This is the second vertical AI BL drama I've sat through, and honestly I went in knowing better. I had it on while I was doing cardio at the gym, and what struck me was just how much the plot echoed the last one I watched. Same step brother romance angle, same mystery girlfriend showing up near the end, same extra guy pining after one of the leads. Genuinely the only thing going for it was the runtime, the whole thing wrapped up in forty five minutes flat. The setup kicks off with Finn moving schools because his mom just married into money. He finds out his new step brother Aiden goes to the same place, and he's warned to keep his distance from him. Their first run in at school is rocky, just like you'd expect, but there's this odd pull between them neither can shake off. Finn keeps telling himself not to read into it because Aiden's straight and openly homophobic. Things shift when some kids start bullying Finn and the student council president, Ryan, steps in to ...
Of late, the world of transgendered people is getting more visibility and public attention. But this documentary came out back in 1999 and is an illuminating and compassionate look at the world of transgender identity, as seen through portraits of some of San Francisco's leading gender mixers. The individuals in this film are people whose (genetically) assigned gender does not match their social gender identity. The subject is pinpointed in the film independent of sexual orientation.
Ms. Treut, a chirpy, sympathetic presence whose curiosity is always balanced by tact, introduces us to a few residents. Texas Tomboy, is biologically a woman, a former Penthouse model who sees herself as Tomboy's surrogate mother. But Tomboy sports blond stubble on her chin and prefers to be called he. A blue-eyed, crew-cut, six-foot photographer named Stafford, on the other hand, doesn't care what pronoun people use so long as they use it respectfully. And Hida Viloria, a voluble hermaphrodite with exquisite cheekbones, can pass effortlessly from ravishing femininity to sullen machismo. Having lived credibly as a woman and as a man, Hida, like Stafford, now seems happiest occupying 'the middle ground'' between them. We also meet Max Valerio, a female-to-male transsexual, and Annie Sprinkle, who calls herself 'a sex artist'. All these times, Ms Treut, talk to the audience in a very odd manner telling us her views in sleep inducing moments.
To be honest, I was disappointed by the documentary. Maybe it did make a lot of sense 19 years ago, but in today's time, it feels shallow. Although the purpose of the documentary was clear, choice of content was not always effectively used. Transitions between scenes were at times abrupt and not very logical. Interviews with a minimal amount of activity in the background were easier to follow whereas busy scenes with a lot of sounds took the focus away from the interviewee. It also would have been nice to see non-transgender point of view as well.
Overall, the documentary was more informal, informational but not professional or something that could hold your attention. (4/10)
Ms. Treut, a chirpy, sympathetic presence whose curiosity is always balanced by tact, introduces us to a few residents. Texas Tomboy, is biologically a woman, a former Penthouse model who sees herself as Tomboy's surrogate mother. But Tomboy sports blond stubble on her chin and prefers to be called he. A blue-eyed, crew-cut, six-foot photographer named Stafford, on the other hand, doesn't care what pronoun people use so long as they use it respectfully. And Hida Viloria, a voluble hermaphrodite with exquisite cheekbones, can pass effortlessly from ravishing femininity to sullen machismo. Having lived credibly as a woman and as a man, Hida, like Stafford, now seems happiest occupying 'the middle ground'' between them. We also meet Max Valerio, a female-to-male transsexual, and Annie Sprinkle, who calls herself 'a sex artist'. All these times, Ms Treut, talk to the audience in a very odd manner telling us her views in sleep inducing moments.
To be honest, I was disappointed by the documentary. Maybe it did make a lot of sense 19 years ago, but in today's time, it feels shallow. Although the purpose of the documentary was clear, choice of content was not always effectively used. Transitions between scenes were at times abrupt and not very logical. Interviews with a minimal amount of activity in the background were easier to follow whereas busy scenes with a lot of sounds took the focus away from the interviewee. It also would have been nice to see non-transgender point of view as well.
Overall, the documentary was more informal, informational but not professional or something that could hold your attention. (4/10)

Comments