FREE TO BE --- YOU & ME!!!! ...well, maybe
I think I mentioned that me and my pals, Milford and Vic, took in a screening of the brilliant gay film from Thailand, TROPICAL MALADY. A beautiful and multi-layered film about desire, consuming passion and love. Presented in a very unusual mix of realism and fable -- the film is divided into 2 parts: Reality and Fable. In fact, the film's director considers it to be two different films about the same two people.
It is rare to see a film come to the states from Thailand --- especially one that was not made with a Western audience in mind. Even more extraordinary to see one that depicts a gay storyline. The director's vision is poetic, romantic, sad and somewhat horrific. It is a challenging and thought-provoking film. There have been a number of films from Thailand which portray stories involving transgendered individuals (such as BEAUTIFUL BOXER) but it is rare to see a Thai film which depicts a gay relationship.
In my opinion, a major part of the beauty and mystery of TROPICAL MALADY develops from the idea of forbidden love. The two male characters never kiss. Instead, the director creates an interestingly erotic moment where the two men lick and taste each other's hands --- which prepares us for the second half or "second" film in which we can see that this erotic moment between the two men was a foreshadowing to shape-shifting to lions. ...the licking of "paws"
After the movie I made the following statement: "I love this movie so much, but I find it sad that in 2005 a Thai film is unable to be made that depicts a gay relationship in sexual terms -- that it has to be presented in allegory"
This lead the three of us into a complex discussion of the state of gay rights, stereotypes and homophobia in Thailand and the US -- as well as how being gay is depicted in mainstream films. It was an interesting conversation and Milford challenged me to name a film produced my a major US studio that depicted a gay relatioinship in graphic detail. If I understood his point --- it was to state that things are really not that much better in US cinema -- that I am fooling myself if I think that US film directors are offering realistic and open depictions of gay life in their films.
Milford -- If you're reading this, please correct me if I've got this wrong or if I misunderstood.
Anyway, this turn in the conversation caused me to pause for a while. The only film I could think of which had been produced and released by a major Hollywood studio which depicted any level of gay life in fully realized form was hardly a glowing example. Tho, not the evil film that it is known to be, CRUISING is probably the only "mainstream" film to offer graphic depictions of gay sex. Granted -- the gay sex depicted is fringe, hardcore S&M -- and the main thrust of the film is that self-hating gay men can turn into murdering maniacs. Great.
Controversial and full of self-loathing gay characters -- the film is quite worrying. However, I have been unable to think of any film financed by a major studio that ever showed two gay men or women actually having any form of sex other than this movie. ...and this was back in pre-AIDS 1980 and was absolutely the last kind of representation that the gay community NEEDED. However, murder plot and twisted surprise ending disgregarded, the sex scenes in this movie were filmed in the "hot" gay S&M clubs of the Meat Packing District circa the late 70's. And, most of the men having sex in the film are actually having it and were gay patrons of the clubs.
It could never be made now --- and, changing morals would now earn this film an NC-17 --- but in the early 1980's it somehow avoided the X-rating thanks to the fact that it stared Al Pacino and was being released by a major studio. But, I think CRUISING is it. Period. ...sad.
Maybe one could consider TORCH SONG TRILOGY and BROKEN HEARTS CLUB (I think both of those came to us via Sony subsidaries) but sex between gay characters was limited to the more "implied" level than we would see in a hetrosexual love story or film. And, as much as I liked TST -- has Matthew Broderick ever looked so "uncomfortable" in a role!?!?! LOL!
At this point, I think it unlikely that FOX is going to make a gay version of 9 1/2 WEEKS.
I think Milford is quite correct. In its own quiet and dignified way, TROPICAL MALADY is every bit as explicit and "real" as any studio-financed US film out there.
Case in point --- HAPPY ENDINGS.
While this film is being marketed as an arthouse film, it is well funded and it is being released by Lions Gate which I believe IS a subsidiary of a major studio. Please correct me if I am wrong. However, if I am wrong and Lions Gate is a true independent film distributor such as STRAND RELEASING -- this makes it all the worse.
HAPPY ENDINGS is by-and-large a gay film written and directed by a gay director. Yes, there are many subplots involving both gay and straight characters, but I think it is safe to say that this film will go down as and be remembered as being a gay film. It has opened several gay film festivals and is being marketed largely to the gay community.
HAPPY ENDINGS is quite sexual. The title says it all. And, we do see people in, about to be or having just engaged in sex without clothing. ...EXCEPT for the gay characters.
Yes, the gay characters act gay and they even get to kiss -- but the clothing stays on. Bottom line, it is OK to show one of the gay characters have sex with a woman, but it is ONLY OK to show him kiss the man with whom the film tells us he will spend the next 7 years of his life.
It is OK to show 2 gay men in the same bed, but it is NOT OK to show physical contact. Trust me --- even a straight audience would have pref. to see the gay male couple touch with strategically placed sheets than Tom Arnold cavorting in the nude with Maggie G.
It is OK to have Laura Dern play a lesbian mom because she is "fem" enough with long hair and a hint of make-up --- as is her on screen life partner. However it is NOT OK to show them in any sexual context.
It is OK to show Lisa Kudrow's characters straight parents kissing and to hint at hot sex. Not OK for the two lesbians.
Bottom line --- our culture might as well film gay relationships as allegory in the jungles of Florida. ...licking scales.
However, props must be given to the true independent distributors out there who opt to film and release movies which show gay relationships as being sexual. I also think we can't forget SHOWTIME which has and continues to produce television shows that depict explicit gay relationships -- tho, somewhat over the top and silly, at least these characters are granted sex lives.
However, as Milford and Vic noted -- those of us in cities like San Francisco, NYC or Boston do live in a sort of bubble. The chances of HUSTLER WHITE, EDGE OF 17, BEAUTIFUL THING or RELAX...IT'S JUST SEX playing at the mall cinema in Boise is not likely to happen. If you're a gay man or woman in Boise you will have to wait for these films to be released to DVD and order them via Net Flix or Amazon. However, I am sure Boise was able to screen IN & OUT.
We have a long way to go before we reach the nirvana hinted at in Marlo Thomas' 1972 TV series. We are only sort of free to be --- you and me.
Still, as I stated to M&M -- I would much rather be a gay man in the US than a gay man in Thailand.
However, I must agree that we have a very long way to go! ...and, I am not so certain that "Will & Grace" or "Queer Eye" is helping as much as just perpetuating stereotype. Or, maybe not.
What do you think?