“9/11 … it’s the only thing real that’s ever happened to them.”

There’s something about this, kinda as with Hedwig and the Angry Inch, that made me certain at all turns that I shouldn’t have been loving it as much as I was. I’ve written far too often of how the world at large’s insistence on the binary separation of male and female as something ever-defining etc pisses me off (I mean, Jesus wept, today I had to tell a machine what was between my legs before I could sit in the waiting room at the dentist’s …), and on the whole, this movie (ironically, again like Hedwig) doesn’t have as much leeway on this matter as you’d think it might: in so many of these self-proclaimed open-minded pieces, you’re still either male or female or, if you’re lucky, inbetween – which is great; but ... if you are inbetween in movies like this, you’ve got to be somehow overly extravagant, flamboyant or offensive – I mean, whoever heard of a boring, down-to-earth deviant, right? All that said, as with Hedwig, in this case it works: because, as I’ll say over any cliché thing that should annoy yet doesn’t, the rules don’t apply if such behaviours come from believable characters; and this movie is among the most human I’ve seen.

I still think that anyone who lets sex rule their lives to this degree is really missing out on 10 times as much as I’m sure they’d think I’m missing out on clinging to my virginity … if I met these people in real life, I’d steer clear of them. But, put on film, I don’t know, it’s every bit as much a celebration of life and humanity and finding yourself as Hedwig was. There’s something about having this stuff laid bare in an undeniably artistic (as opposed to pornographic) context that makes it get seriously under your skin with a passion. I personally didn’t find it as explicit as I’d heard; though certainly there are things shown that I’ve never seen in anything so “mainstream”, I feel more offense is likely to be caused by things like the sexualisation of the Statue of Liberty and the shelf of dildos overlooking Ground Zero at the start.

I’ll watch it again if only for its raw beauty. Between this and Hedwig, I’m pretty sure one day John Cameron Mitchell is really gonna wow me – in fact, I have to admit, it’s probably only that hunch and a second viewing keeping this and Hedwig from that elusive 5th heart.

“One o’ these days this city’s gonna explode. You used to be able to play stickball on the street! Christ, what’s happening …”

I kept thinking this would take off somewhat more than it ultimately does … dare I say that the first thing that strikes me as worth mentioning about it is how … straight a thriller it is, really overall just another undercover cop movie with “the gay” laid on heavy with a quaint disclaimer at the start that it’s not representative of all of them lol. Which is nice …

Most of all it reminded me of last year’s Zodiac ... it was during that movie that I finally realised that Jake Gyllenhaal perhaps isn’t so odd-looking afterall, having the eerie doppelganger of young Al Pacino before him. The look and music of this thing combined with Pacino must surely have been on Fincher’s mind when putting together his Seventies throwback.

It does finally leave you with something to chew over with its ending which seems to me to be open to far too many interpretations for me to touch upon here. So I’d like to see it again … but I’ll likely not do that until the rumored 140 minute uncut version emerges.

Lord … Ed Wood meets Herschell Gordon Lewis with a dash of John Waters lol. And by no means does this have even the semi-historical significance of either of those first two guys’ work – letting alone the artistic merit because, well, it’s best left alone, right? – nor any of the bite of the last. It actually makes me feel better when I watch a movie like this alongside a movie like Cathy’s Curse ‘cos it kinda reassures me and hopefully anyone reading that I’m not just a blind sucker for anything weird and obscure and dodgy lol. While Cathy went in the box with some of my favourite horror movies, this goes more with the forgettable likes of Mother’s Day, Bloody Birthday and Black Christmas – not to mention of course most of the HG Lewis stuff. I guess everyone has their own preferences. This one’s just not for me, and given the content, though I hadn’t expected it, I really would’ve thought otherwise.

