The Four-Faced Liar (U.S. 2010)

The Gist:

Five college-age people, two straight couples and a womanizing lesbian meet in an Irish bar, not as the lead into a bad joke, but rather as the start of a romantic drama, where after becoming friends with the lesbian character, one of the straight women realizes that she does not have to live the life that was planned and laid out for her in excruciatingly exact detail from birth to wedding to death.

Comments (with one big semi-spoiler):

The one big semi-spoiler is this: (Possibly?) in order to make the protagonist seem less of a "bad person" for having an affair with her new lesbian best friend, the story has her boyfriend do some terrible things to help "accidentally" push her away from him. Which I only bring up because this creates a huge problem for me in that he crosses lines which should have made him a pariah in his circle of friends rather than just being treated as the poor guy whose girlfriend dumped him for a woman. 

Other than that, this is essentially a standard romance drama following many of the standard romance drama rules of people falling in and out of love, acting stupid, misunderstandings, and predictability before the couple you expect to end up together finally end up up together. 

Women:

Several (a good thing considering this is a lesbian love story)

People of color:

None. It seems New York City only has white people living in it

Gratuitous nudity:

Not really

• Director: Jacob Chase
• Writer: Marja-Lewis Ryan
• Actors: Marja-Lewis Ryan, Daniel Carlisle, Todd Kubrak, Emily Peck, Liz Osborn
• 87 min
• IMDB

World and Time Enough (U.S. 1994)

The Gist:

A gay couple, an HIV positive artist and his partner, an innocent minded garbage collector, live in occupied territory, that is the 'straight world,' as they deal with issues everyone faces, from love and life, to acceptance and death. 

Comments with minor spoilers:

The movie is very much a product of its time. Not so much the actual story which is a ‘universal’ tale of a couple dealing with love, acceptance, family and death, but rather the background of where this is taking place. These two men are not rich “white collar” gays living in a safe sequestered gay ghetto. Rather they live a ‘blue collar” life in the ‘regular’ world, occupied territory as it were, of aggressive heteronormality and enforced consumerism. The mere act of living together in a committed relationship makes their lives transgressive. Having one of the men be an HIV positive artist who specializes in short lived ephemeral art sculptures is another aspect of its time, of when AIDS was still considered a death sentence.

If it were re-set to now, the basic story would be the same, but the world they lived in would not. Consumerism will have won, and be worse in ways, but the fact of two men together, if not wholly and totally accepted, would at least not be too uncommon.  

All this aside, I like the movie, though it has several flaws. The device of interviewing one of the minor characters to serve as a narrator doesn’t really work and feels more awkward than useful. Another issue is that the movie feels lopsided as if it were actually two different not entirely complimentary stories lashed roughly together, a story of men in love followed by a tale of obsession (after the artist finds out his father has died). 

There's also the frankly awkward ending. The movie ends, then a couple minutes later ends again. One ending "artistic" and the other hopeful, which makes it seem as if there was a disagreement over how it should end so "they" just included both versions. 

Regardless of the problems, what does work is the idea that these two men are in love, both physically and emotionally. Going back to idea of the movie being a product of its time this is kind of a radical presentation. The early nineties were Hollywood giving us Tom Hanks as a ‘perfect’ gay man (meaning safely platonic and dying) in Philadelphia, while independent queer cinema was responding with a big F’ YOU to society with angry, suicidal, queer kids in Totally F***ed Up. This movie is neither extreme, neither safe nor enraged, but it ends up being more ‘real’ for this. 

Even with problems, it is worth seeing, though if you do, watch it to the very end.  

Women:

Yes

People of color:

Yes 

Gratuitous nudity: 

No

• Director: Eric Mueller
• Writer: Eric Mueller
• Actors: Matt Guidry, Gregory G Giles 
• 90 min
• IMDB 

West Hollywood Motel (U.S. 2013)

The Gist: 

A young gay couple with issues of compatibility, a lesbian couple whose issue is that things are not as "hot" in bed as they used to be, two young men with numerous issues who've just met, and a middle aged straight couple who gain an issue when the wife suddenly grows a penis, are all staying at the same motel as a not very good at his job of being an omniscient narrator tells us about how they deal with their problems. 

