This is the latest post regarding my LGBTQ superhero novel, Silver Demon, where I talk about stuff that either inspired me or interesting tidbits that I have come across while doing research.
In any case, during the course of the novel, one of the characters ends up losing both of their hands. While doing research on what that would be like, I came across the youtube videos of the the No Handed Bandit and they were interesting enough that I thought I might share them.
User Page for the No Handed Bandit
The No-Handed Bandit shows how he puts his arms on:
September 19, 2012
September 2, 2012
Queer Review: ParaNorman (2012)
ParaNorman
Directors: Chris Butler and Sam Fell
Writer: Chris Butler
Cast: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Tucker Albrizzi, Anna Kendrick, Casey Affleck, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Leslie Mann, Jeff Garlin, Elaine Stritch, Bernard Hill, Jodelle Ferland, John Goodman
Overview
A groundbreaking children's film about the dangers of persecuting people simply for being different, ParaNorman also manages to be a fun and entertaining adventure for the whole family, whether they be young, old, or recently dead.
Synopsis
Norman (Kodi-Smit-McPhee) is blessed with the unusual ability to see dead people. Except everyone around him sees this ability not as a blessing but as a curse. Bullied at school, he becomes friends with Neil (Tucker Albrizzi) an overweight lug who appreciates, rather than fears Norman's ability to see dead people. When Norman is approached by his Uncle, Mr. Prenderghast (John Goodman) who also shares his ability, he is told by his uncle that the birthday of the accursed town witch who was executed 200 years ago is approaching. It turns out that Norman must prevent the witch from raising an army of the dead. But when things go wrong, Norman and his friends find themselves being pursued by an army of zombies. In order to save their town they must find a way to end the witches curse permanently.
The Queering
In 1933 Franklin D. Roosevelt argued that "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." This could be summed up to be the main theme of ParaNorman which lacks a traditional villain. There are several plot twists that reveal, bit by bit, that the different groups of "villains" that appear to pose the greatest threat at the beginning, are not what they initially appear to be. In the end, the greatest danger presented in the film comes from those characters who give into fear and hatred. There is also a rather brief but interesting moment where a car radio has the news media trying to fan the flames of fear during the height of a crisis, so one character changes the channel to easy listening.
Norman's condition functions as an obvious metaphor for being gay. He is referred to as having been "born that way" and bullied at school for it. His father and other family members go out of their way to try to encourage Norman to stop seeing dead people and just try to be "normal".
In addition to this subtext, ParaNorman also contains a groundbreaking gay character, Neil's older brother Mitch is explicitly revealed to have a boyfriend. This is groundbreaking in two ways. One is due to the almost complete absence of queer identified youth in cinema in general. The second is due to the total absence of LGBTQ characters in mainstream films aimed at kids. As it is, Mitch is the first (that I am aware of) gay identified youth in a mainstream film aimed at kids.
On the technical side of things, the stop motion animation for ParaNorman is first rate. It was be filmed in 3D, but I saw the 2D version and did not feel that I was missing out on anything. The voice work is also well done and there are no recognizable celebrity voices to distract the audience from the story. The humor is fairly overt for the macabre subject matter, with some truly clever moments such as the use of the theme from Halloween that turns out to be Norman's cell phone ringer or the way the filmmakers reveal that Norman's grandmother is actually dead.
Overall, an enjoyable flick with some well done animation and interesting subtexts to go along with a nicely told story.
Recommendation
Anyone normal or para-normal should see this film.
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.
Directors: Chris Butler and Sam Fell
Writer: Chris Butler
Cast: Kodi Smit-McPhee, Tucker Albrizzi, Anna Kendrick, Casey Affleck, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Leslie Mann, Jeff Garlin, Elaine Stritch, Bernard Hill, Jodelle Ferland, John Goodman
Overview
A groundbreaking children's film about the dangers of persecuting people simply for being different, ParaNorman also manages to be a fun and entertaining adventure for the whole family, whether they be young, old, or recently dead.
Synopsis
Norman (Kodi-Smit-McPhee) is blessed with the unusual ability to see dead people. Except everyone around him sees this ability not as a blessing but as a curse. Bullied at school, he becomes friends with Neil (Tucker Albrizzi) an overweight lug who appreciates, rather than fears Norman's ability to see dead people. When Norman is approached by his Uncle, Mr. Prenderghast (John Goodman) who also shares his ability, he is told by his uncle that the birthday of the accursed town witch who was executed 200 years ago is approaching. It turns out that Norman must prevent the witch from raising an army of the dead. But when things go wrong, Norman and his friends find themselves being pursued by an army of zombies. In order to save their town they must find a way to end the witches curse permanently.
