Thursday, 12 May 2011
A Short Synopsis
Two boys, Neil and Brian, grew up in Hutschinson, Kansas. Neil, 8, becomes attached to his baseball coach (a handsome alpha-male), when he begins to receive special attention from him and preference over the other boys. At coach's house, he spoils Neil with treats and lures him into seductive situations. Meanwhile, good boy Brian is another member of the little league team and starts to get nosebleeds fainting during the season only to assume he was once abducted by aliens. Little does Brian know, he was undergoing the same abuse as Neil. Both boys eventually lose touch with coach and grow from what they experienced that summer. Brian continues to search for the source of his nightmares and symptoms by exploring alien abduction theories. Neil prostitutes himself as a direct consequence of never learning the consequences of sexuality. Both boys eventually come together and solve the mystery of the summer they were both 8 years old.
Tuesday, 10 May 2011
The Filmmaker's POV
Mysterious Skin is a subversive film, as it’s main subject, pedophilia, is still relatively taboo, and the way it is represented is certainly unconventional. Araki offers us a unique glimpse into the underground world of male prostitution, using this world as a means of showing the viewer the long-lasting effects of sexual abuse in childhood. However, this world also serves another important purpose: subverting mainstream American culture in the early 90’s. Araki exposes the homophobia that was, and still is to an extent, so entrenched in American society, without ever directly exhibiting it. The men Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s character, Neil, has sex with in exchange for money are all indicative of their society’s homophobic culture. The first man we see Neil pick up looks like an average, middle-American man. He is a father (as indicated by the teddy bear with the word “Daddy” stitched onto it that hangs from his car’s rearview mirror) and works as a grocery store supplier (as he tells Neil). This man is obviously a closeted gay man, and there is something profoundly sad about the cagey manner in which he must fulfill his sexual desires, likely for fear of being ostracized if he were to live as an openly gay man. Eventually, a relatively naïve Neil begins to realize the danger he is putting himself in by prostituting himself. He contracts crabs, and, once in New York City, is put in various precarious situations he had not experienced in Kansas. The most severe of these situations is when a man who Neil had picked up beats and rapes him after he attempts to escape, sensing that the man was volatile. Neil’s downward spiral awakens the audience to the dangerous world of the marginalized, and Araki effectively demonstrates the adverse way in which prejudice can dominate lives.
Furthermore, Neil and his friends, Michelle Trachtenberg’s Wendy and Jeffrey Licon’s Eric, clearly represent a teenage counterculture in the early 90’s. Their appearance – dyed hair, multiple piercings, heavy makeup – indicate that they do not subscribe to mainstream culture. At the same time, both Neil and Eric are gay, and the gay community at that time was somewhat of a counterculture in itself. Araki aligns himself with them in the film, subverting mainstream culture by contrasting it against the liberal, free-spirited friends. In one poignant scene, the group pulls up beside a trucker at a red light. The trucker, obviously troubled by their unconventional appearances, stares at them threateningly. Neil challenges him, demanding to know what he is staring at before kissing Eric as a dissent. The trucker, now at his breaking point, pulls out a shotgun, and the group quickly peels out of the intersection. Neil, ever defiant, sticks his upper body out of the passenger window to give the trucker the middle finger. This exhilarating scene, in which the three teenage misfits essentially conquer a traditional American lifestyle (represented by the trucker), reveals to the audience that Araki identifies with these teenagers, struggling to express themselves in a stiflingly conservative society.
Finally, Araki’s most prevalent insurrection against mainstream America comes through in his way of representing pedophilia. Their baseball coach sexually abuses Brian and Neil; the Little League setting of the abuse is an important, deliberate choice made by Araki. Baseball’s nickname is “America’s Pastime” – it is the quintessential American sport. Playing in the baseball Little League is an all-American activity. The fact that this acts as a setting for pedophilic sexual abuse means that Araki is, again, subverting American culture, exposing the dark world of sexual oppression that lurks beneath its surface. It is significant, as well, that the coach is described as looking like “the lifeguards, cowboys, and firemen” in his mother’s Playgirl magazines (Araki). These male archetypes are distinctly American figures, and the coach, with his conventional good looks and “Marlboro Man” moustache (Araki), clearly fits with the traditional conception of an all-American man. When he is attempting to seduce Neil, he takes him to a ‘slasher’ movie, buys him pizza, and plays video games with him – all components of a classic American childhood. As well, he gives Neil a value pack of an assortment of sugary breakfast cereals to eat, which, as well, is a distinctly American phenomenon. When Neil and the coach playfully throw bits of cereal around the coach’s kitchen, it is amongst the Fruit Loops and Frosted Flakes scattered across the kitchen floor, symbols of American consumer culture, that Neil is sexually abused for the first time. All of these elements associated with an American childhood are twisted by Araki to, instead, represent something sinister. In this way, Araki is providing a critique of American culture, drawing attention to all that it suppresses.
