Movies
Sacrificing self
New documentary profiles gay Naval Academy alumniĀ
‘Out of Annapolis’
Oct. 22 at 9:30 p.m.
U.S. Naval Memorial Theatre
701 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
$15

Director Steve Clark Hall during his service days in 1982 off the coast of Connecticut. (Photo courtesy of the filmmaker)
Baltimore resident Frank McNeil remembers with a chuckle some of the tricks of the trade he and his Marine Corps buddies ā the few who were out to each other ā used to keep handy during their years at North Carolina’s Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune where he was stationed in the ’80s.
There was a gay bar in nearby Jacksonville, N.C., ironically dubbed Secrets. But partying there was too dangerous because military police would routinely troll the Secrets parking lot for cars with military stickers, trace the owners and confront them.
McNeil wormed his way out of getting busted a few times ā enough to learn Secrets was too close to home to patronize.
“‘So, Corp. McNeil, why was your car parked at a gay bar?'” McNeil remembers the conversation unfolding. “‘Uhhh, I loaned it to a friend.’ You just learned not to go out in Jacksonville, most of us went out in Wilmington, which was like an hour away. So you could go out and have fun but your guard was up, or at least mine was.”
McNeil left the military in 1991, before “Don’t’ Ask, Don’t Tell” was enacted. His story and 10 others are told in the new film “Out of Annapolis,” a documentary that will be screened as half of a double bill at the U.S. Naval Memorial Theatre in Washington Oct. 22. It’s one of three films being screened this month as a mini Reel Affirmations festival as the LGBT film marathon has moved its usual lineup from October to April.
Director Steve Clark Hall, a San Francisco Navy vet whose own story is shared in the film, says he was inspired to make the documentary because he was tired of seeing gays misrepresented.
“I’m just trying to put a real face on who we are,” Hall says. “Everything we see so misrepresents us, so we started with a website three-and-a-half years ago. Who are these people? You know, gays are always assumed to be these other people. Not people we know. Not who we are, but then all of a sudden it’s like, ‘Oh, gays are my good friends or my neighbors.'”
Hall, who spent 20 years in the Navy, says he was “about as out as one could be without having gay tattooed on my forehead. I didn’t raise my hand and say, ‘I’m gay, kick me out.’ I think it wasn’t much of a problem for me because I was always a team player. Always an asset.”
McNeil had an especially rough time keeping his personal and professional life in balance. In those pre-“Don’t Ask” years, he only confided in a “very select” group of friends about his sexual orientation. His late partner, Chris Duncan, was battling AIDS, a factor in McNeil’s eventual resignation.
“It brought a lot of mixed feelings because I really loved what I was doing, but you just couldn’t share completely,” he says. “You couldn’t have your partner’s picture out. You had to change your pronouns. ⦠There was a sense of dismay that you couldn’t quite be honest with the people you were serving.”
“Out of Annapolis” started in the summer of 2008 as an undertaking of the United States Naval Academy OUT ā a group of LGBT U.S. Naval Academy alumni and their supporters. Hall, a novice filmmaker, says the project, which included a study of the experiences of gay alumni, aims to educate the public about the experiences of gay service members before and during “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Participants were selected to give a good cross-representation of experiences. About 300 participated in the study, 75 were interviewed and 11 were chosen for the film.
“It was tough to pare it down,” Hall says. “We had some great stories we had to turn away because it would have over-represented a certain group.”
The movie debuted in New York in June and has been making the rounds of LGBT film festivals since. Hall and five others, including McNeil, will be at the D.C. screening, its local premiere.
“It’s very powerful,” says Larry Guillemette, Reel Affirmations festival chair. “I think it will resonate a great deal given the defeat our community just experienced on the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ legislation. I think it will hopefully galvanize people to get more involved.”
Perhaps ironically, Hall didn’t conceive the project as an anti-“Don’t Ask” manifesto. The policy is hardly mentioned in the film.
“Some of it is just chronology,” he says. “Some of the people we profiled served before the policy began. But the film interestingly doesn’t sit there and try to make an argument, but in some ways just hearing the stories makes it the greatest argument against ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ because people can see what it was really like trying to live under the law. We were forced to be two different people and you just can’t be.”
PHOTO: Frank McNeil at his home in Baltimore (Blade photo by Michael Key)
Movies
āThelma and Louiseā remains landmark of unspoken queer rebellion
Celebrating iconic film 35 years after its release
Hard as it is to believe for those who were around when it happened, āThelma and Louiseā celebrates the 35th anniversary of its release this year.
