Friday, May 31, 2024

Mario Galaretta | Home Early / 2006

absolute terror

by Douglas Messerli

 

Mario Galaretta (screenwriter and director) Home Early / 2006 [6 minutes]

 

A man (Javier Galitó-Cava) in his late-20s is busy packing up his clothes when his lover (Jacob Tuten) arrives home, as we soon discover, earlier than usual. The first man (who I shall call the “lover”) has packed up an entire suitcase and sits it next to him on the couch where he almost passively awaits his friend, dressed in suit and tie as if he works in an office (hereafter referred as the businessman)

     The businessman gets a scotch and sits next to his lover, asking about his cheek, which the nervous friend reports doesn’t hurt anymore. It’s healing the businessman insists: “You are such a whiner.”


     And almost immediately, as he attempts to make love to his friend, finally laying down and forcing his arm and hands into place, we recognize that not only is the lover in total control of the other’s life but has probably been abusing him for some time, particularly since almost any quick

movement of the intense businessman results in a flinch or bodily reaction from his erstwhile lover.

     We see the potential for violence even in this short film when the lover takes out a cigarette and his businessman partner pulls it out of his mouth, his hand coiling up instantly into a fist before he releases his anger by settling back down on the couch, this time demanding he place both of his lover’s hands upon his body.

     The phone rings, and the businessman boyfriend demands that he will answer, which he does suddenly in an entirely different voice, that of a sweet and polite companion explaining that his friend is not available at the moment, that he cannot answer the phone.

      By the time he returns to the room, there is no one any longer on the couch, his lover obviously having picked up his suitcase and run, escaping from what we recognize is a relationship of deep abuse which has finally resulted in his lover’s absolute terror.

      Hardly any real communication between the two men has taken place, but we recognize that were there any attempt at important communication it would surely end in anger, perhaps a slug, an attack on the other to even an attempt express a viewpoint. Although the man’s lover has left, we still fear for him, hoping that he has found somewhere to go, a place to escape any retribution that is sure to follow.

      This little film reminds us that many homosexual men also suffer domestic abuse.

 

Los Angeles, May 31, 2024

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog (May 2024).

John Blanchard | Birkney’s Diamonds / 1981 [TV (Second City Television) episode]

diamonds are a girl’s best friend

by Douglas Messerli

 

Andrea Martin and Catherine O’Hara (writers/actors), John Blanchard (director)

Birkney’s Diamonds
/ 1981 [1.02 minutes] [TV (Second City Television) episode]

 

The December 11, 1981 airing of SCTV is noted for its feature portrayal by Eugene Levy of “Don Caballero,” the Canadian TV comedy show’s satire of The Godfather.

     But one of the best skits of that show was the wonderful lesbian commercial for Birkney’s Diamonds played out between Andrea Martin and Catherine O’Hara. In this work, Martin plays a butch lesbian number to the quite clueless femme lesbian O’Hara.

 


     The entire text is worth repeating:


 

 

“They say a dog is man’s best friend but for me it’s Susan. We’ve been best friends ever since high school. She’s the one who coached me onto the cheerleading team after she got cut. She’s the one who talked my boss into giving me that raise, and when I almost married the wrong man, she’s the one who made me see just how wrong he was. And you know all this time I think I’ve taken our friendship for granted. But not Susan. She said that I’m the most perfect person she’s ever know. She said she’s the luckiest girl in the world to be my friend. She said because of that she wanted to give me something special, almost as special as me. I didn’t know what to say, I mean I thought diamonds were for one thing only. But Susan said they could mean whatever you wanted them to. Friendship? Susan wouldn’t say and somehow I’m glad she didn’t. She didn’t have to do it, but she did, and I’m glad, I think.”