The Queering
In 1933 Franklin D. Roosevelt argued that "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." This could be summed up to be the main theme of ParaNorman which lacks a traditional villain. There are several plot twists that reveal, bit by bit, that the different groups of "villains" that appear to pose the greatest threat at the beginning, are not what they initially appear to be. In the end, the greatest danger presented in the film comes from those characters who give into fear and hatred. There is also a rather brief but interesting moment where a car radio has the news media trying to fan the flames of fear during the height of a crisis, so one character changes the channel to easy listening.
Norman's condition functions as an obvious metaphor for being gay. He is referred to as having been "born that way" and bullied at school for it. His father and other family members go out of their way to try to encourage Norman to stop seeing dead people and just try to be "normal".
In addition to this subtext, ParaNorman also contains a groundbreaking gay character, Neil's older brother Mitch is explicitly revealed to have a boyfriend. This is groundbreaking in two ways. One is due to the almost complete absence of queer identified youth in cinema in general. The second is due to the total absence of LGBTQ characters in mainstream films aimed at kids. As it is, Mitch is the first (that I am aware of) gay identified youth in a mainstream film aimed at kids.
On the technical side of things, the stop motion animation for ParaNorman is first rate. It was be filmed in 3D, but I saw the 2D version and did not feel that I was missing out on anything. The voice work is also well done and there are no recognizable celebrity voices to distract the audience from the story. The humor is fairly overt for the macabre subject matter, with some truly clever moments such as the use of the theme from Halloween that turns out to be Norman's cell phone ringer or the way the filmmakers reveal that Norman's grandmother is actually dead.
Overall, an enjoyable flick with some well done animation and interesting subtexts to go along with a nicely told story.
Recommendation
Anyone normal or para-normal should see this film.
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.
August 25, 2012
Queer Review: Black Swan (2010)
Black Swan
Director: Darren Aronofsky
Writers: Mark Heyman, Andrés Heinz, and John J. McLaughlin
Cast: Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Cassel, Barbara Hershey, Winona Ryder, Benjamin Millepied
Overview
Darren Aronofsky is a master at creating and depicting characters whose minds are in the process of disintegrating. In Black Swan Aronofsky uses his considerable talents to create a compelling examination of the price that must paid for sexual repression.
Synopsis
When Nina (Natalie Portman), one of the hardest working ballarina's in the company lead by Mr. Leroy (Vincent Cassel) is awarded the lead role of the White Swan in Swan Lake, she is thrilled. However, Nina finds herself in direct competition with a new dancer, Lily (Mila Kunis) who embodies the dark and sensual nature of the Black Swan. Thus begins a modern day retelling of Swan Lake.
The Queering
The notion that humans harbor dual personalities occupying opposite poles on the spectrum of good and evil, is an old one. For ages, stories such as The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde have used this concept as their basis. Freuds' conception of the id, the ego, and the super ego, can be seen as a corollary. Although, I cannot think of too many versions that have used a female protagonist to demonstrate this idea, making Black Swan something of a first. This is quite likely due to the fact that society views woman and girls as simply innocent and pure, without any dark beasts lurking within.
That is not the only thing that makes Black Swan such an intriguing film. While Nina never "comes out" as a lesbian or admits to same sex desire, she consistently rejects advances from male suitors - even when she's on inhibition lowering drugs or in situations where giving in would benefit her career - but it is clear that she desires, and even eventually ends up having sex with, her arch nemesis Lily.
Even though Nina never comes out as a lesbian or bisexual, the lesbian sex scene establishes her as having same sex desire. The question is, just how queer is she? In one scene, Nina admits that she has had several boyfriends and is no longer a virgin. This made me wonder if this was simply a lie in order to remain in the closet. Or maybe it was not a lie, she never specified that she lost her virginity with the boyfriends. Did they exist, but were simply beards? In short, forget about the rule of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Arronofsky has managed to find an interesting use for the cinematic rule of "show, don't tell".
One of the themes addressed by Arronofsky, is the intense pressures put upon performers. Nina is obviously a character whose mind is fraying and not just at the edges. It is clear that she has worked insanely hard at becoming the best dancer possible, which means she has denied herself the possibility of a normal social life, much less allowed herself to adequately explore her sexuality. As a result of all this repression, she finds herself having paranoid hallucinating, which include frightening apparitions and visions of herself turning into the black swan.
