gaymoviefest 2012

It's roughly around that time of the year again (actually it's probably a little early, but what the hell) when I start publishing lists of things, and usually around this time I go through the gay movies I've seen during the year (see also 2011, 2010).

I do need to stop waiting until the end of the year to post these reviews though, since I watched all but the last two movies on this list during my enforced convalescence in May.

Unfortunately the list starts out with a stinker... but fortunately I did counteract that with the second movie on the list which was brilliant, and probably the best gay movie I saw this year.

I also realised again that I would really like something other than just relationship movies from my queer cinema viewing... I want some gay science fiction, some queer fantasy, some (more) bent horror, some homo thrillers...

If you know anything good that is more than just two guys in a room talking about their feelings, lemme know in the comments.

So... once again chronologically... welcome to GayMovieFest 2012...

The Brotherhood V - Alumni

Bad, bad, bad, bad, bad.

The plot makes NO sense, the dialogue is appalling, none of the actors can actually act worth a damn, it looks like a film student made it.

And even reasonably attractive young men taking off their clothes couldn't improve it.

This movie should be avoided like the plague... it's not even bad enough to be amusingly distracting or campy... it's just BAD!

Would I recommend it: No, no, no, no, no.

Private Romeo

This is truly beautiful! An all male retelling of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet without a word of dialogue altered.

It sounds like it shouldn't work, and there are a few moments early on with some minor framing dialogue that I wasn't sure about. And a couple of the actors were hard to keep track of (Tybalt and Mercutio particularly) but something about young men performing the very beautiful dialogue of Shakespeare's greatest romance is just gorgeous.

The way it's set up is interesting too... These eight young men are left behind at a military academy while everyone else is away and they're also reciting Romeo and Juliet in their English class... But then suddenly the dialogue just spills over into the real world without any warning.

It sounds clumsy but it's artfully done, especially of you're familiar with the story.

Other than the two leads, Seth Numrich as Sam Singleton (aka Romeo) and Matt Doyle as Glenn Mangan (aka Juliet), who perform the titular star crossed lovers (although I was a little fuzzy on why the two groups of young men were at odds with each other beyond the needs of the story) the two stand-outs were Sean Hudock as Gus Sanchez who takes on the role of Benvolio and Chris Bresky as Omar Madsen who does a fantastic job as Juliet's nurse.

Actually the names thing did bother me a little... more so that the cast list doesn't include their alternate roles (ie Madsen/Nurse or Singleton/Romeo)... there are a couple of instances where the supporting cast switch roles later on, but given that they use the Shakespearean names more than the military academy names during the movie, it would have been nice to be able to have a better clue who was who.

The only points in the movie that didn't really work for me were the two scenes where characters appear to be making YouTube videos miming the words to songs. The first time this happens it almost feels in character for the moment, if a little odd, but the second time just feels like it puts a full stop in the middle of a sentence.

Would I recommend it: Without question! Even if you only have a passing knowledge of the play, it's beautifully done and well worth a look!

Wilde

There is nobody on earth better equipped to play probably the most famous and possibly first publicly acknowledged homosexual, Oscar Wilde, than the redoubtable Mr Stephen Fry!

And yes, there is an element of my fan boy adoration for Mr Fry to that statement but it's also true. He's very much this century's answer to Wilde.

The movie itself is both heartbreaking as well as a wonderful demonstration of how far we've come in a little over a hundred years (and also that there are still people in 2012 that think like people in 1895).

The performances are wonderful and the movie is a cavalcade of English acting talent... Vanessa Redgrave, Zoë Wanamaker, Tom Wilkinson... not to mention the three objects of Wilde's affections... a young Michael Sheen, a Dorian Grey inspired Ioan Gruffudd and Jude Law playing the incredibly petulant yet beautiful Lord Alfred 'Bosie' Douglas (although honestly, if that's really what he was like, then why Wilde put up with him is beyond me).

Plus a very young and beautiful Orlando Bloom gets his first screen "blink and you'll miss it" role as a cheeky rentboy.

Would I recommend it: As a piece of gay history and as a window into another time, I certainly would. The fact that it contains a lot of Wilde's wonderful wit and genius is just icing on the cake.

Nico and Dani (aka Krámpack)

The original title of this movie baffles me a little... the word itself doesn't seem to have a translation anywhere I can find (beyond references to the movie itself), and it seems more of a German word than Spanish which is the language of the rest of the movie. From the context they use it in the movie it's clearly slang for either masturbating or being masturbated, but that would essentially mean that the movie is called "Wanking"...

Weird.

European filmmakers always seem to get this kind of coming out/coming of age/teenage boy type of movie better than any of the English speaking world... Summer Storm for example... and for the most part this is another good entry into the genre.

It did make me realise a couple of things though...

Firstly that as a gay teenager, you don't fall in love with your best friend because he's necessarily the most beautiful guy, you fall in love with him because he's... well, there. That is something of a generalisation, but there's that line that gets crossed between friendship and a one sided love, and it's at least partially because this guy is there, already in your life, and oftener than not, already in your bedroom or in situations where things get confusing.

And that resonates very strongly in this movie... only partly because the straight boy, Nico, very often looks like a lollipop (big fat head, skinny body).

And secondly, something that I don't know that I've ever though of before, or whether it was really brought to mind by the performance of the aforementioned lollypop, but the burden the straight half of these "messy" friendships have to bear isn't fair. That line that once crossed isn't easy to uncross without ruining the friendship.

Getting back to the movie itself though. As I mentioned Jordi Vilches as Nico puts in a fine performance... he's a little obnoxious at times, but he shines in the latter half of the movie as his friendship with Dani starts to weigh on his shoulders.

There's something slightly more desperate about Fernando Ramallo's performance as Dani (or possibly just about the character in general)... I couldn't help thinking that the character was pushing too hard in all directions, not only in his relationship with Nico but in his interactions with a couple of the other characters. In all three instances he pushes the sexual relationship to it's outer limit and seems either clueless or uncaring about the repercussions of doing so.

Would I recommend it: I would probably recommend Summer Storm over this, as I feel like it's the better movie, but I think some of the themes in this will resonate with a lot of gay men.

Give Me Your Hand (Donne-moi la main)

A strange, quiet little film about 18 year old twins, played by Alexandre and Victor Carril, making their way from France to Spain to attend the funeral of a mother they've never met.

We're never told why they never met her... we're never told why they're hitching their way there. In fact we're never told very much. I think there was maybe three pages of dialogue in the whole movie if that.

There's also an animated prologue to the movie that doesn't necessarily make a lot of sense given the feel of the rest of the movie beyond the fact that one of the twins draws almost constantly in an animation/anime style.

And the twins are completely dysfunctional... they act more like they were 8 than 18... their both quite petulant at times, and seem to take turns in being unlikeable... plus their whole relationship seems to revolve around insulting each other, hitting each other and generally being horrible to one another.

