The Brady Bunch

Regarding the viral saga of Timmy/Shimmy started on the "Crazy Days and Nights" blog by "Ent Lawyer", all has been revealed.

I'll cut to the chase: "Timmy" was Arthur Blake, and "Shimmy" was indeed Alice Brady. Although the original blind item alluded that Blake "took over" completely for Brady at some point (at least that's how I read it), that was not the case after all. Blake, a natural mimic, stepped in for Brady on those occasions when the frail actress was too ill to work, which was apparently often.

Therefore, both Brady and Blake reportedly appeared in Brady's Oscar nominated role in My Man Godfrey and a few other films, most notably her Academy Award-winning role as the infamous Mrs. O'Leary in In Old Chicago (pictured above in the "center square" of my Brady Bunch-esque homage to Brady. Fittingly, that was maid Alice's spot on the beloved sitcom, as we all know). Cesar Romero was the closeted gay star who met Brady/Blake while filming Metropolitan, leading to a secret love affair with Blake that lasted a few years.

As I stated previously, who knows if this is indeed true or not (either way, it sure is fascinating), and it will be interesting to see if any "legitimate" media picks up the story, or if anyone truly "in the know" will come out to confirm it. Then there is the intriguing question of whether the Academy will respond.

Regardless of any future developments, "Ent" brings up a good point regarding all his readers who were so obsessively involved with cracking this "Old Hollywood" BI. It has turned on many people to an interest in classic film, and, hopefully, they will actually watch some of these often forgotten treasures that they have read about; if anything else, I'm sure In Old Chicago has jumped to top of many people's Netflix queues as a result of all this. I know it has in mine.

Click here to purchase In Old Chicagoon DVD from Amazon.com.
Links via CrazyDaysAndNights.net and Imdb.com.

Timmy - Shimmy - Coco - Pop

I'm human and I'm gay, so I love a little gossip. Now, I'm not talking about what is usually printed as "gossip" nowadays in the tabloids. I couldn't care less what blonde bimbo #213 is doing with himbo actor#156. That's nothing, amateur hour.

No, I like my gossip dirty, the kind that the rags would never dare put in print for fear of legal repercussions. I'm talking about the stuff that you only hear about when everyone involved is long dead and buried. Kenneth Anger's Hollywood Babylon- now that's gossip worth reading and savoring.

So I love a good "blind item". Names aren't named, so the writer can actually say, for example, that this Hollywood starlet is a big pothead or that "Prima Donna bitch" actor has a thing for the lads. Trying to figure out who it is, well, that's half the fun.

Naturally, the internet is rife with gossip sites and blogs (even some that are not run by obnoxious disgraces to their community), and probably the juiciest one out there is "Crazy Days and Nights". Written by an "Entertainment Lawyer" (so you know he has great access to all the dirt), "CDAN" is currently running a doozey of a "long blind item" that has his readers scrambling to decipher all the hints and clues to a story that, if true, could be the most shocking secret in Hollywood history.

It is a story filled with deception, sex, intrigue, heartbreak, skin conditions and the Academy Awards. If it were a movie, audiences and critics alike would scoff at the implausibility of it all. And yet, that is what makes it so fascinating.

"Timmy" was an aspiring actor in the studio years that never quite broke out of bit parts and the chorus line. He was also a homosexual, a fact that was always unspoken in those days. Circumstances led him to an unbelievable attempt at stardom: "Timmy" became "Shimmy" - an actress.

"Shimmy" worked her way up to lead roles, where she met a closeted A-lister that would become "Timmy's" secret love for many years. Around this time, "Shimmy was cast in the role of a lifetime, a role that lead not only to critical acclaim and the "very big award" (an Oscar?), but also to the ultimate demise of "Shimmy".

You'll have to read the whole "BI" to get all the details, but suffice to say, this is one hell of a story, even if it is all fiction or just the latest in a long line of outrageous celebrity rumors or Hollywood urban legends.

Obsessive "CDAN" fans (some of who have even created their own line of t-shirts touting their picks!) have investigated the pasts and filmographies of dozens of award-winning actresses, from Shirley Booth, Sandy Dennis, Marie Dressler, Judy Holiday, Josephine Hull, Mercedes McCambridge, Hattie McDaniel, Mary Pickford and Luise Rainer (all of whom have been directly discounted by the author) to Fay Bainter, Janet Gaynor, Anne Revere, Margaret Rutherford, Gale Sondergaard, Jo Van Fleet, Shelley Winters (!), Teresa Wright and Alice Brady, who has emerged the "favorite" at last call.

Yep, in his latest update, "Ent Lawyer" has promised the big reveal, with a complete explanation of all the who's, what's and why's, this Wednesday.

In the end, I can only imagine what all these actresses up in "movie heaven' must be thinking about all this. Perhaps they are printing up their own t-shirts: "I'm NOT Timmy".

Links via BlindItems.typepad.com, Amazon.com, UrbanDictionary.com, Wikipedia.org, CrazyDaysAndNights.net, Nerve.com, JoBlo.com, SpreadShirt.net and Imdb.com.

