To Be Takei (2014): It's OK to be Takei's Autobiography

To Be Takei (2014)
dir: Bill Weber, Jennifer M Kroot

SIFF 2014 Film #23

George Takei is one of those stars who has known how to continually adapt and build his brand. He has changed several times over the years, and his brand has always seemed to be honest, which makes him one of the best, most ingenious, stars of our generation. To Be Takei commemorates George Takei in all his fabulous glory, and it's almost exactly what you'd expect from one of the biggest stars on Facebook.

Takei's life began as a kid in California, when at a very young age his whole family was sent to a Japanese internment camp during WWII. From those humble beginnings, Takei made his way into Hollywood, starred in a beloved tv series, became a politician, became a movie star, became an internet star, then became the producer and writer of a musical about the Japanese internment camp. To Be Takei tackles all of these subjects taking us behind the scenes of the brand of George Takei to give us a bit more of the personal than we usually get, just like in most of these commemorative films.

To Be Takei serves as a life chronicle, a career retrospective, a commercial for Takei's new musical Allegiance, a bit of life with George and Brad (George Takei's husband), and a call for gay rights. Crammed into 90 minutes, To Be Takei never really delves too deeply to penetrate much more than the surfaces of anything, including the Japanese internment (for that, you'll have to see Allegiance), but does pass the time aimably enough. Even the warts and all approach amounts to George ribbing everybody about their weight, and Brad semi-adorably worrying and kvetching about everything in order to keep the brand happy and rolling. Brad serves as George's manager as well as lover, and he seems happy about that.

It's hard to be disappointed in To Be Takei as it has so many topics to cover, and does it all entertainingly, but the surface-level lack of depth to any of the topics still disappoints, especially when it comes to either of the really tough topics: internment camps and coming out. Takei didn't publicly come out until after Prop 8 in 2008, but had been dating Brad since 1989(ish). Yet, he doesn't delve into how he stayed in the closet for so long, what he thought of that, and how it affected him. The gay rights topic gets about as much time as the Shatner "feud." The bulk of the film seems to be the internment camp, but much of it is as more informational than completely emotional. It's also separated out into sections as a recurring thread throughout the film, thus never breaking out into a full-on weepy section of depth.

If you really want to know what's on Takei's mind in what he wants to project to the world, To Be Takei is like an OK star-autobiography. Not that long, slightly self-effacing, no real dirt on anybody, and a good summary of a life, but not deep enough to truly get to know the subject (or, alternately, for the star to bury themselves in). It's crowd-pleasing and winning, just like Takei himself, but can I help it if I really wanted more?

The Circle (2014): The History of Gay, Swiss Edition

The Circle (2014)
(aka Der Kreis)
dir: Stefan Haupt

SIFF 2014 Film #20

I'm guilty of being America-centric when it comes to my knowledge of gay history. I know a lot about the history of being gay in America, including pre-Stonewall, and I know about Germany's infamous Paragraph 175 (which has a good documentary, btw). But, I had never heard about Der Kreis (The Circle), a magazine of gay fiction/erotica and photography that also served as a communication underground.

In Switzerland, being gay wasn't illegal. But, it was still frowned upon. Being outed as a homosexual could end your career, and also bring around harassment. But, still, one could distribute material in plain brown envelopes, as long as it passed the censors, and one could throw big gay balls that were seasonal gay megaparties.

To give the history of The Circle a human element, and also to demonstrate how this is not the complete story, Haupt infused the movie with a romance between two men, Rapp and Ostertag, who met at a ball one night, where Rapp was performing as a drag queen. They fell in love, and their relationship sustained the years as they're the characters telling the story in modern times.

Haupt made The Circle with a structure of blending docudrama recreations and actual modern day interviews of Rapp and Ostertag, filling in some of the holes with other interviews of journalists, family members and ex lovers of people who were part of The Circle. The recreations take up the bulk of the film, but the interviews are fascinating, especially since Rapp and Ostertag are two of the cutest 80-year-old gay men you could ever meet.

The Circle goes through the full story of The Circle, from how it was started all the way through how it was destroyed by constant harassment from the police after a series of murders rocked the gay community. While there is probably a certain amount of dramatic license taken, Haupt wisely uses the interviews to keep the maudlin dramatics grounded in reality. There are police beatings, and suicides, and harassment, all of which are representative of larger movements in the gay lifestyle at the time.

