Saturday, July 11, 2026

Blind Beasts and Red Angels: Erotic Obsessions in the New Wave Gothic Films of Yasuzo Masumura

I did some writing a some years ago for a webzine called Film and Fishnets which appears to be defunct. Navigating to the url of my articles returns a "website expired" message, so that's that, I guess. I keep everything I write, though, so I'm going to be recreating those pieces here over the course of this month. These are some of my favorite pieces among my own writing and I'm happy to share them on my own site. I hope everyone else who wrote or created art for the venue has kept their work, too. It was an interesting experiment.


1.

Bear with me for a bit here.

One of the odder personalities in the history of art is the Swiss artist, Henry Fuseli (born Johann Heinrich Füssli before he anglicized his name after moving to England). His most famous painting is The Nightmare, which has been haunting the gothic imagination since its debut in 1781, especially since it was rediscovered, along with all of Fuseli’s other work by the symbolists and the surrealists in the early 20th century. Ken Russell once themed an entire movie around it. It suited Russell’s aesthetic. It doesn’t take a deep dive into Fuseli’s reams of drawings to discover that he was kind of a pervert, one with a deeply fixed fear of being unmanned by women, either figuratively or literally. Take, for instance, this early drawing of a man being forced to submit to his mistress.

Tuesday, June 30, 2026

The Grant Mystique: Sylvia Scarlett (1935)

"There's something that gives me a queer feeling every time I look at you."--Jimmy Monkley (Cary Grant) in Sylvia Scarlett.


Cary Grant's sexuality has been an open question for decades. Grant vowed that he was straight to the end of his days, but rumors circulated his entire life and afterward that not only was he gay, he and his friend, Randolph Scott, set up house together between lavender marriages to minor actresses. If true, it was an on again off again cohabitation of some twelve years. Grant was militant in defending his heterosexuality, though. He was litigious on the subject during his lifetime. And yet...several of his earliest directors were gay. He had a bit part in Dorothy Arzner's Merrily We Go to Hell and a more substantial one in Mitchell Leisen's The Eagle and the Hawk.  He was perfectly happy to allow filmmakers to poke fun at his masculinity, particularly in two films for Howard Hawks. In Bringing Up Baby, Hawks dressed the actor in a marabou negligee and when pressed on his appearance by the film's straights, gave him the line, "I just went gay all of a sudden!" A decade later, Hawks dressed him up as a woman full stop in I Was a Male War Bride, assuming that the sight of Grant so attired would be hilarious. That gag hasn't aged at all well. Grant's daughter, Jennifer, continued to defend her father's heterosexuality after his death, but several of his ex-wives described him as bisexual at the very least. As a personal note: Grant set off my mother's gaydar, which was accurate enough to identify Rock Hudson as a gay man long before he was outed during the AIDS epidemic. So there you go. You have my mother's word for it.

In spite of Grant's defenses and denials, queerness circled his career and screen image, if only as background radiation. Three of the actor's collaborations with Katharine Hepburn were directed by George Cukor, whose homosexuality wasn't just a matter of rumor. Cukor knew all of gay Hollywood, and held parties for them in his home throughout his life. In 1936, Cukor was picked up on vice charges at the Navy pier with William Haines and Haines's boyfriend/husband for soliciting sex from men, something that MGM was at pains to cover up. Cukor was often relegated as a director of "women's pictures" ever after, including, appropriately enough, The Women in 1939 as a consolation prize for being removed from Gone With the Wind because Clark Gable wouldn't be directed by a "fairy" (his word). Cukor himself bristled at the idea that he could only work with women and, indeed, more men won Oscars in his films than did for any other director. He also directed more movies starring Katharine Hepburn--ten of them--than any other director.

Katharine Hepburn herself was no model of depression-era heterosexuality, either. She affected mannish fashions in a time when that was taboo. She frequently wore pants (gasp!). She consorted with known lesbians. Her second film, the very queer-coded Christopher Strong, was directed by Dorothy Arzner after all (her first was directed by Cukor). She was rumored to have had a romantic relationship with her "companion", Laura Harding throughout the 1930s. Some of Hepburn's comments on her own persona suggest at least some level of gender ambiguity. She affected an alter ego named "Jimmy" in her youth, for example, and sometimes complained that she should have been born a man. History notes Hepburn's affairs with men, most notably John Ford (himself of a dubious sexuality if you believe Maureen O'Hara, among others), Howard Hughes, and Spencer Tracy. Tracy was accounted Hepburn's great love, but is it possible that he was a beard? Likely not, but some of her contemporaries, known lesbians all, believed that the actual love of her life was Harding, with whom she remained close throughout her life.