Deeply popular with both critics and audiences at the time, its reputation continues to ride high; itās a movie that manages to exist within a nexus of intersecting genres ā the ābuddy pictureā, the ācrime thriller,ā the āaction adventure,ā theā āwestern,ā the āneo-noirā ā by blending them seamlessly into a crowd-pleasing wild ride of a story, all while delivering a powerful feminist message of outrage, defiance, and empowerment.
And no, āThelma and Louiseā is not a āqueer movieā ā but it feels like one.
Thatās partly because It exists within another genre, too: ālesbian noir,ā which blossomed in its wake with films like āBoundā (1996) and has re-emerged in recent films like āLove Lies Bleedingā (2024) and āHoney, Donātā (2025) ā but that also stretches back across decades into the days of old Hollywood, when coded queer characters were a regular fixture in the seedy film noir classics of their time, never overtly identified as such but obvious to spot for anyone savvy enough to read the subtext. Thatās why āThelma and Louiseā resonated (and continues to resonate) with lesbian and bisexual audiences who see themselves reflected in its two lead characters, even if there is nothing queer about their relationship ā on the surface at least.
Of course, that can be a sore subject; subtext might seem like a ācop-outā for those who long for more open representation for LGBTQ people on the screen ā but itās everything when it comes to recognizing the queerness of older movies (and a lot of newer ones, too), and just because something is not explicitly stated, that doesnāt mean itās being hidden. After all, most good stories rely on the transcendent power of nuance, which always relies on subtext to shine through. And if any movie relies upon subtext, āThelma and Louiseā is certainly one of them. In its masterfully crafted narrative of a weekend āgirlās tripā that goes horribly wrong, a lot of the most important information is left unspoken.
Take Thelma (Geena Davis), to start with: a naive young housewife whose husband Darryl (Christopher McDonald) treats her like a possession, she blithely ignores his mediocrity and disregards ā or at least, pretends to ā his repressive tactics to control her, choosing instead to live in a tenuous illusion of ātraditionalā marriage dynamics; yet when her bestie Louise (Susan Sarandon) offers her a chance to escape for a weekend, she jumps at it ā even if she has to skip the part where she asks his permission.
Louise (Susan Sarandon), a bit older and a lot more worldly, is a waitress who spends her days fending off the insults and advances of her male customers at the diner where she works; she sees Thelmaās situation clearly, and hopes that a temporary respite from Darryl will help her recognize the dead-end reality of her marriage. We understand this immediately, even though a direct word is never said about it, and sheās right, of course. Theyāve barely even gotten on the road before Thelmaās longing for attention from someone other than her inadequate husband ā a honky-tonk Lothario (Timothy Carhart) she meets in a roadhouse where they stop for drinks on the way out of town ā leads to an attempted rape that is only prevented when Louise shoots the predator dead in the parking lot.
That killing is the catalyst that turns them into fugitives; as Louise rightly understands, thereās no evidence of sexual assault, just a dead body and a pair of runaway women, and the letter of the law is not on their side. But in truth, that fatal shot is fired not to save Thelma, who has already been freed from her would-be rapistās clutches when it happens, but because Louise has traumatic memories ā and a chip on her shoulder ā over something that āhappened in Texas,ā years before. We never find out what it was that happened, and we donāt need to; our imaginations tell us all we need to know, just as we know that the killing, while it may have been cold-blooded murder, is a justifiable homicide all the same.
Thereās more of that subtextual nuance throughout, from the perversely inspiring motivations of hitchhiking hustler J.D. (Brad Pitt, in the sex-on-a-stick performance that launched him on his trajectory to stardom), who takes advantage of Thelma’s gullibility to rob the heroines even as he teaches her the tactics that will soon sustain them on their fateful ride-or-die fugitive adventure; to the self-serving āchivalryā of Louiseās erstwhile boyfriend (Michael Madsen) when he casts himself as the āmartyrā for letting her go. And yes, even to the benignly sublimated patriarchal programming that drives police investigator Hal Slocumb (Harvey Keitel in an uncharacteristically empathetic role) to act as would-be savior to these two āfallenā women, though they want no part of his well-meaning attempts to ārescueā them from the consequences of their choices. And when the two fugitives terrorize a piggish trucker (Marco St. John) before blowing up his big-rig tanker, nobody says ā or needs to say ā why it feels like the right thing to do; it simply IS the right thing, and we, as the audience, know it. What we have seen up to that point has placed us firmly on Thelma and Louiseās side, and weāre as ready to watch the puerile patriarchy burn as they are.