The balance between the modern talking heads and the maudlin dramatics really gives The Circle a freshness that few docudramas and period pieces have ever reached. The importance of The Circle is highlighted by the tale of survival of the two talking heads. The weight of the situation is balanced by the sweetness. But, really, the interview/re-enactment format is taken to new levels in The Circle, feeling like the an answer to the new dilemma of Fact/Fiction/Faction in the documentary genre.

Mr Angel (2013): Coming to Terms

Mr Angel (2013)
dir: Dan Hunt

Buck Angel is an FTM transexual porn star. He has had top surgery and is also on male hormones, but he refuses to get bottom surgery due to cost and pointlessness. He asks, at one point in the documentary, Why sacrifice a perfectly good vagina and $50k just to have a penis that doesn't even work like a real one? In a sense, this type of blunt acknowledgement with little respect for Political Correctness is indicative of the tone that Mr. Angel takes on.

Dan Hunt is tasked with creating a glossy profile of Buck Angel that is based in a blunter reality than usual for such a singular profile. He follows Buck Angel's attempts to succeed in the porn world as a man with a vagina. He goes through Buck's childhood, and his troubled history without questioning anything about Buck's choices. Much like Red Without Blue, we're meant to take Buck Angel's self-attitude for its face value without asking too many of the deeper questions.

When Angel was younger, he was a bit of a tomboy and then a bit of a drug addict hellfire who conducted emotional warfare on his family before even realizing that he really wanted to be a manly man. Then he came out to his deeply religious and gender role-conforming family, and...then he becomes a man, a porn star and an activist for the trans community.

There's a lot in this film that Dan Hunt and Buck Angel unpack, but there's a lot left unasked. Buck Angel at one point practically blames his father for making him want to be a boy because his father played with him as if he was a boy. Doing sports stuff, and allowing him to do boyish things socially, except when they went to church where he had to return to his feminine clothing. But, at another he says that this is natural and normal and people are made this way.

At one point, he says "I don't blame my parents. They didn't know what they were doing to me as a kid." And, it's almost a crutch to show how he got so heavily into modeling and drugs as a younger woman. And, then how he saw the manly men and decided that's what he wanted to be, and set out to be one. But, just kept the vagina.

At another point, Hunt is interviewing Angel's parents, and they're trying to put on their accepting face but it's clear they still aren't OK with it. They still see Buck as their daughter. But, how much of that distrust for his identity was caused by the havoc he wrecked as a drug addict and alcoholic is left unasked. This isn't therapy and we're not connecting all of the dots here.

The main difference between Mr Angel and Red Without Blue is that Buck Angel is setting out to be an activist and wants to be a role model. In Red Without Blue, the characters really would rather be living their life in private. Buck Angel is an even more problematic character than anybody in Red Without Blue. Not because of the porn. But because of his past traumas, and it seems fairly obvious that he isn't quite out of the woods in terms of his mental anguish. He's still processing his childhood in various ways. His sister, also interviewed, hasn't reconciled herself with Buck's new maleness, and is skeptical of his new found trans identity. His mom wants to embrace it because Buck is trying to do something good, she guesses.

Mr Angel is by no means a completed film, as most biopics of an ongoing, living person aren't. But, Dan Hunt seems to think that by showing the issues that trans people have to face when they're coming out he's doing something good. But, there is no unpacking going on. At times, Hunt starts diving into traditional gender roles, and genderqueer topics. But, he dives right back out of them.

It's a frustratingly surface movie about a person who changed his surface in order to reflect the tumultuous interior with which he lives. It frequently attempts to dive deeper, but very rarely succeeds. I wish there were more to this film, with more trust being built causing the subjects to break their own masks. But, everybody keeps their masks pretty in tact while the cameras are rolling, doing nobody any favors.

Beyond Hatred (2005): Removing the Core

The scene of the crime...maybe?

Beyond Hatred (2005)
dir: Olivier Meyrou

In American society, there has been a movement to eradicate the names of the criminals in order to focus on the crimes without creating a cult of celebrity. It challenges that the names of the various killers are more famous than the victims of the crimes, and that the fame that surrounds these claims makes being a criminal more desirable, as the crime will be forever attached to your name.