 


    As a voiceover tells the story, Martin shoos a couple of men off, draws O’Hara’s attention, toasts the glass on wine in O’Hara’s hand with her bottle and beer and takes out the ring in a bring blue box, opening it, and handing it to her. And in the end, Martin roughs up another of O’Hara’s suitors, grabbling him by the neck and hauling him away as the oblivious O’Hara states that she’s glad, she thinks. The warble of the diamond store’s theme meme, “Birney’s Diamonds,” brings it all to the perfect close.

      This is the way gay commercials were done in the day: silly, witty, and totally committed to their premise, not bemused or absurdly self-reflective. No winks here, just Martin’s worship and O’Hara’s ignorant acceptance of a foregone conclusion: the dyke will surely get her way.

 

Los Angeles, May 31, 2024

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema (May 2024).

Jake Graf | Chance / 2015

no firm ground

by Douglas Messerli

 

Pablo Brandao and Jake Graf (screenplay), Jake Graf (director) Chance / 2015 [17 minutes]

 

The elderly and grossly overweight Trevor Bunting (Clifford Hume) has become almost agoraphobic since his companion Doris’ death, sitting in his small apartment without even answering his daughter’s urgent telephone calls, wondering about his health. He walks in the park with a floral bouquet, presenting it not to a grave but to a bench in the park he’s officially adopted with a metal plaque in honor of his wife.

     While Trevor sits there one morning, another man suddenly lifts his foot up to bench to tie his shoe, Trevor pushing the man’s foot away without explaining his reasons. The man (played by the director Graf) curses him and walks away, but later as Trevor attempts to relax in the sun returns with another yob, both of them shouting and screaming at him for his possessiveness of the bench. Frozen in place, Trevor is nearly terrorized until suddenly out of nowhere a heavyset man, Amir Abbas (Abs) shouts the two ruffians down and frightens them off. 


     Trevor, still terrorized, reacts in dread as his savior sits down beside him. And when the man asks him in Urdu if he is ok, he suddenly stands, grabs his flowers, and runs off, relieved to be back in the protection of his own house.

       Amir, who a very brief clip at the beginning of the film we have witnessed sitting up in bed after having a nightmare wherein, in the midst of a seeming battle, he cannot save an unseen friend calling out his name, returns home also, hugging his young boy to him, his wife for a moment looking on with joy. But as the boy runs off, her face quickly changes, as she asks: “How long are you going to keep pushing me away?” He begs her, Zara (Amale Mohamed), to leave him alone.

       The next morning, we see Trevor putting on a light pink tie, a far different look from the dreary way he dressed the previous day. Refusing again to answer his daughter’s telephone pleas he returns once more to the bench where Amir again appears, holding out his hand with the offering of his name as Trevor more cautiously takes it and provides his own. He moves a small bag away so that Amir might sit, which he does.

      Taking up a cup of tea, Trevor suddenly pours it out into another cup and offers it to uncomfortably to his new guest, Amir responding again in Urdu that he cannot, he’s fasting. Trevor takes the cup back looking rather suspiciously at is new friend. And almost as suddenly Amir stands again, saying he has to go but that he will see Trevor tomorrow. Of course, Trevor cannot comprehend a word of what he’s saying.

       Back at Amir’s home he and Zara once again share dark glances of accusation and regret. Theirs is clearly a relationship on the verge of collapsing.

      

    The next morning, wearing a polka-dot burgundy tie, Trevor again greets Amir, making a place for him on the bench. This time they both shyly glance at each other when they believe the other is not looking, as a gay couple, one of them shirtless, saunter by. Finally, they catch each other’s eyes, as Amir slightly mocks the saunter of the two, both of them laughing, increasing as they discover something to share with one another.

       In the very next frame, they are walking down a path with Trevor pointing to objects and nontangible entities such as the sky, asking to be told the Urdu name, which Amir gladly provides.

He’s delighted to learn the word for pigeon.

       At home, Zara is serving up Amir’s dinner. Almost immediately the camera cuts again to another such scene with Trevor asking for Amir to name things, an activity that seems to joyfully engage the two men. Back at the table, Amir reaches for Zara’s arm as she, surprised the gesture, smiles.

