Moises Serrano is 24 years old. He has lived in North Carolina for the past 22 1/2 years and is as American as apple pie. Except that he is not. His parents smuggled him and his two sisters across the Mexican border when he was just a baby, and he has been treated by the US Authorities as an undocumented resident ever since. He has also never really fit into any of his peer groups throughout his life. As he explained, as a light skinned Mexican he had trouble assimilating with either other immigrants or the local caucasians, and the fact that he was also small and gay made him even more of a misfit.
On the brink of suicide in his darkest moments when he was 21 years old he discovered that he had a ‘voice’. and all the indignities and inequities that he, and other undocumented residents came up against, now spurred him into fighting for justice. Suddenly this young man with just a basic high school education who had been barred from attending community college, had limited job opportunities, unable to get a driving license and concerned about being picked the authorities, became an outspoken activist. As the anti-immigration climate worsened with the rise of the Tea Party (the Klu Klux still hold meetings in his town) Moises, at a great personal risk, helped establish El Cambio, an organization committed to immigrant and migrant rights in North Carolina. Then there was no stopping him in as he found himself giving keynote speeches in schools, to community groups, local business leaders, city councils etc etc.
At the same time he also fell in love. It turned out that there was (literally) one other gay man in Yadkin County the rural backwater Moises lived in, and luckily Brandon turned out to be the perfect boyfriend. His new relationship is one of the reasons that Moises story goes from despair to one full of hope and a bright future, as he also lands himself a fully paid scholarship to a Liberal Arts College in N.Y.
He is one one of the lucky ones though. As federal and local politicians continue to reject any reasonable approaches to improve the lot of young undocumented residents and they actually bring in more draconian laws and practices then most undocumented residents such as Moises’s tax-paying law-abiding parents, will always live in real fear of losing their very existence and maybe permanently separated from their families.
This new documentary from filmmaker Tiffany Rhynard is the sheer joy that it is as Moises is this extraordinary selfless young man who is so passionate and emotional about every aspect of his life. Whether it be when he is on his soapbox demanding rights for his community, or nervously opening the letter from School to see if they will give him a scholarship, or just the coy way that he responds to Brandon’s acts of tenderness. He put the welfare of others before his own personal needs for so long, it just feels right that by the end he is making headway in both.
Forbidden is one of those wonderful feel-good movies that makes you appreciate that as long as there are Moises Serrano’s in the world, there is hope for all of us.
Veteran French filmmaker André Téchiné may be the wrong side of 70 now but he shows in his latest movie that he still has a very firm grasp of the sensibilities of teenage boys coming of age. He is perfectly assisted by his co-writer Céline Sciamma the writer/director of quintessential adolescent gay movies such as Tomboy and Girlhood.
This is the story of two strikingly different high-school boys living in the French Pyrenees. Damien (Kacey Mottet Klein) is a pale effete boy who sports a diamond stud earring and excels at his academic work and cooking and self-defense. Tom (Corentin Fila) is a a biracial boy living with his adopted parents in a remote mountain farm that entails a 90 minute journey by foot and bus to get to school every day. He is determined to train to be a veterinarian when he graduates, but his school grades are so poor that he may have to abort that ambition. It seems that the only thing that these two total opposites have in common, is that they are both unpopular with their classmates and are always the very last two to be picked to play basketball.
For some unexplained reason the two boys loathe each other, and soon end up actually fighting in the school yard which almost gets them expelled. Unaware of this Damien’s Doctor mother Marianne (Sandrine Kiberlain) has to pay a house call on Tom’s mother Christine (Mama Prassinos) who is pregnant. As she has a history of miscarriages, Marianne has her hospitalized , and then suggests that Tom move in with her and Damien so that he can been close to both the hospital and the school.
This arrangement only serves to antagonize both boys who since their second warning by the School Principal have promised not to fight again, so instead they agree to sneak off into the mountains to battle it out once and for all.
They are both young men of few words and although they have a problem discussing how they feel, there is obviously a great deal of sexual tension just lying beneath the surface. Hate in this case, covers love, and when Damien eventually finds the courage to speak up, he tells Tom “I don’t know if I am into guys, or just you”.
Téchiné never ever lets us in as to where this relationship will lead too until the very end, but this uncertainty runs true because both boys are constantly struggling with recognizing their own sexuality. Both sets of parents are distracted …Tom’s by the impending birth, and Damien’s with his army helicopter pilot father becoming a casualty of the war in the Middle East … so the boys must deal with some of the more awkward aspects of growing up on their own. To their defense, they actually do quite a good job of it.