In Beyond Hatred, Olivier Meyrou has eliminated the last names of the criminals from the crime in order to focus more on the crime and the emotions of the aftermath.

The crime? Three French skinheads killed a gay guy in a park. They beat him severely, mostly in the face, then, thinking he was dead, threw him over a bridge into a pond. The victim was Francois Chenu, age 29.

Meyrou starts the story 2 years after the crime. He doesn't reveal what the crime is for a little while. He doesn't reveal who is speaking, ever. No names or titles are ever used in the film. And, the whole film is designed in order to focus on the family and the aftermath. Meyrou doesn't even focus on the victim, giving his life little more notice than stating he was out and proud, and called his attackers cowards as he was being beaten. There isn't much time for memories. Nor even who Francois Chenu was.

Meyrou nebulizes the case into a generic story in an attempt to make this about every homosexual and every Arab and every non-Skinhead who was ever attacked, beaten, or killed in France. Meyrou is attempting to show the emotional wreckage such a savage crime causes in a family.

Unfortunately, it is somewhat misguided as sometimes you wonder whether the cute guy sitting next to the woman who may be the lawyer is actually Francois' brother. Or, if you're listening to a reporter, a psychologist, or the prosecutor. Sometimes it takes very careful reading (listening if you know French) in order to discern who you are talking to at any given moment, which is completely disconcerting as you miss some of the conversation while you're trying to figure out why this person is talking, and how they fit in.

The crime seemed to be a generic crime. Three skinhead youth out looking for trouble and found it. But, Meyrou isn't concerned about the youth. Nor does he care about their life much, outside from they fell in with the wrong crowd, and one has a couple of terrible parents who also served time because of the crime. Meyrou doesn't care much about the whys of the crime, nor about its continuous proliferation in France.

Instead, Meyrou cares about the family. They tell the stories they have in their head of how the night went. Francois' sister talks about how she received 2 text messages from Francois the night of his death. She talks about how his boyfriend called her that night saying Francois never called, then never came home when he was going to a few days later. I don't think we ever meet the boyfriend either. His devastation is never known. Just the family of Francois.

The final product of Beyond Hatred is supposed to be cathartic and sad. There are several times, moreso early on, where Meyrou has let the long pauses play out to the point where the movie is almost dead. When the sister is describing the crime, there is a full minute where only five sentences are said. Short sentences. Then, there are the heavy handed cues of strings that happen in the first third of the movie that luckily don't carry over into the trial.

Beyond Hatred is a subject that deserves a defter, lighter, touch. How does a family go from losing their child in an act of violence and move past it? Even after the trial has sent away the criminals. Moving past is a necessity, but how? But, Meyrou barely even addresses that, jumping from the end of the trial to 6 months later with an open letter from the parents to the criminals. Of course, that may be because of the parents' wish to not be followed by cameras every few days or weeks, and to grieve in private. Understandable, but the final feature suffers greatly from it.

In the end, Beyond Hatred suffers from pacing problems, a lack of basic understanding on the rules of filmmaking, severe editing issues, talking head syndrome, and a confused focus that doesn't follow through on any of its topics. There are many different approaches one could have taken with Beyond Hatred, but hearing the stories third hand was not the best approach.

For My Wife... (2008): Tragedy Begets Strength

For My Wife... (2008)
dir: David Rothmiller

For My Wife... isn't subtle. It's an emotional roller coaster on a hot bed topic that has had the national spotlight for 17 years now. For My Wife... is an essential vital story that gets to the heart of the gay marriage debate.

For My Wife... opens with a tragedy. During a particularly torrential downpour in Seattle, Kate Fleming drowned in her basement. She was in her office, when a piece of the wall of the basement fell, blocking her office door, and the basement flooded. She couldn't escape. The firefighters had to use a chainsaw to cut through the floor of the bedroom she shared with her partner of 9 years, Charlene Strong.

Kate Fleming was taken to the hospital and put on life support. Her partner, Charlene Strong, was not allowed to make life decisions for her. She was told that "next of kin" or "family" had to be present to make the decisions to take Kate off life support. Charlene Strong was not allowed to say anything about the health care.