Comments, with minor spoilers: 

This is a very odd movie. It feels like an amateur student film in some respects, but well, these days things like film development errors do not exist unless intended to. Which leads me suspect that it's all intentional. But does that mean using then quickly abandoning the idea of the narrator as soon as the characters were introduced was a narrative choice as well? Spoiler, the narrator disappears fairly quickly. Does it also mean that the establishing shots mixing up Hollywood and West Hollywood is also intentional? Spoiler, Hollywood and West Hollywood are two different places. 

Aiming to recreate the feel of a weird decaying educational film is a valid aesthetic goal I guess, but it is strange when as viewer you can't tell if something is a mistake, or if it is just someone trying to skillfully and intentionally make it appear as if it were a mistake. In the end the way the story is told is distracting enough that I think it impedes the movie more than helps it. 

Compared to the storytelling esthetics, the four stories, even the odder ones, are fairly straight forward. The two 'reality-flexible' stories, of the penis growing wife and of the incompatible gay couple (that turns into a meta commentary about love as presented in gay romance movies) are the better of the stories. The lesbian affair one should have been interesting but falls flat for some reason. 

Oddly, or not, the least interesting of the four tales was the one with the most gay "eye candy," the story of the two, cute, young, Latino men. Least interesting, because their tale never gets much further past the very basic premise of "two attractive men end up sharing a hotel room because they are broke and... stuff." 

It's not a must see kind of movie, but if you're in a mood for quirky this would fit the bill. 

Women:

Yes

People of color:

Yes

Gratuitous nudity:

No

• Director: Matt Riddlehoover
• Writers: Matt Riddlehoover, Ethan James
• Actors: Matt Riddlehoover, Andrew Callahan, Amy Kelly, Phil Leirness, Cesar D' La Torre, Starina Johnson, Heather Horton, Luis Lucas
• 78 min
• IMDB

Out To Kill (U.S. 2014)

The Gist:

A gay private investigator moves into a gay condo complex where he meets his gay neighbors: a gay middle-aged couple, a gay singer, a mysterious gay, a gay dentist, and a gay threesome of three gay sex positive, hot gay men. Before he can settle down into his new gay life in the gayborhood there’s a gay murder when one of his gay neighbors ends up gay dead, but who did it when almost all the gays hated the dead gay guy?

Comments with some minor spoilers that do not reveal the solution to "who done it": 

Okay, I’m obviously being facetious with my overuse of the word gay in the plot summary. Unfairly so, as this is not the first, last, nor only movie where essentially every single person in town is gay. Well, except for the lone woman present and presumably the unseen Tampa police (who are described as not caring if a gay guy is dead). It is just that for whatever reason it seems more obvious in this movie than most, just how insular and gay specific these men’s lives are.

Despite all this ‘gay’ going around, the murder plot is not actually ‘gay’ dependent, and (given some changes in gender to force it into the 'real' world) could easily be a murder mystery of the week TV movie, well, if murder mystery movies of the week were still a thing that is.  The mystery is a fair play one, more or less, and if you pay attention to the clues is solvable. Maybe too solvable? I tend to assume any story where I can figure out the murderer before the end as being too easy. 

Mystery aside, switching to the quality of the movie, it's clear that many of the actors were hired for their looks rather than acting skills. Which brings up that the casting is a little odd in that it’s not just attractive mostly white men, but rather attractive mostly white men who all appear to be roughly the same age. I don't think it is actually the case, but given there are jokes about the middle-aged couple being an entire generation older than everyone else, it is weird how everyone seems to be within five-seven years of each other. 

In the end, it’s neither overly bad nor good, just an average meh movie, and no loss if you miss it or not.

Women:

One

People of Color:

One

Gratuitous nudity:

Is a bare butt shot of a guy described in story as being a slut character development rather than an excuse at fulfilling gay flick stereotypes of nakedness for the sake of nakedness? Considering the way the rest of the movie is done, in this case I'd say yes it is. 