Weirdly, taken separately, each of the Carril brothers is handsome enough... but there is just something about both of them together that's more than the sum of it's parts. The homoerotic power of twins I guess.

It's only once they stop on a farm to earn some money to catch a train that things take a decided turn for the worse when one of the twins discovers the other having sex with one of the farm hands...

This sets the whole third act of the movie into motion, which I won't give away any details to... although I did guess how it would all work out.

For all that it's occasionally awkward, the twins are often unsympathetic and there is often far too much left unspoken, the movie is gorgeously shot and intriguing.

Would I recommend it: Given how beautiful the movie is at times and the fact that it kept my attention that whole way through, I'd definitely say yes, although with the caveat that it's just weird at times. Plus, twins!

Howl

I'm not sure how much of a "gay movie" this actually is. Firstly because it feels more like a documentary a lot of the time, but also because while it's about a homosexual poet, I'm also not sure if the movie is really about him or about the fact that his poem was on trial for being obscene.

I will admit that I'm not a huge one for poetry... I much prefer reading prose, for the most part poetry, especially "modern" poetry, just leaves me cold. But there's something to the way the movie deals with what I'm guessing is pretty much the entire text of the poem that is actually captivating.

Partly I think because it's James Franco reading the words, and although I think he's taken on the real Ginsberg's manner of speaking, there becomes something hypnotic about the words. And added to that is the fact that the poem is illustrated by animation that is both metaphorical and full of sexual imagery.

What intrigues me most is the title card at the beginning of the movie that says that the movie is "composed from court records, interviews and Howl". That's what made it feel like I was watching a documentary... but there's that extra layer where you know you're watching, in essence, a recreation of an actual event. And whether that's Franco providing Ginsberg's answers in an interview, or the beautifully summation by the defence attorney, I wondered if it was all really real. Particularly the closing summation.

Franco is brilliant throughout the whole movie. I've only seen him in a couple of things (the James Dean TV movie where he again disappeared into another person... Milk, again a real person... plus the first two Spiderman movies, but we won't count those) but this was unlike anything else I'd seen him do.

The courtroom sections are also brilliant... David Strathairn, Jon Hamm and Bob Balaban as prosecution, defence and judge all turn in great performances, as do the range of actors playing "expert witnesses".

Would I recommend it: It's a little removed from the "gay movie" genre, but just as a movie in it's own right, yes, I would definitely recommend it for the performances alone.

From Beginning To End (Do Começo ao Fim)

Another movie about brothers although this one is just about two brothers in love (with each other).

I'm a little conflicted on this one... Not because the subject of gay incest bothers me but it's just the way the love story is portrayed.

The first half of the movie shows the two brothers (well, half brothers really) when they're kids... maybe 7 and 12 or something like that... and it's clear that they've always been this close... but there's just something uncomfortable about watching two young boys portray that kind of relationship. There aren't any sexual scenes when they're that young, but they feel like they're in love.

And then as soon as the movie jumps ahead fifteen years, there is a somewhat weirdly staged love scene (seriously, does anybody ever do that weird "I'll stand ten feet away from you and take my clothes off while you do the same" thing they do in movies... I know I never have) and suddenly these two brothers are naked and making out with each other.

It's a weird transition and made me feel a little awkward.

The other weird thing is that everybody seems to either know that they're both brothers and lovers and don't really care... or else be so incredibly clueless about it that it borders on the unbelievable.

And whereas there's real dialogue between people in the first half, as soon as it jumps forward in time to the grown-up brothers, it's all moody silences and silent caresses. Or at least it feels like that.

Which is not to say that it's not a beautiful movie... the two grown-up brothers are stunningly gorgeous, particularly João Gabriel Vasconcellos as Francisco, although Rafael Cardoso as Thomás is equally beautiful... and even with the aforementioned moody silences, it's a beautifully shot movie (although I imagine with actors that attractive it wouldn't be too hard to make a beautiful movie) and the love scenes are sweet.

It's really just that nothing really happens... there's some plot along the way, but it all feels a little superficial, as though the main point of the movie was to focus on this slightly obsessive and exclusive sexual relationship between two brothers.

Would I recommend it: Yes with a but... and the but is really just a warning that you may or may not experience a similarly uncomfortable feeling during parts of this movie.

Little Ashes

I honestly can't work out whether Robert Pattinson is completely brilliant in this movie and perfectly cast or a completely shithouse actor.

Given what I know of his other work, I think I'm still leaning towards the latter, but given that the character he's playing is at first socially incompetent and then painfully arrogant and pretty much unlikeable the whole way through, he's kind of a perfect fit.

His co-star Javier Beltran however, is brilliant... actually all the other actors are exceptionally good.

The script is a little vague in parts, owing most likely to the fact that it's a movie based on real people and real events.  And given what I've since read about Dali, it's very likely the whole "gay" subplot between Dali and Lorca is the invention of the writer.

There's also about half a subplot involving their friend, film maker Luis Bunuel that doesn't really go anywhere, and I'm not exactly sure what it's trying to say.

But, like Wilde and Howl before it, it did give me a window into a historical period I wasn't necessarily aware of (in this case Spain in the 20's and 30's) and an idea into the lives of gay men of the past. So it's interesting from that perspective.

And I suppose if you want to see Pattinson awkwardly kissing a man and then appearing to be repulsed by it (possibly only mostly in character), then there's that.

Would I recommend it: I'm going to err on the side of "not really" for this one... it's okay, but I found that I spent most of the movie watching Pattinson, looking for signs of bad acting and trying to pick apart his performance, so it wasn't overly enjoyable.

Steam: The Turkish Bath (Hamam)

Back in the early Jurassic period when I was a fresh young gay and got all of my gay related news from gay magazines, references to this movie were everywhere.

And now having seen it, I think that the people involved in those magazines hadn't actually seen the movie, they just saw one of the versions of this poster with two guys in towels and assumed that it was much gayer than it really is. Either that or there just wasn't much else available in the late 90's.

Which isn't to say that it's a bad movie... it's kind of an Italian/Turkish version of movies like Under The Tuscan Sun or just about any movie where the main character isn't happy in their current life, visits a new country, gets involved with the locals, falls in love with some old building or other and then with one of the aforementioned locals.

But usually the characters in those movies are women, so this was something different.

There really is only one "gay" scene, although there's a degree of homoerotica at certain points, and if you do go into this movie with that pre-existing notion about the main character, then it has more resonance for a gay audience I think.

However the end of this movie completely ruined it for me.  It reminded me of movies with gay characters from the 70's and 80's.  Given the Italian/Turkish co-production, it's probably not really surprising, but it was also totally unnecessary.

Yes, the idea of the ending is set up part way through, but it's the flimsiest of things and completely unrelated to the main thrust of the movie... it just feels spiteful and unfair.

