Connect with us

Movies

Actor Joe Alwyn and writer Tony McNamara discuss their work on ‘The Favourite’

Period lesbian love triangle depicts life and times of England’s Queen Anne

Published

on

The Favourite, gay news, Washington Blade

Joe Alwyn in ‘The Favourite.’ (Photo by Atsushi Nishijima; courtesy 20th Century Fox)

As it continues its wildly successful rollout, “The Favourite” is garnering both popular and critical acclaim. Centered on a lesbian love triangle in the court of England’s Queen Anne (who reigned from 1707-1714), the queer dramedy is breaking box office records for indie films and recently swept the British Independent Film Awards.

Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (“The Lobster”), “The Favourite” is an irreverent and insightful spectacle about war, power, gender, sexuality and even love. The sumptuous film stars Olivia Colman (who is about to take over the role of Elizabeth in “The Crown”) as Queen Anne and Rachel Weisz (“Disobedience,” “My Cousin Rachel”) and Emma Stone (“La La Land,” “Battle of the Sexes”) as aristocratic cousins battling for the queen’s affections and the opportunity to wield the queen’s power.

Screenwriter Tony McNamara became involved in the project seven years ago when he got a surprising call from his agent. McNamara was working as a playwright in his native Australia when his agent said, “There’s a Greek director in London and he really likes your stuff.”

McNamara watched Lanthimos’ movie “Dogtooth” in Greek (this was before Lanthimos made “The Lobster,” his first English language feature) and liked what he saw. “I thought he’s one of a kind,” McNamara says during a press junket. “Right up my alley.”

The two men started talking and Lanthimos, who usually writes his own scripts, explained why he needed a writer. He had read a script by Deborah Davis about Queen Anne. He liked the story, but wanted to do something different with the material. He wanted someone else to work on I with him on it, so he read a lot of scripts.

“Yorgos really wanted to do a period piece because he had never done one before,” McNamara says. “I had written a period piece that he liked. He thought he and I would have the same sensibility and would get on with each other and we instantly did. We really understood what we wanted to do.”

When Lanthimos finally started shooting the movie last year, McNamara was on set for rehearsals and the first few weeks of production.

“Then I went to Italy and told Yorgos, ‘Call me if you need me,’” McNamara says. “Yorgos never called.”

That’s around the time when actor Joe Alwyn started his work on the film.

“I play a young man of the court called Masham who is not the brightest person in the world,” Alwyn says. “He sees Abigail (Emma Stone) as a shiny young thing he wants to chase after. There’s a power play between the two of them in each scene, a cat-and-mouse game where he’s lusting after her and she’s using him to advance herself at court.”

Alwyn says he started to do some research into the real-life Masham, but was stopped by Lanthimos.

“Yorgos made it clear to all of us that he really didn’t want us to get out the history books and start doing our homework,” Alwyn says. “He wasn’t trying to capture a moment in time; he wasn’t making a documentary. He was far more interested in exploring the relationships between the characters. It was a relatively unconventional approach to a period film.”

The London-born actor says Lanthimos’ unusual approach extended to rehearsals.

“Rather than getting out the history books and talking about social etiquette and character and intentions, we did a whole series of strange exercises,” he says. “Reading the script like a play and switching characters and rolling around on the floor and singing and dancing and doing all sorts of things to the point of humiliation which pleased Yorgos a lot. It meant that by the time we started shooting, we all felt very close to each other and were completely willing to jump in without any inhibitions or feeling stupid.”

Alwyn found that the gender reversals in the movie were fun.

“It’s refreshing to see a film that has three strong female leads. The male characters are very much trampled on and walked over and humiliated. What’s funny about it is they seem themselves as the ones with all the answers, but they’re pretty secondary. Yorgos turns all those stereotypes on their head.”

When they’re not making red carpet appearances for “The Favourite,” both men are involved in new projects that also based in history.

Drawing on the play which led to his involvement with “The Favourite,” McNamara is writing “The Queen” for Hulu. Elle Fanning will play Catherine and Alwyn’s castmate Nicholas Hoult will play her husband Peter.

Alwyn, whose recent credits include “Boy Erased,” “Operational Finale” and “Mary Queen of Scots,” is at work on “Harriet,” the Harriet Tubman biopic which also stars Cynthia Erivo, Janelle Monáe and Leslie Odom Jr. He’s also been dating singer Taylor Swift for over two years, but he told People magazine they’ve been “successfully very private” in their relationship.

Screenwriter Tony McNanara was chosen by director Yorgos Lanthimos for ‘The Favourite’ because of his skill with period writing. (Photo by James Gilham for Stillmoving LTD; courtesy 20th Century Fox)

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Movies

Dance icon gets luminous treatment in ‘Ailey’ doc

A real-life story that feels authentic, despite the secrecy of its subject

Published

on

A scene from the new documentary ‘Ailey.’ (Image courtesy Neon)

When it comes to the history of dance in America, few names loom larger than that of Alvin Ailey.

A trailblazing pioneer of the art form who blended styles of modern dance, ballet, and jazz into breathtakingly theatrical presentations that explored and uplifted Black experience in American culture, his works earned him accolades and honors throughout a long career that gave him name recognition even among people with little or no interest in dance. His choreographed masterpieces became touchstones within the medium, with many of them still among the most frequently remounted dance productions more than 30 years after his death, and the company he founded in 1969 – the Alvin Ailey American Dance Theater – remains one of the most lauded and prestigious dance organizations in the world today. Yet despite his status as one of the most famous American choreographers of the 20th century, there are many today, even among the aficionados of dance, who would be hard-pressed to tell you much about his life.