Superb performances particularly from young Klein and Fila, with the latter actually making his movie acting debut. The chemistry literally sizzled between them even when they were so angry with each other and seemed so removed from fulfilling the passion that was causing all this angst. Sandrine Kiberlain the two time César Award Winner (+ 6 nominations) was pitch perfect as the well-meaning mother who deals with an ever absent husband by relying so much on Damien as an outlet for her own feelings.
And then of course there was the very dramatic mountain settings that we first saw in the middle of a brutal winter ending up in a glorious summer.
Being 17 is nothing less than a superb coming-of-age story that is completely riveting to the very last frame, and will probably be come to be recognized as possibly Téchinés best movie to date.
When a struggling writer, HIV positive for 20+ years, accidentally deposits a $100 birthday check, he is dropped from his health plan for earning too much. In this new era of sort-of universal care, can he take on a helpless bureaucracy or come up with $3000 a month to buy meds on his own? “Pushing Dead” is Tom E. Brown’s first feature film and it is one of Frameline 40’s Spotlight Films, with three screenings, including one at the Castro Theater Saturday, June 18 at 6:30 p.m. and another at the Victoria Theater Saturday, June 25 at 9:15 p.m.
OUTwatch – Wine Country’s LGBTQI Film Festival showed your short film “The Tradesman’s Exit at their Pride Shorts on the River program. How personal is the subject matter of that short?
Not very personal. I hang out with my ten-year-old nephew a lot, so I thought it would fun to write something featuring grown-ups, but written from a ten-year-old’s perspective–I’m mad at you, so I’m going to break your stuff. I was hoping, even though the film is a little goofy, that people would connect with this guy and feel how satisfying it is for him to get closure.
Talk about making the leap from short films to your first feature “Pushing Dead?”
It didn’t feel like a huge leap, since I’ve been thinking about this feature for so long. It almost felt like a remake of a film I had made several times before in my head. It was a much bigger crew than I normally work with. That was the biggest difference. Things went very smoothly. I loved it. I can’t wait to do it again.
You attended the Sundance Institute’s Screenwriters and Directors Labs to workshop his feature project” Pushing Dead.” What was that experience like?
Amazing–both labs. They house you, feed you, throw talented folks in the room with you to advise–like Paul Thomas Anderson, Stanley Tucci, and Richard LaGravenese. It’s jarring to return to real life after the labs. Real life is awful (he typed, chuckling). Richard signed on after the labs as a producer of Pushing Dead and has been with me on this 16-year journey.
Tell me about writing the film’s screenplay. How did the premise of the film come to you? Did the sub-plots just develop during the writing process? Are your characters based on real folks?
I was writing about my fears. What if something happens to my insurance? What would I do? These pills cost 6 grand a month. That’s crazy. The characters aren’t based on real people, but there’s definitely a lot of me in there. I think that happens with most writers, you go to something close to you, because you know it’s authentic. I wrote it very quickly, because the Rockefeller Foundation got behind it based on the first few pages, and then the Sundance Institute gave me a deadline of thirty days to get it to them for consideration. I had a real rough outline when I sat down to write and the sub-plots all surfaced during that first draft—surprisingly close to what we shot.
The plot delves into some rather dark places despite much levity. How are you able to switch back and forth from drama to comedy in such a seamless and organic manner?
For me, that’s what life is like. It’s funny, it’s dark, frequently at the same time. Roday got it, so it was easy for me. He’s a remarkable actor. It’s a lot of fun when you trust your actors and let them go.
I’m thrilled to watch a film that focuses on a longtime survivor of HIV, because I know many. Unfortunately, I knew many who didn’t survive. Did you feel a sense of gravity and/or a need to present your lead character as a realistic representation of an HIV+ ma – even if there may be no such animal?
I’ve been positive for over thirty years, so I gave Roday the inside scoop. People deal with being HIV+ differently. Once I thought about it as a relationship, this thing HIV and I have, and I made peace with it, that’s when things got easier. HIV and I are hitched, and we need to get along.
I’m also thrilled that this banner year for Frameline is chalk full of character-driven, well-written American indies featuring gay men, which can’t be said of the past few years. Did you need to resist the temptation to go for the Hollywood brass ring by dumbing down your story and seeking a larger audience?
No, because of the humor and tone, I think this movie is really accessible. I hope it can find a big audience. It’s not going to be for everybody, but I think most will find something they can relate to.
I lived for eight years a few blocks from the intersection featured prominently in “Pushing Dead.” How important was it for you to feature SF as the specific setting for your film?
