A trans tale like few others -- Jeanie Finlay's SEAHORSE: THE DAD WHO GAVE BIRTH

Since the movie under review here is a documentary, rather than science fiction, readers can pretty quickly figure out that SEAHORSE: THE DAD WHO GAVE BIRTH must indeed involve a woman who transgenders to a man and then, even so, gives birth to a baby. Although the film most reminded me of a 1968 play by Colin Spencer, Spitting Image, that my ex-wife and I saw in New York City back in 1969, it is indeed a piece of non-fiction that tracks the decision by this then-30-year-old male named Freddy McConnell, to first be inseminated via the sperm of an unknown donor and then carry to term and give birth to her/his own child.

As produced, directed and with some footage shot by Jeanie Finlay (shown at left), the documentary moves pleasantly along, skirting much depth or profundity, and even seeming to prefer not to get close to anything dark or negative.

Although we get some of Freddy's family history, and meet his mom and step-dad ("Mom's an extrovert who's got this family of introverts," he tells us with a smile), it would appear, from what we see and learn here, that McConnell has so far had a pretty easy time of transgendering.

He does want to keep news of his pregnancy from leaking out to the town in which he and his family live. Oh, yes: And the young man -- one C J -- with whom Freddy was to share and raise this child suddenly backs out of the arrangement for reasons we never learn. Other than all that, though, things are going swimmingly.

It takes about half the film before Freddy finally gets pregnant. From that point, he is besieged by morning (or, as he calls it, "all-day") sickness, the usual bizarre hormonal changes brought on by pregnancy, a little self-doubt countered by his mom's encouragement (that's she, below, right), and finally the reappearance of C J, whom now, we are told, is going to be the new family's faithful friend.

It's not that we necessarily want to learn more negatives here. God knows, most trans folk have enough of those in their lives already. But the nagging question, "Who are these people?" crops up often enough in this relatively short movie that its insistence on bouncing along the surface becomes more and more annoying. Post his child's birth (in water), all seems well once again for Freddy, his new family and his old.

All has not gone quite as Mr. McConnell migh have wished, however. The movie does not go into any of this, but if you would like to learn more, you can click here and peruse an article from Britain's newspaper, The Guardian, at which Mr. McConnell worked as a journalist.

Visually speaking, Ms Finlay gives us a nice look at a duck gathering material for a nest plus a few too many shots of birds flying (freedom, you know) and that titular seahorse, the species in which it is the male who does the birthing.

From 1091 and running just 86 minutes, Seashore: The Dad Who Gave Birth will be available -- to rent or buy -- via digital or VOD this coming Tuesday, June 16.

Lucas Heyne's MOPE takes you behind-the-scenes at a dismally low-end porn studio

Said to be based on a real-life incident (don't watch the trailer unless you want just about every piece of important information given away in advance), MOPE, the 2019 film that made its debut at last year's Sundance festival (do they accept every movie submitted these days?), directed and co-written by Lucas Heyne, enters a world of (and spends way too much time with) depraved and stupid people acting in depraved and stupid ways.

Other than that, however, the film is just about as entertaining and edifying as you might expect.

Mr. Heyne, pictured at left, has failed to find the right (or much of any) tone for his film, resulting in its appearing to go over the top in terms of character, plot and performance -- and then stay that way throughout. Which makes the whole thing a lot less enjoyable or endurable than we might prefer.

Even the refusal to show any full frontal (in a film about the porn industry yet!) seems a weak and unnecessary cop-out. We do get one disembodied shot of a cock via video screen; otherwise, the main tool of porn remains consistently and prudishly just out of range, even and especially when the characters disrobe.

Our two main characters, Tom (played by Kelly Sry, above, left) and Steve (played by Nathan Stewart-Jarrett, above, right) initially seem like oddball slackers given to watching porn and imagining that they could become -- despite their much-commented-upon, small-sized sexual equipment -- major porn stars. What they are and will stay are mopes, which the movie defines at the outset as "bottom-tier porn performers who do the dirtiest, most depraved work in the business."

Indeed they do, but it is all neither as ugly (except for the initial scene in which a porn actress gets jizzed on by a large group of mostly unpleasant-looking men) nor as amusing as the filmmakers may have hoped. From time to time the movie's funny, in a black, bleak, sometimes ironic manner, but because that tone keeps fidgeting from one mood to another to another, as our would-be idiot heroes keep tripping over themselves in the dumbest ways possible, any sympathy built up quickly dissipates, while the comedy fizzles and/or the would-be drama goes sideways. Until, that is, the blood-letting begins. And that, one suspects, is the reason this movie got greenlit.