      In the next scene Amir offers a gift to Trevor of a colorful striped muffler. Waking up in his bed with a smile on his face, Trevor again ignores the message on his machine from his daughter, who is now becoming truly worried because of his unreturned calls.

      The editing of British filmmaker Jake Graf’s film is quite excellent, as we quickly fall into a rhythm of interlinks between the two men, who out of nowhere have found something in each that has become meaningful, perhaps even essential in their lives.

      Trevor finally picks up the phone to make a call. And a moment later we observe the two men on their bench joyfully watching two young boys run in circles around them. Something has shifted in the way Trevor now sees the world. But at the very moment Amir has a horrible vision again, almost breaking down into tears as, in answer to Trevor’s question of what’s wrong, he responds, “Nassir, my love,” revealing that long in the past Amir has been unable to save a friend whom he deeply loved, obviously someone with whom he had a deep relationship, whether or not it was homosexual.

      Trevor puts his hand to the man’s shoulder but resists resting it there as Amir rushes off in despair over his “daymare.”

     Back at home, he kisses his son as Zara once more puts out the food upon the table. Amir has brought her a wrapped gift. In Urdu he comments, “I’m sorry, I know it wasn’t your fault…I just miss Nassar.” She answers, “I know, brother, but Nassar will always be with you,” suddenly alerting us to the fact that she is not his wife, but his sister. And that like Trevor he also has not been able to get over the death of his companion.



      With that news, this complex short work begins to open up, as the two hug in reconciliation. Trevor and Amir can now be seen wandering by a small pool of water almost as lovers in reverie. For the first time they make true physical contact, holding hands.      

     The very next moment, however, the film shifts yet again as Amir returns home to find Zara in tears. They have received a letter from the British government, but we do not know what it says.

      Trevor is again waiting on a bench, but this time a radical change, not on Doris’ bench but another a few yards away from the other upon another path. When he sees Amir arrive and sit down on the old bench, he signals him to join him in what he describes as “a time for a change.” But there is far more frightening change as Amir hands him over the government letter.

       Reading it, Trevor chuckles, “They’re sending you home. You can come back again.” But Amir’s face reveals it is not that easy. Bending over, he pulls ups his shirt to reveal the permanent welts of a whip of torture. And we realize at that moment that perhaps Amir and Nassar were torn apart because of their sexuality and punished, Nassar unable to survive.    

      The way Graf reveals these possibilities are so subtle that they creep up on the viewer as surely as they do for the character, Trevor, himself. Knowing in this 17-minute film is a slow process, not only between the two central figures, but between the audience and what is being subtly conveyed. We keep readjusting our vision of the facts, much in the way Amir and Zara must their vision of reality in the new world into which they have escaped for his protection.

 

       This time Trevor, pulls the shirt back down, puts his hand firmly upon Amir’s shoulder, takes his hand and kisses it, finally drawing his head onto his shoulder with an expression of consolation and love.

     In the very next frame, they are head-to-head with Trevor confessing that he loves Amir. “You gave me hope. You gave me life again,” both in tears so that we might imagine this was a sad farewell, particularly when we hear in the background a voice barking the words, “Mr. Abbas, if you could please just say your goodbyes. We really must go now.”       

     When the camera pulls back, we see the couple in formal dress, Trevor made out with pink accoutrements, Amir with pink lacings in his shirt. The goodbyes are to Trevor’s daughter, to Amir’s sister and her son. The two, now married men, enter their limousine decked out with pink ribbons and drive off a fairytale world which only cinema can provide.


     As one commentator observed, he did not know if Graf had truly studied the British extradition laws sufficiently, but it doesn’t really matter. For Graf has made his own reality in a beautifully constructed form that far outweighs its length. Indeed, other than Ray Yeung’s later 2019 film Suk Suk (Uncle), this is perhaps the best film I have seen about the gay life of aging men, who fall in love not simply because of sexual desire but for the emotional and spiritually personal commitments the two have made to one another. In Graf’s film we discover that in charting this new territory, there is no firm ground.