It’s a very San Francisco movie. The characters and situations feel very SF to me. I tried to capture the city in a subtle way. I’m happy with how it turned out. Feels real to me.
Your lead, James Roday, is both appealing and poignant as an HIV+ man working through some issues. Did I mention sexy?. How did you come to cast him?
He shares a manager with Danny Glover. Danny was attached for many years. The manager sent me Roday’s reel and I knew he was our man. It was such an easy decision. And I think Roday was really into doing something different. I can’t imagine a better “Dan Schauble.”
Not many filmmakers are fortunate enough to cast the likes of Danny Glover, Khandi Alexander, and Robin Weigert in supporting roles? Talk about working with such accomplished actors?
It’s nuts. They were all really amazing—and I’m not just saying that. I’m honored they signed on to do an AIDS comedy by some silly filmmaker guy that has only done a bunch of shorts. I think good actors like to take risks.
I don’t want to sound ageist – because I’m not spring chicken myself, but what was it like to be named one of the “25 New Faces of Indie Film” by Filmmaker Magazine in the company of mostly younger artists?
Actually, when they named me that, I was young—or at least younger. I think I was 32. I’m hoping they’ll start a “25 Old Faces” list.
Congratulations on “Pushing Dead’s” inclusion in Frameline40, a prominent slot in the schedule at the Castro Theater and three scheduled screenings. How does all that feel on your feature?
Frameline and I have a long history, so it makes a lot of sense for us to premiere this film together. They have always been really nice to me and this year is no different. They just added that third screening since our other screenings have filled up. Very excited to have our premiere at the Castro.
What’s up next for you?
I recently wrote a pilot for an episodic project called TENDERLOIN. I’m hoping to get that off the ground. It’s a comedy about life in my little neighborhood.
This shocking and rather provocative movie … the sophomore feature from Austrian actor turned director Klaus Händl deservedly won the prestigious Teddy Award for Best LGBT Feature Film at this year’s Berlin International Film Festival. It is there surprising that since then the reviews have been lukewarm at best, and even odder that it is not the violent aspect that has evoked the criticism but the way that Händl goes into great detail with the gay protagonists relationship as it shoots from one extreme to another. We certainly differ from this viewpoint as this powerful intense drama has remained very firmly in our conscious since we viewed it several days ago, and not for the controversial part of the story line, but for the sheer intensity it created as the couple in crisis struggled to deal with their feelings which seemed so out of control.
When the movie opens life seems positively picture-book perfect for the couple, and Stefan (Lukas Turtur) is a french horn player in the orchestra that his partner Andreas (Philipp Hochmair) manages. The live with their beloved tomcat Moses in a rather beautiful house in what looks like the Garden of Eden (for some unexplained reason there are several biblical references throughout). Blessed with a great set of really close friends who love to get together at their house for garden dinner parties where both the wine and the conversation never stop flowing. When the guests leave, and sometime even before they do, the two men cannot keep their hands off each other and have long make out sessions. This being a European film, those particular scenes are both extremely sensual and very explicit too.
Even when not having sex, the pair are an extremely tactile couple and seem to spend most of their time hanging out the house completely naked. However all this blissful happiness abruptly ends one day when Stefan has an uncharacteristic sudden outburst of violent anger with very grave consequences, which leads to a totally appalled and confused Andreas just shutting Stefan out of his life for all intents and purposes.
At first there is a lot of wailing and head banging, but when the grief starts to dissipate the two start to lead separate lives in their own home and now they are always fully clothed too. Then one day a reckless Stefan has an serious accident in the garden which causes him to the lose the sight in one eye, which results in a slight thawing on Andreas’s part. As both men are still struggling to try to understand the complex reasons behind Stefan’s scary outburst, they are also trying to evaluate their feelings towards each other to try and discover if they can ever salvage enough of their once perfect relationship to build a future and go forward.
The result of the temper tantrum is highly controversial aspect of the movie, but equally so is Andreas’s decision not to immediately leave the relationship after it occurred. This was not based on any practical reasons, but purely from his instinct that even though he coudn’t bear to allow Stefan to be intimate on any level at all with him, there was obvious still some very fine vein of hope/love of the possibility they could one day get through this together.
Drenched with some fine music on the soundtrack which like the plot went from happy to moody and melancholic, it is the two central nuanced performances of Turtur and Hochmair that keep you engaged to the very end and make this rather intense relationship so very believable even in the parts which were tough to rationalize over. And of course full credit should be given to Toni for being the perfect tomcat that every house would want.