• Director: Rob Williams
• Writer: Rob Williams
• Actors: Scott Sell, Rob Moretti, Marc Strano
• Time
• IMDB

Cloudburst (Canada 2011)

The Gist: 

Stella and Dot, life partners for 31 years, face being forcibly separated as Dot's granddaughter wants to put her grandmother into a special care home. They decide to fight for their right to stay together by taking off to Canada to get married.  Along the way they pick up a male hitchhiker. Dramedy ensues.  

Comments with an unimportant spoiler:

We are in deep in Hallmark style movie territory here with a story of two older women working to overcome an obstacle. In this case a crisis created because one of the women never came out to her granddaughter. A granddaughter who apparently has never realized that grandmother's curmudgeon, take no shit from anyone, butch dyke roommate is actually her grandmother's long time lover. 

Despite touching on serious subjects such as the lack of rights faced by many elderly queer couples, over all it is a rather goofy movie tending to focus more heavy on the comedy aspect of "dramedy" rather than drama.

Besides the two women, there is also the young hitchhiker. The spoiler is this: he remains a bit of a cypher. Apparently the guy is no longer welcome in his family home, but the reason why is never quite explicitly spelled out. Because he is gay? Bi? Straight? A dancer? A hustler? Who knows? Then again, it doesn't really matter as the movie is appropriately enough not about him, but rather about the two women. 

While not a must see movie, its not bad for what it is, a melodrama of the week style flick, and if nothing else, Olympia Dukakis seems to be having a grand time playing a cranky, strong willed, foul mouthed old dyke. 

Women:

Yes

People of color:

No

Gratuitous nudity:

Yes, though oddly enough for a "lesbian" movie, only of the male variety. Then again, all the scenes involving nudity are done as comedy since it seems nothing is more hilarious looking than a naked man.

• Director: Thom Fitzgerald
• Writer: Thom Fitzgerald
• Actors: Olympia Dukakis, Brenda Fricker, Ryan Doucette
• 93 min
• IMDB

Plan B ( Argentina 2009)

The Gist:

Bruno wants his ex girlfriend back. Granted, it is not as if she is totally out of his life, she is still occasionally sleeping with him. An affair her new boyfriend Pablo does not know of, but now that Bruno can't "have" her as an actual girlfriend, the affair is not enough. His first "plan" to get her back, to simply ask her to dump the new boyfriend in favor of Bruno is met with a resounding no. So he switches to "Plan B," where he will come between Laura and Pablo by becoming Pablo's friend and seducing him thus causing Laura and Pablo to break up. An admittedly unusual tactic. More so considering both men are straight, but who exactly is Bruno tricking in this scheme? 

Comments:

This is Marco Berger's first movie. I'm a huge fan of another one of his other films Hawaii, and this has several similarities, shared themes, to that story. A slow measured tale of two men hanging out together over the course of a summer learning about each other and becoming friends, and a call back to childhood and innocence symbolized by memories of playing with view-masters as kids. You know, those plastic toys that let you see slides of photos. Then again, if you're younger than middle aged, maybe you don't. 

It's an interesting story, and despite his plan of seduction making no sense at all, Bruno jumps into it with a certain charming, if underhanded gusto, flirting with Pablo in a more or less easily plausible denial sort of way. The story could have been played for goofy laughs, but is dealt with seriously here, which makes for a more complicated story than the set up implies. It's well done and worth seeing, as long as subtitles and an unhurried character development heavy story don't bother you that is.

Women:

Yes

People of color:

Yes, though not exactly

Gratuitous nudity:

No, though there are several underwear scenes, scenes that as they work to show the growing trust and friendship between the two leads doesn't fit the description of gratuitous 

• Director: Marco Berger 
• Writer: Marco Berger
• Actors: Manuel Vignau, Lucas Ferraro, Mercedes Quinteros 
• Note: Manuel Vignau who plays Bruno here, also stars in Hawaii, where he plays Euginio a gay middle class writer.
• Spanish. Argentine Spanish specifically, so a couple of unusual word choices if you're not familiar with it. 
• IMDB

The Men Next Door (U.S. 2012)

The Gist:

Facing his 40th birthday alone because all his friends have bailed on him, things are not looking good for Doug. Until he meets his new hunky 30 year old neighbor and they hit it off. Although in truth things were not really that bad for him, after all he is also dating a hunky 50 year old as well. At least things weren't bad until the 30 year old and 50 year old meet each other and it turns out they are father and son. 

