Frameline 2010: Thursday
Jun. 25th, 2010 07:30 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nakedbeeWatching movies all day sure is hard work. Good thing I'm so disciplined. ;)
Thursday's film reviews below the cut
Note: plot summaries (italics) and promotional images shamelessly lifted from the Frameline website. Click the image to go there for more info, including links to the official movie websites.
Says Who? Gender Variant Representation in Media
A critical look at recent and historical screen representations of transgender and gender variant people, this panel will ask pressing questions about cultural perceptions, media-based activism and community accountability.
Whose voices are heard often and whose are misunderstood? How do diverse communities – queer, trans or otherwise – understand gender variant identities? How do positive or negative representations impact LGBT rights movements and individuals' lives?
Who gets to decide what images "count" as fair or authentic? What are constructive ways of responding to hurtful or inaccurate media portrayals? Join a lively panel of filmmakers, academics and community members for this rich and timely conversation.
Hmmm, I think my main problem with this panel was with my own expecations. Discussions with slashers (both online and at cons) have set my baseline level for meta discussions of this type pretty high, apparently. I guess when the organizer spent a full 5 minutes on the rules for the discussion (which boiled down to 1] be nice and 2] keep comments short so everyone has a chance to speak) that should have been a clue. There was an hour of panel discussion followed by an hour of audience participation. In the first hour, the moderator asked some odd questions (none of the ones above, sadly, which is sort of what I'd come to hear discussed) and the panelists gave some answers (perhaps they too, had prepared for different questions?). It was interesting but not particularly illuminating and then we moved to the audience participation phase.
I think we got through maybe 4 questions (well, 3 rants and 1 rant followed by a question that none of the panelists were really qualified to answer about how to get distribution rights for films) in that second hour. Out of perhaps 700 people in the audience, that's not a particularly significant fraction and I have to lay some blame at the moderators feet for not doing much to influence that. I got the feeling that the audience members who did get to speak were feeling unheard in general and so had each decided to make this forum their one place to be heard. Also, it tended to feel like they blamed the panelists personally for the state of the world and that was unexpected ... I'd imagined a more "we're all gender variant here" sort of attitude but instead it was "you're all doing it wrong."
Maybe it's just the difference between having 30 people in a room (where it feels like there can be some give and take among everyone) versus 700. Or maybe it's the difference between the feeling that there's been a lively debate among slashers for years and that we still have many years ahead of us in which to continue the conversation versus a public gathering of more random folk who aren't already in conversation with each other? I'm not sure. I'm torn between wanting to have more panels at the film festival so that the group can get better and move the discussion forward and just wanting to get on with the movies and leave the discussion for a different venue where there's a better chance of being productive. I guess I'm just left with (and this has been a theme throughout the festival) a profound sense of how much I love fandom.
I really really wanted to attend the panel I'd imagined in my head. Upon reflection, I guess I'd imagined in as an Escapade or Con.Txt style upbeat discussion with lots of pop-culture references. So obviously what I need to do is suggest it as a panel myself and offer to lead it. OK, note to self: don't forget the deadline this year!
All Boys
Pornography has always been a hot button issue. Some speak out against it, while others champion porn’s pro sex consciousness. Gay male pornography has never been as polarizing as its straight counter-part, perhaps due to the absence of an overt power struggle between the sexes. But All Boys explores some questionable elements of gay porn during its boom in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The film focuses on an American, Dan Komar, who moved to Prague to cash in on this growing industry, and examines the lives of several boys who live with him and work for him. Some of his actors are straight and attracted to the work because of the financial benefits. Some actors, like Ruda, are products of a troubled past. For a time, Ruda was not only Komar’s employee but also his lover; at 22 Ruda ends up back on the street (a casting director says that once the boys turn 20, they are considered over the hill by the industry).
This film reminds me a lot of College Boys Live from last year's festival. Exploitation is ugly. The plot summary mentions "the absence of an overt power struggle between the sexes" but here the power struggle is between an experienced man with lots of money and a bunch of much younger men with very little. It was all pretty depressing.
As we walked from that theater to the next film, we talked a lot about how porn can be done without exploitation. We came up with plenty of ideas, but the one that struck me the most was the realization that fandom is already doing it. Here we are, a bunch of people in community, making and consuming porn in a pretty egalitarian, non-commercial fashion. And that is awesome. I love you, fandom!
Another consequence of that discussion (my best ideas often seem to come when I'm walking, I think) was that I finally feel secure enough to let go of my half-formed dream of making money as a filmmaker. I mean, I'm actually OK with my day job and don't really want to abandon it for the life of a starving independent artist. However, I don't think I'd ever really understood the freedom that gives me ... if I'm not trying to break into the industry, then I don't have to play by their rules. I can just make small, self-financed films and then give them away. As obvious as this seems in hindsight (especially since that's how we usually treat fanworks) it really hadn't occurred to me that I could do that with my less explicitly fannish work. So when I start making films, you guys are all going to volunteer to be in them, right? :)
Plan B
After his girlfriend, Laura, breaks up with him, Bruno decides he will do anything to get her back — even pretend to have a crush on her new, reportedly bisexual boyfriend, Pablo. But what happens when he starts to fall in love for real?