It’s interesting to note that when the director was an actor he appeared in a couple of films directed by Michael Haneke, so maybe we shouldn’t be too surprised by the inclusion of the violent incident after all.
“Tomcat” will be shown at Frameline 40 Wednesday, June 22 at 9 p.m. at the Castro Theater in San Francisco.
“Freedom to Marry” director Eddie Rosenstein’s inspirational documentary will be shown Saturday, June 25 at 1:15 p.m. at the Castro Theater. The film traces the marriage equality movement’s historic progress. With probing profiles of Evan Wolfson, the founder of Freedom to Marry, Mary Bonauto, Civil Rights Attorney for GLAD, and many others who fought for all Americans right to marry who they love. The steady march towards the landmark Obergefell v. Hodges decision is no less thrilling because we know the outcome. “Freedom to Marry” may very well become not only a testament to the will of a group of people for their equal rights but as a manual for other groups anywhere who may need to do the same.
Congratulations Eddie on making such a beautiful, emotional, and enlightening film. Is “The Freedom to Marry” your first LGBT-themed film and if it is, what took you so long?
Thank you! It is my first LGBT themed film. Like most of my films, THE FREEDOM TO MARRY is simply about people I find heroic. In this case, the heroes just happen to be gay and lesbian.
Evan Wolfson is such a fascinating man and I think you really captured who he is and what motivates him. How much time did you spend with Evan, both at home, with his team, and in DC and how much of that footage made it into the film?
I’ve actually known Evan since I was little. We both grew up in Pittsburgh, our parents are friends and Evan has been a huge source of pride in our neighborhood for as long as I can remember. As adults, he and I both settled in New York City – I became a filmmaker, and he became as an activist. When it became apparent that ‘this was the year’ that the marriage movement crosses the finish line, I called and asked who was making ‘the film’. Since then, of course, we’ve spent a lot of time together, and it’s been great to reconnect.
Most of the scenes that I shot are, in fact, in the film. I think there’s probably only about a few scenes that I filmed with Evan that aren’t in the final film in some fashion. I try to be pretty economical as a filmmaker, and only shoot when I have a strong sense that what I’m shooting is part of the story. Of course, there is some ‘trial and error’ and exploration. But, it’s too hard on the budget and on the subjects to shoot without a sense of an overall plan.
You did a brilliant job capturing the emotional aspect of those fighting for marriage nationwide. You paint a wonderful portrait of Mary Bonauto. How did you go about getting her to reveal so much about her emotions?
I’d like to say it’s because I earned her trust, but the fact is – Mary is just Mary. Everyone mentions how brilliant, passionate, and fierce she is. But what blew my mind is how compassionate, committed and giving she is, too. And, as you can see, she’s amazingly emotional. She can be a molten volcano when she’s angry; she’s unbelievably loving and protective; and she’s like a human lightning rod when it comes to feeling the pain of others. I’m in awe of Mary and I’m so glad that she let us film her, and share some of her journey.
Tell us all about this special Michigan family and what it was like filming them?
In this film, I followed April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse, two of the main plaintiffs in the Obergefell Case. I chose April and Jayne because, to me, they seemed like the main plaintiffs in the case, plus they were the people whom Mary Bonauto was representing.
April and Jayne’s issue was whether or not they could get married, and therefore whether or not they could legally, jointly, parent their five adopted children in their home state. Those are pretty real stakes and, while all eight of the cases in Obergefell v. Hodges were important, April’s and Jayne’s story struck me, personally, the most viscerally.
These are two women who adopted sick and/or drug addicted infants. Can you imagine how big their hearts are? Meanwhile, the state of Michigan was claiming that they were unfit to marry, and that gay parents aren’t as ‘good’ as straight parents.
Straight people abandoned some of these children, and left them to die. April and Jayne nursed them all back to health. These are the kind of women it’s impossible not to root for, and that made them ideal plaintiffs and, of course, ideal characters for this film.
Is NOM president Brian Brown as creepy and ignorant in real life as he comes off on film? What was it like being in a confined space with him?
Even though so many people on the marriage side despise Brian Brown, I wanted to at least give the people opposed to same sex marriage an opportunity to express themselves. So I approached Brian with respect and an open mind.
Plus, my goal has always been to make a film that doesn’t ‘shut out the other side’, but instead gently puts a human face on the situation, and thereby furthers real conversation. I never want to simply preach to the converted.
The only problem was, by the time I got to filming, most if not all of the arguments against same sex marriage had been debunked. Take, for example, the classic: “Children are better off with a mother and a father.”