Would I recommend it: Yes, I think I would... and I know I've said this before, but I'm going to be incredibly exact this time... watch the movie for 1 hour, 23 minutes 39 seconds and then shut it off.  You might be curious about how it ends, but just walk away, the ending will only disappoint you.

North Sea Texas (Noordzee, Texas)

If there's one general rule for young gay men in movies when they're discovering their sexuality, it's this...

DON'T FALL IN LOVE WITH YOUR STRAIGHT FRIEND.

Actually that advice pretty much goes for young gay men in the real world to.

I covered this idea in the review for Nico and Dani earlier... but it also applies here to a lesser degree.

There isn't a lot of set up or explanation to this movie. It's one of those ones where you just have to take a lot of things as they're presented and hope they're explained later on in the movie.

Some of them are, some not so much, but even with that I didn't feel particularly confused.

Pim (played at the start of the movie by Ben Van den Heuvel and then when he's older by Jelle Florizoone) has a mother who is more interested in herself and her accordion than she is in her child. So he spends a lot of time with another family. That's part of what's never really explained... they're not next door neighbours, in fact they seem to live some way away from Pim and his mother, so the basis of their relationship is never explained.

However, it's clear from the start that Pim is in love with Gino (Nathan Naenen and then Mathias Vergels).

And it also seems like Gino is the sexual instigator between the two of them.

Which did have me muttering at the screen a few times the aforementioned rule for gay characters.

And then there's Gino's sister, Sabrina (Nina Marie Kortekaas)... she's a weird one. As a character, she's almost pointless... I thought she was going to be "The Troublemaker", but even though she completes the first part of that role, there's no pay-off to that part of her story. So I can't quite work out what the point of her is.

Unless of course the story is more autobiographical than I'm aware, and she's just there because she was there.

For once though, this is a coming out/coming of age movie with an upbeat and positive ending. Technically it's largely left to the audience's own interpretation as to what happens after the credits role, but at least this movie allows you to make your own mind up about what happens and doesn't screw it all up in the last ten minutes.

Would I recommend it: Yes. The start is a little bumpy, and there are parts that feel kind of predictable, but the ending makes up for it and left me with a positive vibe.

Weekend

This movie kept getting mentioned last year... and everybody seemed to be saying good things about it.

Although other than a couple of people on my Twitter feed mentioning it, I honestly don't remember ever really reading a review, I just remember it as one of those movies that the gay press got their panties in a bunch about.

But having just watched it, I'm not sure I see what all the fuss was about.

Maybe it's that I've never in my entire life been in the situation that the two main characters find themselves in... maybe it's just that the older I get, the less tolerant (if that's even possible) I am with characters (and by extension people in general) who I find unlikeable.

That's actually been a complaint I've made about a number of movies and teevee shows in the last couple of years... that they were unlikeable in some way, and therefore I'm not really interested in following their story.

And as I said in, I think, the previous GayMovieFest review post, I'm also somewhat tired of stories of gay men going through a "stunted adolescence" (not being comfortable with your sexuality when you're a man in your mid to late twenties), which Russell (Tom Cullen) seems to be suffering from.

To be honest, it's possibly a better version of it than has been in previous movies I've seen, and it makes some degree of sense narratively... but I'm still mostly bored with those kinds of characters.

But it's really the character of Glen (Chris New) who I had no time for. While he doesn't suffer from the same kind of stunted adolescence, he's suffering from "pretentious wankerism"... he's the kind of guy who thinks he's edgy and unconventional and doesn't want to "buy into the hetronormative fantasy" (it's not a direct quote, but he does say something similar). He reminds me of the type of guy who gets involved in "queer politics" in Uni, but never quite moves past it after being out in the real world.

I will commend writer/director Andrew Haigh for making a movie that feels very real for the most part. There's no soundtrack other than when the characters are actually hearing music in the world, a lot of the footage feels almost like a documentary, or if not that, then it feels quite candid... but without a lot of useless shaky-cam action. And the dialogue is always delivered in a completely believable way. In fact there's a scene right at the beginning that I don't think I've ever seen in a movie before... everyone talking over everyone else and not hearing other people.

On the flip side of that, as I mentioned previously there is some slightly questionable dialogue. Not that it feels badly written, I don't think there really is a dud line, it's just that I was annoyed that either of the characters was spouting a particular piece of dialogue.

And whether it's because my own experiences, but the fact that the movie takes place over a single weekend, and some of the discussions the two main characters get into don't feel quite real. No, wait... scratch that... thinking back on it, I've had conversations that weren't as odd in the same way, but still pretty intense within a couple of days of meeting someone. I've just never done that with anyone I've then had sex with.

The other thing that just bothered me was the drug use. Yes, it might be realistic and a part of the world that Haigh comes from... but for me it was completely unnecessary within the story and didn't add anything to it. In fact I felt like it detracted if only because it became almost like a narrative crutch... that they were only having this deep and frank and slightly weird conversation because of the cocaine.

The sex scenes feel more graphic than they really are... it's all glimpses of things, raised thighs, heavy breathing and sucking sounds. And because I didn't really like Glen pretty much from the start, I didn't really care about the sex.

I do wish I could have liked this movie more... but I just didn't.

Would I recommend it: I'm on the fence with this one. For people who aren't me, then I think they may get something out of it, although I can't for the life of me think what that could be... but I think it's one of those ones that you'll have to make your own mind up about. But I'm neither going to recommend it, nor tell you not to see it.

Current Mood:

gaymoviefest 2011

As I mentioned yesterday with the general movie review post, I saw a lot of movies last year... and while less of them were gay-themed movies than perhaps the year before, I did have my fair share of queer cinema mixed in there.

In some ways I feel like these gay movie reviews should be subtitled something like "watching really crap movies with gay content so you don't have to"... there really are an awful lot of frogs you have to kiss before you find one that's even human, let alone a prince.

Sugar

I actually saw Sugar a while ago, so my memory of some of the finer details is a little hazy.

I do remember that it's notable for a couple of reasons... the first being the death of the lead actor, Andre Noble, shortly after the film's debut due to eating monkshood... the second is the only real sex scene between the two main characters (as seen shirtless on the DVD cover on the right) is essentially rape.

It's not a movie that I'm really remembering a lot of positives about actually.

The precocious, wise-beyond-her-years, younger sister character is horrible, and once again the whole movie revolves around a gay boy falling in love with a prostitute/hustler who is essentially only gay for pay.

It's kind of a tired queer cinema cliché, and it isn't given any new interpretations in this movie.

Would I recommend it: Not really, no... it's been done before (and since), and better than this.


Strapped

I'm not sure if it influenced how I felt about the movie, but I realised about 20 minutes in that the lead actor, Ben Bonenfant, was the spitting image of my former flatmate, Ludo. Right down to the facial hair and crinkly eyed, lopsided smile. Granted he looks in 2010 the way Ludo looked in 1996.

I will say that I was really pleasantly surprised by this movie.