Commentary:

Despite the daddy / son porn set up, and the occasional gratuitous (and frankly distracting) penis shots, this is not a kinky porn video, but rather a romantic comedy. One with issues. The lead's main personality trait seems to be that he's indecisive then again everyone else comes off as shallow, so maybe being wishy washy isn't too bad. There's is also a bit too much reliance on goofy comedy that's not so much with the funny. 

My main problem with the movie is the overindulgence in the indie gay flicks MUST have nudity stereotype. A scene with two friends talking should have the viewer paying attention to dialogue, not to wonder why one of them is standing around wearing only a shirt without pants or underwear showing off his dick for utterly no reason at all. 

There are plenty of ways to include nudity in a movie that makes sense and helps push the story along, but that is not what happens here. Instead the near random use of it gets distracting, and for me at least it leads to wondering about the thought process actors use when deciding whether to play nude roles or not, the casting process, and what their contracts look like. In other words, pulling me out of the story entirely. 

All that aside, it's not exactly a bad movie. The acting is, well, not horrible, and the story is sort of interesting (if overly melodramatic). In the end it, it's just a mostly average, fluffy gay flick.

Women:

One

People of color:

None

Gratuitous nudity:

Yes

• Director: Rob Williams
• Writer: Rob Williams
• Actors: Eric Dean, Michael Nicklin, Benjamin Lutz
• 84 min
• IMDB 

Vegas in Space (US 1991)

The Gist:

The Empress Nueva Gabor's girlimium gems have been stolen! Gems that are vital to the continued safety of Vegas in Space, capital of the planet Clitoris! Captain Dan Tracey and his crew are sent to discover the culprit, but as it is a women only world, they must first change their sex in order go undercover as showgirls from Earth to solve this mystery and save the planet. Not an easy task considering the number one suspect is Veneer, the Queen of Police. 

Comments:

As is probably clear from the plot description, this is a very camp movie. More specifically, a very low budget, day glow Barbarella aesthetic, drag queen, comedy homage to bad sci-fi B-movies. Apparently the movie has a reputation of being so bad you must absolutely watch it. Thing is, I don't think it is terrible. Rather it lives right on the edge of bizarre and great. 

From what I can tell, people look at the bright artificial colored fake fur covered sets, the wacky rambling over the top story, all the roles played by both men and women done up in drag, rude humor, the use of both color and black and white sequences, varying acting skills, the very basic idea of a planet of women who all act like mad drag queens instead of actual women, and especially the city of Vegas in Space itself,  a model consisting of a perfume bottle covered table with little plastic flying saucers and rocket ships on string waving above, as proof that the movie is a schlocky mess. 

I look at the same and see a very intentional point of view created by drag artists with the desire to perform and bring their dreams to life, shaped by the constraints of a very low budget. A budget low enough it took a couple years to film and even longer to finish the post production work, so that it is more of a product of an early 80's San Francisco performance art mind set than the 1991 release date would suggest. The time from filming to release was long enough that some of the cast died from AIDS related causes before it was finally screened. 

Despite my liking it and thinking it successful at what they were trying to do, I do admit it is a very strange beast of a movie, and not something everyone would enjoy. However, it's worth seeing if you like camp or drag or want a look at what drug fueled, sleep deprived drag artists would do in 1980's San Francisco when given access to a camera. 

Women:

All the women are played by both women and men, so regardless if we are talking about character or the actor playing the role, the answer is yes.

People of color:

Maybe? I'm not really sure. Many of the roles involve heavy, bright green or other loudly colored makeup, so it's not really clear.

Gratuitous nudity:

Not exactly, there are a couple of breasts on display, but appropriately enough given the movie they are are obviously fake. The intent seems to be not so much gratuitous as intentionally outrageous.  

