Reviews

What happens when you want to make a documentary about an anarcho-feminist pornography collective but can't seem to find a subject? If you're the makers of Made In Secret you go out and start your own just so you can film it. The result isn't exactly a documentary. After all, it's far more contrived than than Nanook of the North. Yet it's too factual to be called a feature film. It's somewhere between in a previously unrecognized gray area. Though the genre may be uncertain, the entertainment isn't. The film isn't perfect, but it's quite good.

The film opens with Monster reading a delightful performance piece. Lamenting the current state of porn, she longs for "a story so far from dumb that I'll sit in the wet spot after I cum, just to see how it ends." Clearly it's time for a "grassroots pervert revolution." This becomes the launching point for the EVPC. The film leaps forward a few years to Godfrey documenting Hugh Jorgen finishing of the editing on the EVPC's latest cinematic triumph. A short bike ride later and the entire collective is seated in front of a TV to watch a little porn of its own making. It's a good time watching the group try to front nonchalant while watching themselves act out their fantasies. Some make it through with only blushing while other being made to squirm.

Where things really get moving is with the production of the next film, JD Superstar's BikeSexual, a "pansexual romp" that means to put the ass in Critical Mass. The structure of the group is likely as interesting, if less erotic, than any product it produces. With rotating facilitators, directors and crew the group is certainly recognizable as an anarchist collective. They require consensus decision making, a process for which the films makes an excellent case, and they have rules for on-set behavior that were developed from a remarkably insightful critique of the critiquing of pornstar's bodies. The members are dedicated to helping each other make films that they would find truly erotic instead of "shot after shot, of slot after slot." If that means two straight men like Mr. Pants and Professor University have to do a scene in the bottom of a skate park's halfpipe then they'll certainly go for it. It "fundamentally challenges parts of myself," Prof. University says of the experience.

The making of BikeSexual ends up including an impressive array of on-location shoots. In the shower, garage (for the "lesbian bike repair scene") and forest the collective toils until finally hitting a ferry to shoot a little "guerilla porn." Their enthusiasm is infectious and it helps the rather amateur camera work and low quality video seem intimate rather than cheap. Where the films fails is in some of the contrived drama around the filming of the documentary itself. Though the filmmakers openly acknowledge that the film isn't entirely factual, some parts feel made up when they shouldn't.

All of this could be little more than an entertaining yarn were it not for the group's dedication to wrestling control of porn away from corporate control. Quality, community- based grassroots erotica. It's a novel idea made more compelling by the demand that it be watchable for reasons beyond the skin. That doesn't sound like too shabby a "revolution to watch with one fist in the air and one in" the crotch.

If there was a pill that would change gays into straight, would you take it? If so, what would the effects be? Those are two of the pertinent questions in the excellent sci-fi flic Hard Pill. Tim (Jonathan Slavin) is a sad little cubicle monkey. His personal life is a disaster. He pines for guys he doesn't seem to have a chance with, mostly because they are straight or straight- ish anyway. This is a point made clear by his coworker Joey (Scotch Ellis Loring) when he says that Tim has "a sea of fags at his disposal and he stays home with a straight man." Nowhere is Tim's social life more depressing than when he practically begs his straight friend Don (Mike Begovich) to let Tim fellate him ("Can't we ever just watch a movie?" Don asks?). As Tim's personal life is defined each of the cast is introduced with a graphic that works as a spectrum of sexuality. It's an interesting and clever idea to show the shades of gay and straight in each character though it wears out its welcome a bit by the time the entire cast is introduced.

The film uses "street interviews" with various folks to introduce a new controversy involving a pill intended to provide an opportunity for homosexuals to go hetero by making a chemical change in the brain. One of the best one-liners in the film has a Christian fundamentalist making a selectively supportive comment about the drug. With Tim feeling that, "The only currency in the gay world is being attractive," he signs up for the human trials for the drug. What Tim doesn't seem to realize is that each of his friends and neighbors has problems as bad or worse than his own, they just have ways to deal. Sally (Susan Slome) covets Tim but continues an unfulfilled flirtation with a coworker. Joey throws his balls between more legs than the Harlem Globetrotters but he lacks an emotionally satisfying relationship. Don's relationship is contingent on his continuing use of antidepressants. It's to the credit of writer/director John Baumgartner that these subplots are so well developed without sacrificing the central story or adding superfluity.

When Tim begins using the pill it's not just his world that changes. Each person has a place they fill in others' lives and when one tries to change something so fundamental to their own self it goes without saying that there be effects on their relationships with others. The film's major success is in exploring these results. After a first straight screw that he apparently regrets, Tim finds himself attracted to Tanya (Jennifer Elise Cox) with results transcending the chemically dependent nature of their mutual attraction. Slavin's excellent performance makes Tim a sympathetic anti-hero. Despite Tim's consistent aversion to sensible solutions for his problems, one can't help but root for him to succeed, even if it's the result decidedly unsympathetic actions on his part.

Baumgartner's superb story offers a lot to viewers beyond just the visual story and fine performances from the cast. Musings about the effects of chemical personalities are as relevant to the real world as they are in Hard Pill speculative Los Angeles. The gradation of sexuality is a path rarely explored but it's done well here with the help of not only a graphic, but a healthy dose of remarkably non-exploitive skin. Throw in a brief yet profound argument for gay marriage and you've got yourself one hell of a movie. Enjoy.

Intolerance is bad. Lying is bad. Being true to yourself and others if good. All laudable sentiments no? What's that? You don't understand? Well perhaps you'd like to have those themes jackhammered into your skull. If that's the case then one really must see Summer Storm, an exercise in didacticism that would make the Revolutionary Communist Party shudder at the lack of subtlety.

Tobi (Robert Stadlober) and Achim (Kostja Ullman) are best friends who wrestle naked and jerk off together. Pretty standard really for a couple of youngsters. It just might be though, that Tobi has a "different" kind of affection for Achim (hint: Tobi is gay). Achim doesn't know of course because of the extreme subtlety of Tobi's desire, like when he makes a pass at him while bowling or straddles him with an erection in the locker room. They and the rest of their Bavarian hillbilly team are off to a coed rowing camp for some summertime recreation. Also at the camp will be Achim's girlfriend Sandra (Miriam Morgenstern) and Tobi's supposed love interest Anke (played by Poland's Britney Spears, Alicja Bachleda-Curus). But wait, that's not all. There is also a team of urbane Berlin rowers called the Queerstrokes.

Confronted with his homosexual urges and Achim's alternating obliviousness and disinterest, Tobi begins to sink under the weight of his illusory heterosexuality. How do we know this? Because Toby sinks in the water in an illustrative scene. After accusations of Tobi's gayness go public, a barrier seems to form between him and his teammates. What gives us this insight? Maybe it's the gigantic pine tree that falls between him and his teammates.

The scenery is often breathtaking and the acting is as good as the script will allow. The film has it's moments of comedy, sometimes unintentional, but it needs a lot of work to make it enjoyable. Lost underneath the preaching is a coming-of-age story about homosexual athletes. Potentially there are many interesting angles to approach this subject from but Summer Storm prefers to take it head-on with a Mack truck. The road that truck takes is paved with good intentions. Anybody wanna guess where it goes?