The film's biggest "star" is David Arquette (above), playing a successful porn director whom our boys con into imagining they have something to offer him, but once his couple of scenes are over, this character disappears. The real star here is an actor named Brian Huskey (below), whom I've seen multiple times during his long and fertile career, but until now, he has not had a role big enough to grab my attention. He certainly does here, playing the seedy, creepy lowest-of-the-low-end porn producer who is happy to use our two nitwits until one of them proves too much for even the likes of him. Mr. Huskey does wonders with the role.

As do the other actors on view. In fact, these good performances somewhat make up for the problematic concept, script and direction on view. As in porno in general, the women's roles are merely for show and for servicing the guys, though the actresses certainly do what they can with the material. The saddest role goes to Tonya Cornelisse as the late-in-the-game, addict girlfriend of Steve.

As the increasingly nutty Steve, Mr. Stewart-Jarrett is believable moment to moment, yet the script makes him so beyond-the-pale so soon and so often that it is difficult to believe anyone would put up with this guy for nearly as long as they do. It is, finally, Mr. Sry who brings what caring and heart that Mope can manage. He makes Tom the only remotely "good" guy on view: kindly, helpful, and even -- in the realm of technology, at least -- intelligent.

And then the dismal script has him, in an "inspirational" moment, telling Steve, "You can do this!" "This" turns out to be leading a gang-bang on Steve's own girlfriend. Well, it's all just ironic black comedy, right? Barely.

From Quiver Distribution, Mope opens via digital streaming everywhere across the USA this Friday, June 12.

A gift for gay pride month: Daniel Karslake & Nancy Kennedy's superlative documentary, FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO

Tackling the little-seen subject (among several here) of a "good" and highly religious couple who end up placing their religion and their idea of "god" above that of the welfare of their child, FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO -- anyone whose religious life included heavy study of the Bible's new testament will immediately know where those words come from (for those who don't, this is explained near the finale) -- offers up an extremely cogent and moving study of family relations when that family includes children who are on the GLBT spectrum.

As directed and co-written by Daniel Karslake (shown at right) and co-written and edited by Nancy Kennedy (below), the documentary covers four very different families -- different not only in their choice of religion but in how they respond to the needs of their children.

While they do the best they can, the results are very different, and the choice of these four families by the filmmakers proves to be both inspired and inspiring -- and in one case almost unbearably moving.

In two cases, the child in question is merely gay, in the other two he/she is transgendered. That TrustMovies uses the word "merely"  above makes further plain to him how far the GLBT movement has come during his lifetime, as well as making clear the still enormous difference (and continuing struggle) between being accepted as gay, lesbian or bisexual and being so as a transgendered human. The move does not beat this idea to death, but it does make certain that the viewer is aware and appreciative of it.

The film begins by introducing us to the Robertsons, Linda and Rob, first as young marrieds (above) who are deeply involved in their Evangelical Christian church, and later as a family with four fine children, one of whom, Ryan, lets them know during his early teen years, that he is gay.

We soon meet the Porchers (above) and the McBrides (below), both of whose offspring eventually becomes transgendered. The stories told here are as much about the effects and reactions of this "otherness" on the parents as on the kids themselves. Which is as it should be, since it is the parents who exert the most control over their children and can force the situation into something they may regret for life.

Since most viewers will not be familiar with the gay and trans children shown here, or for that matter with their parents (I was not, at least), the filmmakers wisely lay out the stories in a smart narrative form. What we learn about these families -- in one case, as with the Baez-Febos family, shown below, and the major event that their child becomes a part of -- consistently surprises us and often pulls us up short. We get a lot more than the merely "expected" here. The purpose of this documentary may be to change the viewpoint of as many people as possible, but the manner in which it does this is exemplary: it never raises its voice but still consistently draws us in.

The filmmakers clearly knew how to gain the trust of their subjects, and they in no way betray that trust. They also know how to film professionally; their movie is a pleasure to view. Consequently, we're immersed into all these lives (that's the Porchers' son Elliot, below),

but especially into the lives of that couple we first met, the Robertsons (shown below as their older selves). Their story, of a family so torn between fundamentalist religion and love for their son that they make decisions -- like conversion therapy -- that will impact everything, forever.

We've already seen a number of films, both docs and narratives, dealing with the impact of this conversion therapy on the kids who went through it. It's a rare one, however, that gives us the parental viewpoint -- and does it so thoroughly and so well. While what the Robertsons have to answer for may be a terrible burden, what they are doing with this burden proves a wondrous thing.