Like Sugar, it also features a prostitute/hustler, but this one isn't a drug addict and it doesn't end in pain and misery.

It is a little bit fantastical... not overly so, but you have to suspend disbelief that Bonenfant's character can't find his way out of an apartment building seemingly populated entirely by homosexuals (as one of the characters says, "this is the gayest building on the gayest street in town"... so that about covers it I guess).

Essentially he spends the entire movie wandering around the building, meeting new people and having sex with them (well, he is a hustler after all).

The movie plays with a lot of the archetypal gay characters... not only the hustler, but the guy who only ever had a gay experience with a friend in his teens, the aging queen who tries to hang on to the way things were with drugs, the married guy... but doesn't make them feel cliché.

And Bonenfant has some beautifully understated acting throughout. It's interesting to watch the way he changes with each interaction... how both the actor and the character alters himself to match the person he's with.

Would I recommend it: Wholeheartedly... it's a well crafted ride down the proverbial rabbit hole.


O Fantasma (Phantom)

This movie seems to start out as one thing and finishes as something quite different.

Most of the movie is about obsession and chasing that sexual rush, which I have to say I can relate to... although not to the extremes to which the main character, played by Ricardo Meneses, takes it.

His whole existence seems to be dedicated to the next sexual thrill, the next anonymous encounter... but he becomes obsessed with one particular guy which leads him down a particularly strange path.

I don't want to give away too much but the last part of the movie plays more like some kind of post apocalyptic movie, where he appears to have suffered a kind of psychotic break and has essentially "gone feral".

It's also a particularly European movie (more specifically Portugal) given the depiction of not only nudity and the sex in general, but also an actual on screen blow-job.

Would I recommend it: Potentially, if you want something from the fetish side of the fence I'd recommend watching up to about the 77 minute mark (1 hour 17 minutes) and then making up your own ending... or you could watch the whole thing, just don't expect the ending to make a lick of sense.


The Art of Being Straight

I'd like to start this review out with a plea for any and all indi film makers... you may have written the story, you may be directing the story, the story may be based almost totally on your actual life... but for the love of all that's holy, please don't fucking star in the movie!

Also, please be aware that something actually needs to happen in your movie, otherwise it's just celluloid masturbation.

And please stop making movies about guys in their mid 20's who haven't come out yet. They're fucking boring.

Can you tell that The Art of Being Straight pretty much ticks all of those boxes?

It's also a movie that is filled with a lot of really unlikeable characters... actually, they're not even unlikeable... I was just completely ambivalent about every single person in this movie. They're all incredibly narcissistic and monumentally self involved. And none of their actions have any consequences.

None more so than the writer/director/lead actor, Jesse Rosen...

Maybe it was supposed to be "naturalistic"... like a moment in time of their lives. Well, if so, can I just remind everyone involved that life generally isn't that interesting. There's missed potential there too... the lead character's back story, the consequences of screwing your boss, telling your roommates...

And the movie is only 67 minutes long... which is possibly the only blessing.

Would I recommend it: Unless you have a particular fondness for closet cases banging guys twice their age, then I'd say go right ahead. If you actually like story in your movie, then stay far, far away.


Wrecked

I've seen some turkeys since I started keeping reviews of the gay themed movies I've watched, but this piece of crap has to take the total cake.

The actors can't act, the dialogue wouldn't sound any better if they could (if there actually was any written dialogue and they're not just making it up as they go along), there may or may not have been a bunch of time jumps (I think there were a couple, but there maybe have been more) that make no sense. Plus, if you're going to use the same actor over and over and over for different parts, have him take out his giant face piercing, otherwise it's just weird.

The movie tries to be "edgy" by showing the three twinks from the bottom half of the poster naked, erect and jerking each other off. They may be having actual sex, but it's not explicitly shown. This would be titillating if the twinks had the emotional/acting range of a teaspoon, and I actually gave a crap about the characters by that point.

If anything, the nudity of one of the characters makes him even less attractive... and given that the character is a total tool, that's not really that hard.

This doesn't feel like a real film, this feels like the pervy film school movie of some guy who couldn't get twinks to sleep with him, so instead he makes a movie where they behave badly, have pseudo sex and jerk off in front of him.

It's not edgy, it's not interesting and it's certainly not erotic.

Would I recommend it: Oh fuck no. But if you happen to see it on DVD anywhere, please buy it and then melt the disc so nobody else ever has to see it either.


L.I.E.

There are a lot of tropes that gay film makers seem to cling to, partly because they make have happened to the writer at some stage, but also because there's often some element of truth to them that gives audiences (and writers) a shorthand to understand what's going on.

One is the young gay man as a prostitute, which may also include the young gay man as the "victim" or "prey" of an older, somewhat predatory, gay man. And another is the young gay man as victim in general... bad things happen, not because he may be confused about his sexuality, but just because he's the protagonist and an easy way to move the story along is to let bad thing after bad thing happen to your protagonist.

And sometimes, you throw all of those things into one movie, shake it all up and see what happens.

L.I.E. (or Long Island Expressway) is a movie that does that, and it's also a movie I have mixed feelings about.

I have to admit that I was very uncomfortable watching the young protagonist being "groomed" by the "chickenhawk". He's vulnerable, he's reaching out for some kind of positive attention, he's unsure about his sexuality, he has issues with his father... it's all fairly text book, but it's just... creepy.

I think partly because the predator is played with incredible skill by Brian Cox, and Paul Dano (who was 17 when it was made, but looks 14) plays the boy with such longing and vulnerability.

It is a disconcerting movie though because parts of it attempt to be quite erotic, or have that sexual charge that pretty much everything does when you're 15, but then you realise that the characters are 15 and it just starts to make you feel uncomfortable.

The movie did fall back on the cliché of the smarter and more well educated than his years/peers teen though... with the protagonist displaying a talent for writing/poetry as well as a knowledge of art and poetry that seems completely at odds with his behaviour throughout the movie.

It also makes the viewer feel complicit in the grooming/seduction that's going on, as though his apparent intelligence somehow is justification.

Alternatively, I've just revealed something questionable and slightly unpleasant about myself.

Would I recommend it: I'm as conflicted about the recommendation as I am about the rest of this movie. Based solely on the performances, I would have to say yes, because it's incredibly well acted. But it's not a movie I would necessarily say that I "enjoyed" or that would be something I would immediately want to tell other people to watch. So make of that what you will.


Grande École

Everything in sexier in French... it's just a fact.

Even when the characters in a movie are all completely mental... it's slightly less bothersome because it's in French.

Having said that, there's a limit to how far you can push that kind of thing. The lead character's girlfriend in Grand Ecole (or Great School) is a complete nutjob... the entire premise for the movie (that both she and her boyfriend try to see who can sleep with her roommate first) comes absolutely out of the blue. Well, either that or it's just something very French that doesn't translate. I choose to believe it's bad storytelling.

