However, Darth Vaders' plans are much bolder than capturing a few Rebel Leaders. Vader wants to lure Luke out of hiding so he can use a dark secret from the Skywalker family past to turn Luke to the dark side.
The Queering
The Empire Strikes Back does what few sequels actually do. It takes the premise of the original as a springboard for a different story. Better yet, A New Hope was a fairly light hearted space romp, The Empire Strikes Back introduces not only a darker tone, but legitimate substance into the saga.
While Empire Strikes Back is the darker, and most mature out of all the episodes, it is also the one that gives it's female lead the least amount to do. Leia is pretty much on hand this time around solely to flirt with Han Solo and yell at Luke "it's a trap!". Hard to imagine a farther cry from the princess in the last flick who picked off stormtroopers with a blaster and boldly took charge of her own rescue before it had even properly begun.
I mentioned before how the Empires' Stormtroopers, are named after a NAZI militia. Here, the ground troops who attack the Rebels on the Frozen planet Hoth, are given uniforms that make them more or less resemble the white hoodies of the KKK. I am not sure what to make of this. Since the rebels are pretty much mostly white, it feels a like drawing any kind of parallel between the rebellion and the civil rights movement feels a bit appropriative.
As for queer subtexts, Han Solo once again not only proves himself willing to put his life on the line to rescue Luke Skywalker, yet he's more than willing to delegate protecting Princess Leia duties to Chewie (Peter Mayhew). Worse, when during a key dramatic moment, when Leia tells him she loves him, Han is unable to respond with a "I love you too" but rather "I know". Really Han? Meanwhile, while Darth Vader showed absolutely no hesitancy when it came to torturing Leia in the last episode, he decides this time around that the best way to lure Luke out of hiding is to torture Han. I wonder, does this mean that Luke cares more about Han than Leia?
All in all, the darker tone and grown up attitude, helps elevate this Star Wars entry a true classic.
Recommendation
See this flick, or do not see this flick, there is no point in merely trying to see this flick.
The Rating
4 stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Irvin Kershner
Writers: Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan, and George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Billy Dee Williams, Anthony Daniels, David Prowse, Peter Mayhew, Kenny Baker, Frank Oz, Alec Guinness, Jeremy Bulloch, James Earl Jones
Overview
Continuing the adventure started with A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back takes the saga in a very different, and much darker direction. A shocking twist (now ruined for anybody who watches the films in chronological order) elevates this entry onto a much higher level.
Synopsis
Following the destruction of the Death Star, the evil Empire is desperate to capture the leaders of the Rebel Alliance. While Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) heads to Degobah to be trained by the ancient Jedi Master Yoda (Frank OZ), Han Sol (Harrison Ford) and Leia (Carrie Fisher) find themselves in desperate flight from Darth Vader (David Prowse, James Earl Jones). However, Darth Vaders' plans are much bolder than capturing a few Rebel Leaders. Vader wants to lure Luke out of hiding so he can use a dark secret from the Skywalker family past to turn Luke to the dark side.
The Queering
The Empire Strikes Back does what few sequels actually do. It takes the premise of the original as a springboard for a different story. Better yet, A New Hope was a fairly light hearted space romp, The Empire Strikes Back introduces not only a darker tone, but legitimate substance into the saga.
While Empire Strikes Back is the darker, and most mature out of all the episodes, it is also the one that gives it's female lead the least amount to do. Leia is pretty much on hand this time around solely to flirt with Han Solo and yell at Luke "it's a trap!". Hard to imagine a farther cry from the princess in the last flick who picked off stormtroopers with a blaster and boldly took charge of her own rescue before it had even properly begun.
I mentioned before how the Empires' Stormtroopers, are named after a NAZI militia. Here, the ground troops who attack the Rebels on the Frozen planet Hoth, are given uniforms that make them more or less resemble the white hoodies of the KKK. I am not sure what to make of this. Since the rebels are pretty much mostly white, it feels a like drawing any kind of parallel between the rebellion and the civil rights movement feels a bit appropriative.
As for queer subtexts, Han Solo once again not only proves himself willing to put his life on the line to rescue Luke Skywalker, yet he's more than willing to delegate protecting Princess Leia duties to Chewie (Peter Mayhew). Worse, when during a key dramatic moment, when Leia tells him she loves him, Han is unable to respond with a "I love you too" but rather "I know". Really Han? Meanwhile, while Darth Vader showed absolutely no hesitancy when it came to torturing Leia in the last episode, he decides this time around that the best way to lure Luke out of hiding is to torture Han. I wonder, does this mean that Luke cares more about Han than Leia?
All in all, the darker tone and grown up attitude, helps elevate this Star Wars entry a true classic.
Recommendation
See this flick, or do not see this flick, there is no point in merely trying to see this flick.
The Rating
4 stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 18, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977)
Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew, David Prowse, James Earl Jones, Ken Burtt
Overview
The first Star Wars movie released, A New Hope introduces us to a galaxy far far away, filled with the likes of Darth Vader, Princess Leia R2-D2, C-3PO, Han Solo, and a whiny, angsty teenager by the name of Luke Skywalker.
Synopsis
Two droids, R2-D2 (Ben Burtt, Kevin Baker) and C-3PO (Anthony Daniels), fall into the hands of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), a moisture farmer on the backwater planet Tattoine. The droids contain plans vital for the destruction of the recently completed Death Star, a space station capable of destroying an entire planet, which makes it the most dreaded weapon in the Galactic Empire's arsenal. With the dreaded Darth Vader (James Earl Jones, David Prowse) in pursuit, Luke, C-3PO, and R2-D2 join with Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guiness), Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) and blast off from Tattoine for Alderaan, only to find the entire planet was destroyed.
The Queering
The first time I saw A New Hope, it was in my Grandmother's basement on a TV that could double as a piece of furniture. The television was old, really old, and still works today. It had a remote control that attached to the TV directly via a physical wire that, in contrast to today's modern remotes, had only one knob that you turned to chain the channel. With the recent passing of my Grandmother, I find myself actually trying to figure to get it to my current apartment in Wilkes-Barre, so I can use it as a TV stand. Because nostalgia.
