Connect with us

Arts & Entertainment

‘In the Life’ celebrates 20 years

Groundbreaking TV series receives $1 million gift to mark anniversary

Published

on

Maria and Brian Singer of Laurel, Md., and their children Lucas and Jackie, one of the families featured in ‘Becoming Me.’ (Photo courtesy of Brian and Maria Singer.)

The groundbreaking television series “In the Life” received an impressive gift for its 20th anniversary celebration — a $1 million donation from board co-chair and New York philanthropist Henry van Ameringen. This timely award gives the organization a chance to celebrate its milestone while planning for the next 20 years.

The media-shy Ameringen writes movingly about the importance of “In the Life” in a blog entry for the Huffington Post. The 82-year-old activist remembers growing up in a time when “the absence of images reflecting real gay life made it easy for people to assume we were everything bad that was said about us.” This was exacerbated when the AIDS epidemic struck the gay community in the 1980s and Ameringen, like many other LGBT activists, became politicized.

“Staying on the sidelines was impossible,” he writes. “The government was doing absolutely nothing to halt the spread of this disease nor help those who were suffering. AIDS was seen as a ‘gay disease,’ and with so few positive portrayals of gays in the media, and far fewer gay people being out at the time, most Americans believed all the stereotypes they had heard about us.”

However, the premiere of “In the Life” in 1992 contributed to the change in the media and political landscape. Ameringen notes, “The simple fact that there was a television program, airing on public television stations around the country, that represented LGBT people in such a genuine and accurate manner was stunning.” Veteran media expert and activist Cathy Renna says, “‘In the Life’ has become the ‘60 Minutes’ of LGBT journalism” and credits the show for creating a large and diverse audience for LGBT stories.

Michelle Kristel, executive director of In the Life Media, says that quality and content have been the key to the program’s longevity.

“In the early days,” she says, “we led from a place of novelty and uniqueness. When we were first broadcast in 1992, you just didn’t have out, proud gay and lesbian people on television. We were pioneers. But what has sustained us is the quality of our content and the fact that we are telling stories about real people and the critical issues facing our community.”

Philanthropist Henry van Ameringen gave $1 million to ‘In the Life,’ which has been described as the ’60 Minutes’ of LGBT news. (Photo courtesy Renna Communications)

The celebration of the show’s anniversary is already underway. The 20th season kicked off with a red carpet gala and an October 2011 episode that looked back at the history of the show. Kristel explains that “In the Life” began as a variety show hosted by lesbian comedian Kate Clinton, but that over time it evolved into a behind-the-desk news show with in-the-field reporting before assuming the short-form documentary format it has today. Over time, the award-winning show has also developed a robust online presence with web exclusives that supplement its television programming.

Kristel says the staff had a blast putting together the retrospective show. “It’s always fun for us to look at the old tapes. We had a lot of fun putting it together and taking in the depth and breadth of all that we’ve done over the years.” The anniversary celebration will culminate in the annual June Pride Brunch where supporters can “eat, drink and be merry” while watching New York’s Pride Parade from the windows of “In the Life’s” studios on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan.

When asked about the importance of the show, Kristel points out that the impact of the series goes beyond its television and online audiences. For example, this month’s episode, “Becoming Me,” which chronicles the lives of families dealing with transgender and non-gender-conforming children, is already becoming a resource for educators, parenting groups like PFLAG and social service agencies. Kristel says, “The show is a beautiful articulation of what we do really well, which is to take an issue and tell personal stories that relate to the issue and that make it tangible for our audiences. We worked on this piece for nine months and we were able to go in-depth with the eight families we interviewed and really understand their journeys.”

Kristel also cites the impact of the show on legislators and policy-makers. The two-part episode on HIV criminalization educated viewers about a little-known fact. “Very few people,” Kristel points out, “realize that in many places you can go to prison for attempted murder for having consensual sex if you are HIV-positive.” The first part of the episode, “Legalizing Stigma,” which aired in December 2010, was shown at the first-ever congressional hearing on HIV stigmatization and led to the introduction of legislation to rescind those laws. The second part, “Perpetuating Stigma,” which aired in February 2011, was shown at this year’s United Nations AIDS conference in Oslo and was referenced as a resource in the Oslo Declaration.

