Gus Van Sant is one of the most night and day filmmakers that I am familiar with, creating feature films and shorts that I can’t find a middle ground on, I either love them or hate them. It’s a great relationship to have with a filmmaker, because I know when I see something by him, I know that I will come out of the experience with a passionate reaction to what I’ve seen. After his mainstream Good Will Hunting, Psycho, Finding Forrester trifecta, I thought I was done with him. Especially since I didn’t share the praise for My Own Private Idaho that so many others have, I didn’t see any reason to continue paying attention to him. And then his Death trilogy happened followed by Paranoid Park and he made this impossible turn-around that was so out of the blue. He went from movie-of-the-week Oscar seeker to some kind of godson of Bela Tarr. I’m suspicious of the abrupt transformation, but I’m certainly glad that it happened. So when Milk was announced I was ecstatic to see how he would apply his new cinematic techniques to this kind of a film. The trailer was eventually released and reviews began coming in and all signs were pointing to a return to his 20th century form. I lost interest in the project and pushed if off of my radar, as I’d lost hope that it would have anything worthwhile for me. There are two genres in film that I have trouble forcing myself to be interested in (beside traditional Hollywood junk): political thrillers and biopics. There is something silly about a Hollywood celeb dressing up as a well-known figure and acting out his Wiki page or recreating something that should be a documentary instead of fictional non-fiction. There are filmmakers who play with fiction and non-fiction in formally interesting ways, but biopics and political recreations are just a kind of candied version of the truth for people who are too ADD for the real thing.
So anyway, I was hesitant to see this film when it was released, and I certainly wanted to see it far enough after Proposition 8 so that my feelings toward the film wouldn’t be swayed too much by that. I think it’s important to forget concurrent real life events that relate to a film when watching it, like talking about Wendy and Lucy and the economic crisis as if the film is a response to these ‘tough times.’ Neither of these films was made with these issues in mind, so I think it’s unfortunate that I have to watch them in circumstances that cause me to think about things that the filmmakers weren’t intending for me to think about. Prop. 8 does help me contextualize the battle against Prop. 6 recreated in Milk, but like I said, I wish I didn’t have a contextualization other than the film itself.
I thought Milk was pretty great, as good as it possibly could have been given its format and subject. Sean Penn was a revelation for me, I’ve never liked him in a film before, but he characterizes Harvey Milk as such a sweet and important man I couldn’t not wish that the film would end differently than it was going to. The film managed to make me forget that it was based on history, a plus, and I was able to become absorbed in the characters personal decisions and relationships as if the outcome wasn’t already determined. When Harvey and Scott split, it’s pretty tough to take, and the lover that Harvey has after him feels inferior simply because he isn’t Scott. I could praise every actor individually, but it’s been done already all over the internet, so I’ll just say that everyone in this is the best that I’ve ever seen them.
I don’t think it was good when, at the end of the film, they show photos of the main characters in the film, first the actor dressed in character, and then a photo of the actual person. All of the real life photos revealed just how dolled up and attractive the film made them, reminding me that the film partially exists to make money based on its stars and sex appeal. Should the gay community be interested in this because James Franco looks like a hunk and has his shirt off a lot, even if the real life Scott is not that easy on the eyes? or that all of Harvey’s staff look like the cast of That 70’s Show? I could have suspended the illusion just a little bit longer than the credits. But anyway, it’s an important film about an important man, and the main point is that as many people as possible know about him and what he did and how things aren’t so different now than they were in the 70s. The Oscar season has already tossed out any illusion that they intend to honor the bests films of any year, and have instead latched onto an idea that their decisions will be political statements. The idea that Slumdog Millionaire is the Best Picture winner, therefore I guess considered more important than Milk, is embarrassing and idiotic.