Ben Hur and The Celluloid Closet

I agree with movie reviewer Mark Bourne, [www.dvdjournal.com/ reviews/c/celluloidcloset.shtml] The Celluloid Closet is “not a movie made solely for ‘gay audiences.’ It's a good movie, period.” And for me one of the most sardonic scenes from the documentary was the one involving the late Charlton Heston in the movie Ben Hur getting blindsided again (Cf. Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine for another) by Gore Vidal’s ploy to get him and co-actor Stephen Boyd to play the scene as if they were former gay lovers. While Boyd was brought in on the scheme and agreed to play the part, Heston was not let in on the plan. The result is, as summed up in Mark Bourne’s review, “…a wryly amusing, and more dramatically engaging, experience.” He adds, “As you might expect, Heston over the years has not just denied that any homosexual context exists in the scene — he also steadfastly refuses to work on any movie that includes Gore Vidal in any way.”

In an interesting side note, Gene Siskel, in a TV review of the documentary in At the Movies with Siskel and Ebert, suggests that any group could show its own history through a history of film clips. [http://bventertainment.go.com/tv/buenavista/ebertandroeper/index2.html?sec=1&subsec=1434]

There is an interesting update on the documentary by Michael Bronski, who teaches Film, Women's and Gender Studies and Jewish Studies at Dartmouth College. In a lengthy 2008 article in Cineaste, “From The Celluloid Closet to Brokeback Mountain: The Changing Nature of Queer Film Criticism,” Bronski reviews three new books, The View from Here: Conversations with Gay and Lesbian Filmmakers Edited by Matthew Hays, The Cinema of Todd Haynes: All That Heaven Allows Edited by James Morrison, and Reading Brokeback Mountain: Essays on the Story and the Film Edited by Jim Stacy. In the review, he talks about “the enormous cultural shifts that have occurred in the three decades” since Vito Russo's 1981 film survey, The Celluloid Closet, which, he points out, has had “the most impact” on gay film reviews. However, he says, “…the problem with Russo's dichotomized negative/positive image analysis was that it simply didn't leave much middle ground for ambiguity, or in some cases, even interpretation.” He encourages us “…to take very seriously how much the world of ‘gay movies’ has changed in the past ten years and how very different it is from thirty-five years ago… and to understand—in the largest historic and political context possible—the impact, and the potential, of queer cinema today.” Michael Bronski’s latest book is entitled Pulp Friction: Uncovering the Golden Age of Gay Male Pulps. [http://www.cineaste.com/articles/changing-nature-of-queer-film-criticism.htm]

If the “The Celluloid Closet” had been made in 2010, according to Scott Kirsner’s recommendations from the ITVS Digital Initiative Report from the Field: [http://www.itvs.org/funding/resources/report-from-the-field]

“The Top Five Connection-Creating Strategies” might include:
1. Starting a blog or website to generate awareness of what’s in the works as a way for potential collaborators, sources, funders, and DVD-buyers to get in touch early on.
2. Participating and posting in existing online communities related to the film’s topic.
3. Maintaining a database of everyone who has offered help during production.
4. Considering ways to allow interested parties to get involved by open-sourcing research, by having others contribute by shooting far-off locations and interviews, and even by having others do some editing.
5. Thinking about posting some clips/excerpts from rough cuts on video-sharing sites to begin building an online presence for the film, and providing links back to the film’s web or blog.

“The Top Five Marketing and Promotion Strategies” might include:
1. Leveraging the lists and websites of membership organizations related to the topic of the film to communicate with viewers who may be interested in seeing/purchasing it.
2. Connecting with bloggers who cover the issues in the film, offering them interviews, review copies of the DVD or embeddable clips from the film.
3. Collecting e-mail addresses (and ideally ZIP codes too) from the visitors to the film’s website; notifying them when the film is playing in theaters or on TV, or when it becomes available on DVD or as a download.
4. Posting clips on video-sharing sites or social networking sites, with links back to the film’s main site to help introduce it to new audiences.
5. Considering allowing Internet users to remix or “mash up” parts of your film, or create their own trailers for it. This adds their perspective to the work and, ideally, helps it reach a broader audience.

“The Top Five Distribution Strategies” might include:
1. Making sure DVDs are available when audiences are most interested in the film: during the theatrical run, during festival screenings and at the time of the first TV broadcast.
2. Considering producing at least two versions of the DVD, at two different price points: one for general audiences and a second version for educational/group use, with discussion guides and supplemental material.
3. Carefully evaluating distribution offers that wrap up digital rights with theatrical or home video rights. What might the distributor do in the near-term to generate revenues with those rights?
4. Focusing digital distribution efforts on outlets with already-established audiences (such as Apple’s iTunes or Amazon.com’s Unbox); if working with a newer outlet, negotiating for premium placement on the site and additional promotion.
5. Insisting on regular reporting of sales figures and the ability to audit them, whether selling DVDs or digital downloads/rentals with a business partner.

—Jim McKinney