In addition, the celebrated web exclusive “Injustice at Every Turn” brought to life a report on transgender discrimination that was produced by the National Center for Transgender Equality and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. “The report was devastating,” Kristel said. “I read the report and I thought ‘people need to know about the profound levels of discrimination that transgender people are facing.’ But the fact of the matter is that very few people are going to read a report like that, so we produced a video that put a human face on these issues. That video was presented at the U.S. Department of Labor as a way of informing the department about discrimination in the workplace. This is one of the things we do well, to take an issue and put a human face on it and use it to move people to have a better understanding of the lives that people are living and the ways that people are impacted by social injustice and discrimination.”

Kristel is quick to point out that “In the Life” also produces some fun stories as well. A recent episode profiled the late Sam Steward, a sexual renegade, writer and pornographer. With a hearty chuckle, Kristel relates that “he started life as an English professor, but found that the life of an academic didn’t suit him particularly well. He left that to become a writer of erotica and a tattoo artist. Along the way, he documented, in some detail, his sexual escapades. He had a wooden card catalog that he called “The Stud File” with little cards and descriptions of everybody that he ever had sex with and with pertinent details about their physiques and their skills.”

Ameringen’s gift comes at a critical time for In the Life Media, allowing the organization to continue to deliver stories that document the lives of LGBT people and to explore the issues that affect them. About $100,000 of the donation will be used to match new and increased contributions. The balance will offer the organization a valuable opportunity to invest in its future.

Kristel says, “The media landscape has changed radically since we were first broadcast, not only in the way media is produced, but also the way that people consume media. What has remained constant is the power of media to shape the national dialogue. So we will be using this gift to make an assessment of the organization. We will be investing in digital initiatives that will allow us to not only improve our tools for engagement with our viewers but to give our viewers the tools to help us advance equality for LGBT people.”

“In the Life” airs locally on WETA and WMPB and programs can be seen at itlmedia.org/.

 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Movies

Van Sant returns with gripping ‘Dead Man’s Wire’

Revisiting 63-hour hostage crisis that pits ethics vs. corporate profits

Published

on

Bill Skarsgård and Dacre Montgomery in ‘Dead Man’s Wire.’ (Photo courtesy of Row K Entertainment)

In 1976, a movie called “Network” electrified American moviegoers with a story in which a respected news anchor goes on the air and exhorts his viewers to go to their windows and yell, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!”

It’s still an iconic line, and it briefly became a familiar catch phrase in the mid-’70s lexicon of pop culture, the perfect mantra for a country worn out and jaded by a decade of civil unrest, government corruption, and the increasingly powerful corporations that were gradually extending their influence into nearly all aspects of American life. Indeed, the movie itself is an expression of that same frustration, a satire in which a man’s on-the-air mental health crisis is exploited by his corporate employers for the sake of his skyrocketing ratings – and spawns a wave of “reality” programming that sensationalizes outrage, politics, and even violence to turn it into popular entertainment for the masses. Sound familiar?

It felt like an exaggeration at the time, an absurd scenario satirizing the “anything-for-ratings” mentality that had become a talking point in the public conversation. Decades later, it’s recognized as a savvy premonition of things to come.

This, of course, is not a review of “Network.” Rather, it’s a review of the latest movie by “new queer cinema” pioneer Gus Van Sant (his first since 2018), which is a fictionalized account of a real-life on-the-air incident that happened only a few months after “Network” prompted national debate about the media’s responsibility in choosing what it should and should not broadcast – and the fact that it strikes a resonant chord for us in 2026 makes it clear that debate is as relevant as ever.

“Dead Man’s Wire” follows the events of a 63-hour hostage situation in Indianapolis that begins when Tony Kiritsis (Bill Skarsgård) shows up for an early morning appointment at the office of a mortgage company to which he is under crippling debt. Ushered into a private office for a one-on-one meeting with Dick Hall (Dacre Montgomery), son of the brokerage’s wealthy owner, he kidnaps the surprised executive at gunpoint and rigs him with a “dead man’s wire” – a device that secures a shotgun against a captive’s head that is triggered to discharge with any attempt at escape – before calling the police himself to issue demands for the release of his hostage, which include immunity for his actions, forgiveness of his debt, reimbursement for money he claims was swindled from him by the company, and an apology. 