As if religion-based intolerance wasn't enough, the gay community has another reason to dislike Catholicism. The past several years have seen a distressing number of Catholic priests exposed as perpetrators of sexual abuse against minors. That many of the victims were young men or boys allows room for the public to confuse abusive priests with gay men instead of recognizing them as predators who had same-sex victims. It's this confusion and the homophobic panic that can arise from it that Peter Paige has on his mind in his directorial debut Say Uncle.

Paul Johnson (Paige) is a completely self-absorbed cubicle slave. His world revolves around his godson Morgan with light romantic and artistic interests on the periphery. That world experiences a drastic change in gravity though when his friend and Morgan's mother Sarah (Lisa Edelstein) tells him that they are moving to Japan. Paul is so much a helpless child that Sarah worries what he will do without them. After finding the new tenants (Gabrielle Union & Marc Anthony Samuel) in Sarah's old house to be less accommodating about him letting himself in, Peter tries to find a new direction in his life. The answer becomes obvious to Peter, find other kids to play with.

That some folks find a lone weirdo male showing up at parks to play with kids a little disturbing isn't too surprising. One mother, Maggie (Kathy Najimy), is so frightened by Paul that she starts a public campaign to have him arrested before he victimizes one of the children in the community. She first tries the police but she is brushed off as a lunatic, appropriately. Saying that, "We need our 'Just Say No'", Kathy rouses some other parents to the cause. This all leads to rumors galore and very public accusations.

The problems with this film are largely unrelated to its technical aspects. It's well shot and a strong cast performs adequately. The film though, doesn't make any sense. Though seemingly meant to be a warning about the perils of homophobia Paul is kind of creepy. His total unawareness of his surroundings and other people make him seem to not have it all together upstairs. Maggie's quest is certainly an awful hysterical pursuit but shouldn't she be worried, at least initially, about some space cadet hanging around children at a park? After all the press over an unresponsive system of order not protecting children from abusive men it should come as no surprise that she, a mentally unbalanced person to begin with, begins an ill-conceived exercise in vigilantism. All this seems to be offered with a sense of satire but it generally misses the mark. One of the characters needs to be a sympathetic, and reasonably sane person to satirize the actions of the other. Without that, it's a screwball story.

In the film Paul's defining characteristic isn't that he's gay, or that he's a painter. Paul, more than anything else, seems to be a guy who only wants to hang out with kids (not that anybody finds Michael Jackson creepy...). That undermines significantly the reaction Maggie gets to the "linchpin" in her case, Paul's homosexuality. Maggie being a nut case herself doesn't help strengthen the commentary the film offers. What we end up with is a situation that, though unfortunate, isn't exactly unexpected. When two totally clueless and unstable people cross paths, it should be no surprise that something bad happens.

David is one of ten children from Aize and Masud Deri. Those ten children thus far have 22 grandchildren and those 22 grandchildren have produced 10 great-grandchildren. As the children and grandchildren age it will get even more confusing. This is diagrammed to great effect with a family tree. But, why isn't David's branch growing? The answer to this question at the center of his family in the winning documentary Say Amen!

David Deri lives in Tel Aviv, much to the chagrin of his small town and very traditional family. His parents, along with most of his siblings, are continually harassing him about his wedding plans. His mother tells everyone that she wants David to find a nice girl that will bring him back to religion. His brother Shlomi is continually trying to set him up with a friend but when confronted with David's homosexuality he insists that David should have left it, "like Israel leaves the nuclear question."

For a first person documentary Say Amen! remarkably lacks a sense of self-indulgence. It's mostly Deri filming other people talking about him while he starts to come out of the closet to his family. His camera occasionally annoys those would prefer to not be filmed but after his sister insists that "he's doing it for posterity" all relent.

Settler vs. native is not the only conflict in Israel. There are also the many conflicts that have arisen from having settlers from many parts of the world living in one place. Say Amen! documents one particular type, that of traditional Teimanim with the more urbane influences of Western Ashkenazim. As David does his best to convince his siblings that it's OK to be gay, and OK to tell mom and dad, they react in ways that reflect different aspects of Israeli society. One wishes that all intra-communal conflicts could be resolved to as touching and humorous an end as that of David Deri and his family, not that it's going to stop them from insisting that he make a family.

It's March 2003 and many Iraqi Kurds are fleeing towards the Iranian border trying to escape the bombardment of Kirkuk. One pair, a newlywed couple still in fancy dress, is halted when the bride steps on a land mine. Realizing that the mine will detonate if she steps off, she pleads for her husband to help. He runs off in a panic to find help. This is the wonderfully absurd premise of Riverside, a solid film written and directed by Ali Reza Amini.

The film has a broad cast of characters who are all trying to reach safety in Iran An old woman who has nothing left but her cow. A man trying desperately to get the body of hid young son to Iran before burying it. A deserting solider carrying a remarkable quantity of guns. A grandmother carrying her two grandchildren. Three men rather lost and wandering towards the border with only a conflict over doogh to keep them motivated. The first part of the film introduces these characters with rather sparse dialogue, letting their actions successfully define their current situations. There is a sad determination to the grandmother uttering promises of strength to her grandchildren as she hauls them on her back through the mountainous terrain. Most powerful perhaps, is the old woman after a fighter plane spooks her cow. The cows runs off and she sings a quiet condemnation of both her fate and the cow while looking for it. "It was me and the cow and the cow has left me now," she laments.

As each moves towards the border they begin to come across the bride, who stares at her foot knowing the awful absurdity of her situation. They relate their stories to one another while offering words of strength and encouragement to the bride. Continually assuring her that her husband will be back soon with help they play music, offer good and bad advice, and relate a lovely anecdote about a woman who keeps getting served dry bread and fish head at wedding banquets.

While each is on their way to the eventual meeting spot the film is engaging and moves at an excellent pace. After getting there though, it seems to lose focus and fall a little flat. The plentiful fine moments are swapped out for occasional ones though the film remains gorgeously shot. All this is done against the backdrop of the US invasion of Iraq. No character ever says anything condemning or supporting the attack. They don't need to. Their difficulty as refugees speaks loudly enough. It's not just the current war that it's condemning though. It's the legacy of an earlier war that exacerbates the problems caused by the present one. It's an excellent message for the comedic tragedy Riverside, and this review, to end on.

"This instrument can teach, it can illuminate and yes it can inspire. But it can only do so to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is nothing but wires and lights in a box." Thus spoke Edward R. Murrow, somewhat a legend of broadcast journalism. Better than average but less than legendary is Good Night and Good Luck, a new film about Murrow's historic confrontation with Sen. Joseph McCarthy. The timely themes of the film will not go unnoticed by even mildly aware viewers and though the film is certainly competent, that it perhaps its greatest contribution.

The films opens with Murrow (David Strathairn) giving a speech to the Radio Television News Directors Association. His speech encapsulates much of the problems of that television had then, and still has now. The film shares the beginning of the speech at the beginning of the film and ends with the end of the speech. In between are scenes of the decision making that led to See it Now's confronting of McCarthy and McCarthyism. Other journalists had been poking at McCarthy for some time and Fred Friendly (Clooney) and Murrow found an opportunity to do an excellent piece on television that would add their names to the growing ranks of dissenters. The first shot fired was on Oct. 20, 1953 when See it Now broadcast the story of Air Force reservist Milo Radulovich. He was discharged from the service after his father and sister were labeled as communist sympathizers. Ending the program with, "the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, even though that iniquity be proved beyond all doubt, which in this case it was not," Murrow and Friendly had for the first time taken their personal misgivings about McCarthyism public. This confrontation, and subsequent ones, missed a vital point that the film misses as well. In a free society, what's wrong with being a communist if you want to? Instead of labeling all kinds of people as communists incorrectly, what if McCarthy had been 100% correct? Clooney does not investigate what the problem would have been about having competent professionals, who are communist, in government, or private industry, position. One can only imagine the laughter that would loose should an agitator for a single-payer health system be labeled a subversive Canadian agent. Being a docudrama perhaps it would have been a bit out of place for the film to go there but it was the fundamental flaw of McCarthyist, and anti-communist ideologies, that communists had no place in America, a purportedly free nation.