Well, almost half the kids in this country are being raised by single moms, so that doesn’t work. Plus, same sex marriage has been around long enough, now, that there is data available. And all the studies show that, with regards to raising children, the sexual orientation of their parents doesn’t seem to factor in at all. Plus, of course marriage is not only about procreation. Older people get married. Infertile people get married. Lots of marriages do not result in children. We don’t require married couples to to have children, and we don’t force them to divorce if they don’t.
Another big argument is that, “This violates our religious beliefs.” Well, that may or may not be true, but marriage isn’t actually about religion. It is a civil institution. A marriage certificate is a legal contract, given out by the government, not by the church.
In other words, during the course of making this film, it became increasingly clear to me that there were no real reasons for Brian or anyone to legitimately oppose same sex marriage. I wasn’t creeped out by Brian – he’s a nice enough guy, in most respects. But I hope that someday he realizes that he has made a career out of inciting hatred and spreading discrimination. And, while he likes to try to pretend otherwise, this is not a theoretical debate. When people like put that much time and effort into spreading hatred and intolerance, real people experience real harm.
I cannot count the number of equality rallies and ACT-UP protests I’ve been to and always right next to us would be the religious fanatics with their giant bloody crucifixes, offensive signs, and ratty bibles. They can be quite aggressive and threatening. Is it just me or do they really ramp it up when the cameras are on?
I agree. They totally ramp it up when the cameras are on. They’re want the attention, and cameras are the megaphone they want.
“Freedom to Marry” has its ‘stars,’ but every single one of the ‘supporting cast’ is just as captivating. How difficult was it to select which individual person and their story you would include in the film?
It was incredibly difficult, because so many people gave so much. And I feel terrible about all the people who I was not able to include.
And it’s not only the famous attorneys, civil rights leaders and plaintiffs who deserve a shout out. I think a lot about the millions of LGBT people who shared their stories at the dinner table, or at work, or knocked on doors at the homes of strangers in order make their voices heard. Many of these folks really put their own family, community, job, happiness and safety at risk. In the end, that’s what’s amazing about this story, and that’s why we finally have the freedom to marry in America.
“Freedom to Marry” should be used by any group struggling to achieve equal rights and you expertly show us how marriage equality was achieved. Did you work closely with your subjects and/or other experts to create the structure of your film or was it something that came about organically?
I always hoped, in addition to a being a character driven story, and an important part of the historical record, that this film could offer some sort of a roadmap about how to effect social chance. That was one of the reasons I made this film, to begin with, and figuring out how to juggle those elements was one of the most interesting creative challenges, from the start.
It can be tough to keep an audience engaged when they basically know how your film will conclude, but you do so seemingly effortlessly. How much did this concern you during the process of making your doc?
Funny, some people tried to convince me not to make this film about trying to win this case, for exactly the reason you mention – because, by the time we finished the film, audiences would already know what happened, so maybe just tell the historical story. But, I thought this could be more powerful if it wasn’t just a history film. I thought that, if we could bring audiences close to the main characters and figure out how to make an epic story really intimate, that audiences would get lost in the moment, and come along for the ride. Plus, not everyone knows the story. Plus, a back stage pass to one of the most important civil rights movement of our time is going to feel even more precious, as time goes on.
You are a better man than I for not mentioning and lambasting the organization that in my opinion co-opted marriage equality even though they refused to believe fighting its way through the courts was the way to go. Did you feel that you needed to turn the focus back on the Mary, Evan, Freedom to Marry, and company and away from HRC?
A movement requires a lot of people, and everyone has a role. I obviously couldn’t include everyone, simply because it’s impossible to do that in a single film.
You really set the record straight. Your film will stand as the record of the LGBT Community’s struggle for marriage equality. Did you feel the magnitude of getting it just right, packing in all the pertinent information, and hitting those pivotal moments?
I totally felt the magnitude of that responsibility, and I still do!
I’m thrilled, Gary, that you like the film so much. But, of course, I’m bracing myself to hear from people who don’t.
Luckily, we can be sure that this movement will be studied in many of ways, for many years. We can be sure that there will books, theses and other films to help fill the gaps, and to tell the story from different perspectives. In fact, one of the projects on my own to-do list, is a ten part series that tells the whole story, chapter and verse. It’s an amazing American story, that’s for sure. I hope I can put that together.