I know it's always chalked up to "but he/she is totally in love with her/him" when crazy people do crazy things to moderately less crazy people, but he really should have kicked her to the curb way before everything got out of hand.

It's also one of those movies where the lead character has a perfectly awesome thing going, but is still lusting after someone so completely unattainable... which makes me want to shake said lead character and scream at him to see what he has. They often don't though, and proceed to completely balls up the very good thing trying to attain the unattainable. It never ends well.

But issues with character motivations aside, it's not a completely horrible take on the "boy in college realises he likes boys" motif. Although Gregori Baquet and Salim Kechiouche do feel quite awkward during the majority of their love scenes (in a way that Baquet doesn't feel during love scenes with his female co-star).

And the male/male sex scenes are handled a little oddly... the first one feels like it's taking place on a theatre stage... the lighting is heightened, the staging is unnatural, and it feels like a performance. The second is actually gorgeous and erotic but seems to take place (semi-spoiler alert) inside a kaleidoscope or hall of mirrors or something... and while it makes for a couple of amazing visuals, it makes the whole thing feel removed from reality. Which would be fine other than the fact the aforementioned male/female sex scenes aren't treated that way.

In a lot of ways, Kechiouche makes the movie. He's a much more real character than the other three male characters, who seem to spend to much time being too clever for their own good.

I don't quite no why, but it doesn't seem like very many gay filmmakers, or possibly just gay screenwriters (or screenwriters who write gay screenplays) know how to end them. A lot of my reviews seem to end with "this movie was really good except for the last 15-20 minutes". And this is another one. There's this entire sequence that feels like it was lifted out of an overly academic and intellectual play and just doesn't seem to make a lick of sense (again, could be a French thing).

Would I recommend it: Hmmmm... I'm divided about this one too. It's very sexy and French and has full frontal male nudity and hot men kissing and a whole naked water polo team showering... but parts of it either seem somewhat trite and cliché or else are made to feel completely heightened and almost not part of the rest of the movie. But there's sexy French boys... speaking French...


Other movies

Okay, there is another movie that should have been on that list... The Big Gay Musical... but I couldn't get more than ten minutes into it.

Quite literally, at the ten minute mark (which is pretty much two minutes or less after actual dialogue starts due to the initial musical number), I groaned at the movie after it introduced the tired old plot device of the gay man in his 30's who hasn't come out to his parents... and now they're coming to see him in his first off, off, off Broadway show, which is, (in no way a) surprise... gay! I mean the musical number was bad enough... normally I like that.... but it's a musical about a musical and we're actually seeing one of the numbers being performed on stage... and...

And I just could not do it. I just didn't care. So it got filed, to remain unwatched pretty much forever.

There were also some other gay themed movies that I watched early in the year and forgot to write reviews for...

• Boys Briefs 5: It just didn't feel particularly gay... or somehow I got a copy missing some parts. I saw the very first one of these in Melbourne years and years ago, and it was good... now it appears to be any old crap.
  
• Kaboom: The dude from the Terminator TV series playing another gay role... started fairly well but just got weirder and weirder and weirder.
• Caravaggio: Story of the painter... Derek Jarman makes strange anachronistic movies. Not as good as the Edward II one.
  
• BearCity: Actually really good. Nice to see a different group of gay men featured in a gay movie, although for the most part still the "pretty" version of it, and hitting a large number of the standard rom-com buttons.
• The Ritz: Incredibly campy 70's movie set in a gay bathhouse full of farce and mistaken identity... but actually really funny.
  
• The Graffiti Artist: I think this movie runs for about 20-30 minutes before the main character speaks a single word (or before anybody speaks from memory). A little "artsy" and predictable at times, but an interesting mix of gay culture and street art culture.
  
• Nowhere: By the same guy who did Kaboom... again, starts well, ends up fucking bizarre.
• Beginners: See my review here.

Just as something of a side note... I was already planning to post this today, but it became weirdly apt as my Medium Boss (not H-San who's the Acting Small Boss, or the Big Boss... but the Boss between those two... Medium Boss) tried to get us all to watch a movie called The Dying Gaul. Which is essentially a gay themed movie.

I still don't quite understand WHY she wanted us all to watch this particular movie, or whether she just wanted to include everyone in The Extended Nut House so nobody felt excluded... but none of us (apart from Rockchick, who is enthusiastic about almost everything) were particularly enthusiastic, so we said we'd watch the first 20 minutes or so... see how it went.

I'm not exactly sure how long I lasted, but I was the first one to leave (followed fairly closely behind by Sugarmonkey). I couldn't stand any of the three major cast members, and the writing was so cheesy. And having looked up the rest of the plot online, I'm very glad that I didn't bother with it.

But it did give us something to discuss for the rest of the afternoon.

Current Mood:

gaymoviefest 2010

I've been watching an awful lot of gay themed movies of late... like, A LOT of them... and I've reviewed others in the past, so here are some thoughts on what I've been watching.

Oh, and there will be spoilers! And I'm trying a different method of "scoring" them... whether or not I would recommend them to others...

So, in chronological order...

Tan Lines

It's like the casting directors of Home and Away set out to make a "realistic" gay drama, watched some art house movies along the way, got confused, didn't want a happy ending, got confused again... and this is pretty much the result.

It's neither particularly realistic and gritty overall, nor is it a total piece of soap opera fluff. What it really is is fairly uneven, very odd and somewhat less sexy than I think it was intended to be.

It isn't helped by the fact that the lead actor, Jack Baxter (and that's NOT him on the poster) looks like he's about 12, so you end up feeling more than a little bit dirty.

I also have no idea why the hell they felt the need to include Midget's "part time job". You know that it's sketchy and not what he says it is the first time you see him head off to do some "gardening and shit", but it's seriously twisted and honestly doesn't make ANY sense at all!

Overall it's a bit uneven... the script isn't great, the acting is pretty average, and on top of that, the ending is fairly damn depressing. Realistic maybe, but still depressing.

Would I recommend it: Nope... like a few of the other movies on this list, is has moments where you can see the movie it was trying to be, but they're too few and far between.


Edge of Seventeen

Edge of Seventeen is probably one of the more realistic coming out stories I've seen, even with the retro overlay of it being set in 1984. The lead character, Eric, falls in love during his summer job, loses his virginity... and then the guy never returns his calls.

I'm guessing that at least parts of it are autobiographical for writer Todd Stephens (who is also responsible for the two "Another Gay..." movies) since it has a lot of truth in it. Or maybe he's just that good a writer and Chris Stafford is that good an actor that he can make it feel that real.

It's also one of the first movies I've ever seen where the coming out process actually triggers the physical/style changes in it's main character that I think most gay teens go through to some degree, I know that I did once I started going out... the hair went white blonde, the clothing got edgier and tighter, all that...