Overall, the acting is nearly perfect. Natalie Portman successfully navigates the difficult role of playing the nice girl whose gentle facade hides a raging monstor. Mila Kunis essays a role that is well within her range. As the sexual predator Mr. Leroy, Vincent Cassel gives off the just the right amount of creepiness without going overboard.
I did have some minor grips about Arronofsky's direction. Early on, I found the use of hand held camera shots to be distracting. Also, I felt there were times when Nina turning into the black swan that were too overdone. Like I said, this falls into the minor gripe category, but there were times when I felt Arronofsky was beating the audience over the head with a drumstick when a more feather-light touch might have been more effective.
However, for those who care about quality films that offer up deeper thematic content, Black Swan is not one to be missed.
Recommendation
This is no ugly duckling. Swim across any lake in your way in order to see it.
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: Darren Aronofsky
Writers: Mark Heyman, Andrés Heinz, and John J. McLaughlin
Cast: Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis, Vincent Cassel, Barbara Hershey, Winona Ryder, Benjamin Millepied
Overview
Darren Aronofsky is a master at creating and depicting characters whose minds are in the process of disintegrating. In Black Swan Aronofsky uses his considerable talents to create a compelling examination of the price that must paid for sexual repression.
Synopsis
When Nina (Natalie Portman), one of the hardest working ballarina's in the company lead by Mr. Leroy (Vincent Cassel) is awarded the lead role of the White Swan in Swan Lake, she is thrilled. However, Nina finds herself in direct competition with a new dancer, Lily (Mila Kunis) who embodies the dark and sensual nature of the Black Swan. Thus begins a modern day retelling of Swan Lake.
The Queering
The notion that humans harbor dual personalities occupying opposite poles on the spectrum of good and evil, is an old one. For ages, stories such as The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde have used this concept as their basis. Freuds' conception of the id, the ego, and the super ego, can be seen as a corollary. Although, I cannot think of too many versions that have used a female protagonist to demonstrate this idea, making Black Swan something of a first. This is quite likely due to the fact that society views woman and girls as simply innocent and pure, without any dark beasts lurking within.
That is not the only thing that makes Black Swan such an intriguing film. While Nina never "comes out" as a lesbian or admits to same sex desire, she consistently rejects advances from male suitors - even when she's on inhibition lowering drugs or in situations where giving in would benefit her career - but it is clear that she desires, and even eventually ends up having sex with, her arch nemesis Lily.
Even though Nina never comes out as a lesbian or bisexual, the lesbian sex scene establishes her as having same sex desire. The question is, just how queer is she? In one scene, Nina admits that she has had several boyfriends and is no longer a virgin. This made me wonder if this was simply a lie in order to remain in the closet. Or maybe it was not a lie, she never specified that she lost her virginity with the boyfriends. Did they exist, but were simply beards? In short, forget about the rule of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Arronofsky has managed to find an interesting use for the cinematic rule of "show, don't tell".
One of the themes addressed by Arronofsky, is the intense pressures put upon performers. Nina is obviously a character whose mind is fraying and not just at the edges. It is clear that she has worked insanely hard at becoming the best dancer possible, which means she has denied herself the possibility of a normal social life, much less allowed herself to adequately explore her sexuality. As a result of all this repression, she finds herself having paranoid hallucinating, which include frightening apparitions and visions of herself turning into the black swan.
Overall, the acting is nearly perfect. Natalie Portman successfully navigates the difficult role of playing the nice girl whose gentle facade hides a raging monstor. Mila Kunis essays a role that is well within her range. As the sexual predator Mr. Leroy, Vincent Cassel gives off the just the right amount of creepiness without going overboard.
I did have some minor grips about Arronofsky's direction. Early on, I found the use of hand held camera shots to be distracting. Also, I felt there were times when Nina turning into the black swan that were too overdone. Like I said, this falls into the minor gripe category, but there were times when I felt Arronofsky was beating the audience over the head with a drumstick when a more feather-light touch might have been more effective.
However, for those who care about quality films that offer up deeper thematic content, Black Swan is not one to be missed.
Recommendation
This is no ugly duckling. Swim across any lake in your way in order to see it.
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.
August 22, 2012
Queer Review: Making Love (1982)
Making Love
Director: Arthur Hiller
Writers: Barry Sandler and A. Scott Berg.