The crisis becomes a public spectacle when Kiritsis subjects his prisoner to a harrowing trip through the streets back to his apartment, which he claims is wired with explosives. As the hours tick by, the neighborhood surrounding his building becomes a media circus. Realizing that law enforcement officials are only pretending to negotiate while they make plans to take him down, he enlists the aid of a popular local radio DJ Fred Heckman (Colman Domingo) to turn the situation into a platform for airing his grievances –  and for calling out the predatory financial practices that drove him to this desperate situation in the first place.

We won’t tell you how it plays out, for the sake of avoiding spoilers, even though it’s all a matter of public record. Suffice to say that the crisis reaches a volatile climax in a live broadcast that’s literally one wrong move away from putting an explosion of unpredictable real-life violence in front of millions of TV viewers.

In 1977, the Kiritsis incident certainly contributed to ongoing concerns about violence on television, but there was another aspect of the case that grabbed public attention: Kiritsis himself. Described by those who knew him as “helpful,” “kind,” and a “hard worker,” he was hardly the image of a hardened criminal, and many Americans – who shared his anger and desperation over the opportunistic greed of a finance industry they believed was playing them for profit – could sympathize with his motives. Inevitably, he became something of a populist hero – or anti-hero, at least – for standing up to a stacked system, an underdog who spoke things many of them felt and took actions many of them wished they could take, too.

That’s the thing that makes this true-life crime adventure uniquely suited to the talents of Van Sant, a veteran indie auteur whose films have always specialized in humanizing “outsider” characters, usually pushed to the fringes of society by circumstances only partly under their own control, and often driven to desperate acts in pursuit of an unattainable dream. Tony Kiritsis, a not-so-regular “Joe” whose fumbling efforts toward financial security have been turned against him and seeks only recompense for his losses, fits that profile to a tee, and the filmmaker gives us a version of him (aided by Skarsgård’s masterfully modulated performance) that leaves little doubt that he – from a certain point of view, at least – is the story’s unequivocal protagonist, no matter how “lawless” his actions might be.

It helps that the film gives us much more exposure to Kiritsis’ personality than could be seen merely during the historic live broadcast that made him infamous, spending much of the movie focused on his interactions with Hall (performed with equally well-managed nuance by Montgomery) during the two days spent in the apartment, as well as his dealings with DJ Heckman (rendered with savvy and close-to-the-chest cageyness by Domingo); for balance, we also get fly-on-the-wall access to the interplay outside between law enforcement officials (including Cary Elwes’ blue collar neighborhood cop) as they try to navigate a potentially deadly situation, and to the jockeying of an ambitious rookie street reporter (Myha’la) with the rest of the press for “scoops” with each new development.

But perhaps the interaction that finally sways us in Kiritsis’s favor takes place via phone with his captive’s mortgage tycoon father (Al Pacino, evoking every unscrupulous, amoral mob boss he’s ever played), who is willing to sacrifice his own son’s life rather than negotiate a deal. It’s a nugget of revealed avarice that was absent in the “official” coverage of the ordeal, which largely framed Kiritsis as mentally unstable and therefore implied a lack of credibility to his accusations against Meridian Mortgage. It’s also a moment that hits hard in an era when the selfishness of wealthy men feels like a particularly sore spot for so many underdogs.

That’s not to say there’s an overriding political agenda to “Dead Man’s Wire,” though Van Sant’s character-driven emphasis helps make it into something more than just another tension-fueled crime story; it also works to raise the stakes by populating the story with real people instead of predictable tropes, which, coupled with cinematographer Arnaud Potier’s studied emulation of gritty ‘70s cinema and the director’s knack for inventive visual storytelling, results in a solid, intelligent, and darkly humorous thriller – and if it reconnects us to the “mad-as-hell” outrage of the “Network” era, so much the better.

After all, if the last 50 years have taught us anything about the battle between ethics and profit, it’s that profit usually wins.

Continue Reading

Books

‘The Director’ highlights film director who collaborated with Hitler

But new book omits gay characters, themes from Weimar era

Published

on

(Book cover image courtesy Amazon)

‘The Director’
By Daniel Kehlmann
Summit Books, 2025

Garbo to Goebbels, Daniel Kehlmann’s historical novel “The Director” is the story of Austrian film director G.W. Pabst (1885-1967) and his descent down a crooked staircase of ambition into collaboration with Adolph Hitler’s film industry and its Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. Kehlmann’s historical fiction is rooted in the world of Weimar German filmmaking and Nazi “Aryan” cinema, but it is a searing story for our challenging time as well.