Netflix Knows I'm Gay

OK, so, I got a little email today from Netflix, touting all the bells and whistles they have added to their new-fangled "Community" section. So, I jumped over to check it out, even though I hardly ever use any of those features ... seriously, does anyone?
Anyway, one of the new features is a list of, well, lists, made up of movies that you may want to watch. Now, being the all-knowing "movie guy" that I am, I don't really need Netflix (or Amazon, or Imdb ...) to tell me what to watch, but I took a gander anyway and here is what I found, verbatim. (And, I might add, I did not make any of this up ... well, except for my catty parenthetical comments):

• "GLBT Flicks-O-Rama" (I love anything that's "O-Rama".)
• "Great Gay Movies!!" (Gay movies so great, they deserve not one, but two exclamation marks!!)
• "Fabulously Gay Cinema" (Like, there could be any other?)
• "Gay Things to Make You Laugh" (Not at, with; you know, like drag queen nuns or leathermen in buttless chaps.)
• "The G-List" (Minimalist.)
• "I'm Gay, So What?" (Out and proud.)
• "The Pantheon of Gay Cinema" (Elitist.)
• "GAY MOVIES WORTH SEEING" (DEMANDING.)
• "Gay Family Jewels" (Naughty.)
• "*** Rainbow Cinema ***" (I assume those asterisks represent sequins.)
• "Steve's Great Gay Films" (If you've seen Steel Magnolias, you know why this is funny.)
• But my absolute favorite is: "My Fave SAL MINEO Movies" (which, somehow, is only three movies long ...)

Now, I know that Netflix has all kinds of computer gizmos to track what movies you like, rent, rate, et cetera. But still, it's just a bit ... unnerving to be pegged so succinctly and yet so accurately. Is it because I'm in the midst of an Ugly Betty marathon? Perhaps it was that recent double feature of Puppetry of the Penis and Private Dicks: Men Exposed that tipped them off. I know: it was the Hugh Jackman Oklahoma! that did me in.
I can just see the poor minimum wage Netflix employee with the Carpal Tunnel ripping open the latest red envelope from me and saying, "What? Another gay movie?"

Aside from this ... profiling, I highly recommend Netflix to any and all movie fans. For more information, and to sign up for a free trial subscription, click on their ad located in the sidebar.

Full Frontal Theater

Ever since the nude wrestling match between Alan Bates and Oliver Reed in Women in Love, we have had the occasional opportunity to see celebrity penises out in the open for all to enjoy.

These often fleeting, forever frustrating glimpses of gratuitous male nudity range from the dramatically necessary (Geoffrey Rush in Quills, Peter Sarsgaard in Kinsey) to the outrageously hilarious (M.C. Gainey in Sideways, Ken Davitian in Borat), from the famous (Richard Gere in American Gigolo, Jaye Davidson in The Crying Game) to the infamous (Vincent Gallo in The Brown Bunny, the entire cast of Shortbus), even from the animated (Bart Simpson in The Simpsons Movie) to the prosthetic (Mark "Dirk Diggler" Wahlberg in Boogie Nights).

And it doesn't seem to matter whether you are an established name actor (Marlon Brando in Last Tango in Paris, Kevin Bacon in Wild Things, Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain) or a rising star (Christopher Atkins in The Blue Lagoon, Viggo Mortensen in The Indian Runner, Daniel Craig in Love is the Devil) or even an actual male (Felicity Huffman in Transamerica): they have all dropped trou for our viewing pleasure.

Knowing full well that "art house" stands for "soft core", we have sat through many a pretentious pic from foreign lands (A Room With a View, Total Eclipse, Y tu Mamá También, The Dreamers) to get a peek at "the full monty" (which reminds me: The Full Monty).

Where else but in "the cinema" can we get our fill of the private parts of Ewan McGregor (The Pillow Book, Velvet Goldmine) and Harvey Keitel (Bad Lieutenant, The Piano) on ample (or maybe, not so ample ...) display?

Well, thanks to the wonders of the internet, fuzzy screen shots of all of the above and more (minus the disapproving glare of Saint Joan) are just an unrestricted 'Google' away ... or is that 'Ogle'?

Extra! Extra! Movie Dearest in the Headlines!

Movie Dearest has received a nice write-up from my pal and fellow film critic Neil Cohen over at Echo Magazine (Phoenix's main source for gay news and reviews). Here is a snippet:

"Do you ever beat yourself up for not knowing every single thing about the movies? Well, never fear, Movie Dearest is here. ... If you're in danger of losing your gay card for not knowing the difference between Joan Crawford and Joan Blondell, or if you just want to see hot pictures of Zac Efron and Channing Tatum, Movie Dearest is for you."

Thanks for the kind words, Neil!

And for the record, Crawford is on the left, Blondell on the right (above). And yes, there will be a test later ...

Link via EchoMag.com.

To Remake or Not to Remake

Would you remake these movies?