A New Hope opens by introducing us to R2-D2 and C-3PO, two characters whose chemistry was severely missed in the prequels. One wonders if somehow, they had been given more screen time together in Episodes I - III, those movies would have been better received. Re-watching the Star Wars films recently in order to write these reviews, the biggest difference I could find between the two trilogies had nothing to do with overall artistic quality of the films but rather with how long C-3PO and R2-D2 spent together on screen.
Of course R2-D2 and C-3PO could also be seen as something of a gay-odd couple. In fact, in spite of all droids in the Star Wars universe appearing fully sentient, they are consistently de-humanized. Given that they are mechanical and therefore genderless, they seem a natural set of characters to impose queer subtexts upon. A subtext that can be seen perhaps most obviously in the scene where the two droids try to enter Mos Eisley Cantina and are told "we don't serve their kind here". This scene reminded me of the fact that during the time of the Stonewall Riots, it was illegal to serve known "homosexuals".
Another queer subtext shows up in the relationship between Han Solo and Luke Skywalker. While both Luke and Han both express heterosexual desire for Princess Leia at some point, there is a pattern worth commenting on. Han, a space freighter who has been cavorting around the galaxy up to this point in time with only a Wookie companion, takes quite a bit of persuasion before he is willing to go and rescue Princess Leia from captivity. In the end, it's pretty clear he's only does participate in her rescue because of the potential reward. Later, he does verbally express interest in Leia, but it's Luke that he puts his on the line to save at the end, without any promise of material reward. Talk is cheap Han, talk is cheap.
Also, if anyone can explain how the last scene does not resemble a marriage ceremony between Han Solo and Luke Skywalker, I would be interested in knowing about it. Thanks.
There is however, a rather unfortunate negative ableist subtext regarding Darth Vader. Vaders' most visible and memorable traits (heavy breathing, scary mask thingie) are directly tied to the character being physically disabled. I talked about Darth Vader being de-queered during his transformation into most evil Sith Lord, but what escaped my notice was how this came about through Anakin's body being several damaged, 3 of his limbs light-sabred off, and his lungs burned, forcing him to breath through a respirator to live.
But what message does it send when a characters' descent into evil is marked by bodily damage? It happened as well with both Palpatine and General Greivious in Revenge of the Sith, with General Greivious being a precursor to Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine rapidly aging specifically due to his use of the Dark Side. Obi-Wan specifically mentions here in A New Hope that Darth Vader is "more machine now, than man". In the Star Wars universe it seems, a damaged soul equates to a damaged body. Actually it's not so much a Star Wars trope as it is a highly problematic ableist trope in general. This is just something that needs to be said.
Problematic elements aside, A New Hope effectively sets up the Star Wars Universe by cramming as many strange beasties and clunking mechanical beings into every frame possible. The Special Edition, released in 1997, inserted even more creatures, particularly into the Mos Eisley sequences. While critics have complained about Lucas's tendency to insert as many background material, be it cantankerous machinery or alienated monsters, it is the intricate background details that make the story work. This Galaxy Far, Far Away works the way it does for so many fans the way it does precisely because there is so much texture. No movie series before (or since really) has managed to create an entire universe with this much depth of background detail to get lost in.
Recommendation
Would be worth seeing, even if in fact there was no new hope to be found here.
The Rating
4 Stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher, Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Peter Mayhew, David Prowse, James Earl Jones, Ken Burtt
Overview
The first Star Wars movie released, A New Hope introduces us to a galaxy far far away, filled with the likes of Darth Vader, Princess Leia R2-D2, C-3PO, Han Solo, and a whiny, angsty teenager by the name of Luke Skywalker.
Synopsis
Two droids, R2-D2 (Ben Burtt, Kevin Baker) and C-3PO (Anthony Daniels), fall into the hands of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), a moisture farmer on the backwater planet Tattoine. The droids contain plans vital for the destruction of the recently completed Death Star, a space station capable of destroying an entire planet, which makes it the most dreaded weapon in the Galactic Empire's arsenal. With the dreaded Darth Vader (James Earl Jones, David Prowse) in pursuit, Luke, C-3PO, and R2-D2 join with Obi-Wan Kenobi (Alec Guiness), Han Solo (Harrison Ford), Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew) and blast off from Tattoine for Alderaan, only to find the entire planet was destroyed.
The Queering
The first time I saw A New Hope, it was in my Grandmother's basement on a TV that could double as a piece of furniture. The television was old, really old, and still works today. It had a remote control that attached to the TV directly via a physical wire that, in contrast to today's modern remotes, had only one knob that you turned to chain the channel. With the recent passing of my Grandmother, I find myself actually trying to figure to get it to my current apartment in Wilkes-Barre, so I can use it as a TV stand. Because nostalgia.
A New Hope opens by introducing us to R2-D2 and C-3PO, two characters whose chemistry was severely missed in the prequels. One wonders if somehow, they had been given more screen time together in Episodes I - III, those movies would have been better received. Re-watching the Star Wars films recently in order to write these reviews, the biggest difference I could find between the two trilogies had nothing to do with overall artistic quality of the films but rather with how long C-3PO and R2-D2 spent together on screen.
Of course R2-D2 and C-3PO could also be seen as something of a gay-odd couple. In fact, in spite of all droids in the Star Wars universe appearing fully sentient, they are consistently de-humanized. Given that they are mechanical and therefore genderless, they seem a natural set of characters to impose queer subtexts upon. A subtext that can be seen perhaps most obviously in the scene where the two droids try to enter Mos Eisley Cantina and are told "we don't serve their kind here". This scene reminded me of the fact that during the time of the Stonewall Riots, it was illegal to serve known "homosexuals".