Cast: Michael Ontkean, Kate Jackson, Harry Hamlin, Wendy Hiller, Arthur Hill, Nancy Olson
Overview
Although, one of the earliest mainstream films to attempt a positive portrayel of gay male sexuality, Making Love actually succeeds at being one of the worst. The lone upside of the film is that this mind bendingly awful tripe was able to be made in the first place, could be considered a sign that queer content was losing the stigma it once held.
Synopsis
Married doctor and all around nice guy, Dr. Zach (Michael Ontkean) is vaguely troubled by his ill defined sexual orientation and attraction to other men. He meets and has an affair with writer and gay Lothario Bart (Harry Hamlin), who is uninterested in a committed relationship. Caught in the middle is Zachs' wife, Claire (Kate Jackson) who only wishes to start a family with Zach.
The Queering
In my lifetime, I have been to my share of gay bars, as well as to what some people might refer to as "redneck" bars. And yes, I know the term "redneck" is overlaid with problems but bear with me for a moment. Oddly enough, none of the supposedly gay bars presented in Making Love really reminded me of any gay bar I have gone to. However, the bars do somewhat resemble redneck bars where the male patrons just so happen to like to gently hold each other or tenderly caress their partners shoulders.
There is no kissing though, as apparently someone declared law against the non-main characters kissing in this film. We do occasional see a bit of what might almost be considered necking, but really, the better term would be neck pecking.
And this is where the problems begin with Making Love. The strong sense of artifice that infuses every scene. There is not a single moment that does not betray the fact that it was dribbled from a writers pen. From moment to moment, I had a hard time deciding what was worse, the horrible acting or the gag inducing writing. The lone exception is Harry Hamlin, who gives the best performance by managing to display a moderate degree of charisma.
There are those who claim that Making Love was a groundbreaking film regarding positive portrayals of LGBTQ characters. That may be, but the film goes overboard in this regard, causing the characters to become 1 dimensional caricatures. In a romance, it is essential that there be somebody who can feel real. Here, the audience is given nothing more than hollow wisps blowing on empty breezes.
There are other problems as well, one that I previously pointed out inAnother Gay Movie. That is the film does not ever really feel like a queer film at all. Sure, some of the characters occasionally kiss members of the same sex and roll around a few sheets with them as well. But the film also goes to extraordinary lengths to point out the heterosexual nature and backgrounds of both Zach and Bart. There is far more straight kissing in this film than gay kissing.
For a film that portends to be one of the earliest major gay films, there was an awful lot of focus on the heterosexual relationships. The film even ends with Claire staring wistfully staring as Zach makes his final farewell to her. In real life she would have burned his cheating ass in effigy and moved on with her life.
Throw in the lack of any genuine examination of queer concerns -- at least outside of an occasional reference such as when Bart talks about his fathers' attempts to get him to engage in the manly pursuit of Baseball -- and I have a difficult time considering this an example of gay or queer cinema.
I can cite plenty examples of extremely problematic cinema from the late 60's such as The Detective, The Sergeant or The Boys in the Band but each of those films at least dealt openly with legitimate queer characters and issues. Which of course made them revolutionary for the time period that they came out of. That is not a statement that can be applied to Making Love which amounts to nothing more than the blandest pile of fluff one is as likely to find in the 80's. In a decade not known for its' substance, that is saying something.
Recommendation
I would rather make love to a rabid pack of feces flinging howler monkeys than watch this film again.
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: Arthur Hiller
Writers: Barry Sandler and A. Scott Berg.
Cast: Michael Ontkean, Kate Jackson, Harry Hamlin, Wendy Hiller, Arthur Hill, Nancy Olson
Overview
Although, one of the earliest mainstream films to attempt a positive portrayel of gay male sexuality, Making Love actually succeeds at being one of the worst. The lone upside of the film is that this mind bendingly awful tripe was able to be made in the first place, could be considered a sign that queer content was losing the stigma it once held.
Synopsis
Married doctor and all around nice guy, Dr. Zach (Michael Ontkean) is vaguely troubled by his ill defined sexual orientation and attraction to other men. He meets and has an affair with writer and gay Lothario Bart (Harry Hamlin), who is uninterested in a committed relationship. Caught in the middle is Zachs' wife, Claire (Kate Jackson) who only wishes to start a family with Zach.
The Queering
In my lifetime, I have been to my share of gay bars, as well as to what some people might refer to as "redneck" bars. And yes, I know the term "redneck" is overlaid with problems but bear with me for a moment. Oddly enough, none of the supposedly gay bars presented in Making Love really reminded me of any gay bar I have gone to. However, the bars do somewhat resemble redneck bars where the male patrons just so happen to like to gently hold each other or tenderly caress their partners shoulders.