40 year-old Dean is trying not to have a mid-life crisis, but his chances of succeeding are slim. He’s a very successful graphic designer in Silverlake California who is starting to loath his good paying clients because of their poor taste levels. Now because the lazy eye he’s had from birth is playing up, his eye doctor has just prescribed tri-focal glasses which he is having great difficulty adjusting too. Then his rather solitary and seemingly empty life is suddenly disturbed by an email that arrives totally out of the blue. It’s from Alex an ex-boyfriend who broke his heart when he walked out of his life 15 years ago, and then totally disappeared off the grid never to be heard of again.
Dean’s initial reaction is one of anger, but he is so intrigued as to why Alex should now decide to get back in touch after all this time, that he responds quite politely. After a couple of emails flying back and forth, Dean swallows the bait and invites Alex to join him for weekend as his desert hideaway near Joshua Tree. They never make it inside the front door before clothes are being ripped off starting a very long and passionate bout of lovemaking as if they had never been apart.
Despite some deep and bitter regrets over their break-up all those years ago, they are both obviously able and keen to consider taking up where they left off. If only it was that simple, and first they both have to discover the baggage and commitments that they have each accumulated over the past 15 years to see if that would be even be possible. If they can deal with each others secrets and truths, they may have a chance or burying the past and starting anew, but is this too much to ask?
This riveting new drama is written and directed by Tim Kirkman who proved in his earlier work such as the delightful Loggerheads that he has quite a remarkable skill at making heart tugging stories, and this one is no exception. What is exceeding clever here is that once the totally charming (and very hot) pair meet up again, we have have no clue whatsoever how their story will pan out. The idea of wanting to know how our lives would change if the major love of our life came back for a second round is such an intriguing one that so many of us can relate too and this makes us even more invested in the outcome of Dean and Alex’s own story.
In what is essentially a two-handed drama, Kirkman cast well with Lucas Near-Verbrugghe as Dean who even though he has the biggest secret to share, comes over as the more honest of the two, and Alex played by Aaron Costa Ganis always seems that there is much more to his story about the past 15 year that he will never let on. Both men give sterling and utterly convincing performances that ensure we are engage right until the final credits role.
This rather wonderful compelling drama is a must-see for any and every hopeless romantic who will always wonder what would have happened if things had worked out differently.
The only chance that Joey (Lola Kirke) has of improving her life choices is by enlisting in the Army. They at least will not only let her see the world but also fund her entry into college too. She is a recent high school graduate in a economically depressed small Pennsylvania town, and with jobs extremely scarce, she gets low-paying work with a dairy farmer looking after his herd of cattle and helping out at his ice cream stand. It is whilst she is working there one night that she gets picked up by Rayna (Breeda Wool) an attractive and flirtatious woman who is probably twice her age.
When Joey wakes up in Rayna’s trailer home the next morning she quickly discovers that her party-animal ‘date’ is in fact a married mother, with two young children, whose truck driving husband is out of town. As she hastens to leave, Rayna asks that Joey keeps what happened last night on the down-low, but it’s quite clear that even after this one brief encounter, Joey is already smitten.
Joey’s older siblings warn her that Rayna has a hard-earned reputation for being trashy and has had more than her fair share of bed partners, including Joey’s own brother. However she pays no heed and starts hanging out with Rayna as often as she can even though the woman is petrified that people will discover the true nature of their friendship. In fact when they are caught making out in the farmers barn, it costs Joey her job.
Her infatuation with Rayna makes her now re-think about joining the Army as it will mean leaving her, but the older woman encourages her to enlist as the pay could enable her to leave her husband and set up home with Joey instead. Once Joey is in the services and doing her basic training before being shipped off to serve in Afghanistan, Rayna changes her mind again, and that’s where the title of the movie comes in.
The intriguing movie directed and co-written by newbie filmmaker Deb Shoval was developed from a short movie that she made in 2010. The story of an inexperienced young lesbian making bad choices after falling for a much older woman is not new, but her angle with economic hardships making both women so vulnerable, gave it an interesting fresh angle. Joey’s risk-taking decisions were always made from the heart and at the encouragement of her older lover who’s own chosen path was guided by her internalized homophobia and her finely honed survival skills that would always result in her callously using people for her own ends.
The drabness of these women’s existence living hand-to-mouth was perfectly portrayed with this image of depressed small-town life which somehow seemed totally unchanged for decades, a little like the whole concept of closeted lesbians marrying men. Kirke put in a fine convincing performances as an irrational Joey whose blinkered vision was a tad too hard to accept even though a first love can often make you do some wildly aberrant things, and Wool playing the annoying self-centered Rayna, was excellent too.