 

Los Angeles, November 24, 2022

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2022).

Stephen Cone | Henry Gamble's Birthday Party / 2015, general release 2016

so many stories

by Douglas Messerli

 

Stephen Cone (screenwriter and director) Henry Gamble’s Birthday Party / 2015, general release 2016

 

After reading Akiva Gottlieb’s discussion of the writer-director Stephen Cone in the Los Angeles Times this morning, I decided to view Henry Gamble’s Birthday Party, which had been recommended to me by the totally unreliable algorithms of Netflix (who often suggest for me a series of films I would never possibly watch). Well, I have watched numerous gay films, of course, and they recognized that I might be interested in this one, although I had previously shunned it because I had perhaps seen far too many young-boys-coming-out films and just felt I had to move on. My true love, obviously, is of classic international films.

 

      What a remarkable surprise, however, was Cone’s 2015 film, which revealed to me a new talent that I might never have imagined. For Cone’s film is not really about a gay boy coming to terms with his sexuality (although it is that too), but an entire community of highly committed Evangelical Baptists having to come to terms with their own personal demons in relationship with their equally fervent beliefs which deny their all-too human desires and behaviors.

     Unlike so many directors attempting to deal with the same issues, Cone (the son of just such a Baptist preacher) never once dismisses or diminishes their values, but merely helps us to try to understand their own deep suffering because, as they might put it, sinners are still to be loved because Jesus forgives, despite their sins. Often their views of themselves and others as deep sinners is horribly judgmental and painful, and in the case of Henry (beautifully played by Cole Doman) and his mother, Kat (Elizabeth Laidlaw) given the fact that father and husband Bob (Pat Healy) has somewhat recently taken over the pastoral position of a cancer victim known as HM (and whose wife, Rose Matthews, is a guest at Henry’s birthday party) such religious values have put them into deep turmoil. 

     In fact, nearly the whole religious community, young and old, have been invited to Henry’s 17th birthday party, which sets up a large ensemble cast that works very much like those of Robert Altman’s films and even one of Cone’s cinematic mentors, Jean Renoir, particularly in his Rules of the Game. If here the sexual romps are more carefully hidden—the pool being a perfect place to play sexual games beneath the water—the boy’s actions still represents a series of adventurous sexual episodes which result in a great many problems.

      As the young visitors to the party strip off their outer clothing to go swimming in the Gamble’s pool, the elders hover over their youth’s frolics to discuss moral issues—particularly Bonnie Montgomery, the only truly moral gorgon of the group—and, basically to gossip, as do the young kids themselves. Some who dare attend the affable Henry’s party are clearly secular and separated from their religious peers, particularly a lesbian couple; while others, such as the only black of the group, Logan (Daniel Kyri) and the former pastor’s son Ricky, are visually, if not vocally, ostracized. Both, so the youngsters and their elders gossip, are gay.

 

     The Gamble’s daughter, Autumn (Nina Ganet), now attending a Christian-based college, is equally an outsider. Evidently, having had sex with a young neighboring student, Aaron (Tyler Ross), who also tags along later to the party, she feels, mostly based on her religious principles, that he has taken away her “purity.” She is also uncomfortable with her own body.

      Rose has brought a few bottles of wine to the party, which are quickly secreted under a back sink, but, one by one, the elders sneak out to imbibe in what they describe as medicine, and the elder community spirits shift, as they begin revealing their sins and, most importantly their fears and questions.

      By the time the party has nearly come to a close, Kat, the pillar of the Gamble family, has admitted to her daughter that she has not been fulfilled by her marriage to her pastor husband and that she has had a brief affair with the former Baptist minister as he was dying from cancer. The secular girls brilliantly question the would-be biologist Autumn about how she balances the fundamentalist teachings of her religious academy with the truth of Darwinian and other scientific teaching. Some of the randy young boys find love with the quite willing girls, and, Ricky, locked accidentally in the bathroom, razors his face because of his personal suffering as being a young gay man in such a deeply religious community, now rejected as a chaperone for the annual community summer camp. He has been caught with an erection while showering with some of his young charges.