A History of American Independent Cinema
In order to look at the history of American independent cinema, we must first define what constitutes an ‘indie film.’ This is a rather contentious task. Film critic Emmanuel Levy’s ‘ideal’ definition of an indie is “a fresh, low-budget movie with gritty style and offbeat subject matter that express the filmmaker’s personal vision” (cited in Tzioumakis 1). However, this definition becomes dubious when one considers the fact that big-budget films made with financing from subsidiaries of large studios, such as The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring and Good Will Hunting, can also, technically speaking, be considered independent films (Tzioumakis 2). However, for the sake of conciseness, focus will be placed here on films that fall more under Levy’s classification.
Going back to Hollywood’s Studio Years, independent film existed in the form of movies made by Poverty Row studios to service independently-owned movie theatres that could not afford to buy the major studios’ productions (Tzioumakis 64). These films were characterized by, according to film historian Wheeler Dixon, “shoddy sets, dim lighting restricted mostly to key spots, non existent camerawork and extremely poor sound recording” (cited in Tzioumakis 63). These studios became the rulers of the B movie genre in the 1940’s (Tzioumakis 83), as well as major players in the ethnic film market (Tzioumakis 90). At the same time, picture magazines Life and Look experienced surges in popularity, demonstrating to filmmakers that the everyday can provide gripping dramatic material (Carney). As well, Italian neorealist films came to Stateside theatres, and the on-location shooting and “looser, less focused narrative and photographic style” that was characteristic of these films would influence American filmmakers in a huge way (Carney). This shift in consciousness was most evident in New York, which had always been more receptive to European cinema than the rest of the U.S. due to its large immigrant population (Carney). Facilitating the renaissance in American independent film even further, The Paramount Decree, which found the major studios guilty of applying monopolistic practices to eliminate competition, was signed by all the majors in 1948, and thus began the dismantling of Hollywood’s studio system (Tzioumakis 101).
In the second half of the century, modern independent American cinema really came to be defined, as films like Easy Rider (which would have been considered exploitation in the 1950s) entered the mainstream (Tzioumakis 171). The period between 1967 and 1975 came to be known as the Hollywood Renaissance. In this period, independent films saw great success, as they were born out of a new revolutionary sensibility that had spread through the U.S. and were thus able to “capture the spirit and mood of a nation in turmoil” (Tzioumakis 184). This short-lived era, however, ended with Hollywood’s abandonment of these socially relevant films and swift movement toward big-budget blockbusters at the end of the 1970’s (Shaw). This shift “left a door open to new voices” (Shaw).
As a response to the new, conservative politics that dominated the nation in the 1980’s, a countercultural film movement developed, whose leaders included Spike Lee and Jim Jarmusch (Tzioumakis 209). Breakthrough indies like sex, lies, and videotape were shown at Robert Redford’s newly-established Sundance Film Festival, which paved the way for a whole new crop of independent film festivals to emerge (Shaw). Independent filmmakers of the 1980’s generally financed their own films, which “afforded [them] the freedom to explore pressing social issues” (Shaw). One such issue was that of sexual identity. This litigious subject was taken up by the filmmakers of the New Queer Cinema sub-movement, of which Gregg Araki was, and still very much is, an important figure.
New Queer Cinema refers to the wave of queer-centered films that were shown on the festival circuit in the early 1990’s (Aaron 3). These critically-acclaimed films gave voice not only to the gay community, but also to the marginalized sub-groups within this community, such as gay black men and male prostitutes (Aaron 4). Some key figures of this movement, apart from Araki, include: Gus Van Sant, Todd Haynes, Jennie Livingston, and Tom Kalin (Aaron 3). These films subverted cinematic conventions in their content, form, and genre (Aaron 4). They also represented the AIDS virus in a new light, rejecting the soberness of an early death and instead focusing on the experience of a person attempting to make the most out of his or her remaining time in the world (Aaron 5).