Clooney does an excellent job fitting the archival footage of McCarthy and others into this film. He guides the film with a good pace but it still seems to be padded a bit. A subplot about the secret marriage of Joe & Shirley Wershba (Robert Downey Jr. & Patricia Clarkson) is neat enough and good for a few one-liners but there doesn't seem to be any reason for it to be in the film. It stands in contrast to the subplots of CBS' wavering support for Murrow and the pressures applied to coworker Don Hollenbeck (Ray Wise) about his supposedly subversive activities. The transitions between scenes are welcome each time with wonderful jazz vocalist Dianne Reeves performing old time pieces in the CBS sound studio. The strength of the performances by Strathairn, Clooney and especially Frank Langella as CBS head William Paley help keep the flaws of the film fairly well hidden.

Though perhaps mildly overstating the importance of Murrow's influence on the downfall of McCarthy, Good Night, and Good Luck does a good job of elucidating the atmosphere of paranoia that pervaded many parts of the country at the time. It makes a strong and enjoyable contribution to the body of work involving the Red Scare but in the opinion of this reviewer, it still misses an important point. After seeing it, if you're taking public transportation home, be sure to listen for the recordings that ask you to look out for suspicious activity around you. Then the real strength of the film will be even more evident.

Through four-fifths of North Country, the audience receives a rare treat. It's a film that deals with a serious issue, sexual harassment, in a serious way. It is a compelling drama that is well shot, directed and acted. It is nothing short of tragic then, that the last fifth of the film is some of the worst put to screen this year. Screenwriter Michael Seitzman is no stranger to vastly overblown, yet flat, melodrama. One can see his Here on Earth for a sample of how ridiculous his conception of human interaction is. Yet how is it that most of the film is not only watchable, but truly exceptional, when the ending was so terrible? The answer probably has more than a little to do with director Niki Caro. In 2002's Whale Rider Caro guided another spectacular story about a woman who challenges the gender roles of her community. It was a beautiful and engaging tale and North Country starts out the same way.

Presenting a fictional account of the nonfiction book Class Action: The Story of Lois Jensen and the Landmark Case that Changed Sexual Harassment Law, North Country begins on the stand with Josey Aimes (Charlize Theron) being grilled about her sex life. The film then goes back to Aimes' hiring at the mine and the problems she and the other female workers faced there. The harassment was pervasive. It wasn't just catcalls and sexist utterances, though it was those. It was in many cases more or less sexual assault. When Josey felt able to complain about it, she could do so in the Human Resources office, with a pinup calendar staring back at her. It was the type of openly hostile workplace that really makes you wonder, as Josey's dad (Richard Jenkins) does, how is it that so many men can behave so badly? They wouldn't act towards women the same way at a company picnic so why do they do it at work?

Josey's struggle is not made easier by most of her female coworkers. They need the high- paying mine jobs as much as she does and the repercussions for speaking out have been well-illustrated. Unemployment and hungry families are not welcome ideas when there is no reason to believe your complaints will be acted upon. Or at least, acted upon positively. Josey is subjected to degrading and brutal reprisals as are some of the other women despite having not complained themselves. Particularly disgusting, though it's hard to pick out the worst from so many choices, is an instance where Sherry (Michelle Monaghan) finds semen in her locker.

Josey finally gets to court only to have her sex life put on trial. That this is done is no surprise. In the actual case Jensen vs. Eveleth Taconite the women were subjected to detailed examinations of their personal lives after a judge granted the company's lawyers access to their medical records. Where the film begins to falter is when it tries to defend Josey's sex life. Josey's sex life is not the point and never was. By focusing on that it focuses less on how she and her coworkers were routinely terrorized at work. Though her lawyer Bill White (Woody Harrelson) does an adequate job in rebutting arguments, the arguments are ones that need not be addressed. All the court scenes deal with only this.

The struggles of Aimes are based largely on the events of Lois Jensen's Job-like struggle. Where the film fails though, is by trying to rearrange them neatly and add "Oscar moments". Many of the actions, even the ones that seem over the top, actually did happen. But they didn't happen like they do in North Country. Particularly regrettable are a courtroom confrontation between White and Bobby Sharpe (Jeremy Renner) and a surrogate father-son talk between Kyle (Sean Bean) and Sammy (Thomas Curtis). The awful Hollywood legalisms and almost absurdist melodramatic conclusion is a tremendous letdown after a great start and middle. It's worth noting that the missteps happen where the film strays farthest from the true story, the Michael Seitzman coming through maybe. That's not to say that it isn't worth seeing or that is doesn't have brilliant moments, such as Sissy Spacek's one woman wife-strike, it's just that a halfway decent ending would have made this one of the year's best films. Instead it abandons an important and well done story for the sake of, what? Oh well, at least it was better than Disclosure.

In theory one could make a film this year about what Martians are like. It could be a well- shot and directed, finely acted story. It would still feel out of place though because we known that Martians do not exist. It's kind of like when a Doom character, and a scientist no less, states that, "the final ten percent of the human genome" has yet to be mapped. That's simply not true and hasn't been since April 14, 2003. "Some say it's the soul." Really? Who? Anachronisms can be cute sometimes but here, and in sci-fi generally, they're just stupid.

Something terrible has happened in the Union Aerospace Corporation's research facility on Mars. Now Sarge (The Rock) has received orders to prepare his team of mercenaries, known as the Rapid Response Tactical Squad, to go through "the Ark" and retrieve data and any remaining members of the research team. The last message received was from Dr. Carmack who called for a total quarantine. It seems that something was hunting his team. Something that alternately came out of the Aliens prop library or George Romero's stash of zombies.

Instead of having any personality each of the characters has a quirk or two. Goat (Ben Daniels) for example is a guy who prays and mutters religious verses. Unsurprisingly, he does not look highly upon Portman (Richard Brake) who is a porn or sex addict of some sort and has bad teeth. Duke (Razaaq Adoti) is a playful fun guy while The Kid's (Al Weaver) defining characteristic is that he is youngish looking. John Grimm (Karl Urban) comes along too despite having an unpleasant personal history of sorts with the place they are going to. Unbeknownst to him, his sister Dr. Samantha Grimm (Rosamund Pike) is going to be a guide for the group. This is the "drama" of the film. Will they reconcile their differences? Will they come to terms with their parents' deaths? Will their accents remain the same throughout the film? Is the audience likely to care? 'No' to the last two questions and the others aren't worth the time to investigate.