It’s of course even harder to write a level-headed review of this movie following Heath Ledger’s death than it was in the fog of Oscar buzz on its original release, and these are the only two ways I’ve yet seen it, so time will still tell as to whether it’s as good as I’ve found it both times around. Sky Movies had it scheduled to screen the night following Heath’s death, I think purely out of coincidence – they did a triple bill of his movies on Saturday in a specific tribute – and I kinda felt like I wanted to do something, like anything, as the news just hit me in a way I’d never have expected and it seems it hit a lot of people the same way too.

The first time I saw the movie, I kind of missed the 1963 date at the start and it took me until the late 70s/early 80s styles came in to actual realise exactly when it was all set, and it seems to me this kind of highlights why it’s so much better than the surface story would suggest. So many movies do the whole society against the minority thing, and this could’ve easily gone exactly the same way. What makes this one special is the deep-seated conflict at the very heart of the relationship – Ennis’ absolute conviction that what they’re doing is just abhorrent, and where that notion comes from. This story could happen right now – though society has just about changed for the better when it comes to accepting sexuality, it doesn’t make it any easier for those with a certain upbringing to accept who they are let alone act on it. The sixties setting here really only heightens an already tough piece of drama.

I was upset at the time when Ledger didn’t get the Oscar – though I was glad to see checking the IMDb while watching that he was nominated … I’d forgotten if it was he or Jake Gyllenhaal who got recognised (they both did – Gyllenhaal in the supporting category) – of course, I’m even more upset now. It’s probably been said all over the place especially in the past week, I’ve read it myself a dozen times, but it’s one of those things that deserves to be said so often – it’s an amazing performance. The key scene in the tent, from his half-pushing Gyllenhaal away, half-pulling him back; his long-coming emotional outburst after Gyllenhaal’s “I wish I knew how to quit you!” line; to that last line, “Jack I swear”; the one word that comes to mind about every second of this character is “beauty”. And it’s a beautiful film he lives in.

24th January, 2006:

I was one of the first people to snigger at the gay cowboy thing, I confess … I’m a South Park fan, I watch Letterman, what can I say? Add to that, I really didn’t like the hype that this movie was getting. Much as I respect Ang Lee as a film maker – even in the recent shadow of Hulk, The Ice Storm at least was a masterpiece – and good as the movie looked, it still felt a little to me like all the last remaining homophobes on the planet were finally coming out to beg redemption by praising it. I mean, didn’t Far From Heaven kinda tread this territory before without such a hue and cry?

So I began the movie looking for reasons to hate it – it’s a little obvious here, a little clichéd there, etc, etc. But, I’m glad (relieved?) to report, my prejudices are not set in stone. This movie is even more beautiful and deep than I’d been led to expect. And when I say deep, I mean I’m seriously, as Cartman would say :p The photography is gorgeous, the pacing precise and never dull, the performances, eek, I’m gonna say it, braver than anything in recent memory. Heath Ledger is going to get the Oscar, I hope Michelle Williams too. As movies go, 2005 just looks better and better the more I see – why couldn’t all these movies be scattered throughout instead of all clumped in the end???

I really should hate this with all my heart. It’s yet another 2-hour comedy, like we needed more of those (to those who say negative reviews of movies like this are “missing the point” – one question: since when did points like this need 2 hours to make?!), and even though it’s Adam Sandler and I’ve fully warmed to him by now, the set-up just sounds as horrendous as it is. This movie sets about the entirely paradoxical task of making it okay to laugh about not only homosexuals but firemen again while still revering their heroism in the face of … blah.

I should be going into my whole gender stereotypes spiel/rant again here, but I’m not, and not just because I can’t be bothered anymore. I will repeat that it disturbs me massively that there are clearly vast numbers of people who think these movies portray some kind of status quo to aspire to – like, when Adam Sandler wakes to a “hot” nurse, and then is swarmed by Hooters girls outside the hospital, that this is like the height of fantasy for most men watching. And isn’t it hilarious that a little boy does the splits and plays with his sister’s easybake oven? “It’s so wrong!” ... but, no, really, it’s okay! Sigh. Make up your mind, guys.