Going back to Hollywood’s Studio Years, independent film existed in the form of movies made by Poverty Row studios to service independently-owned movie theatres that could not afford to buy the major studios’ productions (Tzioumakis 64). These films were characterized by, according to film historian Wheeler Dixon, “shoddy sets, dim lighting restricted mostly to key spots, non existent camerawork and extremely poor sound recording” (cited in Tzioumakis 63). These studios became the rulers of the B movie genre in the 1940’s (Tzioumakis 83), as well as major players in the ethnic film market (Tzioumakis 90). At the same time, picture magazines Life and Look experienced surges in popularity, demonstrating to filmmakers that the everyday can provide gripping dramatic material (Carney). As well, Italian neorealist films came to Stateside theatres, and the on-location shooting and “looser, less focused narrative and photographic style” that was characteristic of these films would influence American filmmakers in a huge way (Carney). This shift in consciousness was most evident in New York, which had always been more receptive to European cinema than the rest of the U.S. due to its large immigrant population (Carney). Facilitating the renaissance in American independent film even further, The Paramount Decree, which found the major studios guilty of applying monopolistic practices to eliminate competition, was signed by all the majors in 1948, and thus began the dismantling of Hollywood’s studio system (Tzioumakis 101).
In the second half of the century, modern independent American cinema really came to be defined, as films like Easy Rider (which would have been considered exploitation in the 1950s) entered the mainstream (Tzioumakis 171). The period between 1967 and 1975 came to be known as the Hollywood Renaissance. In this period, independent films saw great success, as they were born out of a new revolutionary sensibility that had spread through the U.S. and were thus able to “capture the spirit and mood of a nation in turmoil” (Tzioumakis 184). This short-lived era, however, ended with Hollywood’s abandonment of these socially relevant films and swift movement toward big-budget blockbusters at the end of the 1970’s (Shaw). This shift “left a door open to new voices” (Shaw).
As a response to the new, conservative politics that dominated the nation in the 1980’s, a countercultural film movement developed, whose leaders included Spike Lee and Jim Jarmusch (Tzioumakis 209). Breakthrough indies like sex, lies, and videotape were shown at Robert Redford’s newly-established Sundance Film Festival, which paved the way for a whole new crop of independent film festivals to emerge (Shaw). Independent filmmakers of the 1980’s generally financed their own films, which “afforded [them] the freedom to explore pressing social issues” (Shaw). One such issue was that of sexual identity. This litigious subject was taken up by the filmmakers of the New Queer Cinema sub-movement, of which Gregg Araki was, and still very much is, an important figure.
New Queer Cinema refers to the wave of queer-centered films that were shown on the festival circuit in the early 1990’s (Aaron 3). These critically-acclaimed films gave voice not only to the gay community, but also to the marginalized sub-groups within this community, such as gay black men and male prostitutes (Aaron 4). Some key figures of this movement, apart from Araki, include: Gus Van Sant, Todd Haynes, Jennie Livingston, and Tom Kalin (Aaron 3). These films subverted cinematic conventions in their content, form, and genre (Aaron 4). They also represented the AIDS virus in a new light, rejecting the soberness of an early death and instead focusing on the experience of a person attempting to make the most out of his or her remaining time in the world (Aaron 5).
Gregg Araki and Auterism
Auterism
Gregg Araki is an independent American filmmaker born December 17, 1959 in Los Angeles California. He grew up in Santa Barbara and earned a Bachelor of Arts in Film Studies at UC Santa Barbara. He eventually got a Masters of Fine Arts in Film Production for the University of Southern California.