None of this is spoken aloud, nor is it even alluded to, but it comes through, nonetheless. Chalk it up to the power of Callie Khouriās Oscar-winning screenplay, which expertly lays this inner narrative as the foundation for everything that happens, and leaves director Ridley Scott to supply the stylish, action-packed visuals.
Thelma and Louise may not be āa couple,ā but we canāt help notice as their clothing evolves from frilly-femme to ābutchā utilitarianism along the way, nor how their connection to the men in their lives easily dissolves without fanfare. And by the time we reach the movieās thrilling denouement, when all they have left is their commitment to simply stand up against the things that have kept them feeling incomplete, unfulfilled, and unacceptable, itās an achingly familiar feeling for any queer viewer who has experienced the same ā and let’s face it, that’s probably almost all of us.
We all know what happens, so it’s no spoiler to say that, when they drive off to oblivion in the Grand Canyon, they choose freedom over life itself ā and when they head over that cliff, fully embracing their fate as a feminist iteration of the Bonnie and Clyde brand of ānobleā outlaws, they seal their fate with a kiss.Ā
At that point, any further explanation would feel like an insult. Their love for each other transcends anything theyāve felt with the inadequate men in their lives, it’s as simple as that, and their triumph is perfectly captured in that final freeze-frame moment, when they drive off the cliff and begin their plunge toward certain death and it feels like joy.
Yet still, we like to think that their car ā like Danny Zukoās at the end of āGreaseā ā simply flies away with them instead, into the bliss of an endless summer, and you canāt get any queerer than that!
Movies
āHere the Whole Timeā delivers queer coming-of-age comedy
A feel-good journey toward self-discovery
There are a lot of queer coming-of-age movies about how hard coming of age can be when youāre queer ā and thatās because, for far too many queer young people, coming of age is a very difficult experience.
Yet as difficult as it may be, imagine how much more so it is for queer kids who are also struggling with other factors that make them a potential target for bullying and social stigma. When your awakening sexuality is complicated by fears and self-esteem issues that can cause you to feel ostracized even by the other queer kids, itās pretty hard to find a place where you fit in. Unfortunately, there are far fewer movies that address that kind of ādouble whammyā scenario, and even fewer whose leading characters donāt look like model-perfect “influencers,” complete with chiseled abs, perfect hair, and flawless skin ā which makes it all the more welcome when a movie like that actually does come along.
Thatās why the arrival on Netflix of āHere the Whole Timeā ā a Brazilian teen romcom from director Daniel Lieff ā feels a bit like a surprise gift.
Its central character ā Felipe (Miguel Lallo), a teenager who lives with his single mom Rita (DĆ©bora Falabella) ā is already out as gay, but thatās not the only reason that his life at school is torturous; as he informs us through his own narration, heās always been the butt of cruel jokes and public bullying because heās always been (in his own words) āfat.ā Heās teased in the classroom, humiliated in the hallways, and victimized at dodgeball in his gym class; so when his eagerly awaited summer break arrives, heās looking forward to weeks of freedom in which he never has to interact with anyone except his mother.
His blissful dreams of isolating himself in his room are shattered, however, by a rude awakening in the form of Caio (Diego Lira), a neighbor boy and former childhood friend, whose mother and father have left him to stay with Rita while they are away on a trip. Athletic, handsome, and popular, heās everything Felipe is not, and despite any previous bond of companionship they may have had, Felipe has no intention of playing the gracious host.
Yet as the days go by, the two boys begin to resuscitate their friendship; rather than being the bully Felipe expects, Caio is mostly respectful and exceedingly polite in trying to negotiate their temporary co-habitation. Forced to spend time together, the two gradually warm to each other, opening the door to a renewed friendship; they begin to āhang outā together, expanding the usually isolated Felipeās social circle to include Caioās BFF Beca (Mika Soiero) and her girlfriend Melissa (Bel Moreira) ā leading to a revelation that turns his newfound friendly feelings for Caio into something more of a crush.
Is the feeling mutual? Can Felipe set aside his insecurities enough to even find out? We did describe the movie as a āromcom, so you can draw your own conclusions from that, but itās a wild ride of a story, and half the fun is watching it unfold through each new development, so we wonāt give any of those surprises away.
It wonāt be a spoiler, however, to discuss the way āHere the Whole Timeā undercuts the sentiment of its predictably āsweetā formula with its presentation of Felipe as something of an anti-hero, a strident ārebel with a causeā who disdains and distrusts everyone around him except for his mother and sees his therapy (or at least pretends to) as just an extension of school ā complete with the unwanted inconvenience of homework.
Heās also, ironically, something of a bully himself, initially responding to the presence of Caio ā who is no happier about their temporary living arrangement than he is ā with willful and deliberate contempt, and levying his position as host (or as son of the hostess, at least) to assert his circumstantial power and dominance over an unwanted guest. Of course, we can see all along where it comes from, the habitual offense-as-defense tactic that has helped him survive and gain what little self-confidence he has, but that doesnāt make it any less rude.
Still, we donāt dislike him for it; a lifetime of body-shaming can do that to a person. Besides, it makes the transformation that comes in him ā after learning to stand up for others like he stands up for himself, and other valuable life lessons he undergoes along the way ā feel much more like an uplift. And if his insecurities win out once in a while (as they do, to dramatic effect, in the filmās penultimate chapters), who can blame him?
Caio, too, is portrayed against expectation. His self-assured swagger, like Felipeās misanthropic hostility, comes from a young lifetime of self-protective compensation, but itās just as easy for us to see through, and as the tenderness inside is revealed, heās a far cry from āpopular jockā stereotype that Felipe ā and the audience ā assume him to be,
Itās the dynamic between these two eminently likable characters that makes the film work, granting each of them their own dovetailing journeys toward self-discovery and allowing the feel-good sentiment of the story to emerge as something authentic, rather than just another trope-driven fantasy.
Much of this is thanks to the two young leads, who fully commit to their roles and strike a winning chemistry that makes us want them both to find their way through the amusing ā but no less traumatic ā growing pains they experience, both together and apart. They succeed in building an onscreen world in which we can believe, with them, in the possibility of rising above the obstacles thrown in their path, and it leaves us feeling not just uplifted, but maybe even a little joyful.
Kudos also go out to Falabella, whose performance as the quintessential ācool momā makes her stand out as the filmās adult MVP; likewise, director Leiff handles the material with a superb sense of balance between over-the-top absurdity and quietly joyful moments of truth. In the end, though, itās screenwriters Ray Tavares and Victor Brandt ā adapting from a book by Vitor Martins ā thatās truly responsible for crafting a charming coming-of-age story that allows itself to reach for the unlikely happy ending instead of sticking with the tried-and-true bittersweetness that usually arrives to provide an extra dash of unrequited yearning.
Of course, more jaded viewers ā especially if theyāre adults ā might find the overall effect of āHere the Whole Timeā less of than convincing. But for most of us ā and hopefully itās target audience, especially ā itās a charming reminder that ācoming of ageā isnāt just about sex or compromising with disillusionment. More than anything else, itās about learning to let go of our disappointed assumptions to blossom into the life we truly deserve.
As a refreshingly upbeat entry into a genre that somehow holds a key position in our compromised adult lives, itās definitely a ride worth taking,
Movies
āTeenage Sex and Deathā has never been more entertaining
Come for the jump scares, but stay for the tour-de-force filmmaking
If any movie title can be said to describe exactly what it is going to show us, āTeenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasmaā would have to be it ā and yet, it doesnāt communicate anything to prepare us for what we are going to see.
For that, youād have to already be a fan of the creator behind it ā transfeminine, non-binary filmmaker Jane Schoenbrun ā and the surreal, dysphoric, and meta-formal nature of their previous work.
A horror fan since childhood, Schoenbrun spent their teen years frequenting online message boards for popular horror shows, writing fan fiction, and going to see punk bands in basements; a bachelorās degree in film from Boston University paved their way into the world of āindieā cinema, and their first directorial effort was an online documentary about the phenomenon of āSlender Manā (look it up), which explored the way media and reality can blend together in the cultural imagination.
That blending has continued to permeate their films: their first feature, āWeāre All Going to the Worldās Fair,ā about a lonely teen who is drawn into a creepy online challenge, tells its story entirely through video clips she and the other participants share online; their second, āI Saw the TV Glow,ā is an eerie and devastating tale of two teen friends who form a bond over their shared obsession with a paranormal television show and drift apart when it is cancelled, only to be drawn together again when buried memories of it begin to infiltrate their ārealā lives. Both are driven by themes of gender identity, social isolation, queer awakening, and transformation ā the stuff that resonates deeply with queer and trans audiences ā and Schoenbrun didnāt bury the subtext in the story; instead, the subtext was the story.
With āCamp Miasma,ā their third and (thanks to its win of the āQueer Palmā at Cannes) highest profile feature film to date, they carry their creative obsessions forward into a surreal narrative that exists around the border between reality and media-manufactured fantasy, and brings them into the the world of queer adulthood. Even more boldly, perhaps, itās a comedy (albeit a dark and grisly one), a satire of the movie industry itself ā which gives the director plenty of cheekily self-referential opportunities to make this their most āmetaā film yet. After all, itās about a young non-binary director working on a horror film, and you canāt get much more āmetaā than that.
The onscreen director who serves as Schoenbrunās semi-autobiographical avatar is Kris Williams (Hannah Einbinder), who has been tasked by a studio with remaking its classic slasher movie from the 1980s (āCamp Miasmaā), in hope of generating an updated reboot of the once-lucrative franchise it spawned. Kris, who loves the original film, hopes to coax the actress who starred as its āfinal girlā ā Billy Presley (Gillian Anderson) ā into returning to the screen for the new one, though she has been retired from acting and living as a recluse ever since. Managing to get a meeting with her at her secluded home in the Pacific Northwest, Kris arrives in a snowstorm to discover that Billy now lives in the same abandoned campground where āCamp Miasmaā was filmed four decades ago. She also has seemingly developed the unsettling eccentricities of an aging once-famous scream queen who has faded into obscurity and spent decades dwelling in memories of the past.
Despite some initial misgivings (on both sides), the two hit it off, and Billy agrees to help Kris develop her ideas for the reboot. As they work, their shared obsessions around the original film and its horrifying mythos draws them closer together into a more intimate kind of relationship ā even as Billyās unconvincingly ātongue-in-cheekā insistence that the franchiseās iconic killer is a real entity, waiting to be reawakened for the next massacre, begins to creep into Krisās own psyche.
Ingeniously mixing fan nostalgia for vintage āFriday the 13thā-style slasher films with the Lynchian surrealism of modern horror cinema and the campy-but-transgressive absurdity of a movie that wants us to be āinā on the joke, āCamp Miasmaā takes Schoenbrunās broodingly ironic Gen-Z sensibilities and spins them into something that works on multiple levels. As a horror film, it relies on the familiarity of its tropes and gleefully manipulates our reactions, yet undercuts its own formula to turn it into a blend of parody and homage that somehow elevates the genre by way of its own deconstruction. As a piece of postmodern cinema, it precludes attempts at analysis by transparently analyzing itself as it goes as part of its own self-aware scenario, turning intellectual interpretation into just another trope of its own. As a queer allegory, it nullifies the standard critical interpretations by wearing them jokingly on its sleeve. As a love-letter to cinema, it brims with callbacks to iconic masterworks like āSunset Boulevardā and āPsycho.ā It uses the irresistible darkness of its milieu as a vehicle through which to express a liberating, sex-positive celebration of queer joy, unencumbered at last by a confrontation with the fear, shame, and insecurity forged by social constructs that are so often used to suppress it. It even works as a romance, turning the age gap between its two leads into a bridge that overpasses any notions of conformity and eliminates false sentiment by framing it as a sexy kind of cross-generational mentoring.
At the center of it all is the powerhouse pairing of Einbinder and Anderson, whose dynamic together works so well we never bat an eye over that age gap; they sink their teeth into the material and deliver it with a fearlessness that feels a bit like pure glee, and they give what might just be the two best screen performances of the year.
There are also some winking cameos, like āKids in the Hallā alumnus Kevin MacDonald as a local hotel clerk who was once enlisted as a supporting player in the āCamp Miasmaā franchise, and veteran character actor Dylan Baker as the facile-minded studio exec who simply wants Kris to create something commercial enough to turn the franchise into a cash cow again. Jack Haven (the trans co-star of āI Saw the TV Glowā opposite Justice Smith) commands our attention as Camp Miasmaās weirdly air-duct-masked slasher ā named āLittle Death,ā a phrase which, translated into the French āLa petite morte,ā is a euphemism for orgasm, just in case it wasnāt already clear that the movie operates as a psychosexual drama, on top of everything else.
Ultimately, though, itās Shoenbrun who is the real star; much in the way that Alfred Hitchcock turned his own unique milieu into a kind of star power that eclipsed even the draw of the big name actors who populated his films. They come into their own with āTeenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma, creating one of the best films of the year so far and cementing their reputation as one of the most excitingly visionary filmmakers of the post-Millennial era.
In other words, come for the blood, gore, and jump scares, but stay for the sublimely entertaining ā and entertainingly original ā tour-de-force filmmaking that raises this one to the level of pop culture masterpiece.