I am often befuddled by the knee-jerk reactions of most people when they hear about a movie being remade (or given a sequel, or turned into a stage play or TV show). They are often up in arms about the mere thought of such "blasphemy" ("I can't believe they are remaking such-and such!"), as if they themselves have a stake in the property. Granted, they have an emotional interest in the original movie, but another version of it is not (or, at least, should not) "ruin" the first film. It will still exist no matter how the remake (or sequel or stage play or TV show) turns out.

Nevertheless, some recent announcements have cinephiles scratching their heads (if not forcibly tearing their hair from them). Take the news that India is remaking Casablanca. Sounds a bit odd, sure, but what was left unsaid from all the headlines was how often this actually happens, as this list attests (yes, there were Indian remakes of such movies as Kramer vs. Kramer and The Silence of the Lambs). And that's not even mentioning the most (in)famous example, the so-called Turkish Star Wars. And why should we be surprised? American studios do it all the time.

The Wizard of Oz is another all-time classic that will soon be remade -- or should I say, re-imagined -- as both a feature film and a TV mini-series. Again, nothing new here: from The Wiz to Wicked to the Muppets, filmmakers can't stay away from that yellow-brick road. And yet, none have (or will) tarnish the original (itself technically a remake as well).

Then there is the curious case of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Like Dorothy and friends, Snow and company have had their tale told and retold several times, yet two future films are taking a crack at it again. Disney itself is retooling its own classic as a martial arts epic, titled Snow and the Seven. Meanwhile, teen queen Amanda Bynes has seven nerds instead of dwarfs in Sydney White, which seems to owe as much to Ball of Fire (itself a "reimagining" of the fairy tale) as the original story.

Oz and Snow White aren't the only oft-told tales having another go. In addition to Robert Zemeckis' animated version, Dickens' A Christmas Carol will get a romantic comedy twist with Matthew McConaughey of all people. And Kipling's The Jungle Book will get another live action attempt.

Science fiction and horror movies are particularly ripe pickings for remakers of late, especially those from the 70's and 80's. This is likely due to two reasons: the advancements of special effects technologies, and most of today's younger directors were weaned on such films (suckled at the teat of Spielberg and Lucas, as it were).

In addition to Rob Zombie's Halloween redux (opening this Friday), such other haunts from the past that will be revisited in the future include Friday the 13th, The Changeling and even another Wicker Man (lord help us all). Reaching even further back into the vaults, RKO will update its own Isle of the Dead, and there will even be a modern take on The Tingler (really, who could do it better then William Castle?).

As for sci fi, the remakes in the works range from such certified classics as Fantastic Voyage and Logan's Run to cult favorites like Death Race 2000, Escape from New York and even Barbarella. And that's not even mentioning the sword and sorcery fantasies Clash of the Titans and Conan the Barbarian.

Speaking of which, it will be interesting to see who they get for Conan; whoever is cast will have big ... furry briefs? ... to fill. Which brings up another challenge remakers have: finding actors talented enough and willing enough to take on iconic screen characters. For example, who could make us forget Bruce Lee in Enter the Dragon?

On the other hand, some films have subject matter that provide compelling avenues for a remake regardless of the film's original star power. For example, Sean Connery and Dustin Hoffman starred in, respectively, The Anderson Tapes and Straw Dogs, both in the process of being remade. The former had technological aspects while the latter deals with themes of societal brutality that not only still resonate in today's world, but are probably even more prevalent.

Of course, there are also remakes that are merely being made to cash-in on a current trend (Howard Stern, who wants to remake Porky's of all things, must be really happy with the box office of Superbad).

Then there are the special cases. Footloose, like this summer's Hairspray, is being remade via the Broadway stage. Documentaries are another option, such as the recently announced fictionalized remake of Murderball. Then there is the always fertile ground of television, with Dallas being a current example.

And finally, there are the "remakes that aren't really remakes" like Seventeen, a remake by any other name of Big, only in reverse.

Naturally, there is no way one can foresee how well any of these remakes will turn out. They could be good, or they could join the ranks of the worst of all-time. However, fear not, for it looks like at least one studio is taking steps to prove wrong the old adage that there is "no original ideas in Hollywood". So there is some hope for the future. Oh, and one more thing ...

I can't believe they are remaking Valley of the Dolls!

Links via HollywoodReporter.com, Amazon.com, Imdb.com, Variety.com, Cinematical.com, AfterEllen.com, MoviesBlog.MTV.com, Bloody-Disgusting.com, ObsessedWithFilm.com, ZombieDirector.blogspot.com, SlashFilm.com, TVGuide.com, EW.com and Movies.AOL.com.

Tag, You're It

Lines of dialogue aren't the only words written for a movie that can be quoted. A memorable movie tagline can sometimes become just as big as the movie it came from ("In space, no one can hear you scream." from Alien) or even be better then the movie (take your pick from these two Jaws sequels: "Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water." or "This time, its personal.").

Entertainment Weekly recently asked their readers to name their favorite movie taglines, and their subsequent list is filled with such usual suspects as ''They're young ... they're in love ... and they kill people.'' from Bonnie and Clyde and ''Be afraid. Be very afraid." from The Fly.