He is involved in New Queer Cinema which is a movement for queer-themed independent films. The movement began in the 1990’s and found its roots in the all-encompassing word that is queer, a word that surfaced in 1980’s academic writing. The word queer includes gay, lesbian, bisexuality and transgender activity. The movement elaborates on the identity and experiences of these groups and highlights the fluidity of sexuality. The idea of fluidity is derived from post-modernist theories from the 1980’s; that sexuality is a cultural construct. It should not necessarily be seen as a fixed idea but rather an ever-changing lifestyle. New Queer Cinema films often subvert regular modern conventions of film for they usually depict scenes of raw and explicit sexuality between two people of the same sex. The movement forces viewers to reconsider traditional heterosexual conventions such as implicit same-sex intercourse, marriage and family, often portrayed in modern cinema. Due to its harsh content and subversive material, it is considered to be a radical movement
Araki is considered to be an important filmmaker for he gives a critical voice to queer teenagers, often considered to be misunderstood individuals. Araki uses this voice as a common thread in his films that unifies his body of work consisting of 11 films, 10 of which he wrote. These films are Kaboom (2010), Smiley Face written by Dylan Haggerty (2007), Mysterious Skin (2004), This is how the World Ends (2000), Splendor (1999), Nowhere (1997), The Doom Generation (1995), Totally Fucked Up (1993), The Living End (1992), The Long Weekend (1989) and Three Bewildered People in the Night (1987).
Another common thread in his films is his unique aesthetic often categorized as ‘guerrilla’ named after the style of warfare, unlegislated by the government. Which means his film style is unique and sometimes raw and real. His harsh style of film, his explicit imagery and his subversive messages forces him to be an outsider in the Hollywood system. However, his messages do not go unheard for he highlights pressing issues gay youth face, one of which is isolated suffering.
'The Sad Young Man'
Some refer to this theme in Araki’s films as being ‘the sad young man.’ Araki often portrays this character in his films to offer a visual and physical presence of this specific sort of suffering. In ‘Mysterious Skin,’ there are two sad young men, Neil and Brian who both suffer the consequences of being abused as children by their baseball coach. This persona is also featured in his film ‘The Long Weekend’ about a young gay man named Michael who reunites with his college friends in attempts to rediscover their sense of brotherhood. Michael is sadly mistaken when this sense of closeness is gone and the weekend becomes a complete disappointment.
The Journey
Another theme found in Araki’s films is a sense of journey. In ‘Mysterious Skin’ Neil is on a journey to amplify his life and venture away from his small hometown. He travels to New York City to be with his best friend Wendy however only ends up in more trouble and almost gets killed in the process. He eventually finds his way back home and is able to seemingly close that dangerous chapter in his life by enlightening another victim of child abuse, Brian. Brian too is on a journey of discovery in attempts to understand strange alien flashbacks. He uses recordings of his dreams to locate Neil who ultimately solves the mystery of his past. An example of journey in another of Araki’s films is ‘The Doom Generation’ a film about three teenagers on the road who attempt to find love and experiment sexually without judgment.
Straying from the Hollywood System
Although Araki’s films are unique and differ from those in the Hollywood System, it is difficult to completely separate one’s work from its conventions. Araki often portrays stereotypical themes of buddies and juvenile delinquents. However Araki does not wish to copy Hollywood’s convention of realism. To avoid this gutter, Araki often integrates impossible plot twists such as the idea of space aliens in ‘Mysterious Skin’ and its portrayal Brian’s experiences with extraterrestrial life. The idea of the supernatural, especially space aliens, surfaces in other films such as ‘Nowhere’, a film about a group of L.A teens and their weird everyday lives.
Our Generation
Araki believes our generation is “lost”, “hopeless” and “fucked up.” In order to illustrate this belief, he creates characters that possess the above characteristics. To this avant-garde filmmaker, these characters represent modern youth. In ‘Mysterious Skin’, Neil is representative of this persona. His personality is dark and void. He cares very little about his health, relationships and dignity. He focuses on making money and abandoning his hometown. Perhaps he is solely corrupted due to the trauma he was subject to as a child, or perhaps he ultimately represents our generation as a whole.
'Mysterious Skin' and 'Let the Right One in'
Common Themes
Adult Relationships
‘Mysterious Skin’ is comparable to Tomas Alfredson’s ‘Let the Right One in’ on many thematic levels. Firstly, both films explore the theme of adult relationships. In ‘Mysterious Skin’, both Brian and Neil are subject to a sexual adult relationship without their consent. Both boys are lured into a relationship by a predator and are both too young to understand the magnitude of the situation. Neil is gradually seduced while Brian’s molestation is only somewhat revealed to the viewer to convey a sense of the unreal. However, in both cases, the boys must experience a relationship way beyond their years and cope with the subsequent consequences such as intimacy issues, low self-respect and a false outlook on human relationships. In Alfredson’s ‘Let the Right One in’ both Oskar and Eli, a young boy and an immortal female vampire, begin an adult relationship. Although both parties look like children, in reality Eli has survived for hundreds of years, nourished by human blood. Therefore her wisdom and maturity surpass Oskar’s’ tenfold. Furthermore, the secrecy required to maintain their relationship requires the perseverance and dedication of an adult.