There is no kissing though, as apparently someone declared law against the non-main characters kissing in this film. We do occasional see a bit of what might almost be considered necking, but really, the better term would be neck pecking.
And this is where the problems begin with Making Love. The strong sense of artifice that infuses every scene. There is not a single moment that does not betray the fact that it was dribbled from a writers pen. From moment to moment, I had a hard time deciding what was worse, the horrible acting or the gag inducing writing. The lone exception is Harry Hamlin, who gives the best performance by managing to display a moderate degree of charisma.
There are those who claim that Making Love was a groundbreaking film regarding positive portrayals of LGBTQ characters. That may be, but the film goes overboard in this regard, causing the characters to become 1 dimensional caricatures. In a romance, it is essential that there be somebody who can feel real. Here, the audience is given nothing more than hollow wisps blowing on empty breezes.
There are other problems as well, one that I previously pointed out inAnother Gay Movie. That is the film does not ever really feel like a queer film at all. Sure, some of the characters occasionally kiss members of the same sex and roll around a few sheets with them as well. But the film also goes to extraordinary lengths to point out the heterosexual nature and backgrounds of both Zach and Bart. There is far more straight kissing in this film than gay kissing.
For a film that portends to be one of the earliest major gay films, there was an awful lot of focus on the heterosexual relationships. The film even ends with Claire staring wistfully staring as Zach makes his final farewell to her. In real life she would have burned his cheating ass in effigy and moved on with her life.
Throw in the lack of any genuine examination of queer concerns -- at least outside of an occasional reference such as when Bart talks about his fathers' attempts to get him to engage in the manly pursuit of Baseball -- and I have a difficult time considering this an example of gay or queer cinema.
I can cite plenty examples of extremely problematic cinema from the late 60's such as The Detective, The Sergeant or The Boys in the Band but each of those films at least dealt openly with legitimate queer characters and issues. Which of course made them revolutionary for the time period that they came out of. That is not a statement that can be applied to Making Love which amounts to nothing more than the blandest pile of fluff one is as likely to find in the 80's. In a decade not known for its' substance, that is saying something.
Recommendation
I would rather make love to a rabid pack of feces flinging howler monkeys than watch this film again.
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.
August 18, 2012
Queer Review: Cool Hand Luke (1967)
Cool Hand Luke
Director: Stuart Rosenberg
Writers: Donn Pearce and Frank Pierson. Based upon the novel by Donn Pearce.
Cast: Paul Newman, George Kennedy, J.D. Cannon, Lou Antonio, Robert Drivas, Strother Martin, Jo Van Fleet, Clifton James, Morgan Woodward, Luke Askew
Overview
A classic flick about a man sent to prison that mixes elements of the Christ story with Rebel Without a Cause, plus a few standard queer subtexts .
Synopsis
After a drunken bender where he vandalized a bunch of parking meters, Luke (Paul Newman) is sentenced to work on a chain gang. At first an outsider, Luke is eventually accepted, and then revered by the other prisoners. But when Luke's mother dies, he is not only barred from attending her funeral, the captian puts him in The Box for several days to prevent him from running. This only increases Lukes' desire to fight the system, and he makes several daring escape attempts, each one more likely to lead to his demise.
The Queering
While I was at times reminded of James Deans' Jim Stark from Rebel Without a Cause, Luke more often invokes the image of Christ. Luke, who starts the movie out as an outsider, ends up obtaining a following of dedicated disciples before turning into an outright martyr. In one scene, where he eats 50 eggs for a dare, leaves him in the classic crucifix pose, arms outstretched and his legs crossed at the ankles. Another scene, where he curses God during a rainstorm and asks to be struck down, is highly baptismal in nature.
Ultimately, Luke is a rebel, fighting against a system he does fully understand. In a very general sense, he can be read as a queer hero. Certainly, the counter culture movement that would give birth to the Stonewall Riots in 1969 is very much alive in Luke.
When the jail Captain utters the films most iconic line: "What we have here Gentlemen is a failure to communicate" it quickly comes clear that even the Captain does not fully understand the message is he trying to convey. He certainly opposes anarchy and rule breaking, but what does he stand for? Society often seems to consider rebels to have no cause. We ask what do the Lukes/Jim Starks/Occupy Protestors/hippies of this world want? But very rarely do we ask ourselves what is the point of order when it must be enforced with abject cruelty?