Does any of this matter given the enforced heterosexuality of movies during the Production Code era? Is it even useful to speculate about dead movie stars who never publicly acknowledged that they were some variety of queer? Maybe not as a rule. The Breen office and paranoid studios made damned sure that this is all reading tea leaves in the absence of documentary evidence. Even granting that, you cannot avoid the queerness of the imagery in Grant, Hepburn, and Cukor's first collaboration, Sylvia Scarlett (1935), in which Hepburn cuts off her hair and poses as a man for most of the film and kisses a girl. And if the film weren't queer enough already, Edmund Gwenn--Kris Kringle himself--plays Sylvia Scarlett's reprobate father in the film. Gwenn never remarried after he separated from his wife around 1916. He spent his later years living with the much younger Olympic bobsledder, Rodney Soher, and allegedly had multiple male side-pieces. One almost feels sorry for poor Brian Ahern, possibly the only prominent straight cast member in the film.

It is the overt queerness of Sylvia Scarlett that is most often cited as the reason it flopped. It is that same overt queerness that has granted it an afterlife in spite of its initial failure. It's a cult item these days, a film that figures prominently in the history of gay Hollywood. It's also an important film in the careers of both Grant and Hepburn, though it sent them in opposite directions.

Tuesday, June 02, 2026

Revisiting The Invasion of the Body Snatchers and Its Progeny at Horror 101

Seeing the original 1956 version of The Invasion of the Body Snatchers when I was nine years old was a formative experience for me, which I discuss with my friend Aaron and his guests at Horror 101 with Dr. AC this week. We also discuss the descendants of that film, for better or for worse. Join us, won't you?





Christianne Benedict on Patreon
This blog is supported on Patreon by wonderful subscribers. If you like what I do, please consider pledging your own support. It means the world to me.

Monday, June 01, 2026

Norma Jean at 100

I had a weird dream last night where I was working as a camera operator on Some Like It Hot and I was covertly filming a short film in which Marilyn Monroe was delivering Molly Bloom's monologue from Ulysses and that's why she was always late to set for Wilder's film. In my dream we did multiple set-ups to make it cinematic rather than just pointing the camera at her, which in retrospect, I probably should have done in the first place. She flubbed her lines once or twice, but she knew the material.

I have no idea of if the real Norma Jean could do a Dublin accent, but in my dream she could.

The picture at the head of this post is from Clash by Night, by the way, a film notable because she doesn't use the baby doll voice for which she's famous. I picture Molly Bloom looking a bit like this. Jesus, can you imagine this woman saying:

"I was a Flower of the mountain yes when I put the rose in my hair like the Andalusian girls used or shall I wear a red yes and how he kissed me under the Moorish Wall and I thought well as well him as another and then I asked him with my eyes to ask again yes and then he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes."

That would have melted movie screens.

I know the real Marilyn read Ulysses and lobbied for the part of Molly Bloom in a film she wanted to get off the ground. I know she got angry when producers told her that she wasn't right for a film version when she knew those producers hadn't even read it.

Anyway, she would have been 100 years old today. Hollywood squandered her talent, but she made a bunch of great films in spite of that.





Christianne Benedict on Patreon
This blog is supported on Patreon by wonderful subscribers. If you like what I do, please consider pledging your own support. It means the world to me.

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

Revisiting Duel (1971) at Horror 101

My friend, Dr. AC, had me back on his Horror 101 cast again to talk about Duel (1971), the TV movie that put Steven Spielberg on the map. This is one of the masterpieces of 1970s horror filmmaking, and more than a little of that moxie was provided by screenwriter and favorite of the blog, Richard Matheson. Join us, won't you?





Christianne Benedict on Patreon
This blog is supported on Patreon by wonderful subscribers. If you like what I do, please consider pledging your own support. It means the world to me.

Thursday, March 05, 2026

The True/False Film Festival 2026: Preludes

The annual True/False Film Festival rolls into my fair city again today with a selection of non-fiction-ish films on offer. I always think of the festival as a kind of circus, given that there's a parade and a bunch of interactive art projects associated with the event. I've seen several of this year's films prior to the start of the festival in my role as screener. Here are my thoughts on those films, all of which make their world premieres tonight.

Phenomena (2026, directed by Josef Gatti) is to physics as Microcosmos was to biology, minus the snail sex. It attempts to visualize physical phenomena for the screen and covers major topics like light, matter, energy, waves, gravity, magnetism, entropy, and life itself. In each case, the film uses a macrocinematic technique to create visual poems from the individual phenomena. The color spectra on the surface of bubbles, produced by the transparency and thickness of the bubble wall create a spectacular light show, for example, that resembles the light shows they used to create with colored oils for psychedelic rock shows at the Fillmore. The self-assembly of matter is demonstrated by the growth of salt crystals, for another example, while waves are produced with a vibrating plate and sand, et cetera. Each movement has a distinct visual key, and the score makes the whole thing play like a physics version of Fantasia.

