Showing posts with label 1980. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1980. Show all posts

1.22.2008

Antonia Franceschi in Fame (1980) - Blog for Choice Day 2008

The following is my contribution -- done StinkyLulu-style -- to Blog for Choice Day - 2008, a virtual event which asks us all to contemplate the necessity of using our vote to support the future of reproductive freedom.

This year's "Blog for Choice Day" asks that we all consider the importance of using our votes to support political candidates who are committed to preserving, fortifying and extending reproductive freedom in the United States. And when I contemplated how I might contribute a post to this event, I couldn't help but reflect on how unplanned pregnancies popped up all over the cinematic landscape in 2007. Notably, unplanned pregnancy provided the narrative impetus for the three of the most acclaimed -- in both critical and box-office terms -- comedies of the year (Knocked Up, Waitress and Juno). Yet, in a paradox that we might call "The Smushmortion Contradiction of 2007", the word abortion was nearly unmentioned in U.S. cinema. (The Romanian film 4 Weeks, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, which I have not yet had the opportunity to see, seems to an international exception proving this year's American rule). Any number of feminists have commented on this "Smushmortion Contradiction" -- see my favorite such post here -- but I found myself most interested in how the delicacy, the tentativeness, the fear with which the option of terminating a pregnancy is treated in film today, a full 1/3 century after Roe v. Wade. Indeed, this trepidation seems such a start contrast to films from the first decade after Roe, suggesting that contemporary U.S. filmmakers are trapped inside The Lake of Fire, censoring themselves for fear of controversy. Think back to some of those films of the 1980s, films which unobtrusively took for granted that the world was a better place for women when they had the option of choice: the frankness of Jennifer Jason Leigh's character arc in Fast Times at Ridgemont High; the terror of the botched abortion in Dirty Dancing; and the character arc performed by...


...Antonia Franceschi in Fame (1980).
approximately 6 minutes and 51 seconds
8 scenes

roughly 5% of film's total running time

Antonia Franceschi plays Hilary Van Doren, a rich white girl who lands (at the beginning of "Sophomore Year") in the midst of the multicultural urban swirl of the New York City's High School for the Performing Arts.

Franceschi's Hilary is a gifted dancer, who brandishes her racial and economic privilege with weary cruelty. She hates her stepmother, reveres her absent mother, and seems intent on being a "bad girl" ostensibly to get the attention of her distracted father.

The film tells us little of Hilary's backstory (though it seems safe to assume that she's been kicked out of any number of "better" schools than Performing Arts).

Franceschi's performance operates in slow reveal. When we first see her, gossiping in ballet class, she seems like just another dancing princess. But within a quick set of dialog-while-dancing scenes, Franceschi begins to show that her Hilary is neither a delicate ballerina nor a talentless rich bitch.

Rather, she's a badass on pointe.

Franceschi's Hilary seduces the film's "wicked" Leroy and, without condescension, Franceschi clues us in that Hilary's erotic rebellion against her Park Avenue privilege is complicated. As Franceschi's Hilary chatters about herself while escorting Leroy through the fanciest building he's ever been in, Franceschi begins to show that behind that bravado of a white girl who can banter with the black girls ("yes, but who wants diabetes") stands a young woman not sure whether she's loved.

And the slow reveal of Franceschi's performance is echoed in the character's longest, simplest and most memorable scene.