For those readers who thought the first paragraph contained an analogy, sorry to say that it doesn't. Martians do figure prominently in Doom. They apparently are the source of human life on Earth as well, an origin story only slightly more plausible than creationism. With all the nonsense going in the film it's hard to notice the dialogue, which is probably for the best. Any film that says stuff like, "Semper fi motherf*****!" is likely to seem a little off. It would have been humorous at least if Sarge had instead used all English words, "Always faithful motherf*****!" Alas comedy is largely beyond the collective abilities of the filmmakers. Doom does have it's moments, as when Destroyer (Deobia Oparei) uses a computer monitor as a flail, but it needs a lot more of them.

John Carpenter's resumé as a horror director is as impressive as just about any. The original version of The Fog is one of many films the director has the right to proudly look back on. Director Rupert Wainwright's resumé is not quite as accomplished. It gets no better with the garish nonsense-fest that is his similarly titled remake. Though the original was not Carpenter's finest film it was certainly better than competent, a label that wouldn't apply to this one. The film opens by revealing much of the mystery the first one saved for the end. The rest of the film is spent filling in the details and offing the occasional character in ways that are not particularly innovative, impressive, scary or interesting.

Nick (Tom Welling) runs a charter fishing boat in Antonio Island, Oregon. After a successful outing with his assistant Spooner (DeRay Davis), he begins to take his charges back to the shore when his anchor catches on something heavy enough that his winch starts to pull the boat under instead of pulling the anchor up. The anchor finally comes loose but with it come a bunch of leper ghosts dressed as pirates. Wait, it gets dumber. Various relics of the past were knocked loose by the anchor and have now washed ashore. For some reason one of them starts a fire by inexplicably getting hot but the rest of them don't do anything. Spooner and Nick's cousin take Nick's boat out for a party but find trouble when the titular cloud overtakes them. Some die, some don't but you don't really care one way or another.

More detailed boredom ensues with the audience finding out approximately from whence the fog came but not being entertained by the explanations. Elizabeth (Maggie Grace) and Stevie (Selma Blair) play Nick's past and current love interests but with the exception of Stevie, you can't really understand what any attraction could be because the characters have neither depth nor personality. The three are all descendants of the city's founding fathers who are to be honored in an upcoming ceremony. The fog however remembers the founding of the town differently and has other plans. There are some scenes where a little suspense is genuinely built up and the film is well shot. Compelling pictures in this case though, do not make for a compelling story.

There is a good allegory to be made, as Carpenter did, about sins of the past coming back to haunt us in the present. Instead The Fog takes the past and throws it away to bury it and forget it instead of remembering and learning from it. How dumb is that?

Despite copious data that would indicate otherwise, suicide terrorism and fundamentalist Islam are inextricably linked in the public mind. It's more comfortable to imagine villains to be driven to such an act by an extremist ideology, perhaps compounded by personal or psychological problems, than to imagine them as having tangible goals one could possibly relate to. If suicide terrorists are not religious extremists then one would have to start looking for what else could prompt such behavior. In states that are victims of suicide terrorism, the answers to those questions are quite often troubling as it is normally the case that it was some act, or acts, perpetrated by the victim state that triggered the bombing or bombings (Explanation being different from justification, etc.). In Joseph Castelo's new The War Within, the would-be bomber is a combination of the two narratives.

A recipe of equal parts fundamentalist indoctrination and victimization by American foreign policy have created Hassan (an excellent Ayad Akhtar, who shares screenplay credits as well). The film opens with Hassan in Paris' Latin Quarter. He's abducted by American agents and taken to Pakistan for "questioning". There he's subjected to continuing sessions of torture that break the man he was before. His sole source of strength in prison is the support and care of fellow prisoner Khalid (Charles Daniel Sandoval), a member of "The Brotherhood", a group Hassan initially rejected. The story of Hassan's conversion from a secular, drinking, smoking, dancing mechanical engineer to a fanatically devout militant bombmaker is not fleshed out. It is more or less abandoned for the sake of catching up with Hassan a few years later though sufficient key details are parceled out in the occasional flashback.

Three years later a free Hassan is smuggled into the United States where he unites with a clandestine terrorist cell headed by Khalid. Assuring Khalid that there is no likelihood of his being detected, Hassan goes to stay with Sayeed (Firdous Bamji), a friend from his youth. Sayeed, Farida (Sarita Choudhury) their son Ali (Varun Sriram) are well adjusted to American life. They're are a liberal, and largely secular bunch that do well to combine Pakistani and Muslim traditions with American pastimes as when having an Eid barbecue. Being lifelong friends Sayeed welcomes Hassan, who tells him that he's interviewing for jobs, back into his life.

After initial plans for multiple, simultaneous bombings are thwarted by the FBI, Khalid and Hassan try to salvage something from their original plans. Adjusting their objectives means for a longer stay than Hassan originally intended. He returns to Sayeed and with his help finds a job as a taxi driver while waiting for an opportunity to carry out his mission. Hassan has some difficulty with Sayeed's lifestyle but his personal struggle grows with his reintroduction to Sayeed's sister Duri (Nandana Sen). Though finding some Western tendencies of hers to be dissuading, Hassan and Duri start to rekindle a mutual attraction that is hinted as having existed in their shared past in Pakistan. This new twist in his life, along with his lifetime friendship with Sayeed make Hassan begin to struggle with his mission. Hassan sees different aspects of American life that give him pause and challenge his beliefs, and his willingness to carry out what he sees as his duty.

In what is probably intended to be a portrayal of a different side of Islam, Sayeed and Hassan are witness to a sermon at a mosque by an Imam who talks about jihad as "the struggle of everyday life." This is one of the few but important missteps the film takes. Though likely well-intentioned, portraying the real conflict between moderate and fundamentalist Islam sheds no light on one of the films primary subjects, terrorism. "What I do, I do for Allah," Hassan states, in one of many lines that obfuscate the causes of terrorism. Terrorism is a political tool, not a religious one. No matter how horrific, illegal and unjustifiable, each campaign of suicide terrorism has an explicit and stated political goal that needs to be addressed in one way or another. Castelo does a good job in showing that actions of the intended victim state were a causative factor but a great deal more time is spent on Hassan's religious conversion.

When Sayeed, Hassan and a group of Sayeed's friends are discussing the United States their conversation reveals the disconnect often present in the parlay over American policy. Sayeed's thinks America is a pretty decent place though "things are not perfect here." This is not at all related to a friend's claim that, "This country is a greedy tyrant." They seem to be disagreeing but it's easy for them to both be correct because they are not talking about the same thing. Sayeed, in a somewhat contradictory position for his character, represents the self-centered point of view shared by many Americans. This is contrasted nicely with the strong condemnation the films gives of the policy of extraordinary rendition, where suspects are taken to third-party nations for interrogation by means not allowable under American law.

Through sure handed-direction, solid pacing and a slew of solid performances, The War Within is a conspicuously imperfect, but still quite good film. Hopefully some of the ideas the film has might creep in to the public mind such as the message on a billboard in the background of a scene in Times Square, "Democracy is best taught by example, not by war."

It's never too late for love. That's the theme behind essentially every senior romance film. The same questions tend to come up in most of them. Will s/he be able to move on from the loss of the previous partner? Will the adult children accept dad/mom's new love? Will a grandchild do something adorable? All these questions are answered in the winning comedy When I'm 64. Though a formula film if there ever was one, it's formula terrifically executed.

Opening with a soccer brawl we are introduced to Ray (Paul Freeman), a working class "geriatric hooligan." His semiretirement is spent whiling away the hours at the pub and driving his taxi. The routine is punctuated by the occasional very public soccer brawl, much to the chagrin of his adult children. At 64, his children think he might have better things to do with his time. Ray tends to agree but as a widower, he's reluctant to try to find a new love now that the love of his life is gone. Jim (Alun Armstrong) has spent his entire life at one school. First as a student, Jim stayed on at various faculty positions eventually becoming the headmaster. A lifetime bachelor he's now reached the UK's retirement age and is set to leave the school, essentially for the first time. After spending his entire life in a regimented institution, he's ready for a change. His plan is now "to not have a plan". Without a plan his two remaining goals in life might seem a little lofty but perhaps a plan is not needed to; 1. See the world and, 2. Fall in love. First things first though, Jim has to fix the reason he's been called "Beaky" for more than a half-century.

Coincidences keep Jim and Ray bumping into each other. Jim's plans for travel are upset when his elderly father falls ill. Knowing that his son is 65, the hospitalized father suggest that perhaps, "we should ask for a double room." With Ray offering support for Jim their friendship grows and begins to test the boundaries of Ray's lifetime heterosexuality. Funny and touching events ensue leading to a somewhat corny, though totally satisfactory punch line.

The path followed by Ray brings up some interesting family issues that often appear in gay cinema. The main one is, how great is the need for family support? Ray is faced with the fact that one of his children is abhorred by the idea of homosexuality. In many films there's a struggle of some sort that ends up with one of the parties hurt or both sides happily rid of previous prejudices. It's refreshing to see a film where the protagonist doesn't have to justify himself to others in order to justify himself to himself.

Watching Floored by Love one thought comes almost immediately to mind, "My god this looks like a really bad sitcom." Sure enough, it turns out that FBL is a pilot for a series that may start this fall in Canada, poor poor Canada.

Cara (Shirley Ng) and Janet (Natalie Sky) are a lesbian couple living in Vancouver. Janet has come out to her mother already but Cara's parents are still in the dark about their daughter's homosexuality. The pressure is on to out herself though when the parents come from Malaysia for her younger brother's wedding. That same week British Columbia legalizes gay marriage. With Janet wanting to wed, Cara has to decide whether or not to tell her conservative Chinese parents that's she's gay. Will she? Would she? Could she? Cara's situation is contrasted with that of Jesse (Trent Millar). Jesse has just declared his homosexuality to the world at the age of fourteen. His biological father Daniel (Andrew McIlroy) is coming for a visit soon. His stepfather Norman (Michael Robinson) fears that his chances of finally being fully accepted by Jesse are harmed by the fact that Daniel is gay and he is not. Will dialing 1-800-Makeover help?

The dialogue and delivery come straight out of a lesser 1950's program along with the overdone physical emoting. The Full House-style melodrama is enough to make you wince from time to time and the attempts at comedy largely fail. McIlroy, Millar & Sky are the only performers that approach competency in this miscalculation but given the material they have to work with, it's no surprise that none impress. It's possible that the campiness was purposeful. It often seems like there is no way the performers are really that bad, that they must be trying to mimic the inferior sitcoms of days yore. If this is indeed the case than this review should probably be rewritten. The rewrite would focus on Floored by Love being a poor and ineffective send-up of old sitcoms.

Writer/director Desiree Lim has put together a by-the-numbers bland-fest that's entirely forgettable. There was a time when merely having an openly homosexual protagonist was enough to make a mark on the screen. That time is gone. In this day we need quality as well.

Some Real Fangs is a low budget, low quality vampire comedy directed by Desiree Lim that will likely impress no one but is bizarre enough to make you think about it for a good five minutes. What you will be thinking about is, "What was the purpose of those dance numbers?" It doesn't really make a difference as they are easily the best parts of a pretty bland short.

Tara (Sepideh Saii) is a young Indian girl in Vancouver. She comes from a long line of vampires but she might have a problem continuing the tradition. Someone needs to fall in love with her within the next two weeks or she won't grow her fangs. This of course would be difficult for anyone but it's bound to be much harder for someone without any personality like Tara. For unknown reasons Tara passes out and her roommates take her to the hospital. They knock (apparently in Canada you have to knock) on the doctor's door and who should open but the gorgeous doctor Nelly (Natalie Sky). Nelly has a handsome male visitor that might be a hindrance to Tara efforts. Can Tara woo Nelly? Will dance numbers help? Is there a point to this film? Probably not but it was made anyway. The dance numbers do help a bit but not because they're spectacular or anything. They just seem strikingly out of place and that breaks up the monotony of the rest of the film.

Like many nations with struggling economies, Iran has people as one it's exports. The excellent new film We Are All Fine examines not the problems faced by those that leave, but those that stay home. Jamshid has been abroad for six years. It's been two years since anyone in the family has heard from him. Like many, he left with the declared intent of earning a piece of money and returning in a couple of years. Formerly a regular correspondent, sending both money and letters, Jamshid's family has not heard from him in over two years. The family has settled into a consistent, if still struggling, ritual of survival. All is thrown into confusion and conflict though when a man claiming to be a friend of Jamshid's shows up at their door, apparently sent on a mission to get the family to record video messages for Jamshid that the friend will take back with him.

Jamshid's sister Nahid (Leila Zare) is now the family's sole breadwinner. With Iran's high unemployment she can take little solace in the fact that her employed status has become more important than a dowry as her earnings go towards supporting her mother, father, grandfather, younger brother plus Jamshid's wife and daughter whom he left behind in Iran. Jamshid's abandonment of the family has left her with little sympathy for him and no desire to participate in the video messages. Her father Abbas (Ali Rashvand) is unhappy along the same lines. His anger over his son's behavior is compounded by his failing health and frustration over being helpless to provide for the family. The two are countered by the mother (Ahoo Kheradmand) and Omid (Mohsen Ghazimorad), neither of whom want to put off Jamshid, though for different reasons. Mom just wants to hear from her son again and fears that expressing displeasure might keep him away. Omid is dissatisfied with his life and looks to his older brother for guidance and help. Omid can't relate to Nahid's aversion to the video asking, "He's asked for something after all this time, we can't just disregard it." Omid's finishing up his military service and his education but has few prospects for either marriage or a job. He talks about emigrating with another soldier during the morning flag- raising ceremony. These are several comments director Bizhan Mirbaqeri makes about the current state of affairs in Iran.

The story is told with two different cameras, the first being a very well-framed 35 mm steadicam. Mirbaqeri captures scene after scene with an excellent eye for visual metaphor. The transition shots of the family members walking between rooms in the house are especially effective. This is combined and contrasted well with the digital camera the family rents to film the messages for Jamshid. Never is this put to more effective use than when Jamshid's wife Vida (Aida Keykhahni) takes her turn in front of the camera. Her description of becoming "a widow at 20" is the most powerful moment of the film. We Are All Fine is not without missteps. Most glaring is an unnecessary and unresolved romance subplot involving Omid. The flaws though are minor and few making the film an even more striking success for a first-time director like Mirbaqeri.

"Brain drain" afflicts many of the poorer parts of the world. Often the best and brightest leave to pursue opportunities abroad that are not available to them at home and far too many do not return. In places where the conditions are exceptionally bad the problem is sometimes severe enough that emigration has curtailed economic development. It's not unlike Vida's situation. The motherland becoming a widow before there was ever really a marriage.

When one first hears of the Log Cabin Republicans the immediate thought is, "What the hell is wrong with those people?" There is of course nothing homogeneous about the homosexual community but it seems at first to be a rather large conflict of existence to be both gay and Republican. Wash Westmoreland begins his documentary Gay Republicans by filming each of a group of interviewees saying the word "oxymoron". What this remarkable film shows is that "Gay Republican" is hardly a paradox of two words. Nor is there any reasonable generalization that one could make about them. Westmoreland gathers a group of people united under the banner of the Log Cabin Republicans and lets them illustrate what they share and where they differ.

There are several excellent subjects and a couple of them are puzzling individuals. Mark Harris is a grassroots Republican activist who he says, "happens to be gay." His faith in the party supersedes any problems he might have with what the Republican leadership does in relation to gay rights. In what might be the most depressing moment of the film Harris talks about the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). "Now is not that right time for gay marriage," he says. He, along with Maurice Bonamigo, represents the segment of the LCR that will stand with the party come hell or high water. These two are what most people would think of when they think of gay Republicans. They are Republicans, not gay Republicans. If the film is accurate they don't appear to be conservatives either, at least not by the traditional Jeffersonian definition. The Log Cabin Republicans, named after Lincoln, are mostly an example of the difference between "conservative" and "Republican". While many are both, there are a great many Republicans are not conservative by any reasonable definition. They are better called the Christian Right. Theirs is a theocentric ideology espousing a Big Government of a different type acting as a morality police force. With so dominant a presence in the Republican party and so clear a position against equal rights for homosexuals what are folks like Harris and Bonamigo to do? Stand by your man apparently. Harris even states that homosexuals might one day thank Bush for helping bring the discussion of gay marriage into the spotlight. Ignoring that equal rights activists have been building a movement for gay marriage since around 1972, would Rodney King thank the LAPD for helping shine a light on the crime of police brutality? A notable achievement of Gay Republicans is that Westmoreland allows Harris and Bonamigo space to make their cases without dismissing them or labeling with a terrible term that rhymes with "elf baiting." They stand, or fall, on their own merits.

They are contrasted nicely with a group that is more representative of the LCR, conservative gays. When Barry Goldwater piped up about gays in the military he famously said, "You don't have to be straight, you just have to shoot straight." For conservatives like Goldwater homosexuality is a non-issue. It has nothing to do with state's rights, fiscal responsibility or any of the other issues that Republicans used to talk about. Former Arizona state legislator Steve May and corporate lawyer Carol Newman are much more a part of this sect. May was first a name during the Clinton administration when he was a victim of the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy. Newman became politically active as a libertarian but opted to join the Republican Party instead. Both have a huge problem with the Christian right and what they see as the hijacking of the Republican Party. They supported Bush in 2000 when he extended somewhat of an olive branch to the homosexual community but felt totally abandoned after Bush declared his steadfast support for the FMA. They struggle with trying to reconcile their conservative beliefs with Bush's proposal of "institutionalized discrimination."

These two polar viewpoints are filmed in public and private in the period leading up to a decision on whether or not the LCR will endorse Bush for reelection in 2004. Westmoreland has collected an impressive array of participants and scenes including gay Democrats talking about gay Republicans, Christian extremists talking about homosexuals, whether Republican or not, and a few different people talking about how rare Republican lesbians are. Good pacing and healthy doses of humor, as when Bonamigo criticizes the fashion of the Carter and Clinton administrations, help illuminate a group of people that are often not accepted by either the homosexual or Republican communities. When talking about his resentment of being forced to choose between leaving the party or supporting a candidate that does not accept him, May paraphrases Ronald Reagan to great effect in explaining the dilemma that gay Republicans face, "I did not leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me."

Blind faith is hazardous to morality. It allows all kinds of awfulness to take place with a minimum of resistance. If you are sure that what you believe in is righteous, what is done to uphold that belief, however terrible, becomes much more palatable. The danger that is blind faith is personified by The Operative in the excellent new Joss Whedon space opera Serenity. Played with perfection by Chiwetel Ejiofor he is a soldier for the Alliance, the governing body of a solar system colonized by Earthlings. The governance of the Alliance is not welcomed by all despite the modern amenities that come with it. As such it is the job of "believers", people like The Operative, to subdue threats to the Alliance's power. It is not that The Operative is a flawed being so much as he is a man who put his faith in something before he knows the whole picture. "What I do is evil, I have no illusions about it," The Operative declares. He believes in the Alliance so though evil it may be, "it must be done."

His target in Serenity is River Tam (Summer Glau), a "psychic weapon" created by the Alliance and freed by her brother Simon (Sean Maher). Simon is a medic aboard Cpt.. Malcolm Reynolds' Serenity. "Mal" (Nathan Fillion) is an ex-soldier and now more of a soldier of fortune. The Alliance fears that River's psychic abilities have allowed her access to some damaging information. While Mal knows that something's not right with the girl, he doesn't know exactly what it is that plagues her, nor does she. The ensuing action is a struggle to find out, and comes to terms with that knowledge.

The cast of relative unknowns achieves this with ease. Whatever flaws they might have as performers, as a group they have an undeniable chemistry. They are comfortable with Whedon's style and his one liners that pop up throughout the film. Whedon knows enough about storytelling to know that a quick punch line can both be comedic and add poignancy to a dramatic scene. Especially good is a line from Kaylee (Jewel Staite) at a moment when when it appears all hope is lost. Needless to say hope is not lost, it just required the proper motivation. The special effects are competent if not perfect and Summer Glau is a graceful as one would expect from a trained ballerina in dealing out spectacularly choreographed beatdowns, a task Ejiofor performs with skill as well. Those dead and defeated at the hands of The Operative, River and others are not let go lightly. Whether at the killed by the good guys or the villains it's nice to see that even minor characters do not pass gently into that good night. The Operative, conscious of his beastly actions, does not shy away from the deaths he causes. He faces them down and though he does not wince or hesitate, it's clear that he doesn't accept it as right. Coming from a villain, that's a welcome vision. In a climatic battle that would seem to be Awful vs. Terrible, both Mal and The Operative are quick to point out that those doing the actual fighting are innocent though they are dying at the hands of each other, and they're both right.

Misguided faith and collateral damage are not the only relevant topics Whedon has on his mind. The basis of the conflict between the Alliance and the outer planets is one of meddling in the affairs of others. The believers have no problem with the cause of the Alliance for a variety of reasons, all wrongheaded. Whether wanting to civilize the savages or bring an Alliance-style peace, the intrusions are not welcomed. A child says it best in the film, people do not like to be meddled with, no matter the intentions of the meddlers. In extending the policies and values of the Alliance over the wishes of those who would prefer their own path the Alliance stirs up a hornet's nest that makes any previous danger pale in comparison. American policy makers would do well to note the final theme of the film: Trying to force a Pax Americana on folks that do not want it will bring no meaningful kind of peace to anyone.

The protagonists are a lovable but geeky batch of characters. The antagonists are a group of generally unlikable bully sorts. The underdogs inevitably win in some symbolic battle to prove they're not losers after all. That's the Slobs vs. Snobs picture in a nutshell. They're generally light on character development and focus overwhelmingly on letting the audience know that it's okay to be geeky/ugly/fat/skinny/smelly/some other unpopular characteristic. While those messages rarely reach those that could use the lesson the films can often be a bit of fun with heroes that are easy to root for and bad guys just as easy to hate. Shelly Horman's new Guys and Balls (Männer wie wir) is a decent one. The slobs are a group of homosexual soccer players and the snobs are a team of rude, homophobic Fußballspielers in this screwball comedy.

Ecki (Maximilian Brückner) is the goalie for a small German town's soccer team. Already in the doghouse for a controversial play at the end of the last game he's totally ostracized when he makes a drunken pass at a decidedly heterosexual teammate. His longtime nemesis Udo (Carlo Lubjek) takes charge and get him kicked off the team and his parents are shocked by the news of their son's sexual orientation. Parting words between the team and their ex- goalie bring a challenge; for Ecki to field a team of homosexual for a match against his old team. He heads to the big city to find his sister in the hopes that she can help him find some gay footballers. Wouldn't ya' know it he finds a group of unlikely heroes. The group includes a trio of leather-clad bikers, a very feminine Turkish deli worker, an extremely masculine lesbian, a closet construction worker and a couple of Brazilian players. The broad spectrum of gay personality types, including stereotypes, could come off as amateur caricatures in lesser hands but Horman & crew do a fine job of compensating for the characters' lack of depth. The biker trio especially is shown with a light humor that comes at the expense of common perceptions of lifestyle leather queens rather than at the expense of the characters themselves. The dearth of character development isn't normally that big of a problem. Only when unnecessary melodrama is introduced does it intrude. Scenes between Rudolf (Christian Berkel) and his son tend to ring a bit false because we don't know much about either of them and the sudden conflict between Ecki's parents seems a bit out of place.

In the city Ecki finds not only his sister (Lisa Pothoff) but also Sven (David Rott), a handsome hospital worker with looks and soccer skills to spare. As Ecki, with the help of a drunken former soccer star for a coach, works to make the team ready for the match he also must work to put his relationship with his parents back together. Will the team be better than everyone expected? Will Ecki's parents be able to transcend their prejudices? The answers are never really in doubt just as in any film of this type.

That a film is a predictable by-the-numbers formula doesn't necessarily mean it's no good. There is a reason that formula exist, they sometimes work. A fun, light comedy that's a bit stupid and a little romantic, Guys and Balls is an example of one that does.

Writer and star of Dirty Love Jenny McCarthy and director John Mallory Asher are getting a divorce. It's always sad when happiness inverts for a couple but sympathy for a family tragedy can turn to revulsion when the couple expresses a bitter hatred for each other and takes the feud public. While any public discourse around their separation has been civil and subdued, it's clear that the reality of the situation is quite the opposite. Dirty Love represents the nadir of this battle with each obviously trying to destroy the other's career. A stunning achievement of incompetence, this film might sweep the Razzies.

This awful tripe begins with Rebecca (McCarthy) finding her boyfriend Richard (Victor Webster) in bed with another woman. While her distress is a natural reaction, the form it takes is entirely alien. Shrieking hysterically and contorting her face into bizarre expressions, Rebecca's reaction is less like a heartbroken lover than it is like the obnoxious jerk who wants to be in the live television shot. "Hey! Hey! Look at me over here!" She proceeds to hook up with a series of random human-ish caricatures including a corny magician, a man with a penchant for using large fish as buttplugs and a lecherous Woody Allen impersonator. Could it be that she's looking for love in all the wrong places? Is it possible that her true love is her good friend and all-American nice guy John (Eddie Kaye Thomas) who has been quietly waiting in the background? The use of the word "quietly" in the previous sentence was purposeful. A sign in an audition scene reads: Quite Please. Ms. McCarthy, please note the difference.

Rebecca's quest is made more unwatchable by the presence of her two friends Carrie (Kam Heskin) and Michelle (Carmen Electra). Carrie's character is likely an undercover agent from another species that learned about the behavior of human women from "dumb blonde" jokes. Michelle is an white ebonics-spouting hair remover whose performance would probably be offensive if it wasn't so incredibly bizarre. Somehow, these characters manage to take away credibility from a film that has none to give. One wonders if McCarthy knew this when she wrote the lines, "Just stop. I don't believe a word you're saying."

Herr Asher's blitzkrieg of crap includes plentiful unnecessary zooms and multiple blurry shots. A scene where McCarthy is dosed with "Ecstasy laced with acid" hints that despite being a young filmmaker and actor in Hollywood, he has never used any drug nor does he know anybody that has. Mr. Asher is clearly no longer in love with Ms. McCarthy and he wastes no opportunity to portray her in as poor a light as possible. He apparently is no longer in love with any of the other performers as well as they are all given the shaft. Speaking of shafts, abandoned mines would be an ideal place to store all copies of this film.

The impression we get from watching this schlock is that McCarthy and Asher would not only do anything for a laugh, but would do anything for considerably less than a laugh. It's an exercise in nauseating embarrassment that's worst part is somehow not a scene where people slip and fall in a remarkably large puddle of menstrual blood. One character asks, "What do I look like? A comedian?" How one wishes someone had responded when that line was written.

To hell with equal marriage rights! To hell with full citizenship and ending gay-bashing! To hell with all of it! What the male homosexual community needs is a gay softcore slasher flic with all the contrived trappings of a hetero softcore slasher flic and by Jove, deliverance has come! HellBent, judging by the title and the fact it's some dude dressed as the devil killing gay guys, is probably meant to be a bit of a send-up of Christian fundamentalism as well as 80's slasher films. Though not a bad effort, it doesn't accomplish either of those very well. Instead the film, written and directed by Paul Etheredge-Ouzts, mostly plays like any other slasher movie with a young, good-looking cast.

Eddie (Dylan Fergus) is a hesitant fellow that really wants to go after this handsome guy (Bryan Kirkwood) he spies at the tattoo parlor. The guy, Jake, is a ruggedly handsome biker type and Eddie goes too ga-ga to form a coherent pickup line. Will they eventually get together? Check the formula. Eddie's roommates fill out a gang of likely horror film victims quite well. If Stifler from American Pie was bi he'd be Chaz, the outgoing and a bit obnoxious guy. Tobey is an underwear model that decides to be a "Queen for Halloween", looking like a really buff Pamela Anderson. Finally there's Joey, a nerd who is quietly pining for this hot jock. In slasher movies there's often a dearth of character development and this one is no different. Most opportunities for enriching the characters are given over to boy talk, sometimes amusing, sometimes not. As they group gets together to head out for the West Hollywood Halloween Carnival, Chaz takes drives them to a spot where two homosexuals were beheaded the night before by some maniac. As formula dictates this is where the evil is unleashed. As the crew make their way, and make out, through Carnival the devil-man stalks and begins to pick them off, one by one.

The other slasher convention that this film perpetuates is the naked chest. To the delight of 14-18-year-old hetero boys everywhere at some point during a slasher film an attractive woman will remove her shirt. In the more daring ones, the ones on Cinemax late at night, there might even be some poorly simulated sex! For 14-18-year-old homosexual boys that are as comfortable with their sexuality as hetero boys of the same age, meaning barely, this movie may provide a few stolen moments of forbidden delight. For the rest of us, a nostalgic grin.

What all this adds up to is a slightly better than average knife-wielding maniac film. Even though the story comes apart quite badly towards the end it still has its moments of goofy fun and mindless gore, essentially all one needs to make a slasher film. For a movie that bills itself as "The first ever gay slasher film," one would think there would be something in the film to reflect some aspect of homosexual identity. There isn't. That the characters are all gay or bi is a nice twist but it would be better called, "The first ever slasher film with all gay characters." As such this film should remind viewers of a one-line critique Timothy Leary offered of some feminists that is equally applicable here, "Women who strive to be equal to men lack imagination."

The Memory of a Killer initially seems a bit interesting. Koen De Bouw is an undercover cop trying to bust a child prostitution gig. His path crosses with that of Jan Declair, an assassin with early symptoms of Alzheimer's. Memento showed quite compellingly the multitude of dilemmas that would be present for solving a puzzle without a memory. Instead here we get a generally competent but not particularly engaging formula film of a tortured cop and a tortured villain, each out to solve the same case. One does it because it's his job and the other, well, we don't really know, maybe some childhood thing. Nonetheless the assassin will ruthlessly and quickly kill innocent folks, but not a teenager. While it's true that moral boundaries are at some level arbitrary, it still seems odd that someone that has exactly zero problems offing folks would hesitate just because of the age if the target.

Declair is hired to smite a few people involved in the blackmail of a powerful family. As the bodies start to pile up De Bouw starts to investigate. Lots of dead bystanders and contrived twists later we end up with an unlikely alliance. That alliance is threatened continually by the number of face to face showdowns between the protagonists. How often must they be in contact? Director Erik Van Looy gives Declair's fading recall an interesting look as the assassin's confused and indecisive look reappears whenever trying to figure the next course of action. That alone though, is not enough to break the mold.

Alternating between amusing and annoyingly gimmicky, TMOAK could have use some judicious editing. The story is convoluted and the pieces don't add up convincingly. By the time De Bouw figures out the unlikely answer the film is a half hour past a preferable end point. It's not a poor film but with all of different American art forms to be exported, this middling formula film is one of the more unfortunate results.

Music video veteran Marcos Siega's new film Pretty Persuasion is interesting for a few reasons.

1. Evan Rachel Wood has a breakout performance as Kimberly Joyce, a teenage sociopath with a steel will and an uncanny talent for manipulating others.

2. The film seems to want to depict alternate versions of destructive alienated youth with a peripheral back story of a school shooting contrasted with the behavior of Kimberly and her cohorts.

3. There is more than one film going on. One is a raunchy comedy that includes lines like, "We've been going out for three months now and I love you and all so I was wondering if I could pack your fudge chute?" The third film here is even a more puzzling contrast. It's a film that can't seem to decide if it wants to mock racism or be racist.

Taking the those comments in order; Evan Rachel Wood has the kind of role that her character, an aspiring actress, would dream of. Whether it's using lines gleaned from pornos to seduce or telling a friend that "If I couldn't be white I'd wanna be Asian," her anger and loneliness is stabilized by a steely fixation on personal success and revenge. The script breaks that facade on occasion but with all that bad she does, the scenes of her vulnerability seem a bit contrived, forced and inauthentic, as if Kimberly was manipulating the audience as well. Nonetheless the film is probably worth seeing just to see Wood's performance. Kimberly's quest for revenge against teacher Mr. Anderson (Ron Livingston) and later against others could have come off much more flat in the hands of a lesser performer.

As far as showing another form of extreme teen angst the film is considerably less able. Successfully comparing and contrasting other behavior to a teen killing his/her schoolmates is a tall order only partially filled here. Because the scenes of the villains vulnerability aren't too convincing one gets more a picture of a singularly evil girl compared quite evenly with the singularly evil boy that shot up his school. He is described as having laughed and being totally unmoved by his actions. We end up with more a portrayal of aberrant behavior than a depiction of troubled youth. Especially in the last shot of the film you can kind of see what Siega was going for but it's just not there.

The last topic is the most troubling. There are few regular film characters more despicable than the wacky fun bigot. James Woods plays with remarkable ability but his rants about Jews and African-Americans are not funny nor do they really mock racism. You don't really get the sense at this point that the filmmakers are bigots, just that they aren't able to mock particularly well. Alternately they were going for some kind of shock value for some undefined reason. Other characters give different impressions. Kimberly's assertion that one Jewish kids dad is a money-grubbing shyster that helps criminals go free would seem to be in the same weird form as her father but there's a problem in that the kids dad does try to replace emotion with money and does help criminals go free. Even more regrettable is what happens to Randa, a Muslim girl. Her character's demise smacks of an easy-out opportunistic co-opting of a racist stereotype. It's likely that a short scene later was intended to change that perception but it fails to redeem or clarify. The multiple scenes of raunchy comedy are at times funny but mostly feel kind of bizarre. With comedic dialogue that is at times clever but mostly middling, something is needed to lift the script but accusations that the stepmother is "f#$&*@g the dog" make it more confused, not more entertaining.

That Siega has a history in music video is clear. The purposeful staging of extras and their background choreography gives the film an interesting look that doesn't wear off. His glamorous Beverly Hills looks like the Brittany Spears video it's parodies quite well. In the end though, the story just doesn't hold up. A more streamlined story of Kimberly, Randa and Britanny (Elisabeth Harnois) and their awful journey would likely be a fine film but this version has a lot of baggage to shed.

In Fly Away Home Carroll Ballard directed a moving story of an orphaned flock of goslings that needed to be guided through their first migration. The guide was a young girl that recently lost her mother and she was helped by a father she didn't know at all. Duma is a radical departure from that theme. In Duma it is an orphaned cheetah. a young boy and a deceased father. If it worked in Fly Away Home so well why not stick to it eh? Duma begins with a cheetah cub being orphaned when some mean old lions make a snack out of mama. It's the first of many scenes where Ballard shows his impressive talent for weaving nature footage into a feature film. The problems start when we are introduced to the human characters. The acting is not the problem and with a cast including Campbell Scott, Eamon Walker and Hope Davis it shouldn't be. The characters they have to play though are too two dimensional to really care much about. Scott plays a father without flaws and Davis is a caring but slightly distant mother. The early scenes of Xan (a debuting Alex Michaeletos) with with Peter (Scott) do not carry enough emotional weight for the death of Xan's father to move us.

Xan's subsequent quest to return Duma to the wild is where the real story is. Again it is a competently performed story that plays more or less straight with nothing to really engage us outside of beautiful shots of cheetahs and the South African landscape. Ripkuna (Walker) finds Xan sheltered in the wreckage of an old airplane where his motorbike ran out of gas. As they begin their journey across the wilderness they encounter dangerous and benign animals to about the same effect for filmgoers: mild, detached amusement. Toss in some light personality conflict and you've got an idea of what happens.

One wonders what a South African director might have done with the same material. Though there is a different sensibility in adult-child relationships, it's still a little uncomfortable watching a black man dig for water in a scalding sun while the white kid sits in the shade with his pet cheetah. Nothing is taught to the audience in Xan's classroom either though it's almost entirely white. Even in naming the cat there is a chance to say something. Duma is the Swahili word for cheetah. Swahili isn't a dominant language in South Africa but Duma only sounds cool to them because it's from a language that they don't, and likely wouldn't, speak. Would any of the Anglophones on this list name their cat Gato? Duma doesn't end up having much to say about love, loss or life in South Africa. Great wildlife shots redeem the film a bit but given that Ballard already told this story, it would have been nice if it was done as well this time around.