Although you wouldn't know it from EW's list, gay-themed films have had taglines for years too.

Considering the controversial subject matters of early queer films, tagline writers of the day had to get creative when a film dared to broach such themes back then:

• "You don't know women until you know them without men!" - Caged
• "What made these women different?" - The Children's Hour
• "Tennessee Williams shocks you again as he transports you to a STRANGE, NEW BOLD WORLD!" - Suddenly, Last Summer

As censorship loosened over the years, and more and more realistic, adult-themed stories were being told, you still had to read between the lines of some tags to glean the movie's queer content:

• "The Boys in the Band ... is not a musical."
• "Between Ellen and Jill came Paul ..." - The Fox
• "Only his draft board and his girlfriend know for sure." - The Gay Deceivers
• "There's more to love than ... Making Love."

Others were more blatant, yet nevertheless proved to be truth in advertising - they were as offensive as the movies they were touting:

• "Benson is a cop who wants to clean up the streets ... His partner just wants to redecorate." - Partners
• "A sad gay story." - Staircase

Some just told it like it is:

• "Weird. Wild. Sexy. Strange." - Myra Breckinridge
• "An exercise in poor taste." - Pink Flamingos

Or out-right lied:

• "The Musical Comedy Smash of the 80's!" - Can't Stop the Music

While others were just downright indecipherable:

• "When you run into yourself you run into feelings you never thought you had." - Personal Best

As more and more movies with gay content were produced, taglines got better and more open:

• "An urban fairytale." - Beautiful Thing
• "For Money. For Murder. For Each Other." - Bound
• "It's not who you love. It's how." - Chasing Amy
• "School's out, so is Steven Carter." - Get Real
• "There's a first time for everything." - The Incredibly True Adventure of 2 Girls in Love
• "Sometimes you just have to be yourself." - Ma Vie en Rose
• "Having a ball ... wish you were here." - Paris is Burning
• "How's a guy supposed to find Mr. Right when his dad won't stop trying to help?" - The Sum of Us
• "One girl. Two guys. Three possibilities." - Threesome
• "You are cordially invited to a wedding where everybody wants to kiss the bride ... except the groom." - The Wedding Banquet

Or maybe not:

• "No one would take on his case ... until one man was willing to take on the system." - Philadelphia

Nowadays, gays are everywhere, and recent movie taglines reflect that with some of the best of the genre:

• "Parenthood is about to get a little hairier." - Bear Cub
• "Love is a force of nature." - Brokeback Mountain
• "The shortest distance between friends isn't always a straight line." - The Broken Hearts Club: A Romantic Comedy
• "You can't fit in when you already stand out." - Camp
• "An actress is nothing without a meaty part." - Girls Will Be Girls
• "An anatomically incorrect rock odyssey." - Hedwig and the Angry Inch
• "When it comes to love, sometimes she just can't think straight." - Kissing Jessica Stein
• "Aaron prays. Christian plays ... Opposites attract." - Latter Days
• "Open Your Mind. And Everything Else." - Shortbus
• "Life is more than the sum of its parts." - Transamerica
• "A story about two guys trying to make it in the big city." - Trick
• "Love should never be a secret." - Yossi & Jagger

Alas, there is always a throwback to more unenlightened times:

• "They're as straight as can be, but don't tell anyone." - I Know Pronounce You Chuck and Larry

Links via Portfolio.com and EW.com.

Idol/Busch

Today's unrelated announcements that queer theater diva Charles Busch and XXX porn star Ryan Idol will each be trodding the boards in the Big Apple soon is notable for several reasons.

First, the two are both gay icons, though obviously for very different reasons. Second, they both will appear in plays well known to gay audiences. Busch will star in the Off-Broadway debut of his own Die, Mommie, Die!, reprising the role of Angela Arden that he immortalized on film in the hilarious movie adaptation. And in the upcoming Broadway revival of the comedy The Ritz, Idol will play the bit (but hardly small) part of "bathhouse patron". And thirdly: I have met them both.

Now granted, both of these meetings were of the "Oh gee, it's-so-nice-to-meet-you, I-love-your-work, good-bye!" kind, but when you brush up against fame, it sticks with you.

I will recount the less sordid of the two events first. Back in the summer of 1989, my then-boyfriend and I went to Los Angeles on vacation. Our trip coincided with the west coast run of Busch's then most-famous play, Vampire Lesbians of Sodom, headlined by none-other then Busch himself. Having just acted in the Phoenix premiere production of said play, I was thrilled to be able to see the Charles Busch, along with most of the original New York cast, in what turned out to be their final performance there. As a result of a few well-dropped hints to a kindly usher, we met Busch after the show. He was very gracious and even signed my program, which I still treasure.

As for the Idol encounter some years later, my memories are a bit dimmer owing to the locale. It was at the opening of some gay bar in north Scottsdale (now long gone) where free cocktails were flowing and Idol was the main event. He performed a little strip tease dance and was then "auctioned off" to the highest bidder for the remainder of the night. But before his "dream date", Idol took the time to sign some tragically out-of-date publicity shots for the masses, myself included. Idol was trying to be clever (or, as it turns out, as clever as a porn star can be), writing cutesy sayings along with his autograph; you know, things like "Hey Nick, do you like my ....?" You get the idea.