I also have to give major snaps to comedian Lea DeLaria, who I've only ever seen being funny/obnoxious in things... she proves the old adage (or maybe it was Joss Whedon who said it), comedy is hard, drama is easy.

Would I recommend it: Yes, thoroughly.


The Mostly Unfabulous Social Life of Ethan Green

Ethan Green's social life may not be particularly fabulous, but it's certainly never dull.

While I've seen a couple of strips from the original comic series, I wouldn't say that I'm really that familiar with the source material for this movie. I'm not sure exactly how, or even if, it stacks up against the comic.

As movie in it's own right though, it's sweet... it reminded me a little bit of The Broken Heart's Club, not so much in storyline, but more in the general feel, even if parts of Ethan Green are much more over the top and farcical.

Farce is a good way to describe it actually... not a true farce in the literal dictionary definition of the word, but it certainly is played for laughs and there are improbable situations and some over the top performances.

But it's a sweet film, Daniel Letterle who plays Ethan is very cute (he does remind me a bit of Noah Wyle though, which doesn't make him any less cute) and it was amusing to see Meredith Baxter as Ethan's mother now that she's come out as a lesbian.

And even though he's probably not conventionally gorgeous, I did have a bit of a thing for Dean Shelton as Punch... but what's not to love about a character who says "I'm a sensitive, globally aware kind of guy who's horny 24 hours a day"...

Would I recommend it: Yeah... it's sweet and fluffy... it's a bit like fairy floss really. Enjoyable while you're in the middle of it, but not especially filling.


Otto or Up With Dead People

Otto is a zombie. Or maybe he's pretending to be a zombie. Or maybe he's a zombie pretending to be a person pretending to be a zombie.

Actually, I don't think Otto is a zombie... but he may have suffered a blow to the head at some stage.

He is adorably cute in his zombie makeup though, which I'm sure says more about me than I would like.

Throw in a woman who's directing a zombie porno or manifesto or zombie porno manifesto movie, a bunch of people pretending to be zombies, a zombie orgy and the fact that the whole movie is in German, and you can pretty much guess what you're going to end up with.

It's bad, but at the same time, it's kind of so bad it's good... except for the fact that I don't think it was supposed to be as bad as it turned out to be... and good varies depending on your yardstick.

And there's full frontal nudity... full frontal zombie nudity in fact... not that that's an indicator of whether a movie is good or not, it just makes slightly more sense in this film because of the whole "zombie porno" plot like.

But then it is a Bruce La Bruce movie, so you have to expect both weirdness and cock!

Would I recommend it: If you like weirdness, zombies and cock... sure, why not... but don't expect it to actually be "good".


Trick

I really enjoyed this movie, even though if you think about it for long enough the whole central premise just falls apart, and it contained yet another annoying female fag hag character.

Gabriel is a showtune writer/composer (gay stereotype much) who shares a tiny New York apartment with inconsiderate straight boy Rich and has to endure self involved fag hag Katherine not realising that she's actually a whiny little bitch who needs to get over him and just die... ahem... sorry, but I really didn't like Katherine.

Anyway, Gabriel sees Mark on the subway, Mark cruises Gabriel and they head back to Gabe's apartment to screw around (hence the title).

Unfortunately the universe has other plans and keeps throwing obstacles at the two sending them on a whole night of searching for somewhere to fuck.

Of course they can't find anywhere and end up being interested in more than just hooking up.

There doesn't ever seem to be a particularly good reason why Mark just doesn't walk away from the whole situation. And I don't think it's ever actually addressed... they just keep wandering around together.

Personally, if that had been me and some random hookup's roommate had come back early and thrown us out of the apartment, I would have just called it a day.

But even with its flaws, it's a fairly sweet movie, and you do root (Australian pun intended) for the two leads to get it together.

Although I was somewhat annoyed at Gabriel for being so much of a doormat with everyone... but that was his character I guess.

Would I recommend it: Definitely... although if you have an aversion to Tori Spelling then you should avoid it.


Were the World Mine

What would you do if you discovered that you had the power to turn everyone you knew gay? Would you rush out and make sure that your entire town started getting same sex loving?

And would that play well against the backdrop of a performance of A Midsummer Night's Dream?

Actually it kind of does. Putting aside the moral quandary of "forcing" people to get it on with people who they're actually not attracted to without the aid of fairy dust, it's a sweet movie that attempts to make a number of good points about tolerance and "walking a mile in someone else's shoes before you judge them".

I will say that the poster for this movie is somewhat misleading, if only because the fantasy sequence featured in it only takes up a very, very small proportion of the actual movie.

And honestly, the whole subplot between the main character's mother and the "faded Southern" Avon lady clone is a little bit cringeworthy.

Would I recommend it: Yeah, just don't expect the whole movie to be like the poster.


Presque Rien

I went into this movie knowing nothing beyond the fact that the two main characters get naked and screw on a beach at some point.

What I wasn't expecting was a fairly angsty storyline with jumps in time and location that are fairly confusing and don't really explain everything that I think they really should have. All of which adds up to a somewhat unsatisfying movie with a particularly m'eh ending.

And while the aforementioned sex scene actually feels about right in the context of the movie, there's also a somewhat unnecessary close up shot of the main character's uncut cock which doesn't really add a lot to the movie. Don't get me wrong... I like a little full frontal male nudity in my pop culture, but I also like it to have some kind of relevance to what's going on at the time.

I've read a few reviews of this movie online that make me think that in part I didn't necessarily "get" parts of it... but given the way that the movie is structured and maybe given the fact that I was watching it in French with English subtitles, maybe parts of it were just lost in translation.

On the other hand, maybe other people are just reading things into the movie that weren't necessarily there.

Would I recommend it: No... it has nice moments, but the fact that it confused me with some of the jumping around in time makes me give it the thumbs down.


Eating Out

The main problem I have with this movie is the ending... so this is about to get particularly spoilerific...

There are four main characters in this movie... Caleb (the straight boy), Kyle (the straight boy's gay roommate), Marc (the gay roommate's gay crush) and Gwen (the straight girl).

Essentially Kyle has the hots for Marc who has the hots for Caleb who has the hots for Gwen who has the hots for pretty much any gay boy. Also, Kyle has the hots for Caleb, Gwen has the hots for Marc... and Caleb pretends to have the hots for Marc so that he and Kyle can get into Gwen and Marc's pants respectively. It all gets a bit convoluted and farcical. And there's a completely unnecessary scene with Caleb being "outed" to his parents towards the end.

The problem is that the characters of both Kyle and Gwen are pretty damn unlikeable. Kyle comes up with the whole overly complicated plan, then sabotages Caleb when Caleb and Marc end up hooking up.

At no point does the character of Kyle actually redeem himself so at the end when Marc ends up with Kyle and Caleb ends up with Gwen, it feels totally undeserved. Why should Kyle who has connived and conned and schemed and played everyone actually end up with the "man of his dreams"?