But in the end, kind of like Good Luck Chuck, it has fleeting glimpses of a conscience, and ultimately left me just a little warm and fuzzy inside. It’s Dan Aykroyd’s speech in the end, which pretty much puts to bed all my whinings above and nails just about exactly something I’ve been trying to tell people for years – that gay, straight, bi, tran, or yes even that thing where she tinkles on a balloon, anything, it has nothing to do with who we are as people. People have different aspects and they don’t have to intersect. They’re totally separate things. Likewise it’s possible to have habits and urges and wants and needs, but just because they happen to coincide with some stereotype, doesn’t mean we are that stereotype. You can like Barbra Streisand and women. You can enjoy a bloody slasher movie and actually be a doctor! And so on. Like I said, it saddens me that there are clearly still people out there who require this Mrs Doubtfire ish “Sandler’s gay, but he’s not, but he punches people who diss him anyway!” hammer on the head to realise all this … but I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t as pleased to hear that Aykroyd speech at the end here as I was by the whole “Lady! Gentleman! Lentleman!” thing in Anger Management, lol – it’s just a shame I guess that the rest of the movie didn’t make his point better. The kids are really cute, though, so more tiny positives. Would I watch it again? Only if they released a 90 minute cut.

“If only we were among friends! Or … sane persons!”

What a way to start the year this is (okay I watched Hot Fuzz again before it, but didn’t have much to add to the old review, though it did rise significantly up the 2007 list). I don’t think it had ever really occurred to me before, so thanks I guess to ITV for putting it on early yesterday morning

The lyrics are even more incredible than I remember – this is a guy really loving words, like it’s more often than not the sound of the words taking precedence way over any meaning – “I’ll tell you once, I’ll tell you twice / You better wise up, Janet Weiss.” “You’re as sensual as a pencil.” It almost reminds of Tim Rice at his most fun (I know, different people might take that comparison differently; for the record, I love Tim Rice, this is a positive thing I’m saying).

What struck me too on this viewing is how surprisingly clean the movie is. On the sex front it’s as tame as a pantomime, it’s all implied though if you’ve got any hormones whatsoever I’d be shocked if you weren’t turned on at some point – I personally find it just about the sexiest film ever, like, even Tim Curry is somehow a turn-on lol. There’s the fairly shockingly gruesome killing of Eddie but even that’s more in the sound mix than anything else. I guess if you’re offended by words like “transvestite” and “transexual” it might hurt a bit, but really it’s not even as crazy as I thought it was. It only really strikes one as so utterly subversive etc when you’re able to recognise all the symbolism in it like the rainbow colours and the triangle on Frank N Furter’s medical tunic etc.

“It’s not easy having a good time. Even smiling makes my face ache.”

Ultimately it’s how the ridiculousness of it all just builds and builds (I still remember how much I lost it the first time I watched it that moment when Riff-Raff and Magenta burst in in their alien regalia, lol) only to be cut through by the key line of the whole thing, “Don’t dream it, be it,” and then to cap it all the King Kong reference with Rocky climbing the RKO tower.

I don’t know, sometimes I think I take these things a little too serious considering they are at their core just a little kind of homage or spoof, but, y’know, I always let my heart make the final decision when it comes to movies, and the “Don’t dream it, be it,” and the RKO thing … they really make this movie for me, it’s not just a weird cult entertainment for me, it actually means something. I watched it for the first time almost 10 years ago and if I said it wasn’t at least partly responsible for the things I’ve gradually learned to accept about myself in the years since, may I be struck down for such a giant lie. You can take that last sentence however you want ‘cos I’m still a little averse to being specific. This movie just says how wonderful it is to be yourself and though it almost sounds ridiculous, to not be afraid of things that are pleasing to you. There is simply no better message for a movie to have. If it feels good, why knock it? We badly need another movie like this for today, pronto. I’ll keep my personal detailed ideas on that notion to myself for now