Director Alan Parker frames Franceschi's Hilary in a long shot, showing her sitting in a chair at the base of an opulent staircase. As the character rattles about her difficult decision to accept a position in a West Coast ballet company, rationalizing and justifying and explaining the sacrifice, his camera slowly climbs in toward her in a single shot. Franceschi's Hilary continues to talk about her dreams as a dancer and, as she details her fantasies about the legendary roles "just coming out of her feet," emotions well to the surface of Franceschi's face, its adolescent angles highlighting Hilary's vulnerability and isolation.
And in one of the great "gotchas" of American melodrama (I've seen the scene literally hundreds of times and it invariably squeezes my heart every time), the camera's first look away from Franceschi's Hilary is to a woman in a starched nurse's cap, followed by Hilary's reveal: "There's just no room for a baby." To which the nurse, not unkindly, asks whether she'll be paying with MasterCharge or AmericanExpress. Only then does the film settle into an acknowledgment that Hilary's pregnant, probably by Leroy, and is now deciding to terminate the pregnancy. And in a flash, all that comes before resonates in an entirely different depth. (A critique of this scene -- that the film sets Hilary up as a sexually empowered girl/woman only to punish her for precisely that; that white women with resources always have access to medical procedures that poorer, browner women don't -- might be right, but there's something else in the character that, for me, is just as crucial. The film allowed me, as a Fame-obsessed teenaged sissyboy in the early 80s, to empathize with the dilemma of choice. My reaction to the character then is much like my reaction now. I remember not liking the character at all, hating her a little and fearing her a lot, until this final scene when I, for the first time, empathized with the difficulty of her decision to terminate her pregnancy. And when was the last time a mainstream US film allowed you to empathize with the challenge of choice in such a complex, humane way?)

Franceschi's raw emotional openness -- the uncertainty of her certainty that she's making the right choice for herself and her future -- is staggeringly apt for an actress in her screen debut. Franceschi's Hilary offers an astonishingly rare presentation of the emotional complexity of choice and, because I can honestly say that her character presented my first challenge to think seriously about reproductive freedom, I'm grateful that I started that journey following the terms instigated by Antonia Franceschi's performance. This brief scene is frank, simple, brutal, honest, emotional, and humane -- in short, precisely what qualities we must prioritize when having conversations about reproductive freedom. Voting to support reproductive freedom is my "voting issue", my only litmus test to determine whether or not I can or will support a candidate. As a gay man with no plans to parent, that may seem odd. But, for me, it's a no-brainer. Our choice to, or not to, procreate should not determine our value in a free society. Which is why, after this cinematic year of the Smushmortion, I am so grateful that I came to cinematic consciousness when I did, when a women's right to choose was depicted not a lake of fire but as one option along the path toward her best future.

Take a look at Antonia Franceschi's work in Fame again. It's the work of a fine young actress who's gone on to become a formidable dancer and performance artist in the UK. And consider using your vote this year to support, fortify and extend reproductive freedom.

7.07.2007

Anne Meara in Fame (1980) - The Performance That Changed My Life Blogathon

The following is my contribution to Emma's All About My Movies.: The Performance that Changed My Life blogathon.... See them all at:
After pausing only briefly to contemplate my candidates for "The Performance That Changed My Life," one performance kept stealing focus -- a fleetingly brilliant bit of work that provided some of my first cues that the actressing at the edges might be what StinkyLulu loved best about the movies. Which performance? Why, of course...


...Anne Meara in Fame (1980).

When I was a wee lil Stinky, I watched Fame over and over again, back to back to back, and then over and over again. 'Twas my movie. And possibly because I watched the film so many f'n times, Anne Meara's starkly human performance as Mrs. Sherwood -- the language arts teacher for students enrolled in NYC's High School of the Performing Arts -- burrowed deep into my consciousness.

The role of Sherwood is a quintessential "actressing at the edges" kind of part, for Sherwood is essential to Fame's dramatic arc only insofar as she amplifies the narrative thread of one of the principal characters, Leroy (Gene Anthony Ray) -- the thug-cum-dancer who can dance better than anyone but who can't read. Indeed, the character of Sherwood operates almost exclusively as Leroy's obstacle. Leroy's got the talent, but will he have the discipline and maturity to play by society's rules?

Meara's task, then, for much of the role is merely to be a formidable, hard-ass bitch-on-wheels. Meara's Sherwood cuts Leroy no slack and backs down from few confrontations, requiring Leroy to make the bed in which he must lay. She snarks on Leroy -- humiliates him even -- in front of the class, refusing to buckle even when he explodes in a kinetic blaze of profanity and violence.