      Given Cone’s totally humanitarian acceptance of all his character’s flaws, all is apparently forgiven. Even the nasty Bonnie’s totally restricted daughter, Grace (Darci Nalepa), having been refused the possibility of the pleasure of the pool, causally dips her toes into it, denying her mother’s restrictions. And, in the marvelous surprise of the movie, the birthday boy, Henry, invites the gay black boy Logan to spend the night, asking, as film’s end, if he might kiss him.

     Cone does not show us that act, even though the movie has begun with Henry and his obviously straight friend, Gabe, in a mutual masturbation scene. We don’t need to see what the consummation of Henry’s and Logan’s love for one another; we can remember it from youth, the time of all of our discoveries for love and spiritual meaning.

     This film is one of the most non-judgmental and loving films I have seen in a very long time. These possibly Trump-supporters are made human, filled with the flaws of all human beings, and presented to us a real beings in a time when most of us deem everyone who doesn’t agree with us to simply be “others,” or as Hillary Clinton herself misspoke, as “deplorables.” These characters remind me, vaguely, of one of my two minister uncles, a rather pious Methodist who had five sons, three of whom turned out to be gay, one tragically dying of AIDS. Their mother, at a rather early age, developed Alzheimer’s at time when few of us had even heard of the disease. The heart, as one critic observed, demands its own terms. The spiritual may help some to live, but love, as Christ reminded us, is the most important thing of all. As one of the characters in this film even reminds his pastor “Christ also drank wine.”

      This movie is a small one, despite its extensive cast, but it shouldn’t be dismissed. The New York Times critic, Ben Kenigsberg’s argued that “Mr. Cone is not a sophisticated writer, and his dialogue frequently spells out what ought to be subtext.” I strongly disagree. This is one of the most carefully nuanced and subtle series of conversations of contemporary films. Even apparent character types, such as the insistent Christian critic of all things current, Bonnie, is made multi-dimensional in Cone’s work. People, as her somewhat drunken husband insists, have so many different stories to reveal.

 

Los Angeles, November 25, 2017

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2017).


Christie Viggers and Dale Norton | Love in Brisbane / 2015

sorry, wrong number

by Douglas Messerli

 

Christie Viggers (screenplay), Christie Viggers and Dale Norton (directors) Love in Brisbane / 2015 [15.21 minutes]

 

Christie Viggers and Dale Norton’s Love in Brisbane, obviously an Australian production, is perhaps the least complicated of romantic gay films I’ve ever seen.

     Chef Tom (Jonathan Tuck) leaves his kitchen after cleaning up and begins to cross a Brisbane bridge. At the same moment, in the other director business/economics student Sam (James Dyke) is leaving either a class or the library from the other, when suddenly a point in the bridge where bike riders are told to disembark their vehicles due to construction. Tom does so, but another rider speeds through crashing to the pedestrian Sam, knocking him to the ground and shouting “Out of the way faggot!”

 

      Tom rushes to his side, observing that Sam’s knee is bloody. Tom insists they return to his restaurant wherein he keeps bandages and mercurochrome since, as he admits, he often cuts himself. He bandages Sam, and asks to walk him to his train connection; but the couple wanders the streets instead for the entire night talking, presumably in the manner of Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke in Richard Linklater’s Before Sunset and Before Midnight, although we get only a few snippets of their conversations. Sam mouths the most complex word of the work when he suggests that their meeting has been a matter of "synchronicity." 

     Clearly they’ve fallen in love, and Tom writes his e-mail address on Sam’s arm before they depart, insisting he call him the moment he gets safely home.