The two leads, Manuel Vignau and Lucas Ferraro, are credible and touching as two heretofore heterosexual guys who find surprising same-sex feelings taking hold. Moving, sexy and smart, Plan B tackles the thorny issues of male sexuality and friendship with grace, humor and style.
I loved this film! Like Bloomington from yesterday, it felt like fanfic, which was awesome. The plot was believable, the characters were interesting and 3 dimensional. It's a tough call, but I think I liked it even better than Bloomington. Bloomington had higher production values and faster pacing, but in that film the two main characters fall into bed within a few hours of meeting each other, which felt way rushed. In Plan B, they go through weeks and weeks of getting to know each other and forming a strong friendship bond first. There was sexual tension galore! Everyone in the theater cheered when they finally got together! The one weak spot of the film for me were the too-long interludes of moodily lit shots of buildings that indicated the passage of time between scenes. These got a little out of hand at the end, but the rest was so brilliantly done that I forgive the movie. I don't know if there are plans for a DVD release, but I'll definitely be keeping an eye out.
Spring Fever
Set in the damp, moody springtime of Nanjing, this Peyton Place-meets-Jules et Jim drama follows the clandestine gay and bisexual trysts of China’s “cell phone generation.” More than just a gritty backdrop, the city’s tranny bars, punk clubs and illegal sweat-shops frame the lives of five young people in this impressionistic look at modern life in urban China.
We thought about heading home early and catching up on sleep, but stubbornness prevailed and we decided to sit through this movie. The people who write the plot summaries for Frameline are quite skilled and I should have remembered not to ignore warning words like "clandestine", "gritty", and "impressionistic" because what that means is that I will find the movie depressing, unsympathetic, and nonsensical. Gah, it was sooooooo hard to stay awake during the prolonged scenes where people sit and smoke grumpily, but then all of a sudden someone would be screaming or someone else would be attacking them with sharp objects and I'd jolt back into alertness. This was very much not a film for me.
On the bright side though, I had a lovely conversation with the couple ahead of us in line about comic books. So that was pretty good. :)
Thursday's film reviews below the cut
Note: plot summaries (italics) and promotional images shamelessly lifted from the Frameline website. Click the image to go there for more info, including links to the official movie websites.
Says Who? Gender Variant Representation in Media
A critical look at recent and historical screen representations of transgender and gender variant people, this panel will ask pressing questions about cultural perceptions, media-based activism and community accountability.
Whose voices are heard often and whose are misunderstood? How do diverse communities – queer, trans or otherwise – understand gender variant identities? How do positive or negative representations impact LGBT rights movements and individuals' lives?
Who gets to decide what images "count" as fair or authentic? What are constructive ways of responding to hurtful or inaccurate media portrayals? Join a lively panel of filmmakers, academics and community members for this rich and timely conversation.
Hmmm, I think my main problem with this panel was with my own expecations. Discussions with slashers (both online and at cons) have set my baseline level for meta discussions of this type pretty high, apparently. I guess when the organizer spent a full 5 minutes on the rules for the discussion (which boiled down to 1] be nice and 2] keep comments short so everyone has a chance to speak) that should have been a clue. There was an hour of panel discussion followed by an hour of audience participation. In the first hour, the moderator asked some odd questions (none of the ones above, sadly, which is sort of what I'd come to hear discussed) and the panelists gave some answers (perhaps they too, had prepared for different questions?). It was interesting but not particularly illuminating and then we moved to the audience participation phase.
I think we got through maybe 4 questions (well, 3 rants and 1 rant followed by a question that none of the panelists were really qualified to answer about how to get distribution rights for films) in that second hour. Out of perhaps 700 people in the audience, that's not a particularly significant fraction and I have to lay some blame at the moderators feet for not doing much to influence that. I got the feeling that the audience members who did get to speak were feeling unheard in general and so had each decided to make this forum their one place to be heard. Also, it tended to feel like they blamed the panelists personally for the state of the world and that was unexpected ... I'd imagined a more "we're all gender variant here" sort of attitude but instead it was "you're all doing it wrong."
Maybe it's just the difference between having 30 people in a room (where it feels like there can be some give and take among everyone) versus 700. Or maybe it's the difference between the feeling that there's been a lively debate among slashers for years and that we still have many years ahead of us in which to continue the conversation versus a public gathering of more random folk who aren't already in conversation with each other? I'm not sure. I'm torn between wanting to have more panels at the film festival so that the group can get better and move the discussion forward and just wanting to get on with the movies and leave the discussion for a different venue where there's a better chance of being productive. I guess I'm just left with (and this has been a theme throughout the festival) a profound sense of how much I love fandom.