• Director: Phillip R. Ford
• Writers: Philip R. Ford, Doris Fish
• Actors: Doris Fish, Miss X, Ramona Fischer, Lori Naslund, "Tippi"
• 85 min
• Color, and Black and White
• Note: The director has the story of the making of the movie as a one entry blog. It's an interesting read and includes lots of photos and videos.
• IMDB

Oy Vey My Son Is Gay!! (US 2010)

The Gist: 

A gay man comes out to his family. A family that is not merely Jewish, but are instead JEWISH! His boyfriend is already out to his family who are similarly not merely Sicilian, but SICILIAN! The two families must learn to accept each other as the boys look to not only to live a life together, but to do so as adoptive fathers. 

Comments: 

The acting and production are more or less okay, but over all the movie is not so much more or less okay as much as it's boring. 

Boring for a couple of reasons. It is not merely an "I'm both gay and ethnic and ain't that a hoot" comedy, but one doubled, so that both gay guys have over the top families allowing for a lot of over the top ethnic jokes, and frankly there's a very low limit to how many Jewish and/or Italian jokes can be chucked at the audience before it gets monotonous. 

The other issue pushing it towards dullness is that the focus of the movie is primarily on the Jewish parents, dealing with the "shock" of their son being gay. What did we do wrong? How could he do this to us? My son better be the "man" of the relationship!  How will my gay son affect my social standing in the community? Why is he choosing to embarrass me this way? The usual predictable stuff, that has been rehashed repeatedly in this type of movie to the point where I could not be bothered to care about anything happening on screen anymore 

Women: 

Several 

People of color: 

Not really 

Gratuitous nudity 

No

• Director: Evgeny Afineevsky
• Writers: Evgeny Afineevsky, Menahem Golan
• Actors: John Lloyd Young, Jai Rodriguez, Lainie Kazan, Saul Rubinek
• 90 min
• IMDB

Hawaii (Argentina 2013)

The Gist:

Martin has returned from Uruguay to his old hometown in Argentina to spend the summer before his job in Buenos Aires begins. Unfortunately through circumstances beyond his control he ends up homeless. While looking for temp work he meets Eugenio, an old childhood friend who is house sitting the home he grew up in while writing a novel. Eugenio offers Martin work and as summer rolls on they reconnect. 

Comments: 

It seems that while many people love the movie and think it excellent, there is a vocal minority who find it dull and pretentious. Some because it takes a calm slower pace to tell its story of two men bonding. I don't agree with this position, but I do understand it. The complaint I don't quite get is from people annoyed that the two leads do not immediately leap on top of each other and play out a "sexing up the hired help" gay porn scenario.

Frankly it's a better movie because of this. Instead of immediate satisfaction, we have the equivalent of fore play. Actually that isn't quite right. The feeling of the movie is more pre-fore play. It's intentionally extending the moment right before you touch a lover for the first time, when everything is possible. So despite not turning into quick and easy porn the movie is still very sensual and filled with sexual intensity and the ache of desire.

If not clear I'm one of the people who love the movie and think it is very good. The acting is excellent, the story interesting, it is well told in use of sound and dialogue and lack of dialogue. The movie does not ignore that things would not be that easy for our protagonists. There are class and socioeconomic issues they need to work through. Eugenio is an experienced upper middle class writer, while Martin, essentially an unemployed immigrant, is very much not. 

It has enough depth that it can handle multiple viewings and I think it's worth trying out. But with the qualifier that it may not be worth it if you can't deal with slower paced movies. 

Women:

Technically yes, though barely. Then again, it's a very minimal cast, little more then the two leads. A two hander as the movie folks call it.

People of Color:

Showing the oddity of this category (or at least the oddity of what exactly Latino can mean) if this were an "American" (i.e. USA) movie, I'd be inclined to count the cast as Latino and say yes. But given the movie is Argentinean, I'd still count the cast as Latino and say no. 

Gratuitous nudity:

There is some slight nudity, but given the way the movie is filmed and the story told, I would argue that it is not gratuitous.

• Director: Marco Berger
• Writer: Marco Berger
• Actors: Manuel Vignau, Mateo Chiarino
• 102 min 
• Spanish (Argentine / South American Spanish, so slightly different than the Spanish most North Americans, at least those of us in California or the Southwest, are used to)
• IMDB