Pabst was a legendary silent film director from the Weimar Republic’s Golden Era of filmmaking. He “discovered” Greta Garbo; directed silent screen star Louise Brooks; worked with Hitler’s favored director Leni Riefenstahl (“Triumph of the Will”); was a close friend of Fritz Lang (“Metropolis”); and lived in Hollywood among the refugee German film community, poolside with Billy Wilder (“Some Like it Hot”) and Fred Zinnemann (“High Noon”) — both of whose families perished in the Holocaust. 

Yet, Pabst left the safety of a life and career in Los Angeles and returned to Nazi Germany in pursuit of his former glory. He felt the studios were giving him terrible scripts and not permitting him to cast his films as he wished. Then he received a signal that he would be welcome in Nazi Germany. He was not Jewish.

Kehlmann, whose father at age 17 was sent to a concentration camp and survived, takes the reader inside each station of Pabst’s passage from Hollywood frustration to moral ruin, making the incremental compromises that collectively land him in the hellish Berlin office of Joseph Goebbels. In an unforgettably phantasmagoric scene, Goebbels triples the stakes with the aging filmmaker, “Consider what I can offer you….a concentration camp. At any time. No problem,” he says. “Or what else…anything you want. Any budget, any actor. Any film you want to make.” Startled, paralyzed and seduced by the horror of such an offer, Pabst accepts not with a signature but a salute: “Heil Hitler,” rises Pabst.  He’s in.

The novel develops the disgusting world of compromise and collaboration when Pabst is called in to co-direct a schlock feature with Hitler’s cinematic soulmate Riefenstahl. Riefenstahl, the “Directress” is making a film based on the Fuhrer’s favorite opera. She is beautiful, electric and beyond weird playing a Spanish dancer who mesmerizes the rustic Austrian locals with her exotic moves. The problem is scores of extras will be needed to surround and desire Fraulein Riefenstahl. Mysteriously, the “extras” arrive surprising Pabst who wonders where she had gotten so many young men when almost everyone was on the front fighting the war. The extras were trucked in from Salzburg, he is told, “Maxglan to be precise.” He pretends not to hear.  Maxglan was a forced labor camp for “racially inferior” Sinti and Roma gypsies, who will later be deported from Austria and exterminated. Pabst does not ask questions. All he wants is their faces, tight black and white shots of their manly, authentic, and hungry features. “You see everything you don’t have,” he exhorts the doomed prisoners to emote for his camera. Great art, he believes, is worth the temporal compromises and enticements that Kehlmann artfully dangles in the director’s face.  And it gets worse.

One collaborates in this world with cynicism born of helpless futility. In Hollywood, Pabst was desperate to develop his own pictures and lure the star who could bless his script, one of the thousands that come their way.  Such was Greta Garbo, “the most beautiful woman in the world” she was called after being filmed by Pabst in the 1920s. He shot her close-ups in slow motion to make her look even more gorgeous and ethereal. Garbo loved Pabst and owed him much, but Kehlmann writes, “Excessive beauty was hard to bear, it burned something in the people around it, it was like a curse.” 

Garbo imagined what it would be like to be “a God or archangel and constantly feel the prayers rising from the depths. There were so many, there was nothing to do but ignore them all.”  Fred Zinnemann, later to direct “High Noon”, explains to his poolside guest, “Life here (in Hollywood) is very good if you learn the game.  We escaped hell, we ought to be rejoicing all day long, but instead we feel sorry for ourselves because we have to make westerns even though we are allergic to horses.”

The texture of history in the novel is rich. So, it was disappointing and puzzling there was not an original gay character, a “degenerate” according to Nazi propaganda, portrayed in Pabst’s theater or filmmaking circles. From Hollywood to Berlin to Vienna, it would have been easy to bring a sexual minority to life on the set. Sexual minorities and gender ambiguity were widely presented in Weimar films. Indeed, in one of Pabst’s films “Pandora’s Box” starring Louise Brooks there was a lesbian subplot. In 1933, when thousands of books written by, and about homosexuals, were looted and thrown onto a Berlin bonfire, Goebbels proclaimed, “No to decadence and moral corruption!” The Pabst era has been de-gayed in “The Director.”

“He had to make films,” Kehlmann cuts to the chase with G.W. Pabst. “There was nothing else he wanted, nothing more important.” Pabst’s long road of compromise, collaboration and moral ruin was traveled in small steps. In a recent interview Kehlmann says the lesson is to “not compromise early when you still have the opportunity to say ‘no.’” Pabst, the director, believed his art would save him. This novel does that in a dark way.