Before I go on, let me say that I love my name. Everybody remembers it, which is nice even if I can rarely return that compliment. However, being a gay man named Kirby can have its drawbacks, considering I share the name with a certain brand of vacuum cleaner.

Yes, I have heard more then my fair share of not-so-original "jokes" alluding to the sucking power of the latest model of Kirby Vacuums. And yes, it gets old. Nevertheless, as I waited in that line to get Mr. Idol's John Hancock (as opposed to his John Thomas), I was prepared to take whatever he dished out (a night's worth of tequila helped too).

"Kirby" I said when he asked me my name, bracing myself for the laughter ... that never came. Apparently, the Idol family didn't have a Kirby Vacuum Cleaner when little Ryan was growing up, as opposed to, oh, everyone else I have ever met in my life. The reference flew right over Idol's over-moussed head as he hemmed and hawed, finally coming up with this little ditty: "To Kirby: On my derby, Ryan Idol."

Yes. "To Kirby: On my derby". He even drew a tiny top hat to illustrate his little funny, even though a top hat looks nothing like a derby. And yes, I still have that photo, although it isn't nearly as treasured as my Charles Busch program.

Click here to purchase Die Mommie Die!on DVD from Amazon.com.

Links via Imdb.com, Wikipedia.org, Playbill.com and Broadway.com.

Awards Watch: The Toons

Animation fans and Oscar pundits are abuzz following the Comic-Con preview of Beowulf, Robert Zemeckis' latest foray into "mo-cap" (motion capture) animation. The bottom line is whether the "digitally-enhanced live action" of the film will qualify it as an animated feature under the Academy's newest rules that infer that "any film that begins with live action performance and then uses digital animation to enhance or augment that performance is not eligible."

What is interesting about this new rule (which goes into effect with this year's nominations) is that not only would it have deemed last year's nominee Monster House ineligible, but it may have also affected the eligibility of eventual winner Happy Feet (with its mo-capped dance sequences). If these two movies were left off the ballot, then third nominee Cars would have undoubtedly taken home the gold for John Lassiter and Pixar yet again.

Fast forward from Oscar night to the debut this summer of Pixar's Ratatouille, which displayed this statement prominently and proudly in its end credits:

"100 % genuine animation. No motion capture or any other performance shortcuts were used in the production of this film."

Is it a coincidence that the Academy rules were changed around the same time Pixar felt it necessary to permanently clarify the technology used on their entry into this year's awards race? Obviously having a thing against mo-cap (especially after losing to Happy Feet - that had to hurt), could Pixar have had a hand in changing the rules as to what is and is not an animated feature, at least in the eyes of Oscar?

In the meantime, the jury is still out on Beowulf, but Pixar and their top chef may have an even stronger opponent come Oscar time: Homer Simpson.

Of course, in my eyes comparing Ratatouille to The Simpsons Movie is like comparing the Mona Lisa to a Colorforms set.

Links via Variety.com, Imdb.com, Wikipedia.com, Hollywood-Elsewhere.com, LaughingPlace.com and GoldDerby.LATimes.com.

Brief Encounters

Anyone who has visited their online store or received a catalog from TLA Video knows that they have some unique categories for their videos. In addition to such obvious sections as "Editor's Picks" and "Lesbian Erotica", shoppers can browse for titles under such tittillating headings as "Hollywood Full Frontal" and "International Skin".

In their latest attempt to provide their customers with the utmost in specialized choices, TLA has recently added a new category, "Men in Briefs". Reasoning that most A-list actors avoid the big screen full monty (Ewan McGregor notwithstanding), this section will include a vast array of cinematic treasures with one simple common denominator: movie stars in their underwear.

A surprisingly limited selection for now, "Men in Briefs" features some of the quintessential entries into the annals of male undergarments on film, such as John Travolta in Saturday Night Fever, Tim Robbins in Bull Durham (pictured) and Tom Cruise in Magnolia (but no Risky Business?) And let us not forget White Squall, which pretty much defines this whole sub-sub-sub- genre.

Yes, you too can discover that Clay Pigeons' Vince Vaughn "favors tight, white boxer briefs that hug his crotch and legs nice and snug!" and that both Keanu Reeves and Steve Martin (ew) "show nice packages" in the "warm comedy" Parenthood. I betcha that ain't quoted on the box ...

Nonetheless, no matter how breathlessly they describe Jackie Chan's "god-like body", there is no way I'm watching that. And by "that", I mean Jackie Chan's First Strike.

Links via TLAVideo.com.

Straight Eye on the Queer Guys

Planet Out is currently collecting your stories on how your straight friends and family have reacted to gay and lesbian characters they have seen in the movies. They pose the theory that even if you found such films as In & Out and As Good As It Gets cringe-worthy, they may have actually led to positive responses from the heterosexuals in your life.

My first thought on the subject was of me and Big Edie watching Queer as Folk together ("See ma, it has Sharon Gless in it."), but that was a TV show (and she covered her eyes through most of it). Then there was the time I forced my metal-head brothers to listen to Erasure on a long family trip. Still not a movie, still doesn't count.

Then I recalled a particular weepy night long ago when, after watching Untamed Heart ("He ... (sob) ... left her (wail) ... his records!") with my brother and sister-in-law, I thought, "hey, let's continue down this road to despair" and popped in Longtime Companion. Despite more tears, I feel that they understood me a little more as a gay man, not just as their gay brother.

Visit Planet Out to submit your story, the best of which will be featured shortly on their sister site, Gay.com. I will link to that article when it is posted.

(After further inspection and a lengthy, fruitless site search, there is no direct link to submit your stories listed in the article in question. So I say submit them via the "letters to the editor" link here, and let them now that when they ask people for input, they should try to make it a little easier to do so. And you can tell them I told you to say that too.)

Links via PlanetOut.com, Imdb.com and Gay.com.

Hey Cruella, Put That Out!

In what can only be called a symbolic gesture in this day and age, Walt Disney Pictures has issued a ban on any onscreen images of smoking in its films. Considering that the bulk of this studio's output is such G-rated fare as Ratatouille, I don't think this will be very hard. (As for Disney's more "adult"-orientated films put out under their Touchstone and Miramax labels, smoking onscreen will be "strongly discouraged". Whatever.)

But what does this mean for the images (created in a less "Oh, but we have to protect the children" time) from such classics as Pinocchio (lost boys puffing on stogies on Pleasure Island), The Three Caballeros (Jose Carioca and his ever-present cigar) and 101 Dalmatians (Cruella de Vil is never without her green smoke-spewing cigarette holder)? Disney already got the scissors out for the DVD release of the lesser-known Melody Time, snipping out every last trace of cowboy Pecos Bill's tobaccy habit. Will the same be done to forthcoming new DVD editions of Pinocchio and Dalmatians?

Well, it is doubtful that even Disney would go that far. For one thing, I cannot imagine the expense such self-censorship would entail, and the public outcry from animation purists and film historians would be deafening if these two certified masterpieces were tampered with in any way. Also, in both cases, smoking is shown as bad - Pinocchio turns green, Cruella is the villain. So I think it is safe to say that both films will be re-released unharmed - or at least with a "smoking is bad for you" disclaimer tacked on the beginning ... for now.

However, how much longer will it be until that isn't enough? In the excellent satire Thank You for Smoking, William H. Macy's senator announces a plan to edit out all images of smoking from old movies. He illustrates this by showing a photograph of Gary Cooper with a candy cane sticking out of his mouth in place of a cigarette. Sure, it is a ludicrous idea (if not down right impossible - watch any day of Turner Classic Movies and you will see that everyone in every old movie smoked - constantly), but there is a sense that it could happen - that is what makes the scene funny in the first place.

There are certainly dangers the Hollywood studios would face if they allow Washington to control too much of what you see. The MPAA has already hinted at automatically rating a movie an "R" if there was any smoking in it (can you imagine, an "R"-rated 101 Dalmatians), and studios in England have already instituted a ban on any smoking on its sound stages. Are such blanket policies really necessary? Or is this just more political conservatism run amuck?

You may ask, well, it is just smoking, that's bad for you, so they shouldn't show it any way, right? OK, fine, what about alcohol? Alcohol is bad for you, so no drinking onscreen. Guns? Guns kill people, so no guns either. Cars - cars cause accidents, no cars. Food! Someone can choke on a chicken bone and die, nobody can eat in a movie ever again ...!

Absurd, yes, but you can see how slippery the slope is; the politicians should do their jobs and leave the movie making to the moviemakers (free of any government-sanctioned restraints on content) and let parents give little Johnny the anti-smoking talk. After all, isn't the government busy enough without worrying if a cartoon character lights one up?

Which reminds me: Hey Cruella, got a match?

Movie Dearest Hits the Big Time

I woke up this morning to a pleasant surprise: Movie Dearest is featured on the front page of the Internet Movie Database, the premiere online movie site.

Specifically, my article "Why We Should Not Boycott Hairspray" is listed in today's "Hit List" of featured articles. Click here to visit Imdb.com and scroll to the bottom to see it.

Needless to say, this is all very exciting - Big Edie is verklempt with joy. As of now, my site counter has more then tripled in number and continues to rise.

Welcome to all the new readers and I hope you like what you see and come back for more!

Link via Imdb.com.

My Top 100 ... For Now

To give you a taste for my tastes in movies, I have listed the 100 films that I voted for in the American Film Institute's most recent poll. You can find it in the sidebar under the heading "My Ballot: AFI's 100 Years ... 100 Movies - 10th Anniversary Edition".

As is my prerogative, this list is certainly subject to change. For example, in the six months since I voted I have seen Elia Kazan's A Face in the Crowd, an awesome movie that certainly would be included if I were making the list today. Oh well, at least they will be re-polling members once more in another ten years.

For the record, 64 of my choices made the final cut, announced about a month ago. They are indicated on the chronological list in the sidebar with a *, and the links will take you to their respective IMDB pages.

What is most fun about these things (for me anyway) is figuring out the statistics of it all. You know, the most this or the least that. I have compiled facts and figures for each of the AFI lists, which will appear in this section eventually. To give you an idea of what I am talking about, here is some interesting data for the 100 movies on my ballot:

• The oldest film is Harold Lloyd's Safety Last; the newest is Brokeback Mountain.
• The most represented decade is the 1950's, with 18 films.
• The most represented year is (naturally) 1939, with 5 films.
• There are 3 silents on the list (I know, I need to see more).
• Dramas account for 45 entries, the most represented genre. Musicals, one of my favorite genres (go figure), comes in second with 17.
• Steven Spielberg is the most represented director (5 times), followed by Alfred Hitchcock (4 times).
• The actors who appear the most are Humphrey Bogart, Dustin Hoffman and James Stewart, with 4 films each, while the actresses are Faye Dunaway (purely coincidental) and Judy Garland, with 3 films each.
• The Godfather Part II is the only sequel (isn't that always the case?).
• There are 6 animated films, 7 if you count Mary Poppins.
• There are only 4 films with overt gay themes: Midnight Cowboy, Cabaret, Dog Day Afternoon and Brokeback. This is a case where foreign fare does infinitely better.
• 24 films were Oscar-winning Best Pictures. 43 more were nominated for that prize as well. (For the record, Safety Last was released prior to the Academy's existence.)
• The film with the longest title is The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (49 letters, symbols and spaces); the shortest is Jaws (4 letters).
• 37 1/4 * films are in glorious black and white.

* This figure includes the Kansas sections of The Wizard of Oz.

UPDATE: The list has been removed from the sidebar and can now be found in the comments section below.

Links via Imdb.com and AFI.com.

Why We Should Not Boycott Hairspray

The Three Faces of Edna

Movie Dearest continues the weeklong countdown to the new movie musical Hairspray, opening nationwide this Friday.

When I first saw John Waters' original Hairspray in 1988, I fell in love with it. The film’s energy and sassiness drew me in, but it was the universal theme that "what you look like on the outside cannot keep you from making a difference in this world" is what struck a chord within me and stayed with me through its subsequent adaptations.

I am, of course, not alone in my affection for the material. Audiences, regardless of age, gender, race or sexuality, embraced the original movie and stage versions, making them a cult classic and mainstream sensation, respectively. So the unexpected call for the gay community to boycott the new Hairspray by Washington Blade editor Kevin Naff due to John Travolta's involvement in Scientology caught me off guard (as it also did Travolta, Waters and Adam Shankman, the remake's director).

Mr. Naff's ascertains that Travolta should not have been cast in the role of Edna Turnblad because of its gay icon status (Edna was previously portrayed onscreen by Divine and onstage by Harvey Fierstein, who are the real gay icons in this scenario). This goes beyond the questions many of us had regarding the casting in the first place: mainly, could Travolta even pull it off? Instead, Naff's rather glib article (which is not even all that original; who hasn't complained about remakes?) focuses on Travolta's personal life as a Scientologist and that controversial religion's reported stance on homosexuality.

Before I go on, I will say that I am not going to get into the whole debate on what Scientology is or is not. Religion? Cult? So not going there. Which leads me to my point: should our entertainment choices be dictated by what we know (or, let's be realistic, think we know) about the people who create the movies, TV shows, books, music, et al we watch, read, listen to and, ideally, enjoy?

Does this mean that we should not watch, say, John Wayne's or Barbra Streisand's movies because of their strong political beliefs? How about if I don't like a filmmaker's religious heritage, race or sexual orientation? As you can see, if you start pruning it all down, weeding out this one or that one because of this incident or that scandal, all you end up with is a blank screen.

Naturally, we all have been influenced in our opinions concerning this actor or that director by what we have heard about them, and that (along with a healthy dose of our own morality) certainly informs what choices we make in what we watch, buy, et cetera. And that is how it should be. We all have our own personal standards and, more importantly, we all have our own sense of what we do or do not want to see.

With almost twenty-years invested in the property, I want to see the new Hairspray, and I am not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater, as they say, because of one person's involvement in the project. Nor should I be shamed for doing so, and neither should you.

Links via WashBlade.com, Hollywood.com and NYDailyNews.com.

The Origin of Movie Dearest

When I first started thinking about creating this blog, I knew that I had to have a great title. After all, all great movies have great titles, right? In other words, I didn't want to be the Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever of the internet.

I knew that it would be better to have a title that was catchy, short and no-nonsense, two to three words tops (although in my research I did find that the best blog title EVER was more then that).

I also wanted the title to reflect the three main elements of the site: movies, both classic and current; gay and gay-friendly themes; and a slightly irreverent tone. I also liked the idea of tying it into a particular movie.

So what one movie encapsulates these themes (rather brilliantly, I might add)? One that is classic yet current, queer yet a little queer (the other definition).