Canadian filmmaker Stephen Dunn’s tale of a young gay man’s coming of age story is one of the most imaginative and insightful movies in that genre we have seen in quite a while. Set in his native Newfoundland it’s the story of Oscar (Jack Fulton) who at the start is a relatively happy 8 year old whose seemingly idyllic life is suddenly brutally interrupted when his parents announce they are going to get a divorce. His mother (Joanne Kelly) is moving out which makes the situation even worse for Oscar who is then fobbed off with a gift of a hamster intended as some sort of consolation.
He names his new pet Buffy and he soon discovers that as she is in fact his ‘spirit angel’ and can actually talk, and over the next 10 years becomes the Oscar best friend and confidante.
One day after school he witnesses three older boys hitting the living daylights out of a fourth. He follows them as they drag the screaming boy into the cemetery where they are bent on doing even more harm to him, and Oscar grabs a wooden stake intent on help defend the boy when his assailants rush off and leave him half dead. When the viscous attack makes the TV evening news, his father (Aaron Abrams) tells him that the reason they had beaten the boy up was because he was gay. These are words that will stick in Oscar’s memory for years as he eventually tries to come to terms with his own sexuality.
Fast forward 10 years and Oscar (Connor Jessup) has developed into a creative and talented artist who has applied for a place at a school in New York to study cinematic make-up which he has been practicing on his patient best friend Gemma (Sofia Banzhaf) for years. His mother has remarried and now he has two siblings but he doesn’t feel that he that welcome in their family unit, so he has an uneasy truce with his controlling father who still will not even give him a front door key and who insists on giving him a rude to work everyday. Oscar has a job at a large DIY store for which he shows no talent for at all. His patient boss tells him that all he has to do whenever he sees a customer holding a product just say ‘that’s a nice one’ as she is convinced that suits most situations.
What may suit Oscar however is Wilder (Aliocha Schneider) who is one of his co-workers about his own age and who is not particularly nice but is very hot looking and Oscar can hardly stop starring at him. There is obviously some sort of connection between the two young men but Oscar is too unsure about his own sexuality and feelings to ever want to try and find out more.
That is however until the day that they both get laid-off from the Store and Wilder announces that as he is leaving to go to Berlin for a few months the next day, his roommates are throwing a farewell/Friday the 13th party for him. Deciding to accept his invitation, Oscar is tries to pick out a costume from his closet which still contains all his mothers old clothes as his father had stubbornly refused to hand over to her. He is caught in trying on her clothes by his slightly drunk father who suspecting Oscar may be gay, starts a fight which ends badly when Oscar pushes him over into the closet.
Partying too hard, Oscar is in no fit state to go home, so he and Wilder end up in his childhood tree house that he still escapes too especially when his father has one of his temper rages. Together in bed and half naked the conversation soon turns to sex with Wilder urging Oscar to just accept who he really is.
Asides from the main thrust of the story of this very likable young man trying to get beyond his dysfunctional parents as he matures, Dunn insists on putting some unexpected plot twists that not only serve to keep us on edge until the very end, but helps make Oscar’s journey of self-discovery such a compelling one. Well acted, particularly by Jessup as the young lead, and especially by the hamster too, who was played by none other than Isabella Rossellini, who actually gets the last line and the last laugh in this rather delightful movie.
“Closet Monster” will be shown at Frameline 40 Monday, June 20 at 9:15 p.m. at the Castro Theater in San Francisco
After Saar Maoz an utterly charming 40 year old man served as a paratrooper in the Israeli Army, he was kicked out of the Kibbutz where he had been living with his large extended family for being gay, so he moved to London to begin again and look for the love of his life. Now 18 years later, his ‘forever’ boyfriend left after three years and the very untamed man that took his place lead Saar down a wild and indulgent path which resulted him being diagnosed HIV+. With his conservative religious family back in Israel struggling with their very judgmental opinions on what they consider are the consequences of his ‘life style choices,’ Saar finds a replacement for them in the shape of the London Gay Mens Chorus where the other members give him the unconditional love and fellowship that he so desperately needs and wants.
This new heart-tugging documentary from the Israeli filmmaker Heymann brothers follows Saar for about a year as he seeks to see if can, or even wants to, effect any meaningful reconciliation with his family back home. We see him sitting in his small North London apartment trying to hold back his tears as he reads an old letter from his very macho military father that is full of anger and denial about Saar’s sexuality that was the start of him wanting to disengage from the family. Yet later when his mother comes to London on her own to visit Saar who is her eldest (of seven) child. her love for him is muddied by the fact that the Torah tells her that homosexuality is wrong and should be punished by death. Also she is worried that as Saar’s life expectancy may be limited, they should all be spending it together.
