Showing posts with label outfest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label outfest. Show all posts

OUTFEST 2010: BEAR NATION

A bear hug of sorts.

A bear is…

By Don Simpson

Bear Nation takes us inside two distinct camps of bears: the doughy and scruffy camp and the burly body-builder camp. Though some of these bears are black, some are brown, some are white, and quite a few are grizzly, I should probably clarify that director Malcolm Ingram’s (Small Town Gay Bar) documentary concerns the bear sub-culture of gay men.


Ingram interviews a slew of bears, all of whom discuss their love for bear culture all the while purposefully differentiating themselves from the other unique subsets of gay society (particularly the ultra-feminine “twinks”). Though many of the interviews are entertaining (as in humorous), it seems as though most of the talking head interviews are saying the exact same things over and over again as if they are reading from the same page of a script. The true highlights of Bear Nation are Kevin Smith (Clerks; Chasing Amy) and Bob Mould (Hüsker Dü, Sugar). I was initially put off by Smith’s inclusion in the documentary, but his perspective is so different than everyone else’s that -- for once in his career! -- he is a breath of fresh air (rather than a whole lot of hot air). Mould also has a little something different to offer to Ingram’s camera.


As much as I enjoyed and appreciated Bear Nation, I really felt as though it was missing something. Bear Nation is a great overview of the two differing perspectives of “what is a bear?” As an outsider I find this debate quite intriguing, mainly because I am curious about why the two camps – which are quite the opposite in philosophy and appearance – can’t just agree to disagree? Why do they both have to be called bears? (That right there is the exact question that I really wanted Ingram to discuss.) I understand that both camps are of the opinion that they were bears first, but maybe they can have some sort of meeting of the minds and compromise. Maybe there can be two different categories of bears -- like grizzly bears and teddy bears?


(Bear Nation screens July 17, 9:30 p.m., DGA Theatre 2)
Read more

OUTFEST 2010: PAULISTA


A makover and masked Suzana (Maria Clara Spinelli) in Paulista. 

Brazilian bi-ways

By Miranda Inganni

What happens when a transgender, a drug addicted sexy singer and a horny actress meet at a bar? Well, in Roberto Moreira’s São Paulo-based film, Paulista (Quanto Dura o Amor?), you find that out.

Marina (Sílvia Lourenço) arrives in this dazzling city to pursue her acting career while living with a friend of a friend’s, Suzana (Maria Clara Spinelli). As Suzana falls in love with a colleague, she struggles with the decision of letting him in to her secretive life. Meanwhile, Marina meets a chanteuse, Justine (Danni Carlos), while bonding with her new friend over a beer. Smitten with Justine, and thanks to a chance encounter, the two beauties hit it off, then get each other off.

Lest I forget, male characters feature in this romantic, touching flick as well: Jay (Fábio Herford) as a neighbor who idealizes the search for true love; Gil (Gustav Machado) as the chiseled nightclub-owner and Justine’s husband; Nuno, (Paulo Vilhena) the handsome lawyer who is faced with a predicament because of his partner’s love, trust and honesty.

This sweet (double) love triangle is quite well written by Moreira and Anna Muylaret and acted by all. The Brazilian film moves along at a quick enough pace to keep things exciting, while allowing a glimpse into the inner workings of three friends in search of something more from love.

Recommended.  

(Paulista screens July 16, 9:45 p.m., DGA Theatre 2)
Read more

OUTFEST 2010: EARTHLING

Slowly but surely, comes Clay Liford's Earthling.

The seed pod that fell to earth

By Don Simpson

A spiky ball resembling a naval mine or oversized seed pod from a sweet gum tree drifts in space towards a space station. The station’s three-man crew picks up the strange object. One of the astronauts, Sean (Matt Socia), comes in contact with it; a strange pulse rings out, instantly killing the other two astronauts. Sean survives the encounter, but returns to Earth in a comatose state.

Back on Earth, a temporary brown-out triggers Judith (Rebecca Spence) to suffer an epileptic seizure while driving, thus resulting in a car accident. Judith wakes up in the hospital with no recollection of what happened. The doctors change her anti-seizure medication, assuming that she has grown immune to her previous dosage, and send Judith home.

Distracted and confused by very vivid dreams (or suppressed memories) of a young girl in a swimming pool and also of the astronaut who we now know as Sean; Judith, a respected school teacher, begins to breakdown mentally. She is slowly drifting away from the person Judith used to be, doing things that she would have never done before the accident. Her devoted husband, Stephen (Chris Doubek), becomes frustrated with Judith’s sudden inability to communicate with him. Is she emotionally scarred from her recent miscarriage (presumably from the car accident) or is Judith stressed about something else?

Judith no longer knows who she is -- even her mirror image appears foreign to her. She has developed strange bumps on her forehead and her skin peels off when she scratches it. Water mesmerizes her and Judith seems to be able to create waves in liquids merely by focusing with her mind.

It is not long before Judith discovers a strange group of people who appear to be following her. At first she does not recognize them; however, it turns out that they share many of the same traits as Judith -- seizures, strange bumps on their foreheads, vivid dreams -- yet these kindred spirits seem to have a pretty good understanding of what is going on. We soon discover that the brownout “rebooted” Judith and her rediscovered brethren, reminding them of their true identities and purpose. That spiky pod from space is somehow linked to them, as are the strange slugs, as is Sean.