Another queer subtext shows up in the relationship between Han Solo and Luke Skywalker. While both Luke and Han both express heterosexual desire for Princess Leia at some point, there is a pattern worth commenting on. Han, a space freighter who has been cavorting around the galaxy up to this point in time with only a Wookie companion, takes quite a bit of persuasion before he is willing to go and rescue Princess Leia from captivity. In the end, it's pretty clear he's only does participate in her rescue because of the potential reward. Later, he does verbally express interest in Leia, but it's Luke that he puts his on the line to save at the end, without any promise of material reward. Talk is cheap Han, talk is cheap.
Also, if anyone can explain how the last scene does not resemble a marriage ceremony between Han Solo and Luke Skywalker, I would be interested in knowing about it. Thanks.
There is however, a rather unfortunate negative ableist subtext regarding Darth Vader. Vaders' most visible and memorable traits (heavy breathing, scary mask thingie) are directly tied to the character being physically disabled. I talked about Darth Vader being de-queered during his transformation into most evil Sith Lord, but what escaped my notice was how this came about through Anakin's body being several damaged, 3 of his limbs light-sabred off, and his lungs burned, forcing him to breath through a respirator to live.
But what message does it send when a characters' descent into evil is marked by bodily damage? It happened as well with both Palpatine and General Greivious in Revenge of the Sith, with General Greivious being a precursor to Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine rapidly aging specifically due to his use of the Dark Side. Obi-Wan specifically mentions here in A New Hope that Darth Vader is "more machine now, than man". In the Star Wars universe it seems, a damaged soul equates to a damaged body. Actually it's not so much a Star Wars trope as it is a highly problematic ableist trope in general. This is just something that needs to be said.
Problematic elements aside, A New Hope effectively sets up the Star Wars Universe by cramming as many strange beasties and clunking mechanical beings into every frame possible. The Special Edition, released in 1997, inserted even more creatures, particularly into the Mos Eisley sequences. While critics have complained about Lucas's tendency to insert as many background material, be it cantankerous machinery or alienated monsters, it is the intricate background details that make the story work. This Galaxy Far, Far Away works the way it does for so many fans the way it does precisely because there is so much texture. No movie series before (or since really) has managed to create an entire universe with this much depth of background detail to get lost in.
Recommendation
Would be worth seeing, even if in fact there was no new hope to be found here.
The Rating
4 Stars out of 4
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 15, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits, Frank Oz, Anthony Daniels, Christopher Lee
Overview
Without any poorly developed romance to drag it down, Revenge of the Sith manages to send the prequel trilogy out on a high note. This long descent into darkness as the Jedi Order is wiped out and the Sith gain absolute over the galaxy, is remarkably enjoyable (from a certain point of view...).
Synopsis
The Clone Wars are in full swing, although the end is in sight. During a rescue mission for the kidnapped Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid), Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) manages to kill Count Dooku (Christopher Lee), who had been leading the insurrection against the Republic. This means that Chancellor Palpatine (who is now revealed to have been Darth Sidious all along) must find a new apprentice, so he turns his attention to completing his seduction of Anakin to the dark side. This is made easier when Obi-Wan is sent away to kill the new separatist leader, General Grevieous, leaving Anakin behind. Anakin, who is also dealing with Padme's revelation that she is pregnant and that he thus will become a father, feels spurned by the Jedi Council over this decision and that they do not trust. With so much hanging in the balance, Anakin is pushed inevitably closer and closer to the dark side.
The Queering
I can recall waiting in line to see Revenge of the Sith at the midnight showing in theaters. I remember playing Uno with some college students (I was in the middle of working towards my first bachelors degree myself at the time) who were in line behind me, while sitting on the sidewalk in the middle of chilly enough night. It marks one of the more fun times I had in college. There is a certain excitement that comes, not just from seeing a movie in theater, but in waiting in line to see a work that one is eagerly awaiting the release of. If the movie succeeds, the experience can be transcendent. Seeing it with the right audience, that cheers at the right moments, is far different from seeing even the most artistically accomplished film with an audience that might as well be dead. Citizen Kane is one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time (and rightfully so) but that movie's power is subtler, and doesn't quite compare in many ways to seeing a lightsabre battle between two Jedi's that was legendary long before it had ever been committed to film.
This is not a knock on Citizen Kane, simply the observation that it is possible for one to like different movies for different reasons. I do not think that Attack of the Clones is in any ways, an artistic accomplishment, although there are certainly many nice visuals that could qualify as arty. This may seem like an odd observation, but while George Lucas was hardly a film student at the time he had made The Phantom Menace, not only had he directed a small handful of films, but hadn't actually been in a directors' chair in decades. I think this shows most in the way many of the scenes of The Phantom Menace were incredibly stagy and the camerawork often resembled the work done on well made, but unambitious TV show. By the time we get to the Attack of the Clones, the action is much more fluid and more cinematic. With with no poorly developed romance scenes drag things down, the dialog manages to not be embarrassing to itself or any nearby bits of sand.
Another element that has increased from the previous films are the queer subtexts. The relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan is much clearer and they spend more time on screen together this time around and even get to have a moment of physical intimacy in an elevator shaft. There's even a moment during an important and emptionally charged scene where Obi-Wan yells out "I loved you... like a brother!" Furthermore, the scenes between Soon-to-be-Emperor Palpatine and Anakin ooze the scent of seduction. Also, the fact that Anakin and Padme must keep their romance secret, lends an element of queerness to their otherwise heterosexual relationship. And as I talked about in my reviews of the previous prequels, the Jedi Order can be read as an isophylic order, while there are obvious parallels and references to the events of World War II. Taken together, then there is an obvious parallel between Anakin Skywalker and Ernst Rohm. A parallel that is emphacized when Palpatine has Anakin hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights as the destruction of the Jedi Order can be seen as mirroring the The Night of Long Knives.