Other subtle queer subtexts abound. For starters, Dragline, who becomes Lukes' most devoted disciple and who escapes with Luke on the last escape attempt, is constantly ordering the other prisoners to strip off their shirts during their long forced work details in the hot sun.
In fact, there are few scenes where any of the prisoners are wearing shirts. As a result, I had difficulty thinking of a film with so much exposed male flesh -- although outside of brief glimpse at a set of buttocks, there are no naked private parts on display. The HBO television series Oz comes close, if you consider most of the first several seasons.
As for the acting, Paul Newman is his naturally charismatic self, while George Kennedy gives a memorable performance as Dragline, who first fights against Luke before becoming a follower. As the captain, Strother Martin oozes a subtle menace more frightening than the rattlesnake that the prisoners discover on an open road.
Overall, Cool Hand Luke is a classic movie that delivers a powerful message about outsiders, rebels, and the price we subject ourselves to in order to repel chaos.
Recommendation
Stick em in the freezer or an icebox, do whatever you have to see Cool Hand Luke. If the price of seeing Cool Hand Luke was having to eat 50 eggs, it would still be worth paying.
The Rating
*** out ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
Director: Stuart Rosenberg
Writers: Donn Pearce and Frank Pierson. Based upon the novel by Donn Pearce.
Cast: Paul Newman, George Kennedy, J.D. Cannon, Lou Antonio, Robert Drivas, Strother Martin, Jo Van Fleet, Clifton James, Morgan Woodward, Luke Askew
Overview
A classic flick about a man sent to prison that mixes elements of the Christ story with Rebel Without a Cause, plus a few standard queer subtexts .
Synopsis
After a drunken bender where he vandalized a bunch of parking meters, Luke (Paul Newman) is sentenced to work on a chain gang. At first an outsider, Luke is eventually accepted, and then revered by the other prisoners. But when Luke's mother dies, he is not only barred from attending her funeral, the captian puts him in The Box for several days to prevent him from running. This only increases Lukes' desire to fight the system, and he makes several daring escape attempts, each one more likely to lead to his demise.
The Queering
While I was at times reminded of James Deans' Jim Stark from Rebel Without a Cause, Luke more often invokes the image of Christ. Luke, who starts the movie out as an outsider, ends up obtaining a following of dedicated disciples before turning into an outright martyr. In one scene, where he eats 50 eggs for a dare, leaves him in the classic crucifix pose, arms outstretched and his legs crossed at the ankles. Another scene, where he curses God during a rainstorm and asks to be struck down, is highly baptismal in nature.
Ultimately, Luke is a rebel, fighting against a system he does fully understand. In a very general sense, he can be read as a queer hero. Certainly, the counter culture movement that would give birth to the Stonewall Riots in 1969 is very much alive in Luke.
When the jail Captain utters the films most iconic line: "What we have here Gentlemen is a failure to communicate" it quickly comes clear that even the Captain does not fully understand the message is he trying to convey. He certainly opposes anarchy and rule breaking, but what does he stand for? Society often seems to consider rebels to have no cause. We ask what do the Lukes/Jim Starks/Occupy Protestors/hippies of this world want? But very rarely do we ask ourselves what is the point of order when it must be enforced with abject cruelty?
Other subtle queer subtexts abound. For starters, Dragline, who becomes Lukes' most devoted disciple and who escapes with Luke on the last escape attempt, is constantly ordering the other prisoners to strip off their shirts during their long forced work details in the hot sun.
In fact, there are few scenes where any of the prisoners are wearing shirts. As a result, I had difficulty thinking of a film with so much exposed male flesh -- although outside of brief glimpse at a set of buttocks, there are no naked private parts on display. The HBO television series Oz comes close, if you consider most of the first several seasons.
As for the acting, Paul Newman is his naturally charismatic self, while George Kennedy gives a memorable performance as Dragline, who first fights against Luke before becoming a follower. As the captain, Strother Martin oozes a subtle menace more frightening than the rattlesnake that the prisoners discover on an open road.
Overall, Cool Hand Luke is a classic movie that delivers a powerful message about outsiders, rebels, and the price we subject ourselves to in order to repel chaos.
Recommendation
Stick em in the freezer or an icebox, do whatever you have to see Cool Hand Luke. If the price of seeing Cool Hand Luke was having to eat 50 eggs, it would still be worth paying.