At times, feeling more like a rich existential character study a la John Cassavetes’ A Woman Under the Influence or Michelangelo Antonioni’s L’avventura rather than a sci-fi flick, the concept of pod people invading Earth harkens back to Don Siegel’s Invasion of the Body Snatchers and there have multiple remakes, as well as Shaun Cassidy’s underappreciated short-lived television series, Invasion.

The difference with Earthling is that the humans never become aware of the presence of the pod people. The aliens have assimilated into society convincing even themselves that they are human. Judith and her fellow parasitic alien friends are not on Earth to cause harm or steal its precious resources; they are on Earth to experience the human condition, like experience love. Unfortunately, since this alien species cannot successfully procreate with humans their time on Earth is limited.

Some people might be confused (and frustrated) by the slow and tranquil nature of Earthling. The pacing, atmosphere and tone are reminiscent of Nicholas Roeg’s The Man Who Fell to Earth and Andrei Tarkovsky’s Solaris -- both are films that sci-fi fans love to hate, because they play in stark contrast to the kinetic-pacing and overabundant special effects inherent to most sci-fi films. There are also some low-fi special effects – done in true B-movie fashion – reminding me of some of David Cronenberg’s early films such as Scanners.

Writer-director Clay Liford does not shy away from referencing different genres of cinema -- such as the aforementioned Cassavetes and Antonioni --; in doing so, the resulting creation is something very unique and special. Grounded almost entirely on earth, Earthling is purely a cerebral brand of sci-fi functioning as an intense meditation on humanity. Is a human being defined purely by biological make-up or can it be a state of mind?

Recommended.

(Earthling screens July 10, 2:30 p.m., REDCAT; July 17, 5 p.m., REDCAT)
Read more

FILM REVIEW: DROOL


 
Laura Harring and Jill Marie Jones in Nancy Kissam's Drool 

Drool not droll 

By: Don Simpson 

Anora (Laura Harring) is the beautiful yet mousey southern belle wife to a verbally and physically abusive southern redneck husband, Cheb (Oded Fehr). One day Cheb leaves work early having become ill after giving his boss a blow job in order to keep his job at the local rubber plant. Upon his arrival at home, Cheb discovers Anora getting frisky in bed with their new African-American neighbor, Imogene (Jill Marie Jones). Cheb goes ballistic. Anora, apparently in self-defense, shoots Cheb. Imogene packs Cheb’s corpse into the trunk of her purple sedan. Anora and her two children – Tabby (Ashley Duggan Smith) and Little Pete (Christopher Newhouse) – hop in Imogene’s car and they head to Savannah, Georgia. 

OK, I have some questions, problems and concerns… 

Did Cheb’s actions justify his murder? Once Anora had possession of the gun, did she not also have the power? (I suspect even Anora doubts the murder was justified since she runs away rather than alerting the police.) 

My best guess is that the murder is supposed to represent Anora’s empowerment; however, even after the murder Anora remains the absolute personification of the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition of weak: “Wanting in moral strength for endurance or resistance; lacking fortitude or courage, strength of purpose or will; unsteadfast, wavering.” Does Anora really have to be so disturbingly (and annoyingly) spineless and feeble even after gaining her independence from Cheb? 

The murder appears to be the catalyst to force Anora and the kids on the road for some wild and crazy fun with Imogene; but nothing exciting or interesting happens on their road trip. Once they arrive in Savannah, still nothing exciting or interesting happens. Sure, Cheb needed to be out of the picture in order for Anora and the kids to hit the road with Imogene, but did Anora really need to murder him? The only purpose the murder serves in this story is that it gives the characters an excuse to drive around in a purple car with a dead body in the trunk. Unfortunately, the comedic elements of these events were left on the side of the highway as road kill. 

Imogene is the next problem. First of all, I find the writing for this character to be offensively stereotypical. Imogene serves two purposes in Drool: comic relief and to serve as the target for racist slurs (Cheb, Tabby and Little Pete all refer to her using the “n” word). When Tabby and Little Pete use the “n” word, they are immediately slapped by Anora yet no explanation is provided to them to explain why that word warranted physical violence. 

The lesbian relationship between Imogene and Anora also begs questioning. The motivation for their romantic relationship is never revealed; and the development of their relationship is also neglected. Imogene and Anora occasionally kiss or touch each other’s hands, but are they really lesbians? (Did Drool really deserve to be screened at the 2009 Outfest Film Festival and the 2009 Paris Gay and Lesbian Film Festival?) Our only clue that they might indeed become lesbian lovers appears as the final line of the film. 

And the children…Tabby functions as the part-time narrator of this tale (a storytelling tactic that comes off disjointing and inconsistent, not to mention purposeless). To add a little off-beat humor to the mix, Tabby draws clever caricatures of her family and friends which often become animated. There are a couple early scenes concerning a boy (Dalton Alfortish) at school and his love for blow jobs that prompt Tabby to become a queen bitch – a role that she keeps for the remaining hour of the film. Tabby is not only easy and stupid, but she is also annoying. 

The Little Pete character is confusing; but maybe that is because he is confused. He likes playing with dolls, using make-up and stares dreamily at his male teacher. We can only assume that Little Pete is destined to become a gay man, but we will never know since his character is never developed. 

Harring was excellent in Mulholland Dr. and Inland Empire, but her performance in Drool is absolutely ridiculous. Of course, her character Anora’s faults are all due to Nancy Kissam's offensive and superficial writing and directionless directing.




Read more
Get paid To Promote at any Location
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...