Until of course the kicker scene. When Leroy (suddenly terrified that his grade in English might actually be important now that his invitation to join a major dance company is contingent on his successful graduation from high school) seeks Meara's Sherwood out at the hospital where her husband is undergoing some unnamed "serious" procedure. Meara's Sherwood is at first firm but dismissive when faced with this self-involved student come, to the hospital, for a little friendly grade grubbing. Then when Leroy pushes on her, accusing her of having it in for him, Meara's Sherwood explodes with sheer, agonizing fury. Her rebuttal ("Don't you kids ever think of anyone but yourself!?) stops Leroy cold, allowing him to show Sherwood a quiet gesture of empathy and consideration (thus completing his character's final step in his overcoming her as obstacle).

In most ways, Meara's Sherwood is a thanklessly supporting performance. Everything she does is in support of Leroy's character arc. But Meara mines every moment for its depth, humanity and humor. The accent, the timing, the shrieking vocality -- Meara uses it all to convey the simple fact that this woman is really good at her job and Leroy is but one of her more difficult pupils. She's neither the saintly superteacher, nor the inhuman gorgon. She's just a teacher in the NY Public School system trying to get through another day.

But what changed StinkyLulu's life was noticing the silent, stealthy intricacies of Meara's performance as Sherwood. Meara textures Sherwood's screaming fits with wordless silent moments. The flash of fear rippling her stern facade when Leroy physically erupts. The heart buckling devastation when Leroy tears into her with the oblique epithet "You people..."

Meara's performance provided one of StinkyLulu's first real lessons in the "no small parts" maxim. Hers is a charged performance that knows the soul of this character, and her work at the edges allows Sherwood to become a vivid presence that infuses the film. Indeed, when lil Lulu fantasized about potential sequels, what happened next to the Famers... Meara's Sherwood almost always showed up. (So imagine Lu's shock and dismay when defanged Sherwood actually did show up, all pretty and magnanimous, in the televisions series. Feh!)

Meara's Sherwood prolly taught little Lulu lots more than she ever knocked into Leroy's noggin. And StinkyLulu will be ever grateful to Ben Stiller's mom for crafting the character of Sherwood so intelligently and so generously -- and, in so doing, redirecting Lulu's movie obsessed gaze to those other actresses at the edges of Fame, especially those actresses at the edges of fame itself.

Thanks, Ms. Meara.

4.07.2007

5 Stinky Thoughts on Cruising

StinkyLulu offers the following "5 Stinky Thoughts on..." as my contribution to the Trashy Movie Celebration Blog-a-thon instigated by The Bleeding Tree:

click image to be routed to video

Thought #1: Bad Cruising, bad!
Cruising (1980) still seems to hold the power to hurt people's feelings. The film, which -- arguably -- doomed William Friedkin's career is mostly acknowledged today as the really bad movie around which a then little-known underground film critic named Vito Russo organized a set of protests (forerunner to the Basic Instinct protests of the early 90s) that instigated a generation's interest in queer cinematic representation. Indeed, along with CBS's 1967 "documentary" The Homosexuals and BI, Cruising's nearly the ür-text of modern queer media activism. Nevertheless, Cruising's got a veritable smorgasboard of queer delights: a deliriously confused "whodunnit" narrative; Pacino in all his 70s studness; gay predator/s feasting on gay victim/s; a psychoanalytic explanation of the killer's motives that's the stuff of ex-gay therapeutic fantasy; howler dialogue ("Hips or lips?"); lurid, forbidding, hypersexualized homo imagery; a great period soundtrack; even a minor-celebrity-cameo fisting scene. All told, the movie's just a big hot gay mess of macho homo panic. And, golly, if StinkyLulu doesn't just lurv it... Every filthy bit of it.

Thought #2: Passing As Gay
Cruising's narrative depends upon a simple fact of gay ghetto subculture: not so much that gay is good, but more that -- at least here -- gay is the norm. Further, gay macho imagery runs as electric current throughout Cruising, upending conventional banalities about gay effeminacy every stomp of the way. This makes for a still enthralling scenario at the center of the film's narrative conceit: in order for Pacino's character to "pass" as gay, he must not only become a closeted heterosexual but he must also amplify his performance of his own masculinity. Pacino's Burns -- the tough guy straight cop in real life -- often fails in his attempts to pass as macho, as tough, as manly enough to be believably gay. In a particularly evocative scene, almost precious in its simplicity, Pacino's Detective Burns is refused entry to a club on "precinct" night because he doesn't look enough like a cop. And then there's the sequence when Pacino's Burns worries he's not attractive enough...