This of course makes for a more interesting reading, for as we are repeatedly told, the rise of Darth Vader requires the "death" of Anakin Skywalker, much like Hitler's rise to power forced him into assassinating Ernst Rohm. Of course Anakin's death is purely symbolic in nature, but it can be seen as Anakin having to purge anything "queer" from his life, including both his relationship with Obi-Wan and his secret love affair with Padme. How nice, for a change, that a characters descent into evil can be read as them having to de-queer and straighten themselves out, rather than the other way around.
Overall, Attack of the Clones contains many powerful scenes and on the whole, manages to more than justify the existence of the prequel trilogy. Although I do contend that the previous two were good enough to stand on their own merits. The force is steroids strong this time around.
Recommendation
Served hot or cold, this dish of revenge is purely delectable.
The Rating
**** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L. Jackson, Jimmy Smits, Frank Oz, Anthony Daniels, Christopher Lee
Overview
Without any poorly developed romance to drag it down, Revenge of the Sith manages to send the prequel trilogy out on a high note. This long descent into darkness as the Jedi Order is wiped out and the Sith gain absolute over the galaxy, is remarkably enjoyable (from a certain point of view...).
Synopsis
The Clone Wars are in full swing, although the end is in sight. During a rescue mission for the kidnapped Chancellor Palpatine (Ian McDiarmid), Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) manages to kill Count Dooku (Christopher Lee), who had been leading the insurrection against the Republic. This means that Chancellor Palpatine (who is now revealed to have been Darth Sidious all along) must find a new apprentice, so he turns his attention to completing his seduction of Anakin to the dark side. This is made easier when Obi-Wan is sent away to kill the new separatist leader, General Grevieous, leaving Anakin behind. Anakin, who is also dealing with Padme's revelation that she is pregnant and that he thus will become a father, feels spurned by the Jedi Council over this decision and that they do not trust. With so much hanging in the balance, Anakin is pushed inevitably closer and closer to the dark side.
The Queering
I can recall waiting in line to see Revenge of the Sith at the midnight showing in theaters. I remember playing Uno with some college students (I was in the middle of working towards my first bachelors degree myself at the time) who were in line behind me, while sitting on the sidewalk in the middle of chilly enough night. It marks one of the more fun times I had in college. There is a certain excitement that comes, not just from seeing a movie in theater, but in waiting in line to see a work that one is eagerly awaiting the release of. If the movie succeeds, the experience can be transcendent. Seeing it with the right audience, that cheers at the right moments, is far different from seeing even the most artistically accomplished film with an audience that might as well be dead. Citizen Kane is one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time (and rightfully so) but that movie's power is subtler, and doesn't quite compare in many ways to seeing a lightsabre battle between two Jedi's that was legendary long before it had ever been committed to film.
This is not a knock on Citizen Kane, simply the observation that it is possible for one to like different movies for different reasons. I do not think that Attack of the Clones is in any ways, an artistic accomplishment, although there are certainly many nice visuals that could qualify as arty. This may seem like an odd observation, but while George Lucas was hardly a film student at the time he had made The Phantom Menace, not only had he directed a small handful of films, but hadn't actually been in a directors' chair in decades. I think this shows most in the way many of the scenes of The Phantom Menace were incredibly stagy and the camerawork often resembled the work done on well made, but unambitious TV show. By the time we get to the Attack of the Clones, the action is much more fluid and more cinematic. With with no poorly developed romance scenes drag things down, the dialog manages to not be embarrassing to itself or any nearby bits of sand.
Another element that has increased from the previous films are the queer subtexts. The relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan is much clearer and they spend more time on screen together this time around and even get to have a moment of physical intimacy in an elevator shaft. There's even a moment during an important and emptionally charged scene where Obi-Wan yells out "I loved you... like a brother!" Furthermore, the scenes between Soon-to-be-Emperor Palpatine and Anakin ooze the scent of seduction. Also, the fact that Anakin and Padme must keep their romance secret, lends an element of queerness to their otherwise heterosexual relationship. And as I talked about in my reviews of the previous prequels, the Jedi Order can be read as an isophylic order, while there are obvious parallels and references to the events of World War II. Taken together, then there is an obvious parallel between Anakin Skywalker and Ernst Rohm. A parallel that is emphacized when Palpatine has Anakin hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights as the destruction of the Jedi Order can be seen as mirroring the The Night of Long Knives.
This of course makes for a more interesting reading, for as we are repeatedly told, the rise of Darth Vader requires the "death" of Anakin Skywalker, much like Hitler's rise to power forced him into assassinating Ernst Rohm. Of course Anakin's death is purely symbolic in nature, but it can be seen as Anakin having to purge anything "queer" from his life, including both his relationship with Obi-Wan and his secret love affair with Padme. How nice, for a change, that a characters descent into evil can be read as them having to de-queer and straighten themselves out, rather than the other way around.
Overall, Attack of the Clones contains many powerful scenes and on the whole, manages to more than justify the existence of the prequel trilogy. Although I do contend that the previous two were good enough to stand on their own merits. The force is steroids strong this time around.
Recommendation
Served hot or cold, this dish of revenge is purely delectable.
The Rating
**** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 10, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones
Director: George Lucas
Writers: George Lucas and Jonathan Hales
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Christopher Lee, Samuel L. Jackson, Frank Oz, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Temuera Morrison
Overview
With The Phantom Menace out of the way, the Star Wars saga continues lumbering towards A New Hope with Attack of the Clones. Outside of a bloated middle section and an ill developed romance, Attack of the Clones still manages to offer up more than a few bits of Star Wars magic.
Synopsis
The story opens with the Galactic Republic in grave danger from political separatists. Following an attempt on her life, loyalist Senator Amidala (Natalie Portman) is assigned two Jedi Protectors, the famed Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and his Padawan Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen). It isn't long before Obi-Wan has left to track down a clue as to who may have been behind the attempt on Amidala, while the Senator and Anakin go back to Naboo to recite bad dialog about falling in love and sand that gets everywhere. Obi-Wans' investigation leads him to discover a mysterious clone army. Meanwhile, Amidala's and Anakin's journey leads them to discover that Anakin's mother has been captured and tortured. When she dies in Anakin's arms, Anakin is drawn that much closer to the Dark Side and to a destiny of sounding like James Earl Jones while scuba diving.
The Queering
I can recall going to see Attack of the Clones at the midnight showing way back in high-school with a friend, probably one of the few times I can recall seeing a movie in the the theaters with a friend. I remember the audience cheering at the scene of the Jedi forces first engaging the droid army in battle, as well as the tingly thrill that came with seeing Yoda lighting up his lightsaber before going mano-to-mano with Count Dooku.
Attack of the Clones takes the characters and plot threads established in The Phantom Menace and maneuvers them to where they need to be for the future chapters. Chancellor Palpatine moves closer to becoming the Evil Emperor. Anakin Skywalker finds himself confronted within the darkness deep within, otherwise known to most of us as teenage angst. Meanwhile, Padme and Anakin find themselves drawn closer to each other. As fans of the original movies know, this will lead to them becoming the parents of A New Hopes' whiny teenager/female royalty duo.
As a fan of the original movies, I found most of this fascinating, even if I have to admit that the middle section, where most of this setting up takes place, drags quite a bit. Also most of the romantic dialog is really, really bad. When Anakin describes sand as, "it's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere" he might as well have been talking about what the characters are saying to each other.
On a different note, it is interesting to note just how many parallels there are to the events of World War II. Not only does Palpatine first get elected Chancellor before going on (in the later movies) to become the evil Galactic Emperor, but the name Stormtroopers (who we discover in this episode are clones) comes directly from the NAZI Sturmtruppen. In a sense, The Clone Wars themselves almost seem a bit like World War I in the way they set up events for the later war between the Alliance and the Galactic Empire. While it's never really drawn all that sharply, there is enough political commentary going on here to add a degree of philosophical depth to the series.
Of course, Attack of the Clones also manages to emphacize the queer subtexts that I highlighted in my review of The Phantom Menace. Anakin and Padme have a discussion about the tenants of the Jedi code, where it is revealed that the Jedi's are forbidden from forming connections outside of the Jedi Order. Essentially this means that they are a chaste, monastic order and a common characteristic of chaste monastic orders is that members will often engage in sexual relationships with each other. Once again, the possibility is raised that the relationship between a Padawan and their Jedi Master is one of sexual pederasty.
Unfortunately, this idea is not really emphacized in the few scenes between Obi-Wan and Anakin. It is suggested through the dialog that the two have a deep and meaningful relationship but it's just not shown on screen. The two also spend most of the film at different ends of the galaxy once Obi-Wan is sent off to look for the assassins who are after Padme. As it is, we'll just have to wait until the next episode to have anything worth sinking our teeth into between the two.
As I mentioned above, Attack of the Clones has it's weak spots (to repeat: bad dialog and a weak middle section) but it' still enjoyable and more than just a soulless special effects extravaganza. Jar Jar Binks role has been reduced. The battle royale between the Jedi Knights and the Droid army alone is worth price of admission. Throw in some stunning visuals (and visual effects) along with finally getting to see Yoda kicking ass and you get a movie that is worthy of the name Star Wars.
Recommendation
Worth enduring any number of attacking clones to see.
The Rating
***1/2 out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: George Lucas
Writers: George Lucas and Jonathan Hales
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Christopher Lee, Samuel L. Jackson, Frank Oz, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Temuera Morrison
Overview
With The Phantom Menace out of the way, the Star Wars saga continues lumbering towards A New Hope with Attack of the Clones. Outside of a bloated middle section and an ill developed romance, Attack of the Clones still manages to offer up more than a few bits of Star Wars magic.
Synopsis
The story opens with the Galactic Republic in grave danger from political separatists. Following an attempt on her life, loyalist Senator Amidala (Natalie Portman) is assigned two Jedi Protectors, the famed Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and his Padawan Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen). It isn't long before Obi-Wan has left to track down a clue as to who may have been behind the attempt on Amidala, while the Senator and Anakin go back to Naboo to recite bad dialog about falling in love and sand that gets everywhere. Obi-Wans' investigation leads him to discover a mysterious clone army. Meanwhile, Amidala's and Anakin's journey leads them to discover that Anakin's mother has been captured and tortured. When she dies in Anakin's arms, Anakin is drawn that much closer to the Dark Side and to a destiny of sounding like James Earl Jones while scuba diving.
The Queering
I can recall going to see Attack of the Clones at the midnight showing way back in high-school with a friend, probably one of the few times I can recall seeing a movie in the the theaters with a friend. I remember the audience cheering at the scene of the Jedi forces first engaging the droid army in battle, as well as the tingly thrill that came with seeing Yoda lighting up his lightsaber before going mano-to-mano with Count Dooku.
Attack of the Clones takes the characters and plot threads established in The Phantom Menace and maneuvers them to where they need to be for the future chapters. Chancellor Palpatine moves closer to becoming the Evil Emperor. Anakin Skywalker finds himself confronted within the darkness deep within, otherwise known to most of us as teenage angst. Meanwhile, Padme and Anakin find themselves drawn closer to each other. As fans of the original movies know, this will lead to them becoming the parents of A New Hopes' whiny teenager/female royalty duo.
As a fan of the original movies, I found most of this fascinating, even if I have to admit that the middle section, where most of this setting up takes place, drags quite a bit. Also most of the romantic dialog is really, really bad. When Anakin describes sand as, "it's coarse and rough and irritating and it gets everywhere" he might as well have been talking about what the characters are saying to each other.
On a different note, it is interesting to note just how many parallels there are to the events of World War II. Not only does Palpatine first get elected Chancellor before going on (in the later movies) to become the evil Galactic Emperor, but the name Stormtroopers (who we discover in this episode are clones) comes directly from the NAZI Sturmtruppen. In a sense, The Clone Wars themselves almost seem a bit like World War I in the way they set up events for the later war between the Alliance and the Galactic Empire. While it's never really drawn all that sharply, there is enough political commentary going on here to add a degree of philosophical depth to the series.
Of course, Attack of the Clones also manages to emphacize the queer subtexts that I highlighted in my review of The Phantom Menace. Anakin and Padme have a discussion about the tenants of the Jedi code, where it is revealed that the Jedi's are forbidden from forming connections outside of the Jedi Order. Essentially this means that they are a chaste, monastic order and a common characteristic of chaste monastic orders is that members will often engage in sexual relationships with each other. Once again, the possibility is raised that the relationship between a Padawan and their Jedi Master is one of sexual pederasty.
Unfortunately, this idea is not really emphacized in the few scenes between Obi-Wan and Anakin. It is suggested through the dialog that the two have a deep and meaningful relationship but it's just not shown on screen. The two also spend most of the film at different ends of the galaxy once Obi-Wan is sent off to look for the assassins who are after Padme. As it is, we'll just have to wait until the next episode to have anything worth sinking our teeth into between the two.
As I mentioned above, Attack of the Clones has it's weak spots (to repeat: bad dialog and a weak middle section) but it' still enjoyable and more than just a soulless special effects extravaganza. Jar Jar Binks role has been reduced. The battle royale between the Jedi Knights and the Droid army alone is worth price of admission. Throw in some stunning visuals (and visual effects) along with finally getting to see Yoda kicking ass and you get a movie that is worthy of the name Star Wars.
Recommendation
Worth enduring any number of attacking clones to see.
The Rating
***1/2 out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 9, 2013
Queer Review: Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Ahmed Best, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Frank Oz, Terence Stamp, Andy Secombe, Ray Park, Brian Blessed, Hugh Quarshie
Overview
Every generation has a legend... Every journey has a first step... Every saga has a beginning... that can easily be ruined by a poorly conceived CGI comic relief Gungan. Well, not completely ruined. While The Phantom Menace has unfortunately gained a reputation that has caused it to become something of a punchline, it is still a solidly grand space opera.
Synopsis
The ebil trade federation has invaded the peaceful Naboo planet. In an attempt to convince the Galactic Senate of the peril of their plight, Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) escapes from the planet, with two Jedi -- Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) -- in tow. Unfortunately, their ship is damaged and they must take refugee on Tatooine where they meet Anakin Skywalker (Jake Loyd) who may be the choosen one who can bring balance to The Force.
The Queering
A long time ago, in on a planet not so far away, a certain movie was released with bad acting, godawful dialog, but did have some rather nifty special effects. No one expected it to do very well, but the summer of 1977, it caused quite a stir and thus Star Wars mania began. Two more films were released, creating a trilogy. The second film darkened the tone a bit and the third had... ewoks.
More than 20 years later, George Lucas decided to return to the Galaxy far, far away, and thus we got The Phantom Menace, a film released to the kind of hype that no film could have lived up to. Websites were created solely to display countdown clocks to the moment of the films release. People camped outside movie theaters, just to be the first in line. I would know, I was in line to see it on opening day. I didn't camp out myself, but I do recall downloading the trailers while cursing out having a 56.6K Modem.
I was in 9th grade at the time The Phantom Menace was released. At the time, I recall enjoying it. Jar Jar Binks did not bother me, in fact I think I found him funny. Of course, as I got older, I did find him annoying. However, re-watching it once again as I approach the big Three-Oh, he didn't annoy me. Maybe I'm just getting mellow in my old age. Recently, while browsing through a local department store, I found myself mildly surprised at my total lack of irritation at the pre-Halloween Christmas decorations on display.
However, I cannot argue that the film is "great" in the classical sense of the word. Elements of the film are undeniably stilted. The camerawork and staging is fairly straightforward, a great deal of the acting is stiff, and the dialog undeniably clunky. There are other problematic elements, starting with the racist subtexts (Watto totally resembles a greedy Jewish stereotype, Jar Jar is an unfortunate Rastafarian caricature, the Trade Federation are Asian, etc.) but those have been hashed out well enough elsewhere, that I do not particularly feel the need to discuss them in depth myself.
However, there are a few queer subtexts, so let's get down to business. There are not a lot, nor do they stick out like sore lightsabers, but there is one that I think is worth talking about. The Jedi Knights in many ways are clearly inspired by the Spartan Agoge, where male Spartans were taken and trained away from their family at a young age. This resembles the ways in which the Jedi Order take young candidates at an early age to be trained.
There are other ways in which the Jedis resemble Spartan military culture. In the Agoge, older males are expected to take on a younger male in a pederastic relationship, which of course closely resembles the relationship between the padawans and their Jedi Mentor. Naturally, this lends something of a queer subtext to the relationship between Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon, which is brought out during Qui-Gons' death scene.
At the end of the day, The Phantom Menace does an effective job of setting up the original trilogy even if it's a bit workman like at times. However, there are also moments that I do feel capture the Gung-Ho-B-Movie-With-An-A-List-Budget spirit of the originals and that means it can more than hold a lightsaber to them.
Recommendation
Worth menacing down any Phantom Sith Lord that gets in your way in order to see this movie.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Cast: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Ian McDiarmid, Pernilla August, Ahmed Best, Anthony Daniels, Kenny Baker, Frank Oz, Terence Stamp, Andy Secombe, Ray Park, Brian Blessed, Hugh Quarshie
Overview
Every generation has a legend... Every journey has a first step... Every saga has a beginning... that can easily be ruined by a poorly conceived CGI comic relief Gungan. Well, not completely ruined. While The Phantom Menace has unfortunately gained a reputation that has caused it to become something of a punchline, it is still a solidly grand space opera.
Synopsis
The ebil trade federation has invaded the peaceful Naboo planet. In an attempt to convince the Galactic Senate of the peril of their plight, Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) escapes from the planet, with two Jedi -- Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson) and Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) -- in tow. Unfortunately, their ship is damaged and they must take refugee on Tatooine where they meet Anakin Skywalker (Jake Loyd) who may be the choosen one who can bring balance to The Force.
The Queering
A long time ago, in on a planet not so far away, a certain movie was released with bad acting, godawful dialog, but did have some rather nifty special effects. No one expected it to do very well, but the summer of 1977, it caused quite a stir and thus Star Wars mania began. Two more films were released, creating a trilogy. The second film darkened the tone a bit and the third had... ewoks.
More than 20 years later, George Lucas decided to return to the Galaxy far, far away, and thus we got The Phantom Menace, a film released to the kind of hype that no film could have lived up to. Websites were created solely to display countdown clocks to the moment of the films release. People camped outside movie theaters, just to be the first in line. I would know, I was in line to see it on opening day. I didn't camp out myself, but I do recall downloading the trailers while cursing out having a 56.6K Modem.
I was in 9th grade at the time The Phantom Menace was released. At the time, I recall enjoying it. Jar Jar Binks did not bother me, in fact I think I found him funny. Of course, as I got older, I did find him annoying. However, re-watching it once again as I approach the big Three-Oh, he didn't annoy me. Maybe I'm just getting mellow in my old age. Recently, while browsing through a local department store, I found myself mildly surprised at my total lack of irritation at the pre-Halloween Christmas decorations on display.
However, I cannot argue that the film is "great" in the classical sense of the word. Elements of the film are undeniably stilted. The camerawork and staging is fairly straightforward, a great deal of the acting is stiff, and the dialog undeniably clunky. There are other problematic elements, starting with the racist subtexts (Watto totally resembles a greedy Jewish stereotype, Jar Jar is an unfortunate Rastafarian caricature, the Trade Federation are Asian, etc.) but those have been hashed out well enough elsewhere, that I do not particularly feel the need to discuss them in depth myself.
However, there are a few queer subtexts, so let's get down to business. There are not a lot, nor do they stick out like sore lightsabers, but there is one that I think is worth talking about. The Jedi Knights in many ways are clearly inspired by the Spartan Agoge, where male Spartans were taken and trained away from their family at a young age. This resembles the ways in which the Jedi Order take young candidates at an early age to be trained.
There are other ways in which the Jedis resemble Spartan military culture. In the Agoge, older males are expected to take on a younger male in a pederastic relationship, which of course closely resembles the relationship between the padawans and their Jedi Mentor. Naturally, this lends something of a queer subtext to the relationship between Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon, which is brought out during Qui-Gons' death scene.
At the end of the day, The Phantom Menace does an effective job of setting up the original trilogy even if it's a bit workman like at times. However, there are also moments that I do feel capture the Gung-Ho-B-Movie-With-An-A-List-Budget spirit of the originals and that means it can more than hold a lightsaber to them.
Recommendation
Worth menacing down any Phantom Sith Lord that gets in your way in order to see this movie.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
November 1, 2013
Queer Review: The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
The Bride of Frankenstein
Director: James Whale
Writers: William Hurlbut, John L. Balderston, Josef Berne, Lawrence G. Blochman, Robert Florey, Philip MacDonald, Tom Reed, R.C. Sherriff, Edmund Pearson, and Morton Covan. Inspired by the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly
Cast: Boris Karloff, Colin Clive, Valerie Hobson, Ernest Thesiger, Elsa Lanchester, Gavin Gordon, Gavin Gordon, Una O'Connor, O.P. Heggie
Overview
A campy horror flick, James Whale's The Bride of Frankenstein serves just as much of a deconstruction of the first Frankenstein, as it does a sequel. Then there's the queer subtexts galore to consider, which spend most of the running time competing with each other for the opportunity to scream "it's alive!"
Synopsis
After a brief intro in which Mary Shelly (Elsa Lanchester) reveals that both Dr. Frankenstein and his creation survived the first movie, Dr. Frankenstein is approached by Dr. Pretorius with a proposal. He wants to work with Dr. Frankenstein to create something new and even more ambitious then either one had previously achieved. Dr. Frankenstein refuses, but after Dr. Pretorius joins forces with The Monster (Boris Karloff) and kidnaps Dr. Frankenstein's bride to be, Dr. Frankenstein agrees to help create the most monstrous creation possible, a bride for The Monster.
The Queering
It is not unusual to find queer subtexts in older movies, it is however unusual to find them quite like they are in The Bride of Frankenstein where they're running around each other under thunder clapped skies, dripping off of the ceilings of mad scientists' laboratories, and humping each other in the corner of every forgotten graveyard. Starting with The Monster himself, we have a creature shunned from society, blamed for crimes it cannot understand. When he tries to conform to societies standards of true happiness by getting married, he finds himself disgusted by the results. The revelation of the bride and subsequent destruction of Dr. Frankenstein's lab, can be read as a reflection of the potentially disastrous consequences that await (or at least the anxieties of) lesbians and gays who suppress their sexuality in order to conform to heterosexual ideals of wedded matrimony.
Furthermore, the scenes with the blind hermit are overladen with homoerotic suggestion. It is the hermit who introduces The Monster to the pleasures of smoking, which The Monster likes, a lot. *wink* *nudge* Dr. Pretorius also can be seen "initiating" The Monster into a deviant lifestyle when he offers Frankenstein's creation a cigar as well, while proclaiming that it's his "only vice".
Then we have the relationship between Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius. On one level, you have the obvious reading of these two scientists attempting to usurp God in their pursuit of creating new life. On another, you have two men trying to create a family without the aid of a female mother.
Of course what must also be discussed is the fact that Elsa Lanchester plays both Mary Shelly and The Bride Dr. Frankenstein created. This has interesting implications in that we have the creator becoming the created. Not only that, but very label The Bride (at least under traditional standards) is an image of something that is to also create new life. It suggests a sort of endless cycle of creation, one in which the creators of The Bride of Frankenstein openly suggest that the sequels are never, ever going to end. Or something to that effect, methinks.
Keeping in with the theme of endless sequels and cycles of rebirth, comes also the constant imagery of resurrection, namely in the form of dozens of crucifixes littering nearly every frame. When The Monster is captured early on, he is tied to a large post and held up in an image that is a cross between the iconic image of Sebastian being stuck with arrows, but of the image of Christ himself. In another scene, where the hermit and The Monster become friends, the screen slowly fades to black at the end, with the last item remaining visible is the crucifix on the hermit's wall. It's easy enough to see the connection, The Monster represents the resurrection/rebirth of each of the bodies that Dr. Frankenstein used to create him. But The Monster here is no misunderstood savior, by the end he saves no one, merely grants Dr. Frankenstein and Elizabeth the opportunity to escape.
The original Frankenstein was adapted to film from a stage play and while containing some memorable moments and showing hints of genuine creepiness, often felt stilted and a little silly. The Bride of Frankenstein however, was not adapted from a play, but takes elements found in the Shelly's novel that were not in the first movie, and runs in it's own direction with them. The result is a more organic, more enjoyable motion picture. True, the films do cheapen the themes of the original novel and ends up turning Frankensteins' creation into a farce. Given that the original novel is legitimately considered to be a classic of it's own right, this dumbing down is hard to excuse. On the other hand, how many people have read the novel today because of the movies? Not to mention this movie is a lot of fun it's own right and that is the deciding factor as far as my opinion is concerned.
Recommendation
Whether it's his wedding day or not, even the most superstitious groom should see make every effort possible to see The Bride of Frankenstein.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: James Whale
Writers: William Hurlbut, John L. Balderston, Josef Berne, Lawrence G. Blochman, Robert Florey, Philip MacDonald, Tom Reed, R.C. Sherriff, Edmund Pearson, and Morton Covan. Inspired by the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly
Cast: Boris Karloff, Colin Clive, Valerie Hobson, Ernest Thesiger, Elsa Lanchester, Gavin Gordon, Gavin Gordon, Una O'Connor, O.P. Heggie
Overview
A campy horror flick, James Whale's The Bride of Frankenstein serves just as much of a deconstruction of the first Frankenstein, as it does a sequel. Then there's the queer subtexts galore to consider, which spend most of the running time competing with each other for the opportunity to scream "it's alive!"
Synopsis
After a brief intro in which Mary Shelly (Elsa Lanchester) reveals that both Dr. Frankenstein and his creation survived the first movie, Dr. Frankenstein is approached by Dr. Pretorius with a proposal. He wants to work with Dr. Frankenstein to create something new and even more ambitious then either one had previously achieved. Dr. Frankenstein refuses, but after Dr. Pretorius joins forces with The Monster (Boris Karloff) and kidnaps Dr. Frankenstein's bride to be, Dr. Frankenstein agrees to help create the most monstrous creation possible, a bride for The Monster.
The Queering
It is not unusual to find queer subtexts in older movies, it is however unusual to find them quite like they are in The Bride of Frankenstein where they're running around each other under thunder clapped skies, dripping off of the ceilings of mad scientists' laboratories, and humping each other in the corner of every forgotten graveyard. Starting with The Monster himself, we have a creature shunned from society, blamed for crimes it cannot understand. When he tries to conform to societies standards of true happiness by getting married, he finds himself disgusted by the results. The revelation of the bride and subsequent destruction of Dr. Frankenstein's lab, can be read as a reflection of the potentially disastrous consequences that await (or at least the anxieties of) lesbians and gays who suppress their sexuality in order to conform to heterosexual ideals of wedded matrimony.
Furthermore, the scenes with the blind hermit are overladen with homoerotic suggestion. It is the hermit who introduces The Monster to the pleasures of smoking, which The Monster likes, a lot. *wink* *nudge* Dr. Pretorius also can be seen "initiating" The Monster into a deviant lifestyle when he offers Frankenstein's creation a cigar as well, while proclaiming that it's his "only vice".
Then we have the relationship between Dr. Frankenstein and Dr. Pretorius. On one level, you have the obvious reading of these two scientists attempting to usurp God in their pursuit of creating new life. On another, you have two men trying to create a family without the aid of a female mother.
Of course what must also be discussed is the fact that Elsa Lanchester plays both Mary Shelly and The Bride Dr. Frankenstein created. This has interesting implications in that we have the creator becoming the created. Not only that, but very label The Bride (at least under traditional standards) is an image of something that is to also create new life. It suggests a sort of endless cycle of creation, one in which the creators of The Bride of Frankenstein openly suggest that the sequels are never, ever going to end. Or something to that effect, methinks.
Keeping in with the theme of endless sequels and cycles of rebirth, comes also the constant imagery of resurrection, namely in the form of dozens of crucifixes littering nearly every frame. When The Monster is captured early on, he is tied to a large post and held up in an image that is a cross between the iconic image of Sebastian being stuck with arrows, but of the image of Christ himself. In another scene, where the hermit and The Monster become friends, the screen slowly fades to black at the end, with the last item remaining visible is the crucifix on the hermit's wall. It's easy enough to see the connection, The Monster represents the resurrection/rebirth of each of the bodies that Dr. Frankenstein used to create him. But The Monster here is no misunderstood savior, by the end he saves no one, merely grants Dr. Frankenstein and Elizabeth the opportunity to escape.
The original Frankenstein was adapted to film from a stage play and while containing some memorable moments and showing hints of genuine creepiness, often felt stilted and a little silly. The Bride of Frankenstein however, was not adapted from a play, but takes elements found in the Shelly's novel that were not in the first movie, and runs in it's own direction with them. The result is a more organic, more enjoyable motion picture. True, the films do cheapen the themes of the original novel and ends up turning Frankensteins' creation into a farce. Given that the original novel is legitimately considered to be a classic of it's own right, this dumbing down is hard to excuse. On the other hand, how many people have read the novel today because of the movies? Not to mention this movie is a lot of fun it's own right and that is the deciding factor as far as my opinion is concerned.
Recommendation
Whether it's his wedding day or not, even the most superstitious groom should see make every effort possible to see The Bride of Frankenstein.
The Rating
*** out of ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)