It also inculcates a sense of curiosity in the natural world. In addition to its function as a beautiful cinematic experience, it explains the universe in an engaging way that leaves open the door to explore further. It also draws a connection from all of these forces to the immediate lives of the viewer. This is especially true of the segment on nuclear forces, in which a piece of uranium is put in a chamber with a gas that reacts to radioactivity, creating visible tendrils of vapor wherever a ray passes through. Then it offers the same visual without the uranium, in the presence of just the air. There are still trails of vapor as particles from the background radiation of the universe manifest themselves. The whole thing is compelling, and makes science and the natural world visible in a way that most science media does not. Even without the science background, this is the work of a keen cinematic intelligence. Often spectacular, this would best be seen on the biggest screen you can find.

Buck's Harbor (2026, directed by Peter Muller) is an examination of male isolation and loneliness by way of a portrait of several men who live in Bucks Harbor, Maine. All of them make their living by lobstering, either directly or indirectly. Each of them cope with the disappointment and bitterness of working a hard-scrabble existence. Dave is a recovering addict who becomes harbor master during the course of the film; he once had aspirations to be an artist. Dave has a nephew who is learning the same life, and while their time together ice fishing and hunting and such seem to offer them meaning, the hard wall of adulthood remains for the nephew to climb. Wayne, another recovering addict, is a nomad who has worked dozens of jobs and spent time in prison; he views his isolation as freedom and has a tattoo of a jailbird who reminds him that alcohol destroyed his life. Mark makes lobster traps and has a life that’s not quite as hard as the men who go to sea each day. He’s married, but he has a second life as a crossdresser who performs an alternate identity on web cam. His crossdressing seems like a pressure valve in which he can burn away the expectations of masculinity and escape them, if only briefly.

This is an observational doc, where the various characters talk about their lives as they go about them. This sometimes looks like The Most Dangerous Catch when it's on the water, though without the notion that it's a grand adventure. At land, there’s a sense here that performing the roles expected of men have basically forestalled all of these people from living a full and meaningful life, and there’s also a sense that the patrimony passed on to the next generation is equally hopeless, with the looming spectre of climate change decimating their livelihood. There are occasional shots of lobsters in their environment sitting as if in judgement, or as a kind of Greek Chorus. This is a bleak film, filled with hollow men and economic desolation. It’s also a beautiful film in its way, capturing the coast of Maine and a dangerous profession with an eye toward a dismal poetry.

Seized (2026, directed by Sharon Liese) presents the woes of a free press in microcosm by focusing on the 2023 seizure of the Marion County Record in Kansas by the city government. The Record has been investigating a dispute between the owner of a local restaurant owner, who continued to retain a liquor license in spite of a drunk driving conviction. Her ex-husband leaked the information to the Record, who were dubious enough of its provenance that they chose not to run it. That didn't stop the police from raiding the paper for evidence of improperly obtained information. The Record stuck to their anonymous source. The star of the film is the record's editor, Eric Meyer, whose mother, Joan, was the owner of the paper. The police raided their home as well as the paper's offices, precipitating Joan Meyer's death a day later. The police also raided the home of Vice Mayor Ruth Herbell. This was international news, causing the entire profession of journalism to circle the wagons to defend the record, and also started the process of kicking over the rocks to find the dirty secrets of cockroaches, particularly Police Chief Cody an restaurateur Kari Newell. Cody, it seems, had a history of harassment at the Kansas City Police Department, leading to his early retirement there.

The film casts its net wider than the raid and the aftermath, which resulted in lawsuits against the city and the dismissal of the Chief of Police. It's also a portrait of small town journalism and it's relationship to the communities they cover. In this case, it conveniently also projects into a broader examination of journalism in the current national political environment. It's not above indulging in archetypes, either. Eric Meyer is the kind of journalist who used to populate movies. There's a sly cut between Meyer smoking a cigarette as the cops haul off his files and a washtub filled with sand and a myriad of cigarette butts. One can imagine him with a battered fedora and a cigarette dangling from his lip as he bangs out copy on an old manual typewriter. Given that he's the editor, he's also reminiscent of Superman's boss, Perry White, and a maybe a little bit of Walter Burns from The Front Page, an unscrupulous operator who will get the story and protect the paper no matter the means. He could easily be a villain, but is spared that by the sheer stupidity of his opponents. One doesn't have to squint very hard to imagine these people in the current (in 2026) presidential administration. The restaurateur, Newell, even has the look of this era's authoritarian Barbies.

In this case, the institution of journalism prevails, but there's the lurking threat of corporate media ever-present in the background of the film. Meyer is a bulwark against that, too, but when he's gone, who will depend independent journalism in Marion, Kansas? Certainly not the intern whose story runs in parallel to the main story. He's eager, but he's not going to stay. How do you keep them down on the farm, and all that?





Christianne Benedict on Patreon
This blog is supported on Patreon by wonderful subscribers. If you like what I do, please consider pledging your own support. It means the world to me.

Friday, January 09, 2026

Revisiting Eyes Without a Face at Horror 101

I was invited on to my friend Aaron's Horror 101 pocast again to talk about one of my very favorite films. How favorite? I named myself after a character in it. I've written about it on multiple occasions, and I've reproduced the essay I wrote about it for the old Muriel awards a few years ago below the jump.