This month will see a ton of GLBT offerings released for the yearly Gay Pride time. If any one of these is better -- more important, inclusive and hugely moving -- than For They Know Not What They Do, I shall be surprised. (Among the advocates -- for the open and kindly type of religion offered by certain figures such as Jesus of Nazareth -- interviewed in the film are, above, Bishop Gene Robinson and, below, Reverend Dr. Jacqui Lewis.)

From First Run Features and running a succinct 92 minutes, the documentary hits virtual theaters this Friday, June 12. Click here and scroll down to visit the various theaters nationwide and to learn how you can view the film. 

NOTE: This film wil appear on DVD, iTunes 

and Amazon VOD September 15, 2020

Nudity, sex, dance (and a little psychology) combine in Boaz Yakin's unusual fim, AVIVA

If I can help it, I will never miss a film by Boaz Yakin. This fascinating, accomplished director and writer (not always within the same film) has given us a raft of good movies, with each of his directorial efforts in a different genre. What his films have in common, seems to me, is their placing an outsider at the center and having him/her eventually -- often at great, if not pyrrhic, cost -- win the day. His latest, AVIVA, as per usual, is not simply in another genre; it mashes up several into something that seems pretty much sui generis.

Mr. Yakin, shown at right (some years back), is always as interested in content as in visuals, but Aviva may be the most visual of all his films, even if not nearly his best.

There's a stunning shot of hands on mugs on a table early on followed by several of the kind of memorable images that, when you think of this film later on, you will probably call to mind -- one of which appears just below. (His cinematographer this time around is Arseni Khachaturan, with film editing by Holle Singer.)

For a good while during this film, thanks to everything from the very hot looking men and women, the copious amounts of nudity (often male and full-frontal, prudes be warned), the sex scenes, the openness to both hetero-and homosexuality and the enormous contribution of dance (much of it quite good) to the film, this seemed to TrustMovies to be the most fun he has had at the movies all year. Then, somewhere around the midway point, repetition begins to set in (along with the nagging sense that there is less here, content-wise, than meets the eye and mind), and Aviva comes subsequently only fitfully to life. Though when it does, it can still prove pretty magical, off and on.

The problem, to my mind, is that the movie's strengths and weaknesses go hand in hand with its director's own, because, I suspect, this film is giving us Yakin's own story and struggle. Although there are four actors credited with playing, sort of, two roles -- that of the titular Aviva (both the female and male versions) and Eden (again, the male and female) -- really, I think, these are all just sides of Yakin himself, who wrote and directed the piece and who is clearly struggling with identity, sexuality, commitment, growth and all the rest of it. (Who of us is not? Though some of us maybe don't realize this yet.)

The biggest problem here is that Yakin seems to identify most, and understandably so, with the male version of Eden (played by a most attractive and nicely hung actor/dancer named Tyler Phillips, above, who is making his movie debut) and who has to deal throughout with a kind of hang-dog attitude in which guilt, coupled to the inability to rise above this and grow up, leads to his growing tiresome and beginning to bore the bejesus out of us. He waffles and he wavers and he can't commit and he's pretty much of an asshole, overall.

While the female Eden, played by Bobbi Jene Smith (above, center left) rather echoes her male counterpart, Ms Smith at least supplied the choreography and some of the fine dancing, she also supplies a lot more energy and pizzazz than does Mr. Phillips, and so watching her is not such a drag. She, along with her companion and co-choreographer Or Schraiber (see below) also appeared together in the 2017 documentary, Bobbi Jene.

The title role, female version is essayed by an attractive and appealing Russian-born actress, Zina Zinchenko (above), while the male version is played by hottie, dancer and co-choreographer (the aforementioned Mr. Schraiber, below), who brings a vast quantity of sex appeal and dance knowledge to the proceedings. (Don't worry if all these sexes and characters seem confusing. Eventually they run together into a kind of sameness, some of which is no doubt intentional on the part of Yakin; the rest of it simply follows.)

Dance is just about everywhere here, and sex is, too. (To his great credit, the filmmaker does not stint on the homo over the supposedly more important role of the hetero, the point being that it is all one.) The production design is spectacular, with locations in Paris, New York and Los Angeles. Unfortunately, the word love is tossed about so carelessly and often that you'll realize the filmmaker -- like so many of us -- is perhaps vamping, while he learns the meaning of the word.

And when, toward the end, a character screams out, "Please! We can't do this anymore," you'll probably agree. At a near two-hour running time, shorter would have been better. Particularly when that male version of Eden is, to use Bill Maher's description of Donald Trump, such a "whiny little bitch." Still, as with just about everything Yakin has given us, when it's good, it is so good, that I would watch it all over again.

