Queer Review: The Mechanic (2011)

The Mechanic
Director: Simon West
Writers: Richard Wenk and Lewis John Carlino.
Cast: Jason Statham, Ben Foster, Tony Goldwyn, Donald Sutherland, Jeff Chase

Overview
Simon West's mediocre remake of the 1972 Charles Bronson revenge flick is yet another victim of Hollywood's incessant tendency to straighten out every script it can get it's grubby little hands on.

Synopsis
Arthur Bishop (Jason Statham) is a mechanic or "hitman" who works for a company that carries out assassinations for large amounts of money. When given the job of killing Harry McKenna (Donald Sutherland), Bishop's friend and mentor, Bishop is at first reluctant but relents when faced with evidence of McKenna's duplicity. After McKenna is dead, Bishop is approached by Steve (Ben Foster), McKenna's estranged son, who wishes to learn how to be a mechanic in order to avenge his father's death. Against his better judgment, Bishop agrees and Steve is soon on his way to discovering who really killed his father.

The Queering
I had read one movie commentator who claimed that Ben Foster's character, Steve, was gay. I also knew that Lewis John Carlino had originally intended his main characters to also be gay, but that element was cut out of the original thanks to studio pressure. I even had seen a preview that had a line from Steve where he discussed the attractiveness of another male character. All in all, I was therefore dead certain as I sat down to watch this version of The Mechanic, that at least one of the character's was going to have their original sexuality brought back.

Unfortunately, I ended up being extremely disappointed. Not only were there references to Steve having a girlfriend, but he is also shown sleeping with a female prostitute. Furthermore, there is nothing in the movie itself that even hints at Steve being attracted to other men.

Then there is issue with the gay rival assassin who becomes Steve's first kill, of which I have conflicting opinions about. While I did not take offence at the gay assassin being portrayed as a brutal thug (he is ultimately no more amoral then the two protagonists) but I did not like having yet another movie that takes visceral pleasure from the murder of a gay man.

The Mechanic suffers from other problems as well. The biggest of which is the editing succumbs to the unfortunately trendy style of "who the hell even knows any more that shots can last more then a second during actions sequences"? Interestingly enough, the over-editing makes the most interesting element of the whole movie the complex psychological relationship between leads. I will be the first one to act all surprised that interesting characterization is the best element of a movie starring Jason Statham.

Speaking of Statham, he falls into the same class of macho actors as John Wayne, Bruce Willis, and Arnold Schwarzenegger, who arguably were never "great" actors but whose screen presence and reputation could generate the necessary to drive even the most ridiculous plots forward. What I'm saying is that Statham gives pretty much the performance that one would expect from him. Foster does a more interesting job, creating a psychologically complicated individual intent on avenging the murder of his dad, even though Steve appears to have more hate then love in his heart for the one who fathered him.

There is little else worth talking about The Mechanic. As I said, this is a mediocre motion picture whose strongest element is interesting relationship that develops between the two leads. Nothing more to see here.

Recommendation
For fans of Jason Statham's previous action flicks, little harm will come from viewing this. However, if the action sequences had been better presented and the gay content from Carlino's original screenplay restored, I would have been more comfortable giving this a more hearty recommendation. As it is, this is one movie in need of a few repairs.

The Rating

Trailer



Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.

Blogger Stuff, updating old reviews.

Okay, I'm going back and redoing older reviews in order to have them conform to my current formate. Unfortunately, I've run into a little formatting glitch with blogger and it appears I can't use the new format and keep the old links as I have to redo the whole entry. Annoying I know, but until I can make sure that all the links I've used in the entries are updated, I'll be keeping the old reviews in place, and then deleting them once I'm done.

For the record, A Dirty Shame was the first of the re-edits.

Queer Review: A Dirty Shame (2004)

A Dirty Shame
Director: John Waters
Writer: John Waters
Cast: Tracey Ullman, Johnny Knoxville, Selma Blair, Chris Isaak, Suzanne Shepherd

Overview
John Waters' movie A Dirty Shame certainly lives up to its directors reputation and title. A satirical look at our cultural views on sexual practices, fetishes, and taboos, this movie pushes envelopes and John Waters' goals here are to entertain and offend in equal doses.

Synopsis
Sylvia Stickles (Tracey Ulman) is a neuter, a word that means in the world that John Waters has created a sexless prude. Sylvia's views on sexuality are so strict that she makes most nuns look like perverted sexual deviants. When she receives a concussion which turns her into a sex addict under the influence of Ray Ray Perkins (Johnny Knoxville), her world is changed. Ray Ray, it turns out, is the messiah like leader of a group of sexual freedom fighters, each with their own fetishes. Ray Ray's group soon becomes convinced that Sylvia is The One that can lead them to the discovery of a new kind of sexual gratification.