Both examples of adult relationships discussed above differ in many ways however share one common thread, they involve children. An equation which contains adults, children and love with sexual connotations does not prove itself to be an ideal situation. In ‘Mysterious Skin’ the outcome of the imposed adult relationship is traumatic for both Brian and Neil and forces both boys to grow up in an irregular manner, constantly juggling the afflictions of their childhood. In ‘Let the Right One in’, Oskar too must mature and step outside his comfort zone to handle Eli’s special needs and accept her advice concerning bullies at his school.
Alienation
Another common theme found in both films is that of alienation. Both Brian and Neil from ‘Mysterious Skin’ are alienated not simply physically, but mentally as well. Brian is distant from his family due to the rigidness of his family’s ideals. He is a loner amongst society and only finds companionship with two individuals in the entire film. One is a delusional and physically disabled girl from the countryside who prompts Brian’s belief in aliens. The other is a gay teen who is seemingly rejected by many due to his extravagant personality and physical appearance. Neil on the other hand alienates himself. He only felt love and affection when he was in the presence of his coach. As he grew, he never again experienced the same connection nor received the same attention from any another being. He also rejects his hometown community and judges the stagnant lives of its citizens. Consequently he shuts down his emotions and his entire mental consciousness in attempts to live a pain free existence. Similarly in ‘Let the Right One in’ Eli and Oskar are both portrayed as alienated and as outcasts. Besides for his interaction with Eli, he is portrayed as being constantly alone. Oskar has an immense fixation on death and violence that perhaps stems from his intense loneliness. Eli on the other hand is forcibly alienated due to the fact that she is perceived as a menace to society. She is feared just as much as she is elusive yet surprisingly finds companionship with Oskar. With him, she is forced to contain her urges to suck his blood in order to keep him alive, but to keep her sole friend in the universe. Both pairs of unsuspecting companions, Neil and Brian as well as Oskar and Eli bond over the alienation and hardships.
Parental Abandonment
Both films share a theme of parental abandonment. In ‘Mysterious Skin’ Neil’s mother, while being an excellent companion for him, is not a supportive and authoritative mother. She allowed for abuse to be done unto her son because she was firstly, unaware of the fact and secondly, could not find other suitable arrangements for her son while she was busy. The fact that she raised no suspicion whatsoever allows the viewers to question her ability as a mother. Furthermore she did not question her son’s whereabouts as a teenager. While he was off prostituting himself and putting his wellbeing in serious danger his mother did not intervene nor was she aware of the brutality her son was enduring. Brian’s mother was more maternal than Neil’s however being a very rigid and closed off, she neglected to discuss sexuality with her son. Perhaps this is why Brian’s reaction to sexual abuse was unfathomable. Brian’s father was a perpetrator in the eyes of Brian and was looked upon as his abuser for many years. Therefore a bond between father and son was never achieved.
In ‘Let the Right One in’, Oskar’s parents were very absent. While he lived with his mother, his father lived in the countryside and Oskar spent a limited amount of time with his father. His mother too, got very little screen-time and was portrayed as a hardworking breadwinner. However her absence allowed for Oskar to cultivate his relationship with Eli without any parental suspicions or contestations. Comparatively, Eli had no parental figures in her life. Some may argue that the old man with whom she lived could be seen as a father figure for he risked his freedom, values and eventually life to sustain her. Others however may see him as her adorer. The fact that he risked so much to be with her may be out of pure love and not the affection of a father. Consequently this may be argued to be another instance of an adult relationship.