Later, during funeral arrangements, Charlene Strong was told she couldn't make arrangements for Kate Fleming.  And, finally, she was told by the funeral director that Kate's ashes could only be given to Kate's mother. Charlene had a whole litany of paperwork from their lawyer saying she was the partner, but she was dismissed outright.

Now, the casual reader might be thinking, "was this a relationship that was held in contempt of the family?  Maybe Kate's mother didn't approve?"  But, that was not the case. Kate's mother is seen in the video with Charlene visiting Kate's resting place. This was merely the the workers at the hospital, and at the funeral parlor, telling Charlene that she did not count as family.

Most people would back down from this. It's devastating to lose your partner, and then be told that you don't count. I know several people who lost their partners in the 90s, and they had to fight with their partners' families who did NOT approve of the relationship. It has to be just as bad as being told you don't count when you are approved by the family.

Thankfully, Charlene Strong did not back down. She contacted Joe McDermott, and within a couple months of her loss, she went and testified before the Washington State Senate for the rights of domestic partnership. Here in Washington State, we had a gay rights slow roll out. We started with domestic partnership which gave us a few rights, like hospital visitation. And, then gave a few more to registered partners. And, finally, we gave ourselves gay marriage.

Charlene Strong was one of the primary voices in Phase 1 of the roll out. She went before the committee and testified her story about her loss of Kate Fleming, and the emotional and legal turmoil that she went through as a result of not having the same rights as a straight married couple would have. She had been the partner for 9 years, which I really cannot stress enough. A decade is a long-ass time.

For My Wife... documents this testimony and arguments in the state house and state senate. And, it gives special note to a speech given by Senator Rosa Franklin, an older African-American woman, who gave an amazing, heartfelt, and emotional speech in support of domestic partnership. She was slow, mannered, and passionate. Unfortunately, Rothmiller didn't have enough confidence in the power of the speech and added treacly piano music to hammer home that this is landmark. But, this speech was one of the best speeches given in support of gay rights that has really been given.

And, For My Wife... continues on, showing Charlene Strong standing next to President Obama, as he signed an order to bestow hospital rights to same-sex couples. It also has a stupid song montage of Charlene traveling. And, it also has her earning a GLAAD award, where we get some rather inane chatter, including Kathy Fucking Griffin telling her co-host that she's gayer than he is.  Yeah, this adds nothing but putting Kathy Fucking Griffin in a movie that has nothing to do with her.

For My Wife... came out on DVD in 2009.  It's a short movie, clocking in at just over 60 minutes, and at the times mentioned can feel slightly excessive.  However, the movie is incomplete. It ends on the note that says that the story isn't over, especially for gay rights, which is really what this movie is about. As the movie was being made, another incident had occurred, that of Janice Langbehn and Lisa Pond. A Lacey, WA couple were vacationing with their three adopted kids in Florida when Lisa sufferred a brain hemorrage, and died. But, in the hospital, Janice and the children were barred from visiting Lisa as she died, because Janice was a lesbian. Even though she had all the proper paperwork such as power of attorney, and had the papers faxed to the hospital, it wasn't enough.

Fortunately, progress has been, and is still being made. Since the movie came out, Washington State extended marriage rights to same-sex couples through both legislation and voter initiative. By 2012, Obama had decided that his administration was no longer going to enforce DOMA, the bill from Clinton's era which explicitly defined marriage between one man and one woman. In June of this year, the department of justice struck down DOMA. And, it deferred California's Prop 8 back to the lower courts, basically saying that the earlier declaration of it being unconstitutional was just for that state.

The fight isn't over. In the US, only 14 states extend marital benefits to same sex couples. We're still fighting tooth and nail for the rights to survivorship and health visitation. We're fighting against people who think we're not right in the eyes of God, and that should be all the reason they need. We're fighting against churches who want to dictate the lives of everybody, whether they are members of that particular denomination or not.

And, the fight doesn't stop in the US. We're fighting against oppression worldwide. We're still fighting in Russia against Putin's laws. We're fighting for rights in Brazil, and for rights throughout Europe. For rights in the Middle East.

But, this movie isn't about the global fight.

For My Wife... is about one woman's loss, and the strength she found to help change her own state. And, for that, we are thankful.

Required viewing.