       Sam does so, and both are seen playing over the scenes the two shared together as Moby performs a song about falling in love. We watch carefully, however, as Sam changes the final digit of the number to a 3 instead of a 6, assuring that his phone call will never reach its intended destination.

       Both boys accordingly wander through their next day or days feeling sadly rejected and unable to explain why they’ve not heard back. The lesson of the film seems to be that gay boys should stop writing down their e-mails or phone numbers on their potential lover’s arm or hand, a tendency I’ve noticed over the years that gay boys have acquired in several LGBTQ movies.

       We see Tom again cleaning up his restaurant kitchen just as he has done in the film’s first frames, and as he proceeds to cross the bridge he re-encounters Sam, both young men tentatively greeting one another, wondering why the other hasn’t responded. They quickly realize it’s all been a mistake, and now joyfully bend into one another to for a deep kiss.

    

       Surely they will live happily ever after, since Love in Brisbane is a pretty valentine without even enough profundity to imagine what words the two might have spoken to one another to put them into such a romantic frame of mind.

 

Los Angeles, September 4, 2022

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (September 2022). 

Jeffrey Schwarz | Tab Hunter Confidential / 2015

a lost soul

by Douglas Messerli

 

Jeffrey Schwarz (screenwriter, based on Tab Hunter’s and Edie Muller’s Tab Hunter Confidential: The Making of a Movie Star, and director) Tab Hunter Confidential / 2015

 

A bit like the actor himself, Jeffrey Schwarz’s documentary Tab Hunter Confidential, based on Hunter’s and Edie’s Muller’s 2005 book, is only interesting primarily for its surface beauty: its display of photographs and quick snippets of filmmaking. There is nothing much here of depth, and it represents very few new revelations. One might almost argue that, like Hunter’s career, this new film is fairly superficial, despite its affability. Hunter, himself narrating much of the film, admits from the beginning that he was an extremely shy youth and is still uncomfortable speaking of his sexuality. “Accepting that I was wired differently was no cause for celebration, believe me. We all have our various urges and desires and shouldn’t be made to feel ashamed of them. Being ‘proud’ of your homosexuality, however, was a concept still years away. Not that I’d ever feel that way. To me, it’s like saying you’re ‘proud’ to be hetero. Why do you need to wear a badge? You simply are what you are.”


      Yet at age 84, the still handsomely chiseled male beauty, feels he can now speak out about, at least, some of his own experiences. 

      Despite his seeming resistance, however, this work is utterly fascinating for what it says about the film industry of 1950s, and the difficulties of working as a gay actor in film even today.

      And what is fascinating is that the former Arthur Kelm (or Gelien, the spellings vary from source to source), raised by a German-born mother whose husband abused her and who later suffered from mental illness, had several other careers. If his acting and singing talents were minor, Hunter was, nonetheless, a childhood figure skater of some significant talent (his first lover was champion skater Ronnie Robertson, who may have lost the 1956 Gold Medal at the Winter Olympics by showing up to the event with Hunter which he’d been warned not to) and later an award-winning steeple-chasing horseman. And, most importantly, of course, Hunter was jaw-droppingly beautiful. Even in high school, gangs of women would hover about him whenever he walked down the school halls, forcing him, at moments, to escape into empty classrooms.


       Hunter was first “discovered” by the future agent, Dick Clayton, who working on a shoot spotted the young Kelm as a stableboy. Soon after, the 15-year-old lied his way into the Coast Guard, spending his leaves in Clayton’s apartment and attending Greenwich Village parties, sometimes with Cole Porter at the piano. Clayton, after the young boy was released from the military when his true age was discovered, introduced Kelm to notorious Hollywood agent Henry Willson. And that’s where this film’s narrative becomes most interesting.