Thought #3: Feelin' The Disco Freedom
With little doubt, StinkyLulu's most very favorite scene in Cruising is at a key beat in Pacino's characterization of Steve Burns. Pacino's Burns hasn't been able to find his gay groove, which is getting in the way of his truly going undercover. His attempts to flirt are dumb and clumsy. He peeves one guy as he's ignored by another. He slowly begins to realize he's being outmanned by these homos. They're taller. They're more muscular. They're hotter. They're not all that into little Pacino/Steve. Then one guy asks Pacino's Burns to dance, and Pacino allows himself to be led to the dance floor. And then it's a lyric from a Sandra Bernhard monologue: "Then the guy pulls out a little bottle and shoves it underneath your nose. They're poppers - you've never smelled them before and you're starting to get kind of nervous and dizzy and sexy and hot and sweaty and into the rhythm and you walk out to the dance floor but inside your head it keeps echoing "But I'm straight! I'm straight, man! I'm straight!"" And with a straight/white guy arm jagging set of moves, Pacino/Steve Burns all-of-a-sudden finds his gay groove while feelin' the disco freedom and he joins the tribe cruising the gay ghetto. It's an almost radical depiction of the fluidity of sexual identity. Plus it's just a hoot.

Thought #4: The Men of Cruising
As many things as Cruising gets wrong (those tranny prostitutes are just beyond even genderf*ck plausibility), the flick's got some footage in it that's almost an ethnographic portrait of urban gay sex in the 70s, more frank than anything this side of a Joe Gage or Christopher Rage film. Friedkin's team used real leather bars/clubs as locations, paying selected clientele to hang out and be extras. The extra gig rated $50 a day ($125 in 2007 dollars) -- more if they appeared nude, semi-nude or while "simulating" sexual acts -- plus free poppers and (if the rumors were/are to be believed) a free flow of drugs and booze. Indeed, being cast as one of the "Men of Cruising" became a choice day job for those living in the gay sexual underground. And for others, like those interviewed in an extraordinary article in the February 1980 issue of Mandate, appearing as extras in Cruising represented an opportunity to be out, proud and sexually free -- "to represent" their "lifestyle" to a mainstream audience. The crowd scenes in Cruising are a thrilling, tawdry and vivid portrait of a sexual subculture at a particularly sophisticated yet innocent historical moment, now long gone...

Thought #5: A Brilliant Homo-Panic Passion Play.
At its most basic, Cruising's not so much a murder-mystery as it is a brilliant homo-panic passion play. Here's a careerist macho cop who, slugging for a promotion, agrees to an assignment that requires him to take a huge swan dive into the gay leather scene. And the question of whether or not Al Pacino's character becomes "tainted" by his full-body immersion into gayness emerges as a bigger deal than "who's the killer?" By most reports, the orignal screenplay scripted a sexual identity crisis for Steve Burns, a character arc that Pacino sought to deemphasize. The final screenplay obscures this through sheer incoherence. But, in the film's final resolution, Friedkin reintroduces the idea that Pacino's Burns might just have "gone native" in a particularly appalling way when Steve's fiancée unearths some leather accessories from his closet just as Friedkin cuts to a gruesome crime scene, wherein Steve's only gay friend is found brutally murdered. In this moment, the film opens a question: did Steve go over to the "other" side? Did he become gay? Did he become the killer? This notion of the "taint of gayness" -- that a mere brush with male homosexual behavior threatens to "turn" male heterosexuals gay OR instigates an instinctual panic justifying murder of the tainting homo -- evokes the most vicious, essentialist, homophobic rantings and ravings. This entrenched American sensibility operates as the heterosexist corollary to the racist "one drop" rule, and Cruising's spectacular cinematic incoherence stands as perhaps its most effective portrait...

So, lovely reader, do you have any Cruising thoughts? Do tell...
And be sure to check out the action at the Trashy Movie Celebration!