From Outsider Pictures and Strand Releasing, Aviva, in all its too-long glory, will hit virtual theaters this coming Friday, June 12. Click here and then scroll down to find the virtual theaters across the country in which the film will play. (There will be a free live-stream Q&A on Saturday, June 13; Sunday June 14; and Saturday, June 20. Click here for more information.)

HOMO-SAY-WHAT: Craig Bettendorf's and Kai Morgan's brief look at anti-gay descrimination

The title of this new documentary is said to come from an old joke told in school, in which one guy mumbles "homo say what?" to the patsy, and he (probably) answers back the expected, "What?" -- thus confirming to the rest of the crowd that, yes, he's a .... homosexual! Wow. That's some real funny fun.

TrustMovies is not certain why the makers of this doc -- writer/director Craig Bettendorf (shown below, right) and producer/actor/ interviewee Kai Morgan (below, left) chose this to be the oddball title of their film, other than it is yet another example of the anti-gay bias built up over decades in social, religious and political circles here in the USA (and in most countries throughout the world).

The press release for the film explains to us that "Homophobia didn't just happen. Orchestrated campaigns by cultural institutions and public figures have systematically instilled anti-LGBTQ prejudice into American culture by shaping public opinion." Well, yes. That, along with the near-worldwide culture of "macho" that pushes the innate fear of so many "straight" and "semi-straight" men as being perceived as gay into some kind of overdrive. There are reasons for this that precede and go beyond these "orchestrated campaigns."

Still, it is always interesting and anger-making to see that old Southern California stand-by for shit-faced homophobia -- newscaster and would-be guide to culture and morality, George Putnam (below) -- doing his typical stand-up tragedy that now seems so outdated as to be (almost) funny. So the documentary gives us Putnam on the right-wing and Keith Olbermann (two photos below) as a balance on the left.

Mr. Olbermann offers the doc's high point, as he righteously and movingly calls out those California voters who approved the now infamous Proposition 8, asking them to think about, please, the idea of love as a corrective to their actions. Otherwise, the doc covers the usual old-fashioned excuses for anti-gay rhetoric, from homosexuals as predators, murderers, sadists and general corruptors to those who would gladly destroy the sacred American family and its "values."

As a kind of stand-in for us in the audience, the doc offers up three gay men, one young fellow who seem awfully naive and not very well spoken, another young guy who's is less naive and better spoken, and one older man who has clearly been around block politically and in most other ways. These three comment from time to time on what we/they have seen and heard.

From those 1950s "Social Guidance" films to today's anti-gay video games, the movie tries to cover a lot but still manages to be somewhat repetitive, though it is always good to be reminded of what a treasure is historian/playwright Martin Duberman (above) and to hear that now-departed right-wing hypocrite Jerry Fallwell (below) ramble on nastily and stupidly. Some things never change.

One very good thing that the doc points out is how so-called homophobia is less an actual fear than it is a kind of pleasure and thrill that so many straight men find in tormenting men they believe to be gay. Bullying might be the more appropriate term. From Cinema Libre Studio and running just 76 minutes and appearing no doubt for Gay Pride month, Homo-Say-What hit the street on DVD and streaming (via Amazon and Vimeo) this past Tuesday, June 2 -- for purchase and/or rental.

STOP TRUMP -- and the rest of the current Republican Party. There is no other way.

Historically -- and I mean in the span of my near-80-year lifetime, at least -- the Republican Party (despite whatever it may have been at its birth) has stood for the white, the wealthy and the powerful over the weak, the working class, the poor and the non-white. This attitude has not changed but has simply grown stronger and more obvious as decades passed.

Now, with the ascension/devolution of Donald Trump, a man who, during his entire career, has proved himself a bully, bigot, coward, crook, fool and fraud, along with the hypocritical help of the Republican-led Senate and Supreme Court, the USA has hit the nadir of its very checkered, two-centuries-plus past. Prior to our current Corona-virus era, we had already reached a point at which full-time employment for the masses did not ensure anything close to a living wage.

This current time of lockdown, sickness and death provides an even greater opportunity for the members of the Republican Party to increase their wealth and power, and of course they are going at it like wild dogs in a feeding frenzy.  U.S. citizens can vote these worthless (except for their wealth, of course) sleazebags out of power only if we actually have an unfettered right to vote, which is looking less and less likely with all the voter restrictions now in place, with more being added ASAP.

If we cannot vote them out, they must be thrown out by any means necessary. The New Republic magazine features a most interesting article by Osita Nwanevu in its March issue. The article is titled MAKE IT STOP, accompanied by the following description: In order to save our democracy, we must not merely defeat the GOP -- we have to abolish it. That was how the print version of the magazine put it. Interestingly, the online version, which is all that's available now, plays the description in this abbreviated form: In order to save our democracy, we must not merely defeat the Republican Party. Did someone at TNR get cold feet?