      Willson, often described as the “Fairy Godfather” of numerous film actors, specialized in what is often described as “beefcake” boys, handsomely masculine gay and bi-sexual men including the former Robert Moseley (Guy Madison), Merle Johnson (Troy Donahue), Francis McCown (Rory Calhoun), Orton Whipple Hungerford, Jr. (Ty Hardin), Robert Wagner, and, most importantly, Roy Scherer (Rock Hudson), often checking them out on the casting couch in order to recommend them for parts. He would also dress them, straighten their teeth, teach them how to behave, and even spy on his clients personally in order to protect them. Few of them—or, for that matter, even Willson’s women clients who included Natalie Wood, Lana Turner, and Rhonda Fleming—could act (although Wood had been a child actress before her adult career). As Willson asserted, they were “stars," not actors, and he arranged for them to take acting classes and to study their craft by appearing in local theater productions (Hunter starred in a production of Our Town.) He put their faces regularly into the popular screen magazines of the day, and promoted them, particularly to teenagers. Most importantly, he renamed them, openly branding his own sexual discoveries with the hyper-masculine monikers such as Tab, Rock, Rory, and Ty. Comedian Kaye Ballard even mockingly offered some further suggestions: “Grid Iron, Cuff Links, Plate Glass, and Bran Muffin.”


      To clear them from any sexual insinuations, Willson paired them up with his female clients, so that actors such as Hunter were nightly seen in clubs and restaurants with young women such as Wood, Debbie Reynolds, and others, most of whom, such as Reynolds, were happy to play the role of what Hollywood insiders described as “beards.” As Reynolds noted: “Oh sure, I dated all the boys who were homosexual, because I liked them better. They weren’t fresh. They were fun. They were sweet. They didn’t come on to me. All the straight guys were coming on to me. And I couldn’t stand that. I was seventeen. I was a virgin. I didn’t want hands all over me.” Natalie Wood and Margaret O’Brien used to play a “game of trying to figure out which of their dates had slept with Henry.”

     Hunter claims that although Willson tried several times to sexually involve him he politely refused his body rubbings. “Henry had a magnetic personality, but it certainly wasn’t strong enough to lure me onto the casting couch.” Others, however, easily gave in. Rumor has it that Hudson would sleep with nearly anyone—although Hunter has nothing to say about this. Yet despite the awful appellations the young actor had to endure—“Sigh Guy,” “All-American Boy,” “Boy Next Door,” and “The Squeal Appeal Fella,” the careful Tab did have gay affairs with not only Rudolf Nureyev and Helmut Berger, but a longer relationship with Anthony Perkins, who lived only a few blocks away, allowing both stars to easily link up after hours.

      According to Hunter, Perkins was more seriously in love, yet his career mattered more than anything (and one must admit, Perkins was the better actor), and after Hunter told Perkins that his studio, Warner Brothers, was about to buy a property which he already had performed on television, Perkins had his studio buy the film rights for himself, the relationship gradually faded.

      What becomes apparent in Hunter’s life is that he was forced not only to act on the screen and television, but to transform his whole life into a fiction. What sets him apart from some others is that he was evidently completely willing to perform that role and to knowingly take on the part of the beautiful bachelor boy next door. Sadly, Hunter seems to have been one of the most closeted figures of the entire era.


       Fortunately—and fortune seems to be a subtheme of Hunter’s entire career—the moment he took to the screen he had the accident of being asked to sing what became the most popular single of the year, “Young Love,” backed up by Elvis Presley’s background singers. The record was the #1 record for six weeks, becoming one of the greatest hits of the rock-and-roll era. The voice is thin and frail, but he sings it and others with the belief of young lovers, and, with his beautiful blue eyes, conveys a sense of absolute belief that no one can deny. He was a natural seducer. 