Similarly the character of Gwen is just obnoxious and, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense why Caleb is willing to go through all the drama just to get into her pants (and really, she's not that hot).

Personally I would have been much happier if Caleb and Marc had ended up together (differences in sexual orientation notwithstanding), they were both much nicer characters.

Oh, and I'm guessing the only reason that the version I watched was the "Unrated" version was the fact that you get to see Caleb and Marc's cocks. Which, while nice, didn't actually add a damn thing to the scene given that it comes at the end when they're putting their clothes back on.

And, really, it's written and directed by the guy who not only wrote/adapted Boy Culture but who created Rick and Steve... and I love both of those!

Would I recommend it: Probably not... the Caleb/Marc stuff is nice, but there's too much of it that didn't sit right with me.


Holding Trevor

Well this was a thoroughly self indulgent and pointless piece of cinema.

I don't know what point the writer and/or director were trying to make exactly, but I'm pretty sure they failed. In fact, the writer essentially failed to complete the last third of the movie and it's all very vague and I guess the idea was that you could read it more than one way... but essentially it felt to me like it ends on a big fat downer.

But after learning that the guy who wrote it was also the star, the level of self indulgence makes some degree of sense...

And yet again, this movie was pretty much filled with people I didn't really care about. The titular Trevor was okay, but his two friends/roommates... thoroughly horrible people, who do nothing but emotionally and verbally dump on him all the time.

The only real bright spot are the love scenes between Trevor and Efram... they're sweet and tender and fun and funny.

Would I recommend it: Sure, but switch it off ten minutes before the ending and make up your own!


Yossi & Jagger

At only 65 minutes, Yossi & Jagger seems to finish right at about the time it's ramping up, but at the same time it says what it needs to say without a lot of padding and frills and is content to leave it at that.

The closest way to describe it is that it's kind of an Israeli version of Brokeback Mountain... only with soldiers instead of mountains, and without any wives.

I will admit to being highly confused at the beginning of the movie because the titular character of "Jagger" is also called by his real name, Lior. In fact, the whole "Jagger" thing isn't explained until the very end of the movie (I kind of assumed that one was his first name and the other was his surname).

There are a couple of little subplots that make the setting feel more real but at the same time don't really go anywhere in particular, and parts of the ending where Yossi declares his love for Jagger in front of other soldiers made me wonder what would happen to him, but it's never addressed.

It's also an interesting window on a culture where everyone is expected to do military service, which doesn't just mean looking cute in the uniform, but actual fighting and killing. And what happens in that world when you're gay. The movie doesn't answer the question, I'm not even sure it poses it, but it certainly made me think about it.

Would I recommend it: Yes... it's short and mostly to the point, although it's not the happiest movie ever made.


Big Eden

I wasn't expecting a whole lot from this movie... I had a feeling it was going to be one of those "big city guy finds quirky people in the countryside, cringeworthy culture clash ensues"... in fact, I nearly changed my mind at the last minute and watched something else... but I flipped a coin, and it kept coming up heads (no, really... I flipped a coin).

And boy am I glad I went with it. It was nothing at all what I expected and turned out to be the very best movie I've seen so far as part of #gaymoviefest2010!

It's sweet, it has heart, it's centred around seeing what's really there instead of what we wish was there. And that gay men over 30 who aren't stunning beautiful can still find love.

And to never underestimate the kooky folks in a small town.

It was also nice to see a movie where the female characters weren't essentially playing "gooseberry" and none of the drama comes from their relationships with the gay men... the men have more than enough drama of their own without needing to involve the women.

The standout performer without doubt was Eric Schweig as Pike... you totally feel for him and watching him transform throughout the movie is beautiful to watch.

It's beautiful, it's funny, it's sweet, it's sexy in a whole "lingering looks and touches" kind of way.

Would I recommend it: Yes, yes, yes... a hundred times, yes! Don't just sit there, go find this movie.


Redwoods

I'm not exactly sure what I'm supposed to take away from this movie. What I do know is that I was phenomenally distracted by Brendan Bradley's enormous chin and incredibly square jaw. Like "I couldn't help but stare at it every time he was on screen" kind of distracted... which isn't so great when he's the lead actor.

So much chin! Attractive... but that's serious chin.

Anyway, as I was saying, I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this movie. The aforementioned Big-Chinned Lead (BCL aka Everett) is in a relationship and they have an autistic (adopted) son. Partner and son go on vacation, BCL stays home and meets Much Hotter and More Interesting Dude (aka Chase).

So all the time BCL and Chase are getting closer and closer and flirting and whatnot, all I can think about is his partner and the son and how he's never going to leave them. And all the way through them doing the deed, I keep trying to work out who's fault it is... BCL for cheating on his partner or Chase for getting involved with someone who is already involved.

When the partner and son come back (additional spoiler alert, skip on to the next paragraph if you want to avoid it), partner says one thing to BCL and the next thing, BCL is packing a suitcase and storming out in search of Chase... and then the writer gets lazy and doesn't bother with the whys and wherefores of "you've got to go back... but I love you" rubbish, he just cuts to five years later. And then the dreaded "gay men die at the end of gay movies" curse kicks in... admittedly it's only happened in three of the twelve movies I've seen so far, but it's an easy out when you can't think of a way to end the movie happily.

I also have no idea what the last scene is supposed to signify... besides, they just looked goofy walking down the hill like that.

And for a movie where one of the lines about Chase's writing (he's a writer) is something to the effect of "when you go off on these little asides, you have a tendency to get a little sentimental"... and, honestly, it's very much a case of a writer writing something as fiction but it being completely on the nose about his own writing. It's very sentimental, and fairly by-the-numbers.

It could have been great though... lose the partner and the son... give them some other reason to not go running off together... follow it up with the same ending. Although, thinking about it, that does end up making it sound a little Brokeback.

Also, enough with the incidental full frontal male nudity. This movie suffers from one of the same problems that something like Dante's Cove does (notice I said "one"... DC has a LOT of problems, most of them aren't found in Redwoods)... the only people who show cock are not the two lead actors.

You want to show dick, be consistent... either don't show any or show everybody's. And if your two leads won't show what Mother Nature gave them, have the less attractive members of the cast put it back in their pants.

Would I recommend it: It's kinda middle ground... if you've seen everything else gay themed, then maybe give it a shot... it's not horrible, but it's not great either. And it's another one that I might suggest you stop 10 minutes before the end and make up your own ending.


Dream Boy

This is not a happy movie... Abuse, incest, rape, murder... not a happy movie at all.

Actually it was fairly hard to watch at times because of that. And because of the father/son relationship, and the religious overtones...

The script is adapted from the book of the same name, which I did read ages and ages ago, but I didn't really remember any of it beyond the school bus and something about a tent. And none of it really came back very strongly as I was watching.

It's one of those movies where the dialogue is very sparse and everything is communicated though looks and movement and some degree of landscape porn.