The Rating
*** out ****
Trailer
Want to find a review of a particular work? Check out the Title Index, the archive of all reviews posted listed alphabetically.
August 17, 2012
Silver Demon: The Homocaust and the Liberation That Was For Others
This is the third article on the novel, Silver Demon, that I am currently working on, where I talk about my influences in writing the book.
When we think of the Holocaust (or Shoah) the first thing that jumps to mind is that of the NAZI persecution of the Jewish population. It is true that the NAZI's exterminated millions of Jews in the most horrific example of ethnic cleansing of the 20th Century.
However, the Jewish people were not the only targets of the NAZI's. In addition, Jehovah Witnesses, Romanians, the physically and mentally disabled, communists and other political and religious dissidents, as well as gay and transgender men.
Around 10,000-15,000 men were convicted and imprisoned under Paragraph 175, which stated:
While imprisoned, these men were marked with Pink Triangles, much like the Jews were marked with the Star of David. The pink triangle would later be adopted as a badge of honor by LGBTQ activists who wanted to reclaim the symbol.
The pink triangle prisoners were treated more brutally by the concentration camp guards, due to the stigmatization surrounding homosexuality the death rate has been estimated to be around 60%.
However, the worst part was the aftermath. At the end of World War II, the concentration camps were liberated by allied troops and the rest of the world came to know of what had occurred. However, the liberation for the gay men who had been convicted under Paragraph 175 did not occur. Still viewed as convicted criminals, many gay men were re-imprisoned and/or re-convicted in courts under evidence that had been obtained by the NAZI's.
Reparations by the German government that were made to the Jewish population that had been imprisoned by the NAZI's, did not come as easily to those prosecuted under Paragraph 175. Several survivors, such as Karl Gorath, Heinz Dörmer, and Pierre Seel, would fight for decades for acknowledgment and reparations to little avail.
Furthermore, much like the scientists who acquired medical knowledge while experimenting on concentration camp prisoners, no NAZI was ever prosecuted for war crimes committed against a homosexual prisoner. It was not until 2002 that the German government even apologized to the gay community for what had been done to us under NAZI rule.
When we think of the Holocaust (or Shoah) the first thing that jumps to mind is that of the NAZI persecution of the Jewish population. It is true that the NAZI's exterminated millions of Jews in the most horrific example of ethnic cleansing of the 20th Century.
However, the Jewish people were not the only targets of the NAZI's. In addition, Jehovah Witnesses, Romanians, the physically and mentally disabled, communists and other political and religious dissidents, as well as gay and transgender men.
Around 10,000-15,000 men were convicted and imprisoned under Paragraph 175, which stated:
An unnatural sex act committed between persons of male sex or by humans with animals is punishable by imprisonment; the loss of civil rights may also be imposed.
While imprisoned, these men were marked with Pink Triangles, much like the Jews were marked with the Star of David. The pink triangle would later be adopted as a badge of honor by LGBTQ activists who wanted to reclaim the symbol.
The pink triangle prisoners were treated more brutally by the concentration camp guards, due to the stigmatization surrounding homosexuality the death rate has been estimated to be around 60%.
However, the worst part was the aftermath. At the end of World War II, the concentration camps were liberated by allied troops and the rest of the world came to know of what had occurred. However, the liberation for the gay men who had been convicted under Paragraph 175 did not occur. Still viewed as convicted criminals, many gay men were re-imprisoned and/or re-convicted in courts under evidence that had been obtained by the NAZI's.
Reparations by the German government that were made to the Jewish population that had been imprisoned by the NAZI's, did not come as easily to those prosecuted under Paragraph 175. Several survivors, such as Karl Gorath, Heinz Dörmer, and Pierre Seel, would fight for decades for acknowledgment and reparations to little avail.
Furthermore, much like the scientists who acquired medical knowledge while experimenting on concentration camp prisoners, no NAZI was ever prosecuted for war crimes committed against a homosexual prisoner. It was not until 2002 that the German government even apologized to the gay community for what had been done to us under NAZI rule.
August 15, 2012
Queer Review: X-Men 3: The Last Stand (2006)
X-Men: The Last Stand
Director: Brett Ratner
Writers: Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn
Cast: Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Anna Paquin, Kelsey Grammer, James Marsden, Rebecca Romijn, Shawn Ashmore, Aaron Stanford, Vinnie Jones, Ellen Page, Daniel Cudmore, Ben Foster
Overview
If it was not for the presence of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, this would easily be the weakest of all the X-Men movies released to date. As it is, it is currently tied for last place. Bad writing, too many characters, and the elimination of any potentially interesting queer subtexts, all cause this movie to lack the gumption to take any stand at all.