Adult Relationships
‘Mysterious Skin’ is comparable to Tomas Alfredson’s ‘Let the Right One in’ on many thematic levels. Firstly, both films explore the theme of adult relationships. In ‘Mysterious Skin’, both Brian and Neil are subject to a sexual adult relationship without their consent. Both boys are lured into a relationship by a predator and are both too young to understand the magnitude of the situation. Neil is gradually seduced while Brian’s molestation is only somewhat revealed to the viewer to convey a sense of the unreal. However, in both cases, the boys must experience a relationship way beyond their years and cope with the subsequent consequences such as intimacy issues, low self-respect and a false outlook on human relationships. In Alfredson’s ‘Let the Right One in’ both Oskar and Eli, a young boy and an immortal female vampire, begin an adult relationship. Although both parties look like children, in reality Eli has survived for hundreds of years, nourished by human blood. Therefore her wisdom and maturity surpass Oskar’s’ tenfold. Furthermore, the secrecy required to maintain their relationship requires the perseverance and dedication of an adult.
Both examples of adult relationships discussed above differ in many ways however share one common thread, they involve children. An equation which contains adults, children and love with sexual connotations does not prove itself to be an ideal situation. In ‘Mysterious Skin’ the outcome of the imposed adult relationship is traumatic for both Brian and Neil and forces both boys to grow up in an irregular manner, constantly juggling the afflictions of their childhood. In ‘Let the Right One in’, Oskar too must mature and step outside his comfort zone to handle Eli’s special needs and accept her advice concerning bullies at his school.
Alienation
Another common theme found in both films is that of alienation. Both Brian and Neil from ‘Mysterious Skin’ are alienated not simply physically, but mentally as well. Brian is distant from his family due to the rigidness of his family’s ideals. He is a loner amongst society and only finds companionship with two individuals in the entire film. One is a delusional and physically disabled girl from the countryside who prompts Brian’s belief in aliens. The other is a gay teen who is seemingly rejected by many due to his extravagant personality and physical appearance. Neil on the other hand alienates himself. He only felt love and affection when he was in the presence of his coach. As he grew, he never again experienced the same connection nor received the same attention from any another being. He also rejects his hometown community and judges the stagnant lives of its citizens. Consequently he shuts down his emotions and his entire mental consciousness in attempts to live a pain free existence. Similarly in ‘Let the Right One in’ Eli and Oskar are both portrayed as alienated and as outcasts. Besides for his interaction with Eli, he is portrayed as being constantly alone. Oskar has an immense fixation on death and violence that perhaps stems from his intense loneliness. Eli on the other hand is forcibly alienated due to the fact that she is perceived as a menace to society. She is feared just as much as she is elusive yet surprisingly finds companionship with Oskar. With him, she is forced to contain her urges to suck his blood in order to keep him alive, but to keep her sole friend in the universe. Both pairs of unsuspecting companions, Neil and Brian as well as Oskar and Eli bond over the alienation and hardships.
Parental Abandonment
Both films share a theme of parental abandonment. In ‘Mysterious Skin’ Neil’s mother, while being an excellent companion for him, is not a supportive and authoritative mother. She allowed for abuse to be done unto her son because she was firstly, unaware of the fact and secondly, could not find other suitable arrangements for her son while she was busy. The fact that she raised no suspicion whatsoever allows the viewers to question her ability as a mother. Furthermore she did not question her son’s whereabouts as a teenager. While he was off prostituting himself and putting his wellbeing in serious danger his mother did not intervene nor was she aware of the brutality her son was enduring. Brian’s mother was more maternal than Neil’s however being a very rigid and closed off, she neglected to discuss sexuality with her son. Perhaps this is why Brian’s reaction to sexual abuse was unfathomable. Brian’s father was a perpetrator in the eyes of Brian and was looked upon as his abuser for many years. Therefore a bond between father and son was never achieved.
In ‘Let the Right One in’, Oskar’s parents were very absent. While he lived with his mother, his father lived in the countryside and Oskar spent a limited amount of time with his father. His mother too, got very little screen-time and was portrayed as a hardworking breadwinner. However her absence allowed for Oskar to cultivate his relationship with Eli without any parental suspicions or contestations. Comparatively, Eli had no parental figures in her life. Some may argue that the old man with whom she lived could be seen as a father figure for he risked his freedom, values and eventually life to sustain her. Others however may see him as her adorer. The fact that he risked so much to be with her may be out of pure love and not the affection of a father. Consequently this may be argued to be another instance of an adult relationship.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)