#85 of 2010: Freaks

I don't feel like I have to say a whole lot about "Freaks". Someone who was into the fantastic margins of culture- long before I had realized how huge the margins are- told me to watch it years ago, just like someone probably told you to watch it years ago, and if you haven't yet, do. Even as it puts the characters (who are largely identical to the actors who play them, melodramatic relationship crises aside) "on display", the film somehow manages to use the same voyeurism that allows the performers to earn a living as "sideshows" and "monstrosities" towards an opposing goal: it makes us wish that more people were like them. Because there would presumably be a whole lot less marginalization, mistreatment, and self-pity in the world if more people were as accepting, thoughtful, and resourceful as the "freaks" are here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freaks

#75 of 2010: Together

besides the oblique jabs which consist of the inclusion of a "crazy hippie aunt" or "weird psychic/naturopath", i feel like movies in general shy away from critically examining political and social liberalism in a serious way (i'm not counting outright satires like Allen's "everyone says i love you"). bucking that trend (as i perceive it), "Together" offers a sizable helping of pros and cons concerning practices like communal living, political sexuality, and liberal parenting. Though aspects of radical counter-culture are introduced as stark theoretical oppositions to mainstream family values, the narrative allows a much more complex exploration of the left-leaning continuum to take place. By the still-uncertain (but happy anyway) denouement, we've gotten to know left-wing counterparts to every right-wing stereotype: the protective parent, the self-serving hypocrite, the political evangelist, the sheepish proponent of the most idealistic version of hir beliefs (in place of the right's "american dream" of freedom to prosper is the left's ideal of "harmonious equality" in which the group prospers because of the altruism of its members), and so on. all this anthropological/sociological documentary (the zooms, quick turns, and handheldiness of the camera work are reminiscent of early, possible-to-presume-unscripted reality shows) is part of a complete narrative package, with interesting and interwoven plot lines and a really great brother-sister-parallel-yelling-at-significant-others scene. the subtitles on netflix's disc were definitely shoddy, but who doesn't love listening to Swedish, even if there are big holes in the translation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Together_(2000_film)

#66 of 2010: Strictly Sexual

as a story it was decent, if strictly heterocentric and also improbable (but since when is improbable in itself a problem, right?). the title is ironic; the film actually offers some refreshing takes on love and sexuality (though it seems to lose any ground it gains during intercut "men on relationships" and "women on relationships" counseling sessions. on the other hand, this could simply be a reflection on how we are generally socialized to view the opposite sex and not the opinions of those who made the film. after all, what is said during this scene calls into question a lot of the simple binary assumptions we've been led to make about the four characters [2 men and 2 women], and the advice that is given is shown to be ineffective later in the movie. ok i've changed my mind, there is a net progress regarding gender stereotypes) i agree with the netflix reviewer who mentioned that a serious re-edit would do this some good, and i found some of the dialogue a bit "intro to fiction" sounding. some scenes, however, did achieve the recognizable realism that the entire movie was struggling towards: i.e. the scene where stannie describes his strained (now non-existent) relationships with his parents. it sounds convincing, his somewhat careful, slightly vague (but absolutely effective) in-a-nutshell description of why he and his family mutually opted out of keeping in contact when he was a teenager, and it lays a good foundation for our understanding of what happens to his relationship with donna. overall, though, this is another case of the movie being less interesting than the life of the movie - it has been released almost solely on the internet, streaming on netflix and hulu, and through those channels has managed to make 10 times it's production budget thus far. it may be a landmark in film distribution, but certainly is not one in filmmaking or storytelling. read the press on "strictly sexual", but skip seeing it unless you don't find less-than-good acting or hurried plot climaxes distracting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strictly_Sexual