Synopsis
When a cure for the mutant gene is found, some mutants such as Rogue (Ann Paquin) are overjoyed, while thers are more cautious. However, Magneto (Ian McKellen) views this as a threat to all mutant kind and decides to declare open war against the human race. While this is going on, Jean Grey, who was believed to have died at the end of X2: X-Men United, has been reborn as the Phoenix, a dangerous creature capable of immeasurable destruction.
The Queering
One of the more enjoyable aspects of the X-Men movies has always been the presence of a very definable queer subtext. The mutants, by their very nature, are different from normal humans and their mutations cause the rest of the population to fear and hate them. Thus, the X-Men films have always been allegories about the dangers of prejudice.
In X-Men: The Last Stand though, a major plot point revolves around a "cure" for mutation that was developed by a pharmaceutical company. The problem with this is that there is no parallel that can be made with queer sexuality. In the real world, the only person who would give serious consideration to such an option would be an ex-gay pusher or the self hater.
Not that I want to turn this into a political polemic or anything but to be honest, I find the idea that this would even be considered a possible subtext for being queer absolutely offensive. The suicide rate for teenagers who have been forced into ex-gay therapies is staggering.
Then there are the artistic qualities of the film itself, or rather the lack thereof. The main problem is that there are too many new mutants running around, along with beefed up rolls for those who had little more than cameos the first time around. Therefore, no one having enough screen time to really make much of an impact. Character development, never among the series strong suit, has taken a nose dive for the worse.
As for the threadbare plot, it basically amounts to a scattered build up, followed by a dramatically void climax. As the X-Men's last stand, this is not a send off to get excited about. Audiences were understandably disappointed by what Brett Ratner offered up here compared to what had been accomplished under the direction of Bryan Singer in the first two X-Men films.
Recommendation
For die hard X-Men fans only. Everyone else is advised to take a stand elsewhere.
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: Brett Ratner
Writers: Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn
Cast: Hugh Jackman, Halle Berry, Ian McKellen, Patrick Stewart, Anna Paquin, Kelsey Grammer, James Marsden, Rebecca Romijn, Shawn Ashmore, Aaron Stanford, Vinnie Jones, Ellen Page, Daniel Cudmore, Ben Foster
Overview
If it was not for the presence of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, this would easily be the weakest of all the X-Men movies released to date. As it is, it is currently tied for last place. Bad writing, too many characters, and the elimination of any potentially interesting queer subtexts, all cause this movie to lack the gumption to take any stand at all.
Synopsis
When a cure for the mutant gene is found, some mutants such as Rogue (Ann Paquin) are overjoyed, while thers are more cautious. However, Magneto (Ian McKellen) views this as a threat to all mutant kind and decides to declare open war against the human race. While this is going on, Jean Grey, who was believed to have died at the end of X2: X-Men United, has been reborn as the Phoenix, a dangerous creature capable of immeasurable destruction.
The Queering
One of the more enjoyable aspects of the X-Men movies has always been the presence of a very definable queer subtext. The mutants, by their very nature, are different from normal humans and their mutations cause the rest of the population to fear and hate them. Thus, the X-Men films have always been allegories about the dangers of prejudice.
In X-Men: The Last Stand though, a major plot point revolves around a "cure" for mutation that was developed by a pharmaceutical company. The problem with this is that there is no parallel that can be made with queer sexuality. In the real world, the only person who would give serious consideration to such an option would be an ex-gay pusher or the self hater.
Not that I want to turn this into a political polemic or anything but to be honest, I find the idea that this would even be considered a possible subtext for being queer absolutely offensive. The suicide rate for teenagers who have been forced into ex-gay therapies is staggering.
Then there are the artistic qualities of the film itself, or rather the lack thereof. The main problem is that there are too many new mutants running around, along with beefed up rolls for those who had little more than cameos the first time around. Therefore, no one having enough screen time to really make much of an impact. Character development, never among the series strong suit, has taken a nose dive for the worse.
As for the threadbare plot, it basically amounts to a scattered build up, followed by a dramatically void climax. As the X-Men's last stand, this is not a send off to get excited about. Audiences were understandably disappointed by what Brett Ratner offered up here compared to what had been accomplished under the direction of Bryan Singer in the first two X-Men films.
Recommendation
For die hard X-Men fans only. Everyone else is advised to take a stand elsewhere.
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)