MOVIE REVIEW


BY CYNTHIA RODRIGUEZ





"THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT"

Directed by Lisa Cholodenko

Starring Julianne Moore, Annette Bening, Mark Ruffalo



"The Kids Are All Right" is more than all right because of the outstanding acting by the above mentioned actors. Even the kids held their own. I don't think it would have been as good if it were a bunch of nobodies. I have to say it wasn't exactly what I expected though. On one hand, I think it's wonderful that a movie about Lesbian parents was able to reel in some big actors that have been in more mainstream movies. Although, at the same time I am not surprised that in order to see it, I had to go to our local indie film theatre which will usually feature the movies you know they won't show at your local mall. A lot of them end up being the "Sundance Festival" films and/or the ones you know will become an IFC cult favorite. I don't know if it's because it was opening weekend or an early Saturday afternoon, but oddly enough, there seemed to have been a significant number of senior citizens in the theatre when I walked in just in time and sat all the way at the front when the film was about to begin. I know this for a fact because even in the almost pitch black dark towards the end of the last preview, I felt like I was completed surrounded by a lot of white haired heads. I thought to myself, "Great, it's like watching a lesbian film with Grandma. Do they even know this is about LESBIANS? What are they doing here? This should be interesting. If there are any sex scenes, this is gonna feel a little awkward."



I always find it intriguing how Hollywood deals with gay. Sure, it's come a long way. See: "The Celluloid Closet" (which by the way, I watched at the same theatre.) Yes, they've gone from the ideals of us being either just a bunch of sissies, butches, and deviants, to gay-sploiting us to their advantage to the now somewhat attempts to show that we can be "normal" like everyone else, such as getting married, and having the perfect little family.


Summary: (which I'm sure you've already heard, read about, or have seen the trailer) A very long term relationship Lesbian couple raising two teenagers they each gave birth to thanks to the local sperm bank. One is the artistic, new agey "house wife" who has been trying to find her niche in employment in like forever, the other the bread-winning established professional ( A Doctor ). The 18 year old daughter is getting ready to go off to college. The son, he's like the typical 15 or 16 year old that hangs out with his prickish little friends and rides his skateboard. The son, endlessly curious about their biological father makes his sister track down their "bio-Dad" who turns out to be a motorcycle riding, carefree, lovable bachelor who runs some organic, hippie, co-op type of restaurant. Apparently meeting him is not enough. They introduce him to the rest of the family, and that's where the havoc begins. What starts as seemingly innocent get togethers, and just hanging out turns into an invasion of the estrogen controlled household he helped create that exposes the maybe not so perfect world they thought they had.


It's dificult to dislike any of the main characters in the film. Annette Bening's "Nic" is a little uptight but cool as shit. Julianne Moore's "Jules" is cute as hell, and Mark Ruffalo's slightly flawed "Paul" is the most adorable I've seen him since "13 Going On 30". In the end you just want everything to work out for all of them. There is really no "villian", which I don't think is usually the case in any film.


Now for my take on the whole thing withought doing the spoilers: I appreciate their attempt at showing that a gay couple can do it just like everybody else. Have a long time partner, have children, work, etc. And also that any marriage be it straight or gay especially after a lot of years together can have it's ups and downs, just like everybody else. What I'm a little torn on is the relationship that begins to develop between one of the Moms (Jules: Julianne Moore), and the bio-Dad Paul (Mark Ruffalo). Part of me is afraid it will perpetuate the myth that I believe many feel that all a Lesbian needs is a good man to "change her ways". I mean, I see where they are coming from but I feel people will misunderstand and not realize that in the end, when it comes to that part, it really has nothing to do with anyone's sexuality at all. It also doesn't help that there is more hetero-sex featured in the film than between the two women. Sometimes I think they do that in these types of movies so it will appeal more to the mainstream masses. I believe that as long as people are open to and comprehend that when watching the film, they can truly hold dear the lessons they can learn from the film. A lot of times I think that when people, particularly the straights watch a Lesbian themed film, that they think they will be in for some good girl on girl action. That is not always the case. Afterall, we DO have other things to do as well. It's not always about the sex. Sometimes it has nothing to do with that at all. We work and play like everyone else, but we just happen to be of that sexual orientation.


So, when people come at us with their snide remarks regarding all of the above, you can always say (my favorite line in the movie by Annette Bening), “I need your observations like I need a dick in my ass.”


Not that there is anything wrong with that. Just sayin'.

Read full post >>

I'm not religious, but Hallelujah!!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Read full post >>

FREDDY AND ME, HORROR RE-MAKES, AND
"NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET" 2010


by Cynthia Rodriguez



I'm going to tell you about the longest "relationship" I've ever had. It's complicated so you may not understand. It's as complex as the other person involved. He is a troubled, disturbed, socially unaccepted, completely psychotic and calculating individual. Who is this charming madman? It's no other than the man of everybody's dreams, Mr. tall, sienna-burnt dark, and fugly himself, Freddy Krueger.





It all began at the tender, impressionable pre-teen years. From the time I experienced the first, original "Nightmare On Elm Street" movie I was hooked on horror films. Freddy gave me a new appreciation for the genre. A cousin of mine used to joke that it was a good thing I turned out to be an artist, or else I probably would have been a serial killer. Well, it was amusing at the time anyway. What may have given everyone that idea was the fact that I was so obsessed with Mr. Krueger and it manifested itself in several ways. I was Freddy for Halloween for about 4 or 5 years of my life. It was a blast scaring the neighborhood kids at the door trying to get Halloween candy. But hey, that's why they say, "Trick OR treat", right? That costume was one of my prized possesions. I owned every bit of Freddyabilia I could get my fake, knife gloved hand on. I believe there is more merchandise available today than there was back then, including a site which sells custom made REAL knived gloves. Sure they cost about one month's rent but I am SO getting one of those. I could imitate his voice almost perfectly. I used to have fun freaking out my friends on the phone with it. I have a very cool watercolor I did of him when I was a teen which I guess would probably count as my first portrait painting. I also have an old picture of me at one of my first jobs (I believe it was a local drug store in Queens, NY), one of the years I dressed up as him for Halloween. That may have been a contributing factor of me becoming unemployed shortly after. Also, who else would come out in their Highschoool yearbook dressed up as Freddy Krueger? Sure, at one point my parents considered sending me to therapy for it, but I convinced them it was just part of my creativity, and entertainment. Yes, I was an interesting child. Some kids slept with their teddy bears, and Rainbow Brites, I slept with my talking Freddy Krueger doll.






One, two, the re-makes coming for you, oh excuse me, they call them "re-imaginings" now. What a crock o' shit. I think that horror films may be the most re-made, (or re-imagined), recycled, re-done, re-altered movie genre of all time. I believe there are several reasons for this. This is when I feel comparing horror films to porn is appropriate. Lots of similiarities. One is that both can be made in someone's basement. With horror, throw in a mask, a couple cutlery utensils, some ketchup, and voila. Second, both genres' actors are not exactly known for their Oscar caliber, suberb thespian skills. Most of the time it's a bunch of nobodies. At best, with the horror, if you're lucky you'll get the latest teen sensations from music and television on the screen for five minutes until they get slashed out of the picture. Now I didn't say it would be any good, but with horror, even when it's bad, it's good. A horror film that may blow at the box office can become a "cult classic" on DVD.






Three, Four, this bitch is at your door. Feeling this wouldn't be complete without a little feminist slant, I must say, even as a staunch horror fan, it has not gone unnoticed that just as in other genres such as most sci-fi, and action movies, or MOST films period, with the exception of the "chick-flicks", the horror film has also been dominated by the male species. Perfect example of this would be the fact that pretty much every horror icon is of the masculine type. Freddy, Michael Myers, Jason Vorhees...Chucky. There is yet to be a huge, superstar female serial killer slashing her way to horror film greatness. It would certainly be a refreshing touch to see some sociopathic, bloody action from a gal spewing some smart ass commentary of her own, while stalking and terrorizing some scantily clad drunken frat boys, "Don't run, don't run. Your castration will be so much easier, (for both of us), if you just stay still."


Five, six, hold on to your ____, (okay that one is just too easy.)







Now lets get back to Elm Street. I thought the original was brilliant. It revolutionized horror films. When the nightmare began, it was a dream come true for a whole new world of fantasy horror. Of course since then they have dragged it out, milked it dry. As they have others. They send them to space, to hell, to Manhattan. They tag team with other. These are not just horror films. They are franchises, and Freddy is no exception. Seven, eight, now for the part that I hate...


I was dreading the re-make. I knew it was coming even before it was announced. It was inevitable. They had already taken Michael, and Jason so I knew it was only a matter of time. And of course they were ripe to pick a new Freddy which just the thought of that gave me chills, and not in a good way. Anyone around my age thinking themselves worthy of being called a "Generation X"er knows there is no Freddy Krueger unless it is Robert Englund. Yes, Jackie Earle Haley is an excellent actor but there is no comparison.





Because of this Gen X bias I realize I cannot fairly rate this film. Not that that's stopping me from doing so. On it's own, it's okay. It's watchable. It has all the ingredients, and usual suspects. Plenty of slash, bam, thank you ma'am moments, and cute, young stars of today. Back then, we had Johnny Depp in the original, now they have one of the hunky guys from Twilight. Even in this genre, it has become guilty for CGI overkill. No more just using latex, and cornflakes. In the future I suspect we may be victim to more Elm Street "re-imaginings", maybe a prequel, Freddy as a child or in his tweens, with Robert Englund doing a cameo as his Dad. Whatever it may be, I know I'll be stupid enough to be right there in the movie theatre to see it.



Nine, ten, here we go again.

Read full post >>

LESBIANS LIKE "SEX AND THE CITY", TOO!


by Cynthia Rodriguez



It's not all about the L-Word, Will & Grace, and Ellen. Lesbians like other T.V shows, too. I mean, we do realize other entertainment exists out there that's not necessarily gay. One day I was scheming with a friend about our pre-weekend plans for our "Sex And The City 2" evening shenanigans. Another colleage eavesdropping couldn't resist on harping me with, "How can you like Sex And The City? You're a Lesbian". As if the show had some kind of secret rating I was not aware of. "RATED 'S' FOR STRAIGHTS ONLY." I was like, "Bitch, please. I read the book by Candace Bushnell, and I've seen every episode". I've loved it for years. Albeit an ex-girlfriend got me into it, as ex-girlfriends do. Each ex leaves their mark on you a different way. You get into some musician or band with one. With another, you learn to love a certain movie after watching it with with them about fifty times. And yet, with another, you get hooked on a particular show. Enter Sex And The City.






So, after this little catty exchange with my nosy cohort, I couldn't help but wonder...


Is there straight - gay segregation in the world of entertainment?


After I typed that last line I thought to myself, duh, of course there is! Just like everything else. Why should this region of activity be any different? When people make snarky remarks, or ask me dumb questions like that I can't help but think to myself, "Should we be using separate restrooms, too? Oh thank you my dear heteros for allowing us to drink the same water. May I go see your straight movie now? In exchange, you are more than welcomed to Netflix "Pink Flamingos" if you'd like."






As you can see, this is not any type of review for either of the S.A.T.C movies. It's just another rant in hopes that breeders can understand that when someone comes out, they don't necessarily cut out all forms of entertainment in their life if it doesn't have anything to do with gay. It's also an excuse to publicly applaud one of my favorite shows of all time .






Sure, I must admit, when I first came out, I almost thought it was a requirement to see, hear, and do all things queer...and nothing else. I felt if I dare strayed from the freshly paved, yellow brick road I'd have my newbie permit revoked and be banished from New Dyke City forever. This was around the same time my then apartment was struck with rainbow fever, when even my toilet seat cover couldn't escape the force of the rainbow pattern. I had to hang out in only places that were gay, listen to gay music, gay T.V, gay movies, all people, places, and things had to be...gay. Well, that didn't last. Like a good little dyke, of course I like my gay entertainment just like the next queer, however, I realized if I could just see over and beyond the rainbow, there was much more out there just as amusing. I made an amazing discovery. Straight people can be funny, too. Looking back at my hetero roots I began to grasp the concept of mixing it up, learning that there was a whole world out there that was fun, too, and *GASP*, had nothing to do with gay. Just because I dropped certain things like...men, didn't mean I had to abandon things I enjoyed before because they would be considered some type of straight tendency. I believe that in doing so would be a bit Lesbo-nazi-ish.





So, getting back to the wonderful world of "Sex And The City". First off, I loved the book. More than I think I want to admit. Okay, so it's not "War And Peace", but so what. I was fascinated by Candace Bushnell's stories. The way she just put herself out there, whether they were true or not, it didn't matter. They were realistic enough. If it didn't happen to her, I'm sure it happened to somebody. I had never read anything like that before. That lion-hearted way to go out there and taste life, love, and everything in between. That's what I like about the lead character in the show/movies as well. Her emotional cojones, her confidence, her swagger. Even during all the pitfalls that would rock her emotional foundation, she at least always had the insight to take a moment to step back and examine what was going on. Her choices, way of life, where she was, and where she wanted to be. I guess it helps that it's kind of her job to do that, being that she is a professional writer. But not just anyone can put their life experiences out there, and serve it up on a delicious platter, for the world to feast on, and enjoy.





I guess this is where the Lesbian side of me peeks through. You won't hear me raving on and on about the fashion, the shoes, oh the shoes, I know, I know, the shoes. Yeah, whatever. Sure, that's nice, too. It's definitely all a very purdy package to look it. Cue the dork in me, this is when I say, it's so much deeper than that. I think the producers were brilliant in knowing how to lure the straight women, and gay men into watching this show. The CLOTHES. Then they got sucked in because it actually spoke of important stuff. Relationships, sex, love, etc. Though, just to point out something about the show's famous clothing. I know it means absolutely nothing coming from someone who owns 500 t-shirts, and 3 pairs of jeans, but I must say a lot of what I've seen them wear and people praise them for, like giant flowers on their chest, and huge, awkward hats that can't possibly be practical in any way, other than for runway models and celebrities trying to be all "cutting edge" on the red carpet, who actually wears any of that stuff? First of all, who can afford it? (See prior sentence). And second, seriously, who wears that? No one looks that fabulous just walking to the store to get some milk. Somebody get me my pajama pants and slippers...





The other thing I love are the friendships. Like TRUE friendship. The kind of, years go by, I haven't seen you in awhile but feel like I just talked to you yesterday type of deal, the people get married, have kids, get divorced, get married again, have affairs, I fucked up, you fucked up but I love you anyway, and I know you love me, evolving, everlasting type of friendship that survives, and surpasses all obstacles, and relationships that may come, and go, and come and go. That tight circle of love that wraps around you, reminding you that no matter what, you are never alone. As they would say on the show, "soulmates".






Finally, I love the sometimes raw and risque, in-depth analysis of relationships via their lively, witty conversations and love portrayal are as if taken straight out of women's private talks with each other. You hear yourself doing a lot of "Oh my God, that's so me.--- I've thought that. --- I've said that. --- I've done that". Not that the show hasn't had it's moments with the whole homo-eroticism thing, and has opened doors for other T.V programs to do the same, but the point is relationships are relationships, be it straight, gay, bi, tri- (anything once) sexual, whatever. Some may find themselves relating to a particular character more than another. It certainly makes a SATC party run smoother when people stick to their roles, but in the end, us Sex And The City fans find a little bit of all four of them in each of us.







In case you were wondering:

Character I most relate to: Samantha

My favorite: Charlotte (YUMMMM)

Read full post >>

Workers of the industrial age fought long and hard to secure a 40-hour work week. According to labor historian Prof. Philip Foner, "No single issue in nineteenth-century labor history produced as many songs and ballads." Here's one for you:

       We mean to make things over; we are tired of toil for naught,
       With but bare enough to live upon, and never an hour for thought;
       We want to feel the sunshine, and we want to smell the flowers,
       We are sure that God has willed it, and we mean to have eight hours.

       We're summoning our forces from the shipyard, shop, and mill,
       Eight hours for work, eight hours for rest, eight hours for what we will!

The Fair Labor Standards Act in 1938 realized this dream on a national scale. Mission accomplished? Not exactly.

Like a cruel joke, we workers today have our own struggle for a 40-hour work week; unfortunately ours involves fighting to maintain a full 40 hours in the face of furloughs, hours cuts, "permatemps", and part-time reassignment. A 32-hour work week sounds bad when a person starts out with 40, but consider the plight of the 10% of the American populace who can't find any employment at all--for them, not even a 1-hour work week.

If employers could run companies with only managers and no workers, they would, and this nightmare becomes more and more plausible with innovation in technological advances. Even when employers owned slaves and had no obligation to pay their workforce, they still rejoiced at the introduction of the cotton gin that meant fewer laborers required to make even more money. That's been the name of the game since the beginning of capitalism.

With the abolition of slavery (excepting interns), employers may mask their contempt a little better, but they still find it obnoxious that workers always want stuff--like money, or healthcare, or dignity--that ultimately cuts into their pocketbooks. Sadly for the Boss, until SkyNet becomes self-aware and our robot overlords can fend for themselves, workers will remain a necessary evil to the people who employ them, much to the employer's chagrin.

The cunning employer recognizes this and attempts to persuade the worker into a new frame of mind. The ruling-class employer says to his working-class employee, "Now, now, I am no better than you; we are a team! We're all in this together to make the company the best it can possibly be!" Employers often embellish this lie with a call to sacrifice; "I'd like to pay you overtime, but would you really want to put the company in that position of financial burden?" or, "Think of the company before you come in here and selfishly ask for a week's paid maternity leave."

Our grandparents saw this for what it was--baloney. They recognized that if they had a job manufacturing gold-plated turds for TurdCom Incorporated, an attack on their integrity was not worth a nicer, sleeker, faster, shinier, more efficient gold-plated turd (now with less fragrance!). No amount of sacrifice on their part was going to result in a better gold-plated turd, anyway. It was the job of the Boss with the Seven-Figure-Salary (how quaint) to earn that salary with Big Money-Making Ideas about what kind of company to have and what to produce; the worker's only role was to keep production moving. If the company really needed to save money, why not let the Boss's paycheck take a hit? He (yeah, likely a dude in this scenario) could certainly afford it.

The disparity in wages made the class divide perfectly clear then, and the divide could not be clearer now when even "nonprofit" CEOs can make millions of dollars per year; workers today turn a blind eye to this, however, getting suckered into the "team" mentality only to find that they're the only ones on the "team" doing work for offensively low wages and making sacrifices of any kind. We've all had the experience of involuntarily doing the heavy lifting, and we all can agree it sucks; why are people falling for it now with such vehemence?

It can't be the recession, because our grandparents win that contest of financial hardship. Perhaps it is that the lie has become more believable, now that we live in a world where companies have more rights than humans enjoy. I'll let Jon Stewart explain:

We're all just grist in TurdCom Inc.'s mill, in other words. The company's rights override all others. As far as employers are concerned, workers should waive their right to ask for compensation that the law "guarantees" them--did you know that 75 percent of employers in California break the law by neglecting to pay their workers for overtime?--because it impedes the company's Supreme-Court-awarded right to make money, and the company's rights "win."

Too many workers buy into this and start having aspirations of working their way up through the company's ranks, riding the Gold-Plated-Turd-Train into Big-Money-Station; best way to do that they figure is to kiss ass, work extra hours for no extra pay (often just to keep up with their heavy workloads), and stay docile. Besides, complaints about working conditions are anti-"team" (i.e. "anti-company") and thus subject to punishment; too many complaints, and a worker gets furloughed, has hours cut, is reduced to part-time status, or is replaced.

This is even worse than where we started. Our GREAT-grandparents got paid 60 hours' wages for 60 hours' work; meanwhile, the workers at 75 percent of California's workplaces work 60 hours and get paid for 40. Welcome to 2010, everybody.

Hey, Boss! Got too many employees qualifying for full-time benefits? Fire them all, and hire twice as many part-timers with zero benefits to replace them. Better yet, hire a "temp" from an agency to work for you permanently--no benefits AND no promotions, guaranteed. Best of all, ship all your jobs to someplace like India where workers can live in your factory like this:

Heck! If they live there, you'll never have to pay them overtime! Problem solved!

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 12.3% of American workers (11.3% of female workers) in 2009 were represented by a labor union; I figure that makes my being a lesbian union maid especially rare. I would like to say that none of this applies to the labor union world, but I can't. Where the union worker of 1933 stared down hired guns (and occasionally lost to them) to defend the right to a fair wage, union workers today toil furiously for nothing, disillusioned by labor leaders who work hand-in-hand with management in propagating (and propagandizing) the "coalition" mentality and fearful of becoming the next ex-TurdCom former employee battling to find even part-time employment.

That being said, strong unions could win the new fight for the 40-hour work week just as they did the old one; whether or not working- (or even middle-) class Americans can (or even want to) organize themselves well enough to take on such an endeavor remains uncertain. My own union puts into practice every day that jobs not only can be protected but made better, yet the successes we achieve are possible only with formidable and vigilant effort (and a good measure of unpleasantness between managers and union personnel). Until America's workers quit empathizing with the glorified pimps running her businesses today, this codependent abuse of her working people will continue. As The Boss likes to call it, that's "teamwork."

Read full post >>