The View from Here: Conversations with Gay and Lesbian Filmmakers (review)

Many queer people have always felt a disparity between how they see themselves and how they are seen and portrayed by others. In film, queers often had to represent themselves in a coded fashion, when they had the means of representing themselves at all. In the past twenty years, however, there has been an explosion of out queer cinema – bodies of work that dvd culture has now made more accessible. The thirty-seven filmmakers here are diverse in background, experience, and nationality, and there is strong Canadian representation. Hays tried to conduct as many interviews as possible with key figures, though there are some absences: Todd Haynes, Isaac Julien, and Terrence Davies were either unavailable or didn’t respond to requests. Where, too, is Jennie Livingston – responsible for the most financially successful queer documentary, Paris Is Burning – or Tom Kalin, whose Swoon, about Leopold and Loeb, helped mark the beginning of what B. Ruby Rich called the ‘new queer cinema’ in the 1990s? The strengths here are the biographical preface, filmography, the discussion of the artist’s unique vision, and some context about when, where, and the ease with which the interview was conducted. Also useful is the index and the brief bibliography.

Not surprisingly, given the diversity here, there is little agreement about what constitutes queer film, what the responsibilities of queer filmmakers are, or what it even means to be a queer or gay filmmaker. Some of those included have been explicit in their work, while others say that they just ‘happen to be gay.’ Indeed, there are some interesting surprises (for this reader at least), such as Don Mancini of the ‘Chucky’ horror films, though in hindsight, who could miss the camp factor? Some may also be unaware of Bill Condon, who has made films with obvious and not-so-obvious queer content: Dreamgirls, Kinsey, Chicago, and Gods and Monsters (about gay horror auteur James Whale of Frankenstein fame). Some may also be unaware of Randal Kleiser, who made The Boy in the Plastic Bubble, Grease, Blue Lagoon, and Summer Lovers. The issue, then, is whether one now comes to see these works and artists differently. How much allegory can one read into the film about the bubble-boy character played by John Travolta – an outsider on display if ever there was one – or Olivia Newton-John’s Sandy in Grease, whose ‘repressed sexuality is unleashed by the end of the film’? If Condon has had success working both in Hollywood and independently, others relate the rather difficult and disillusioning experiences they have had doing mainstream films, especially when trying to achieve a particular uncompromised vision. Still others speak of the obstacles in getting funding together for feature films (which is why there are more documentarians here), despite the success of Brokeback Mountain (though some interviewees suspect it was because of Ang Lee’s reputation – and straight orientation – that he was able to get the film made).

One of the most interesting aspects of the conversations here is the kind of dialogue that appears crucial to the way these artists work. Not only do many speak of wanting to make films from a young age because of the influence of directors such as Hitchcock, Cassavetes, Scorsese, Godard, Warhol, or Eisenstein (also gay), but many were also influenced by some of the directors included here, such as Kenneth Anger (Scorpio Rising), or groundbreaking documentarians, Janis Cole and Holly Dale with their pieces on female prison inmates and transgender sex workers. Less obvious is the influence of John Waters (who made Divine famous) on Lynne Fernie and Aerlyn Weissman (Fiction and Other Truths: A Film about Jane Rule and Forbidden Love: The Unashamed Stories of Lesbian Lives) with his strategic use of humour rather than anger. Also significant are the number of collaborative teams, who are either life partners or come together on certain projects with a shared artistic and political vision.

If some interviews are less satisfying – perhaps because they took place during...