I really really wanted to attend the panel I'd imagined in my head. Upon reflection, I guess I'd imagined in as an Escapade or Con.Txt style upbeat discussion with lots of pop-culture references. So obviously what I need to do is suggest it as a panel myself and offer to lead it. OK, note to self: don't forget the deadline this year!
All Boys
Pornography has always been a hot button issue. Some speak out against it, while others champion porn’s pro sex consciousness. Gay male pornography has never been as polarizing as its straight counter-part, perhaps due to the absence of an overt power struggle between the sexes. But All Boys explores some questionable elements of gay porn during its boom in Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
The film focuses on an American, Dan Komar, who moved to Prague to cash in on this growing industry, and examines the lives of several boys who live with him and work for him. Some of his actors are straight and attracted to the work because of the financial benefits. Some actors, like Ruda, are products of a troubled past. For a time, Ruda was not only Komar’s employee but also his lover; at 22 Ruda ends up back on the street (a casting director says that once the boys turn 20, they are considered over the hill by the industry).
This film reminds me a lot of College Boys Live from last year's festival. Exploitation is ugly. The plot summary mentions "the absence of an overt power struggle between the sexes" but here the power struggle is between an experienced man with lots of money and a bunch of much younger men with very little. It was all pretty depressing.
As we walked from that theater to the next film, we talked a lot about how porn can be done without exploitation. We came up with plenty of ideas, but the one that struck me the most was the realization that fandom is already doing it. Here we are, a bunch of people in community, making and consuming porn in a pretty egalitarian, non-commercial fashion. And that is awesome. I love you, fandom!
Another consequence of that discussion (my best ideas often seem to come when I'm walking, I think) was that I finally feel secure enough to let go of my half-formed dream of making money as a filmmaker. I mean, I'm actually OK with my day job and don't really want to abandon it for the life of a starving independent artist. However, I don't think I'd ever really understood the freedom that gives me ... if I'm not trying to break into the industry, then I don't have to play by their rules. I can just make small, self-financed films and then give them away. As obvious as this seems in hindsight (especially since that's how we usually treat fanworks) it really hadn't occurred to me that I could do that with my less explicitly fannish work. So when I start making films, you guys are all going to volunteer to be in them, right? :)
Plan B
After his girlfriend, Laura, breaks up with him, Bruno decides he will do anything to get her back — even pretend to have a crush on her new, reportedly bisexual boyfriend, Pablo. But what happens when he starts to fall in love for real?
The two leads, Manuel Vignau and Lucas Ferraro, are credible and touching as two heretofore heterosexual guys who find surprising same-sex feelings taking hold. Moving, sexy and smart, Plan B tackles the thorny issues of male sexuality and friendship with grace, humor and style.
I loved this film! Like Bloomington from yesterday, it felt like fanfic, which was awesome. The plot was believable, the characters were interesting and 3 dimensional. It's a tough call, but I think I liked it even better than Bloomington. Bloomington had higher production values and faster pacing, but in that film the two main characters fall into bed within a few hours of meeting each other, which felt way rushed. In Plan B, they go through weeks and weeks of getting to know each other and forming a strong friendship bond first. There was sexual tension galore! Everyone in the theater cheered when they finally got together! The one weak spot of the film for me were the too-long interludes of moodily lit shots of buildings that indicated the passage of time between scenes. These got a little out of hand at the end, but the rest was so brilliantly done that I forgive the movie. I don't know if there are plans for a DVD release, but I'll definitely be keeping an eye out.
Spring Fever
Set in the damp, moody springtime of Nanjing, this Peyton Place-meets-Jules et Jim drama follows the clandestine gay and bisexual trysts of China’s “cell phone generation.” More than just a gritty backdrop, the city’s tranny bars, punk clubs and illegal sweat-shops frame the lives of five young people in this impressionistic look at modern life in urban China.
We thought about heading home early and catching up on sleep, but stubbornness prevailed and we decided to sit through this movie. The people who write the plot summaries for Frameline are quite skilled and I should have remembered not to ignore warning words like "clandestine", "gritty", and "impressionistic" because what that means is that I will find the movie depressing, unsympathetic, and nonsensical. Gah, it was sooooooo hard to stay awake during the prolonged scenes where people sit and smoke grumpily, but then all of a sudden someone would be screaming or someone else would be attacking them with sharp objects and I'd jolt back into alertness. This was very much not a film for me.
On the bright side though, I had a lovely conversation with the couple ahead of us in line about comic books. So that was pretty good. :)