One thing I will say, which relates to more than just this movie... why would you go down on someone when your friends are in the next room, the door is wide open and they'll be back any minute? Who the hell does that? It's just asking to be busted. I know, I know... it's plot development and whatnot... but as someone who snuck around giving his best friend clandestine blowjobs for the latter half of his high school experience, it's just not something you do!

The two leads, Stephan Bender and Max Roeg are quite good... their performances feel very real, even if the dialogue is occasionally a bit crap.

I have to say that I didn't particularly like the ending... having looked on Wikipedia, it appears that the book ends in a fairly similar way, but it's one of those endings that can be read more than one way... I just found it a little confused (not confusing, I just think the movie didn't really know which was it wanted to end) and not as satisfying as it could otherwise have been. It's one of those instances there a movie misses out from being so sparse and from not using narration to give us a characters inner voice.

Would I recommend it: No... but not because it's a bad movie, it's just a very sad, depressive and painful one, and I don't know that I'd want to wish that viewing experience on anybody.


The Trip

Like "Were the World Mine", this is a movie whose poster doesn't appropriately sum up the subject matter. It looks as though the whole movie is going to be about two guys on a trip though the American "West"... but in fact the whole thing is a three part period movie that is mostly set in LA.

So not quite living up to expectations there...

Discounting that though, it's not a bad movie. It takes place over three distinct time periods... 1973, 1977 and 1984... the first two of which feature a lot of wigs... wigs that vary in quality... can you tell I was a little distracted by the wigs?

It's also a movie that changes in tone quite a bit as it goes along. The first section feels a little romantic comedy-eske... the middle section is drama... and the last section is pretty squarely in the melodrama/Thelma and Louise mould once it ramps up properly. The last section is also where the poster image comes from and is probably the most "unrealistic" of the three sections.

I don't mean that it's bad... just that it stands out next to the first two sections and takes a risk with pushing the story in a particular direction.

The film makers also decided to frame the three sections of the story against real life events, most notably the Anita Bryant controversy in 1977... partly it does this by using actual news footage as a bridge between the sections, covering the major "gay" news events of the times.

I'm not sure how effective this really is, if only because the story is one that probably could have been set at just about any time with no great change in it's narrative. None of the real world events are so desperately wedded to the plot that you couldn't have set it in 1999, 2003 and 2010, or during just about any time period from the 70's onwards.

The use of news footage did kind of pull me out of the moment a few times, especially during the Anita stuff since the characters are in Los Angeles, and the whole Harvey Milk stuff was happening in San Francisco, it just felt a little false to me somehow.

The two lead actors are quite good though... even with the sometimes awful wigs they have to contend with... and I think I actually prefer Steve Braun with long hair.

On the whole it's a movie with a slightly uneven tone and a particularly unhappy ending.

Would I recommend it: I think this is another one where you stop watching about 10 minutes from the end and come up with your own ending... overall it's not a bad movie, I just didn't like the ending.


Juste une Question D'amour

I think I've reached my fill of coming out movies... it's pretty old hat for me now and I'm getting to the stage where I want more from my gay drama than boys who can't tell Mum and Dad that they like cock.

Having said that, Juste une Question D'amour (or Just a Question of Love) is a fairly good example of the genre.

I had a slight problem with the version I was watching though, as the occasional subtitle was missing, but I got the general gist of it all.

The two leads, Cyrille Thouvenin (who kept making me think of That Vampire Movie Guy, but a much prettier version) and Stéphan Guérin-Tillié are both very watchable, and other than perhaps a slight awkwardness to the major love scene, very convincing.

But overall I think there was one line at the end of the movie that kinda "saved" it for me... or if that's not the right word, then it made me more hopeful than I might otherwise have been by the end.

One of the characters (and I'm not saying who) says "Give me more time" (or the French equivalent obviously) which made all the difference.

It was also one of those movies that managed to feel longer than it was somehow...

Would I recommend it: I would... especially as a coming out movie, although whether it would be appropriate for someone who has major issues with their parents or not I'm not sure. Also, hot French boys are hot...


Newcastle

They're blonde, they're tanned, they're half naked, they're hot... they're surfers...

I started the journey with an Australian gay movie of questionable quality about surfers and I'm ending it with an Australian surfing movie with a lot of homo-erotic and a little bit of actual gay content...

What I really wanted to do was to be flippant about this movie... the boys are all quite cute (even if the lead character does have a bad attitude), there's lots of shots of them in nothing but low hanging boardshorts or less... there's more homo-erotica than you can shake a stick at (lots of slow motion lingering shots of tanned bodies glistening with water... granted they're surfing at the time, but still), and there's the cute alternative little brother who is so very obviously a big homo and having a crush on one of the surfers that seems to be being returned somewhat...

There's lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of swearing, more than a few recognisable Australian actors, lots of beautiful cinematography, and seemingly not much story.

At least that's where I was until about three quarters of the way through the movie.

That's the point that it takes a somewhat radical turn in both tone and feel (unrelated to the gay subplot thankfully), and it turns out to actually be a pretty damn good movie... and I found myself both getting choked up in a couple of spots, but also feeling genuine apprehension and dread at that was happening.

And you know what, even with the radical turn, it works. Yeah, the turn is total and there's some silly fluff about skinny-dipping (Xavier Samuel, Lachlan Buchanan, I've seen your doodles... kinda), and it does seem to end rather abruptly (although there is a nice little tag teaser before the main credit crawl starts)... but I think writer/director Dan Castle can be proud of his efforts... he's made an excellent movie.

Is it a "gay movie"? In truth, probably not... but I can definitely understand why a gay audience will appreciate it.

Would I recommend it: Very much so... come for the hot half-naked surfer boys and the homo-erotica... stay for the strong movie it turns into.


Some final thoughts...

I wasn't sure it was possible to be somewhat homo'ed out... but I could very well be reaching that stage... that's an awful lot of gay cinema!

Pretty much all of these movies are, at heart, romances... well, except maybe Otto and Newcastle, but then they still have boy on boy romance as a plot point, even if Newcastle doesn't develop it that much.

But then, romance and drama are just cheaper aren't they... all you need is a room and two people and you're away.

The other thing that I'm regularly surprised by is usually how mediocre a number of these gay movies are in one way or another. There have been a few surprises along the way... but I had to kiss a fair few toads to find the princes. Again, it boils down to a lot of them being "independent" movies... and as a general rule independent movies are often a mixed bag as far as acting, story and overall quality are concerned.

Without doubt, Big Eden has been the best movie of the bunch... but I think Newcastle is second, but as I said, I don't know how "gay" it really is. Trick is probably somewhat further back in third place, even if I did want to punch Tori Spelling in the face whenever she appeared on screen (mostly that was about the character... mostly). Yossi and Jagger was good too, but it was very, very short.

Now I have three days to seriously mainline Christmas movies...

Current Mood: