Show Me Love, directed and written by Lukas Moodysson,starring Rebecca Liljeberg (Agnes) and Alexandria Dahlstrom (Elin), 1998, Sweden/Denmark, 89 minutes (Swedish with English subtitles)
Though I hadn't heard at the time of seeing this film (which was released in North America back in October 1999) that it had out-performed Titanic in Sweden, that would have prompted me even more to see it (yes, I confess I saw Titanic, but I actually enjoyed seeing Jack Dawson/Leonard Dicaprio die, monster that I am).
Like that picture, this is a romance, and, for perhaps the last parallel, it features a female protagonist who is, as it were, too big for the room. In another unlikely comparison, it reminded me of Blair Witch Project (which, for the record, I also enjoyed, insofar as it was filmed by hand-held cameras and has a grainy quality (I had thought it might be on Super-8, but it was 35mm; many of the reviews I printed off the Net spoke of lush cinematography, which, frankly, suggests some of these critics may be familiar with some very jerkily, darkly filmed works - though I hasten to add I thought it looked wonderful and very authentic, with the minor reservation that surely the zoom button did not have to be used every five seconds (it got distracting)).
But enough of this extraneous stuff. What is it about?
Agnes is a teenager who has moved with her family over to the small Swedish town Amal over a year ago (the working title of the film was Fucking Amal), and has no friends. She spends most of her time at school sitting alone...and nursing a gigantic crush on Elin, the town's "party girl", which she writes about in her computerized diary (needless to say, this gets noticed by several people in the course of the film).
Agnes turns sixteen, and her parents throw a birthday party for her, insisting she let all her 'friends' know about it and that she invite them. Other than Viktoria (a rather spiteful girl in a wheelchair, who is the subject of one of the film's few missteps - we are almost forced to play one outcast against another, and it is an unwelcome choice to make...do we shun the dyke or the cripple? I tried not to make that choice, but Agnes almost has to win if we are to buy the movie's premise...), the only people who show up are Elin and her sister Jessica, who have really only come for the free liquor - but, after Elin and her sister notice the diary, Elin gets dared to kiss Agnes, which she does.
In the typical viciousness and gossip-hunger of high school culture, word gets around, largely with Viktoria's help (though we get the impression it was already buzzing before), and Agne's life is immeasurably made worse.
Meanwhile, Elin is struggling with her own feelings, since she was not left entirely unmoved by the kiss. In typical homosexual panic, she finally loses her virginity to Johan (one of the things I found most endearing about this movie was that, while the boys are not always portrayed in the best light, it is clear that they are just as confused and, as it were, 'victims' of the system that evolved before and around them as the girls are...if perhaps a little more guilty much of the time of the 'crimes' implicit in that set-up...Johan genuinely seems like a nice, if not terribly bright, fellow, despite his somewhat pathetic macho masks) and tries to avoid Agnes.
Eventually, Agnes' parents find out about their daughter, though they do not seem terribly shocked, and are more helpless and silent than anything else. In an earlier scene, we get the sense this might be their reaction, since the father's only way to comfort Agnes in her misery is to tell her that high school hierarchies and the like will seem meaningless and will pass away in 25 years (it's not true, and no teenager who has been told this since the dawn of time has found it comforting...but it is a sign he is trying to relate to a daughter determined not to be cheerful and 'play along').
The true delight of this film is that, though it is only 89 minutes long, it seems to contain hours and hours of emotional truth. There is a happy ending, and I'm not going to give it away, since, like most 'happy endings', we don't know what will happen next...and that's part of the joy and terror of life...and of this very touching, true-to-life drama/comedy. That it was written by a man about two female characters, and convincingly, is yet another delight.
When "In And Out" emerged in the summer of 1997, it seemed an innocuous comedy, and I went to see it. I enjoy fluff as much as the next person.
As much as the next NON-GAY person, evidently, since many queers disliked "In And Out". I'm surprised naysayers did not give Frank Oz, the director, credit for hiring Paul Rudnick, author of "Jeffery", to give the 'gay angle', though I thought it a negative thing to do. As I see it, if you don't have a vision for your production, why do it? I'm in a minority, though, as many think only gays can express the 'gay experience'.
There were several critiques I heard about the film, some stupid enough to warrant little consideration.
I insist there is no such thing as 'acting gay'; if you mean idiosyncratic behaviours, you have left nature for artifice, and that's bad theatre, even in farce, which "In And Out" is. Similarly, I have no problem with straights playing gay roles - that's why it's called acting...I've seen queers do 'gay' roles badly, as I did not buy their character's reality (Rupert Everett, courtesy phone please).
The main beef I heard was that no-one could live as long as Kevin Kline's character, Howard, and have no idea he was gay. This observation speaks to the youth and privilege of those making it. We do not know whether the character had no idea - we have only his word, and words, as products of society, lie and distort, intentionally and subliminally, so that 'reality' fits those (queer and straight alike) who think they can say what is 'real' and 'valuable'.
Despite what I hear from young people today, a lot of queer folk do not identify themselves early on. And, since words inform concepts, if you don't hear the words, and the subject is not discussed, the identity is not donned as a fact. Note the distinction - you might know that you're attracted to boys and/or girls, but the notion of an identity and culture around it, or a sense of solidarity, or an incorporation of the view into a 'normal' life in which you are not the 'norm' need not follow quickly or at all. Since Howard is concerned with order and discipline and control, his ability to accept how he threatens those qualities is diminished.
The fact that many upper-class youth don't face this lack of information and support may reduce these feelings for them, but not always or completely.
Another complaint was the fact that this character liked Barbra Streisand was prissy. I find it interesting that I heard it from people who liked Barbra Streisand and were prissy. Though I've never understood her appeal, or that of disco, scantily clad anorexic (or buff) men, musical theatre and Judy Garland, I know that many queers flock to these things as cultural icons. Such objections smack of denial. In the movie's context, they are 'shorthand' hints.
Another objection was the marriage scenario. Since the twentyish critics had decided no-one could live so long without a knowledge of identity, they condemned his leading on Joan Cusack's character to the last moment. I recall someone saying: 'Any gay who marries a person of the opposite sex is a spousal abuser'. It must be nice to live in a bubble which messages (such as those conveyed by the masculinity tapes Howard listens to at one point in the picture) fail to prick, both those that say you have to get married and that way to stop being gay is to do so. I found it intriguing no-one said anything about Joan's character striving to fit an ideal image she has (had planted) - but youth culture deems fat obscene, so perhaps they tacitly supported the viewpoint.
"In And Out" is a farce - I doubt that, in reality, such a thing would have gone all the way to the altar. Wait - no - in reality, the pressured queer might have gone on for years after the marriage, and that would be spousal abuse - towards both spouses - with society standing by ignorantly as it (ideally) no longer does in cases of physical abuse.
In the final analysis, it is important to overstate that "In And Out" is a farce, though it has a thing or two to say, especially in the masculinity tape sequence, and it proves to have a good heart by the townsfolks' standing up for Howard, which, though I despise cheap sentiment (as did Bette Davis - one icon I accept, okay?), I found rousing and hopeful.
However, in the end, I think the words of Samuel Goldwyn about morals in film-making should be borne in mind. "We make movies. Messages are for Western Union." I would amend it to add that, if you get an idea for a message from your interaction with a text, go send that telegram through your actions now - it's you who get to decide what the text means...