      Even the evil Jack Warner was clearly sold on the new wonder boy, especially after Hunter artfully seduced the married Dorothy Malone figure in Raoul Walsh’s Battle Cry, one of the most successful movies of 1955. The studio bought the musical Damn Yankees as a vehicle for him, while importing most of the rest of the cast—Ray Walston, Gwen Verdon, Shannon Bolin, Jean Stapleton, and choreographer Bob Fosse—from Broadway. Director George Abbott, attempting to transform Hunter, yet again, to his stage vision of the original Broadway star, finally forced the mutable young actor into a more forceful being, as Hunter demanded that he define the role of Joe Hardy in his own way. Although he perhaps succeeded in doing that, one must admit that the final production was not the greatest of musicals to reach the screen (see my comments on Gwen Verdon and him in my “Shall We Dance” essay in My Year 2000). Both Abbott and co-director Stanley Donen were appalled by his lack of talent, Donen later observing: “He couldn’t sing, he couldn’t dance, he couldn’t act. He was a triple threat.” I’ll always, however, remember the lovely, late film number, “Two Lost Souls,” where, finally, he and Verdon, realizing they’re now both utterly failed human beings, temporarily come together for a charming song and dance. The number might almost be used to describe Tab Hunter’s entire career, although his 30-year long relationship with producer Allan Glaser utterly redeems him.


      For his part, Hunter argues that “I wasn’t so much a person now as I was a valuable commodity. . . . They can put you in the slot they want, and you’re supposed to stay there, performing your trick on demand.” Once he had begun to define himself, he was described as difficult to work with and “temperamental.”

      At about the same time, in order to save his major breadwinner, Rock Hudson, from being outed by the wicked Hedda Hopper and others in the even more evil Confidential magazine, Hunter’s agent Willson, as some have described it, put him, along with Rory Calhoun, “under the bus,” revealing Calhoun’s early periods of imprisonment and Hunter’s arrestment—one must recall this was the worst period of the 1950s—for simply attending a gay party at a private house. Jack Warner’s response was heartening: “Today’s headlines, tomorrow’s toilet paper,” but without Willson (Hunter claiming that Willson left him, as opposed to the industry legend that Hunter left Willson) the hunky actor’s career took a tailspin as he was forced again and again to play young sailors, soldiers, and airmen in grade B movies, few of which allowed him any room to display his acting chops—with the exception of John Huston’s The Life and Times of Judge Roy Bean (1972), performing with his former friend Antony Perkins, and, with Sophia Loren, in Sidney Lumet’s That Kind of Woman

       A career in television, including his own show, and a long period in dinner theater, including productions of Bye Bye Birdie, Under the Yum Yum Tree, and West Side Story (a movie role for which he had yearned, going instead to Richard Beymer). Hunter seems quite bitter about his dinner theater years: “The audiences for these shows were married middle-aged women with grumpy husbands in tow, hoping to relive their youth by seeing their onetime matinee idol in person.” Given his previous indentured servitude to thousands of young screaming teen girls, one wonders at his later dismissal of this theatrically conventional, but apparently lucrative activity.


    Nonetheless, he later slightly redeemed his career with wonderfully campy but completely committed performances in John Water’s Polyester (1981) and Paul Bartel’s Lust in the Dust (1985), in which both of them having on- screen affairs with the drag artist Divine.

     In short, Hunter proves a kind a strange gay icon, a man who was willing to contort most of his life into Hollywood sexual “bondage,” while claiming to be absolutely accepting of own “deviance.” While he might almost seem, particularly in his later years, an advocate and icon of open sexuality, he was a deeply political conservative, embracing, during the Viet Nam war the viewpoints of his co-star John Wayne more than those of his own kind, and despite his own beloved brother’s death in Viet Nam. In the end, Hunter seems to be a victim of his own age, as he expresses it, caught between an older Hollywood system and a new politically engaged community which might have freed him from his sexual and political attitudes, as well as his deep religiosity—he remained throughout, despite a period of abandonment, a loyal Roman Catholic.

      Finally, what all of this makes apparent is that despite the seemingly easy, open beauty of Hunter’s aspect and demeanor, there was always a deeper, somewhat frightening and even sinister world behind that gorgeous face and its innocently embracing eyes.

 

Los Angeles, June 12, 2016

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (June 2016).

 

 

 

Index [listed alphabetically by director]

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.