(no subject)
Feb. 26th, 2006 11:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
akashiverThe Kerasotes $5 movie club thing seems to be working out well so far. On Saturday I went to see "TransAmerica," so those of you who are interested in that movie can
I feel bad disliking this movie. It was a well-made movie with good acting. It was enjoyable.
But...
But watching it was like watching a gender n' sexuality minstrel show. The movie obliterated "realism" and "nuance" in favor of cute sentimentality.
I originally really liked Huffman's casting in the central role - and I think she did a great job. But having seen the film, I now feel like the casting of a woman in the role of a transgendered woman was symptomatic of an underlying problem in the rest of the film: it was so desperate for the audience to like the characters and see them as "normal" that it santized them beyond all plausibility.
Example: Huffman's character discovers that she has a son, a drug-using teenager hustler who was sexually abused by his stepfather. Don't worry though - he's a sweet kid, a really nice guy whose "issues" seem to be limited to being comfortable with talking about sex in public. Bree's concerned that her son lacks ambition and wants him to pursue a real career, like becoming a vetrinarian. See, middle America? Transgendered people with runaway drug-dealing hustler sons have the same problems you do! Ain't that funny?
There was a weird genre thing going on with the film. It wasn't serious enough to be a drama and it wasn't funny enough to be a comedy. The characters were too over-the-top to be belivable, and when the film did introduce "raw" moments (the son has sex for cash at a diner, Bree starts a relationship with a man who doesn't know she only has one X chromosome) there are no consequences for the characters. The film just picks up and moves to the next scene.
One of the consequences of this is that the "profound, touching moments" that are supposed to move the audience come across as empty and unearned as a Hallmark greeting.
That's actually very much what this film felt like: a Hallmark card about gender identity and sexuality. It was cute and well-made, but I was expecting something more.
. I went to a practise exam session in the evening (bizarre genre, that), and spent most of today working on a job application and cleaning. In other words, not a particularly thrilling weekend.
Now I've got to organize a training session and get this job application completed. Oh yes, and grade a bunch of essays. (Yay.)
I feel bad disliking this movie. It was a well-made movie with good acting. It was enjoyable.
But...
But watching it was like watching a gender n' sexuality minstrel show. The movie obliterated "realism" and "nuance" in favor of cute sentimentality.
I originally really liked Huffman's casting in the central role - and I think she did a great job. But having seen the film, I now feel like the casting of a woman in the role of a transgendered woman was symptomatic of an underlying problem in the rest of the film: it was so desperate for the audience to like the characters and see them as "normal" that it santized them beyond all plausibility.
Example: Huffman's character discovers that she has a son, a drug-using teenager hustler who was sexually abused by his stepfather. Don't worry though - he's a sweet kid, a really nice guy whose "issues" seem to be limited to being comfortable with talking about sex in public. Bree's concerned that her son lacks ambition and wants him to pursue a real career, like becoming a vetrinarian. See, middle America? Transgendered people with runaway drug-dealing hustler sons have the same problems you do! Ain't that funny?
There was a weird genre thing going on with the film. It wasn't serious enough to be a drama and it wasn't funny enough to be a comedy. The characters were too over-the-top to be belivable, and when the film did introduce "raw" moments (the son has sex for cash at a diner, Bree starts a relationship with a man who doesn't know she only has one X chromosome) there are no consequences for the characters. The film just picks up and moves to the next scene.
One of the consequences of this is that the "profound, touching moments" that are supposed to move the audience come across as empty and unearned as a Hallmark greeting.
That's actually very much what this film felt like: a Hallmark card about gender identity and sexuality. It was cute and well-made, but I was expecting something more.
. I went to a practise exam session in the evening (bizarre genre, that), and spent most of today working on a job application and cleaning. In other words, not a particularly thrilling weekend.
Now I've got to organize a training session and get this job application completed. Oh yes, and grade a bunch of essays. (Yay.)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 04:13 am (UTC)However, my favourite review of it so far is here: http://charliegrrrl.livejournal.com/111707.html#cutid1
no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 04:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 10:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 09:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 02:14 pm (UTC)Hmmm.... What's the training session on?
no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 06:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-27 04:44 pm (UTC)