When Saar then goes back to the Kibbutz for a nephew’s Bar Mitzvah, his family who have albeit ostracized him, now openly express their very hostile opinions on both Saar’s sexuality and his diagnosis. It is mainly based on sheer ignorance but also on a their basic desire not t0 want to even try to understand Saar’s point of view or any real facts. To his credit Saar reacts calmly and tells them that their claim about him ‘abandoning’ his family, and they in turn have chosen to all but ignore him too beyond the occasional phone call. The filmmakers linger on these scenes so that we get the full sense of the arguments, and so that they very carefully ensure that they are seen as being totally bipartisan.
As the story unfolds we see that asides from one rather impossible brother, that everyone moves to more of a central position, and when the Saar’s father visits London, there is a very definite warming between the two men as they try and understand each other more.
As Saar realizes that his pull to both his family and his homeland is far stronger than he had ever realized, he knows that making choices about the next stage in his life may mean leaving the other family who have always accepted him un-conditionally ….the London Gay Mens Chorus.
How the filmmaker ever persuaded the very unpretentious Saar Moaz and his very reticent and conservative family to even agree to make this documentary is a source of amazement, but we should be so very pleased that they did. This excellent film is so compelling and completely engaging that it deservedly picked up the Panorama Audience Award at the Berlinale earlier this year. Plus by the time the final credits role, the title becomes rhetorical as there is no doubt that besides his family, there will be plenty of offers of love for Mr Moaz.
Literally just a stone’s throw from the corridors of power in our nation’s capital, lies a whole area of Washington that is completely alien territory to most Americans. Seeing it portrayed in this startling powerful new documentary, you find that you have to pinch yourself to remember what is being played out here is not some fictional dramatized TV program, but very real life. This area is home to hundreds of african/american and latino gay and transgender youth who have to survive in a culture which has one of the highest rates of anti-gay violence in the whole country, but who have now collectively decided that enough is enough, and it is time to fight back.
Ten years ago, a group of middle-schoolers started ‘Check It’ to provide its members safety in numbers and let people know that if you jumped a gay kid in DC now, you’d likely get jumped back in retaliation. The original 10 members have grown to over 200 tough, rough kids who put up this angry aggressive front with everyone outside of the tight clique that they encounter. They are mouthy and sassy and although most of them are extremely effeminate and outrageously flamboyant, they are far from being sissies for as well as their wickedly sharp tempers, they are also packing knives and brass knuckles. They walk around wearing lipstick and dresses daring anyone to say something to them which is pretty brave …… and very crazy too.
They fund their activities with petty crimes and car jacking, but a great many of them end up hustling as rent boys (and girls) for cash on a notorious stretch on K Street, which means they have to grow up faster than most to become street-wise to survive. One of the more scarier facts that the documentary reveals is in scene when they all rather matter-of-fact recount the number of times they have been attacked, beaten up and even shot-at. There is one sobering incident when one of them phones a rape-help support line, but gets refused help when she reveals the attacker was a prostitution client.
The movie avoids having any real narrative for the first part of the film as it starts to explore the lives of Trey, Day Day, Alton, Star, Skittles and a handful of others. However the second half focuses more on how a couple of extraordinary adults are committed to trying to make a difference to these kids lives that the authorities have, for the most part, given up on. The main one is Jarmal Harris, who also grew up in the Projects, and now runs a summer fashion camp to offer some of the kids an opportunity to prepare for actually getting a job in a field that they love. Even he has trouble making them lose their loud angry attitudes and to stop fighting him every inch of the way, as he is one of the very few chances that they may have of real hope and even happiness.
At this juncture in the movie although the filmmakers and kids have left you reeling in both shock and despair, you end up desperately hoping that this lifeline will be enough to really make a difference. The police call ‘Check It’ a gang, but you cannot help siding with its members who think of it as their family, particular by the very many whose parents had both addictions and issues so that they literally grew up on their own.
Dana Flor and Toby Oppenheimer the filmmakers filmed this over three years, and went back a year later for an epilogue for these kids story. So far thanks to Ron “Mo” Moten the founder of Peaceoholics Inc, it is a good one that is making a difference for a few , which is a start, but they still have a long way to go to give these LGBT kids hope for a better future.
This excellent thought-provoking movie paints a picture of such stark reality that is tough for most of us to even comprehend. More importantly it is yet another wake-up call that it is far to early for anyone to get complacent about LGBT rights simply because we had major victories like SCOTUS making same-sex marriage legal. The kids in ‘Check It’ need so much more than that just to simply survive.