Well, you know the answer of course: the camp-tastic Mommie Dearest, a mainstream, modern movie (1980 isn't that long ago, is it?) about one of the classic era's biggest stars (Joan Crawford, as if you need me to tell you that) that bombed on its initial release yet was embraced by gay audiences, turning it into the cult classic that it is today.

With a slight tweak to the title and some Photoshop work on the original iconic poster art, and viola! A star is born.

Links via LittleBlogToo.blogspot.com, Imdb.com and IMPAwards.com.

Group Mentality Affection

As opposed to what, "Walt Disney's Saddest Songs"?

When I was a kid, I loved to get those Disney song compilation albums, and not just for the music on them. I loved the album art with all the characters from the different movies on it, all mixed together. It was as if there was some parallel universe where, say, Baloo from The Jungle Book lived next door to Dumbo. I would listen to the records and stare at these album sleeves for hours, imagining the adventures of Peter Pan and Pinocchio, Snow White and Cinderella (cleaning, of course), all seven of the dwarfs and all one hundred and one Dalmatians, all together in their merry Disney neighborhood (no, not Celebration).

As I grew older, this "group mentality affection" (GMA for short) spread to my comic book collection, where such multi-hero super-groups as the Justice League of America and The Avengers were particular favorites.

My GMA of course applies to movies in general as well. All those film clip montages that they always show at the Oscars? You know, the ones most use for a quick potty break or a smoke outside? I can't get enough of them (Chuck Workman is a genius in my book). And I think this is one of the reasons why I love the AFI "100 Years" specials so much every year. To me they're like cinephile porn.

All of this is my roundabout way of drawing your attention to the nifty filmstrip artwork that graces this blog's header. I created it not just to make the top of each page more dynamic and professional looking, but to give readers a sense of what you'll find below it.

Each individual film image is from a favorite film of mine that represents not only some particular obsession of mine (animation, gay-themed films, a young Marlon Brando's chest), but also the evolution of film from the early silent era to the modern classics of today, thus conveying that this blog will cover all of film history, not just movies from the past twenty years or so (like every other movie site out there it seems).

And yes, each frame represents a different decade, but I'll leave it to you to name the nine films represented, from left to right (i.e., from the 1920's to the 2000's) in the handy-dandy comments section below.

Link via Imdb.com.

Someone Stop This Madness!

Well, that's it for the introductions. You may be wondering out there "when is he going to stop talking about what he's going to write about and start writing?!" I know, I know, keep your pants on - except for maybe you, Mr. Craig - I'm getting there.

I actually do have a bunch of cool stories to link to and articles to post, so expect those in the next day or so. I've got a lot of catching up to do on this end, but it will all get there soon, promise.

The reason I posted these introductions was to give this blog some organization from the start and to give you an idea of what to expect from me and from Movie Dearest. Plus, down the line, when new readers click on the labels for each post, everyone will have a good starting point for each section, which will eventually form their own kind of "lists", if you will.

Which leads me to my next point. If you haven't noticed by now, I like to make lists, especially about movies. "Best, worst, most", those kind of things. One thing about lists though, especially when you're talking about movies, is that they so quickly become outdated. For example, once you make that definitive list of Bulgarian coming-of-age musical-comedies, along comes Babushka Can Tango and you have to start all over again. It is my intention that this blog will serve as a continuing "list of lists" of all the subjects I've just detailed and more.

(Yes, if more wacky ideas for sections pop into my head, they'll lead off with an introductory post just like these to keep things all nice and ordered; I'm a little anal that way ... and on that note I'll quote Kevin Walker, "No gay jokes.")

So you see, there is some method to my madness ...

In the meantime, you may want to look over to the side bar on the right side of your screen to the "Archive" section. I've grouped them in actual chronological order for now so you can start, in the immortal words of Maria von Trapp, "at the very beginning," with the very first Movie Dearest post.

Enjoy, and I'll be back soon.

Link via Wikipedia.com.

Welcome to Movie Dearest

I have always been a lover of movies. From the Disney classics of my childhood to the latest Oscar-winners, film has always been my passion. And I'm far from discriminating -- I love all kinds of movies: stirring dramas, show-stopping musicals, hilarious comedies, thought-provoking documentaries, wild cult faves, swoon-inducing romances, exotic foreign fare, edge-of-your-seat thrillers, eye-popping animation, beyond-your-imagination fantasies ... you get the idea.

This blog is a means to share my obsession, with recommendations of the latest and greatest, news of eagerly awaited films of the future, essays on whatever may strike my cinematically-preoccupied fancy, and more. Plus the usual links to movie-related articles and such from around the web.

Being a gay man informs my movie-watching as much as anything else, so my writings will tend toward the so-called "queer perspective"; however, this blog isn't exclusively about "gay films", but all films, and it is my hope that it will find an audience as diverse and as fascinating as the movies we all hold dear.

My first batch of posts will be descriptions and examples of the type of articles that I have planned to post on a regular or semi-regular basis, so to paraphrase Al Jolson in The Jazz Singer: "You ain't seen nothin' yet!"