The Queering
As this description implies, A Dirty Shame is not a movie strictly set in reality, but rather in a movieverse alternative, where getting an accidental concussion can cause anyone to switch from being a neuter to being a liberated sex addict and vice versa.

The social message the Waters seems to be pushing here - that many people are too uptight when it comes to sex and too few are tolerant of other peoples private lives - is a little too obvious I would argue. However, I don't think that pushing a social message was even close to being Waters primary objective. A Dirty Shame is a farce through and through and arguably only fails if people are unable to find the humour.

One thing worth noting here is the great deal of sexual imagery seen throughout A Dirty Shame, from the trees and fauna that form suggestive shapes to the giant breasts Caprice "Ursula Udders" Stickles (Sylvia Blair) that dangle over the proceedings.

There is no great acting to be found here, although Johnny Knoxville is memorable as Ray Ray and Tracey Ullman manages the difficult task of playing a character who has no arc, but rather swings wildly back and forth between neuter and sex addict, in a game of sexual liberation ping pong.

Recommendation
Recommended for those not easily offended. For the non-neuters, Water's movie may be perverted and dirty, but there should be absolutely no shame in watching it.

The Rating

Trailer



Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.

Queer Issue: Bullying and Teen Suicide

This is a little more politically focused, with it's discussions of Michele Bachman's influence on the school policies, then something I would normally promote or focus on here. But I thought this was pretty informative and wanted to make sure it was more widely seen.

Queer Review: The Watermelon Woman (1996)

The Watermelon Woman
Director: Cheryl Dunye
Writer: Cheryl Dunye
Cast: Cheryl Dunye, Guinevere Turner, Valarie Walker, Lisa Marie Bronson, Camille Paglia, Cheryl Clarke

Overview
The debut feature of Cheryl Dunye, The Watermelon Woman is a mockumentary that examines the history of black woman in Holywood through the prism of one fictional actress, 'The Watermelon Woman' (Lisa Marie Bronson).

Synopsis
Cheryl Dunye, playing herself, is making a video project on a black "Mammy" actress "The Watermelon Woman" who appeared in 1930's features. As Cheryl goes about her research, she finds out that The Watermelon Woman's real name was Fae Richards and that she had an intimate affair with a white female director Martha Page. While Cheryl is happy with the news that Fae was a lesbian, her friend Tamara (Valarie Walker) is less thrilled with Cheryl's new girlfriend, Diana (Guinevere Turner) who is white.

The Queering
Charming and funny, The Watermelon Woman examines the topics of racial, gender, and sexual identity through the talented lens of Cheryl Dunye. What I really liked though, was how Cheryl is able to include a high degree of thematic complexity regarding the titular fictional character. Cheryl never presents us with a definitive version of Fae Richards. We are shown versions of the truth regarding Fae, but no one point of view is given greater weight. One segment has real life cultural critic Camille Paglia (playing herself) presenting an interesting academic feminist take on Fae. June Walker (Cheryl Clarke), Fae's partner of 20 years, criticizes Martha, as well as Cheryl's obsession with Fae's affair with the white director. The funniest segment however, comes when Cheryl tries to do research at the all volunteer CLIT Institute.

There is also some parallelism between Fae and Cheryl. In addition to both of them being black lesbians, Cheryl and Fae's friends both take umbrage with them dating white woman. I'm not sure why that attitude even exists, but this was the second movie I have seen recently that featured an interracial relationship that was condemned by black characters. The other movie being Far From Heaven.

On the technical side, it is clear that The Watermelon Woman was shot on a low budget. The video is visibly grainy and the editing could charitably be called "rough". As for the acting, though, I would be more critical except not only did the cast lack professional experience, the acting is never so bad as to become distracting.

However, the poor film quality does little to diminish Dunye's passion for the subject matter. In many ways, despite some extreme differences between the projects, I was strongly reminded of Born in Flames as both are low budget films that examine issues of race, gender, and sexuality as a single continuum.

Recommendation
Strongly recommended. The Watermelon Woman succeeds at the difficult task of presenting a compelling, thematically complex, and yet also entertaining story.

The Rating

Trailer


Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.

Queer Review: Tootsie (1982)

Tootsie
Director: Sydney Pollack
Writers: Don McGuire, Larry Gelbart, Murray Schisgal, Robert Garland, Barry Levinson, and Elaine May.
Cast: Dustin Hoffman, Jessica Lange, Dabney Coleman, Charles Durning, Bill Murray, Teri Garr, Sydney Pollack

Overview
Since it was released in 1982, Tootsie has recieved many critical accolades. However, after viewing it, I am going to have to be the sour grape in the fruit bunch that will argue Tootsie has been remarkably overpraised. Dustin Hoffman gives a memorable performance but ultimately, his work is not enough to elevate the movie beyond the trite and mediocre material that the rest of the story is composed of.

Synopsis
Michael Dorsey (Dustin Hoffman) is a method actor whose methods have given him a reputation for being difficult to work with. After a meeting with his agent (Sydney Pollack) he decides to take a chance and try out for a role as a female administrator in a popular soap opera. To accomplish this, he creates Dorothy Michaels, a strong southern woman who refuses to take any crap from men. When Dorothy is cast, she ends up becoming a popular role model with woman across the country. This success however, is really a curse for Michael, who does not wish to live the rest of his life as a woman and he finds himself increasingly desperate to figure out a way the end the charade.

The Queering
Hollywood has a history of releasing similarly themed films close together. Recently, there were those two Friends With Benefits who wanted sexual relationships With No Strings Attached. In the summer of 1998, asteroids threaten the Earth movies hit theaters twice in the form of Deep Impact and Armageddon. In 1982, there were two crossdressing movies released, Victor Victoria and Tootsie.

In any case, I think it is most unfortunate that there exist only a few films that depict genuine transgender/transsexual characters on film. Films like Transamerica that depict actual transgender/transsexual characters, are outnumbered greatly by the likes of Some Like It Hot, Victor Victoria, as well as Tootsie, where male and female characters engage in cross dressing for practical reasons, rather then because of internal desires. In Some Like It Hot the main characters were trying to avoid being killed by the mob. In Victor Victoria and Tootsie the crossdressing is done so the characters can land a job.

The main issue I have with Tootsie is that it not only contains very little queer content, but that it also really is little more then a standard order romantic comedy with the crossdressing element thrown in to add a little flavor to an otherwise bland dish. As I already mentioned, Dennis Hoffman's performance (or should that be performances?) elevates the material. In fact there quite a few nice performances to be found here. Bill Murray has some humorous dead-pan moments and Jessica Lange makes for a nice romantic foil for Dustin Hoffman.

Furthermore, there is some genuinely funny material here and the dialogue is fairly witty at times, although I should point out there are long stretches where nothing happens. There are also a few too many scenes where the characters do little more then sit around and talk about there feelings. Also, I believe that the audience was intended to find the sight of Dustin Hoffman in a dress hysterical, but I find the notion of drag automatically being funny to be disrespectful to the trans community.

Now while the main theme of Tootsie is one of female empowerment, I could not help but notice another message being sent. Since Michael is really a man who manages to help solve the problems of several female characters, Tootsie ends up subtly reinforcing notions of male superiority. It was not, I believe, the intention of the filmmakers to do that, but none the less, such an interpretation is possible given what is on the screen.

While we are on the subject of those intentions, I believe that the filmmakers really believed that they were making a genuinely progressive film. Now maybe for the decade of the 80's it was. Modern audiences however will likely find the underlying themes of Tootsie to be either trite or dated.

Recommendation
For those with any interest in the history of queer cinema and/or a strong tolerance for a comedy with long stretches where nothing funny happens, Dustin Hoffman's performance makes this worth seeking out.

The Rating

Trailer


Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.

Queer Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II (2011)

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II
Director: David Yates
Writer: Steve Kloves. Based upon the novel Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by J.K. Rowling.
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Alan Rickman, Matthew Lewis, Tom Felton, Michael Gambon, Evanna Lynch, Helena Bonham Carter, Maggie Smith

Overview
The final chapter in the Harry Potter movie saga provides a satisfying, although not great, conclusion to the adventure started in Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone.

Synopsis
Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), along with his frineds Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson), is on the final legs of his mission to hunt down and defeat the dreaded Lord Voldermort (Ralph Fiennes). To do this, he must find hunt down and destroy the final horcrux's (magical objects that allow Lord Voldermort an immortal life) that Voldermort had hidden away in dangerous locations. But not only do Voldermort's henchmen control Hogwarts but he also has possession of the Elder Wand, one of the the three Deathly Hallows and the most powerful wand in the world, thus making him potentially invincible even if his horcrux's are destroyed.

The Queering
First off, I must say that whatever individuals decided to convert The Deathly Hallows Part II into 3D using post conversion techniques are morons. The beautiful cinematography that David Yates had brought to the previous Harry Potter episodes he had directed is ultimately ruined by a cheap gimmick. Most of the imagery is dark and blurry and the majority of the action sequences were impossible to make out. I ended up leaving the theater with a splitting headache. Anyone who sees this in 3D will ultimately end up paying more cash for an inferior product.

As for the movie itself, I think the biggest problem (other then the stupid and greedy idea to convert it to 3D) is structural. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows could not have been an easy book to adapt and the decision to split it into two parts has yielded mixed dividends. Considering where Deathly Hallows Part I left off, I was not surprised to find Part II to be plot-lite. I think ending Deathly Hallows Part I with Harry, Ron, and Hermione still trapped in Malfoy Manor would not only have made for a better cliffhanger for Part 1, but would have given Harry Potter more to do this episode then rob a bank before the Battle for Hogwarts and the final confrontation with Lord Voldermort.

Also, while I know that the camping sequences, both those in the book and the previous movie, were reviled by most fans, I personally appreciated them. There is a desperation to them as the trio searches for nearly impossible to find hidden objects while being hunted by Lord Voldermort and his Deatheaters. That desperation is missing from the later chapters of Rowlings final novel and therefore from Deathly Hallows Part II. The last few horcrux's were both the easiest to find and the easiest to destroy, making the struggles and trials of this film seem trite, at least in comparison to what the characters went through in the previous episode.

Of course many people I imagine are interested in Dumbledore, who was never explicitely revealed to have been gay in the books although there were plenty of subtle clues and Rowling later outed him after the books were published. The biggest hint came from Dumbledore's backstory and the relationship he had with Gellert Grindelwald, a dark wizard who preceded Voldermort. In this backstory, Dumbledore failed for too long to realize that his close friend Grindelwald was really evil, thereby allowing Grindelwald to gain power. Rowling has stated that this blindness was because Dumbledore developed romantic feelings for Grindelwald.

Unfortunately, the biggest clue to Dumbledore's sexual orientation was a minor plot hole that was eliminated in the films. Granted this is hardly the greatest straightening out a film has received, as a great deal of backstory has been eliminated in order for the novels to fit into the medium of film.

The strongest themes running througout Rowling's series was about the evils of bigotry. Lord Voldermort was obsessed with magical lineage and his followers condemned those who entered Hogwarts who were from non-magical or muggle families. However, Rowling always took the time to point out the prejudices that many wizards in the magical world, even those who were not among Voldermort's followers, harboured against magical creatures such as Goblins, Centaurs, and House Elfs. The wizarding worlds poor treatment of House Elfs even inspired Hermione to create S.P.E.W (The Society for the Protection of Elfish Welfare) in the fourth novel.

The wizarding societies prejudices were not the only morally nebulous elements either. In The Order of the Phoenix for example, Harry Potter's dad is revealed to have been a bully who mercilessly taunted the nerdy Snape when they were at Hogwarts together. Outside of experimenting with some dark magics in Half-Blood Prince Harry Potter could never have been considered anything other then the noble hero and Lord Voldermort never stopped being the most wretched of villains. The world that these two fought in though, occupied a plane that was composed of more interesting shades then pure black and white.

Looking back at the earlier films, I cannot help but notice that most of this moral ambiguity was eliminated. Granted we see bits and pieces here and there but only the most parched skeleton of Rowling's original themes remains.

At least there is nothing worth complaining about when it comes to the acting. The three leads who gave variable performances in the first two movies, have grown into their roles and their experience shows. Rickman, I would argue probably does the best work overall in the series, nailing the character from the day the Potions Master was first introduced. Ralph Fiennes manages to give life to Voldermort and make him one of the most baddass wizards to be shown on the silver screen. No one can do crazy quite like Helena Bonham Carter. The rest of the cast is not given a lot to do, but many of them manage to give memorable performances with even only a few moments of screen time. Take for example, Maggie Simith's Prof. McGonnogal showdown with Snape or when Mathew Lewis's Neville gives a resigned speech about not giving up in the face of ultimate defeat.

One of the underlying subtexts here is the power of a mothers love. It is love that made Harry's mom give up her life for him and thus prevented him from being murdered by Voldermort at the beginning of the series. It is also a mother's love that caused Narcissa Malfoy to defy Voldermort at a key moment in this episode for the purpose of protect her own son, Draco, thereby allowing Harry Potter to live long enough for the final confrontation. Also, the most memorable scene, both in the book and movie, is Mrs. Weasley's Terminator impression after Bellatrix Lestrange made the fatal mistake of trying to kill one of Mrs. Weasley's own.

All in all, this is a decent movie, that I believe could have been much better had the film made a more sincere effort to retain the complex themes established in the books and more thought given to the how it was structured with the previous movie.

Recommendation
Strongly recommended for those who have familiarity with the previous incarnations. Novices will be completely lost and everyone should stay the hell away from the 3D version.

The Rating (at least until I can properly assess it in 2D)

Trailer



Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.