In any case, the article is worth reading, and what it says is quite true, though I wish Mr. Nwanevu had come out more strongly for progressive Democrats over those of the "centrist" persuasion -- who have done the country and the party more damage than good over the past decades since the Reagan administration, leading us -- thanks to the centrists' refusal to stand up to corporations and Wall Street/Banking -- into such frustration and anger (along with stupidity) from the populace that we now have Trump to contend with.

OK: TrustMovies realizes that never in our history has a genuine progressive Presidential candidate -- from Henry A. Wallace through Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren -- been allowed to run for that office. Corporate power, Wall Street and the banks simply will not tolerate this. (Barack Obama and Joe Biden are about as progressive as my Republican uncle, which is why the former was allowed to run, while the latter is actively encouraged to do so.) Concerned citizens keep trying, but an electorate that has, at this point, been turned into little more than consumers of entertainment (never more so than now, during this pandemic) is no match for the nastiness and cunning of the Republican right.

The current demonstrations against the ending of black lives by police, once these devolve into looting, are less than worthless politically (I have updated this post as of June 22 to say how thankful I am that the looting has stopped and was only a small portion of the current ongoing protest), while the effort to somehow separate black protesters from white seems utterly pointless. Identifying ANTIFA from fake-ANTIFA is well-nigh impossible, too, given the current state of news reporting in print, on TV or via the Internet.

So what do we do? If enough of us are not allowed to vote, then we either go sheeplike to our very slow slaughter, or we rise up and take power by force. How? If I were younger, braver and smarter, I might have a clue, along with the strength necessary to put that into action. But surely some folk out there have one. If so, please use it.

What I can do at this point is use my blog to make a statement. It may be paltry but it's all I have. So there it is. And, yes, I'll be back to movies and entertainment tomorrow or maybe the next day....

Dreya Weber excels in Ned Farr's tale of airborne friends and family, THE AERIALIST

The team of Dreya Weber and Ned Farr have made several films together: The Gymnast, A Marine Story and now, THE AERIALIST, which is the first of three I've managed to see. If the other two are as good as this one, I'll have to take a look. It's always a wonderful surprise when a movie you've agreed to watch (but are not expecting much of) turns out to be not merely OK but a lot more than that.

Mr. Farr (shown at right), who wrote and directed the film and also served as its editor, has done a terrific job of assembling all the parts of what is basically a backstage drama involving a group of backup dancers/ aerialists for a highly successful singer known as Aurora.

We don't meet Aurora until the film is nearly over, yet her importance and power hangs heavily over everything and everyone -- especially over Jane (played by Ms Weber) -- the older woman in charge of these backup dancers/flyers and herself a major performer, who we learn from the film's first scene is experiencing the failure of her body to hold up to the demands of her job.

Concurrently, there's an overly snoopy reporter (Morgan Bradley, above) intent on getting a tell-all interview with Jane, along with what looks like something even more personal.

Meanwhile, Aurora's always-in-the-shade daughter Paloma (Victoria Meade, above, center) who is supposed to act as her mother's voice during rehearsal, continues to give the troupe problems, which are only squared by the arrival of a fellow named Xavier (Kelly Marcus, below), a sleazy young man suddenly hired to "run" the troupe, while sowing further dissension among its ranks.

How all this is handled proves surprisingly cogent, sometimes funny and often moving -- thanks to the acting (from everyone on board), and the writing and direction that rarely underscores, instead using a relatively light hand and enough subtlety to keep us moving quickly, enjoyably along. Even if you easily figure out where the reporter's story is headed (as I did), this ought not become a problem because there is so much else going on to keep you involved and caring.

The film's ace-in-the-hole, however, is Ms Weber (above and below), who possesses a face that Farr, his cameraman (Alexandre Naufel) and we simply love. Happy, sad, active and/or in performance, pain or repose, she is riveting -- with not one unbelievable moment in the entire proceedings. She is, as they say, a natural: strong, graceful and above all real.

Thankfully, the actual dance performance and aerial work we see seems to TrustMovies to be exactly the right amount. It's fun and sometimes beautiful but doesn't run on long enough to stop the story in its tracks. By the finale of the The Aerialist, you may find yourself saying aloud to each other, as we did, "Wow -- this was good!"

Distributed by Indie Rights, the movie -- running 102 minutes -- hits digital streaming this Friday, June 5, via Amazon. Click here for further information.