(Charles Francis is President of the Mattachine Society of Washington, D.C., and author of “Archive Activism: Memoir of a ‘Uniquely Nasty’ Journey.”)

The Blade may receive commissions from qualifying purchases made via this post.

Continue Reading

Theater

Swing actor Thomas Netter covers five principal parts in ‘Clue’

Unique role in National Theatre production requires lots of memorization

Published

on

Thomas Netter stars in ‘Clue.’

‘Clue: On Stage’
Jan. 27-Feb. 1
The National Theatre
1321 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
thenationaldc.com

Out actor Thomas Netter has been touring with “Clue” since it opened in Rochester, New York, in late October, and he’s soon settling into a week-long run at D.C.’s National Theatre.

Adapted by Sandy Rustin from the same-titled 1985 campy cult film, which in turn took its inspiration from the popular board game, “Clue” brings all the murder mystery mayhem to stage. 

It’s 1954, the height of the Red Scare, and a half dozen shady characters are summoned to an isolated mansion by a blackmailer named Mr. Boddy where things go awry fairly fast. A fast-moving homage to the drawing room whodunit genre with lots of wordplay, slapstick, and farce, “Clue” gives the comedic actors a lot to do and the audience much to laugh at.  

When Netter tells friends that he’s touring in “Clue,” they inevitably ask “Who are you playing and when can we see you in it?” His reply isn’t straightforward. 

The New York-based actor explains, “In this production, I’m a swing. I never know who’ll I play or when I’ll go on. Almost at any time I can be called on to play a different part. I cover five roles, almost all of the men in the show.”

Unlike an understudy who typically learns one principal or supporting role and performs in the ensemble nightly, a swing learns any number of parts and waits quietly offstage throughout every performance just in case. 

With 80 minutes of uninterrupted quick, clipped talk “Clue” can be tough for a swing. Still, Netter, 28, adds, “I’m loving it, and I’m working with a great cast. There’s no sort of “All About Eve” dynamic going on here.” 

WASHINGTON BLADE: Learning multiple tracks has got to be terrifying. 

THOMAS NETTER: Well, there certainly was a learning curve for me. I’ve understudied roles in musicals but I’ve never covered five principal parts in a play, and the sheer amount of memorization was daunting.

As soon as I got the script, I started learning lines character by character. I transformed my living room into the mansion’s study and hallway, and got on my feet as much as I could and began to get the parts into my body.

BLADE: During the tour, have you been called on to perform much?

NETTER: Luckily, everyone has been healthy. But I was called on in Pittsburgh where I did Wadsworth, the butler, and the following day did the cop speaking to the character that I was playing the day before. 

BLADE: Do you dread getting that call?

NETTER: Can’t say I dread it, but there is that little bit of stage fright involved. Coming in, my goal was to know the tracks. After I’d done my homework and released myself from nervous energy, I could go out and perform and have fun. After all, I love to act.

“Clue” is an opportunity for me to live in the heads of five totally different archetype characters. As an actor that part is very exciting.  In this comedy, depending on the part, some nights it’s kill and other nights be killed. 

BLADE: Aside from the occasional nerves, would you swing again?

NETTER: Oh yeah, I feel I’m living out the dream of the little gay boy I once was. Traveling around getting a beat on different communities. If there’s a gay bar, I’m stopping by and  meeting interesting and cool people. 

BLADE: Speaking of that little gay boy, what drew him to theater?

NETTER: Grandma and mom were big movie musical fans, show likes “Singing in the Rain,” “Meet Me in St. Louis.” I have memories of my grandma dancing me around the house to “Shall We Dance?” from the “King and I” She put me in tap class at age four. 

BLADE: What are your career highlights to date? 

NETTER: Studying the Meisner techniqueat New York’sNeighborhood Playhouse for two years was definitely a highlight. Favorite parts would include the D’Ysquith family [all eight murder victims] in “A Gentleman’s Guide to Love & Murder,” and the monstrous Miss Trunchbull in “Matilda.” 

BLADE: And looking forward?

NETTER: I’d really like the chance to play Finch or Frump in Frank Loesser’s musical comedy “How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying.”

BLADE: In the meantime, you can find Netter backstage at the National waiting to hear those exhilarating words “You’re on!”

Continue Reading

Popular