That’s not entirely due to neglect or lack of interest, as a new documentary by filmmaker Jamila Wignot – simply titled “Ailey” – helps us to understand. Ailey was a genius who kept his private life as far out of the spotlight as possible. As a Black gay man, he was keenly aware of his doubly marginalized status, and rather than inviting controversies that might overshadow the creations he worked tirelessly to bring into the world, he preferred to let the work itself become his public identity. He even took measures to obscure himself after death, ensuring that his passing from AIDS (in 1989, at the age of 58) would be reported as the result of a terminal blood disease.

In Wignot’s dreamily eloquent film, she presents us with a portrait of a man who seemingly sublimated his entire being into the creation of his art, documenting Ailey’s magnificent career with a wealth of archival footage and interviews. Along the way, she also offers exploratory deep dives into the creation and legacy of some of his most iconic ballets, illuminating some of the themes that wove themselves into his body of work throughout his life. Finally, she follows the creative process as dancers at today’s Ailey American Dance Theater work on a new production of “Lazarus,” one of the late master’s most renowned pieces. In the process, she delivers the biographical facts of his life side by side with the artistic passions that drove him, and places it all in the context of the larger cultural history of late 20th century America – as well as how Ailey’s legacy continues to resonate within the changing social dynamics of our own time.

Yet throughout this feast of information, illuminating the facts and counterpointing the remembrances of those who worked at his side, Wignot also gives us Ailey’s own commentary. Culled from recordings and interviews made during his lifetime, this posthumous self-narration of his own story lets us glean for ourselves what insight we may. In retrospect and alongside the memories of his surviving companions, Ailey’s own words tell us more about the man himself than he perhaps meant to do when he said them, inserting a layer of intimacy within the vast scope of the biography as it unfolds, and the film is all the richer for it.

It should come as no surprise that Wignot has painted such a reverent, yet deeply personal portrait of her subject. She’s been inspired by Ailey’s work – and his vision – since attending a performance of the Ailey Dance Theater during her sophomore year at Wellesley College more than two decades ago. Her admiration is evident from the way she gushes about Ailey in her director’s statement about the film.

“Nothing prepares you for the experience of Ailey,” she says. “The emotional, spiritual, aural, and visual overwhelm the senses … Ailey’s dances — celebrations of African-American beauty and history — did more than move bodies; they opened minds. His dances were revolutionary social statements that staked a claim as powerful in his own time as in ours: Black life is central to the American story and deserves a central place in American art and on the world stage. A working-class, gay, Black man, he rose to prominence in a society that made every effort to exclude him. He transformed the world of dance and made space for those of us on the margins — space for Black artists like Rennie Harris and me.”

The Rennie Harris to whom Wignot refers is the founder of Rennie Harris Puremovement, a hip-hop dance theater company based in Philadelphia, who as guest choreographer of the AADT production of “Lazarus” is featured prominently in the film. He is just one of many professional dance veterans whose voices, featured throughout, seem united in singing the praises of Ailey’s passion, creative power, and timeless aesthetic – and Wignot makes sure we don’t have to merely take their word for it.

Like most dance documentaries — or good ones, anyway — the greatest gift of “Ailey” is the chance to see the dancers in motion. It’s a film filled with electrifying footage of some of Ailey’s masterworks, giving us a rare opportunity to revel in the sheer visual poetry of his style. In pursuit of his ideal to capture “truth in movement,” he built choreographed expressions of the Black American experience, executed with grace, strength, and unparalleled beauty. His work celebrated that history while bearing witness to its injustice, with an emphasis on the dignity, humanity, and hope that makes it possible to look toward a transcendent future for all. It was, of course, social activism through art, though Ailey and his original dancers might not have exclusively intended it that way, and it is not an overstatement to say that it changed the world. Wignot cannily gives us the privilege of seeing just enough of it to stand as testament to its impact, and more than enough to make us want to grab the next opportunity to see the Ailey American Dance Theater perform in person.

In the meantime, you are encouraged to seek out “Ailey,” which premiered in NYC on July 23 and expands to theaters nationwide on Aug. 6, to whet your appetite. It’s a documentary that succeeds far more than many others in telling a real-life story that feels authentic, and despite the carefully guarded secrecy of its elusive subject, it presents as true and complete an impression of him as we are likely to get.

Outside of watching his work, that is.

Continue Reading

Movies

Will ‘Firebird’ focus attention on Eastern European homophobia?

New film reminds us that equality is still an aspiration for many

Published

on

‘Firebird’ is about a young soldier and fighter pilot who fall in love on a Soviet airbase in Estonia.

Retrospective queer films, such as “Milk” (2008), or old classics, such as “Torch Song Trilogy” (1988), share one thing in common: They depict a homophobic world in which queer love faced an iron wall of prejudice — that has largely dissipated in the United States and the West more broadly. Gay audiences can watch these films from a safe distance; we’re dismayed to see how cruel the world once was toward us but we’re relieved that progress has been made and we no longer have to live in secrecy and repression, which amounted to a life half-lived. 

That’s the comforting thought I could not indulge in watching the new Estonian gay love drama “Firebird,” which is currently making the rounds at film festivals and recently had its U.S. premiere in San Francisco. “Firebird” is a beautifully shot film about a young soldier and fighter pilot who fall in love on a Soviet airbase in Estonia. The affair naturally requires discretion (something true for U.S. service members until a decade ago) but even amid the fear that their careers and lives could be upended at any moment if the wrong person stumbled about their liaisons (close calls pop up throughout the film), the two men form a loving bond that stretches over years and long distances. It wouldn’t be unfair to call it a Soviet-era “Brokeback Mountain.” 

No spoilers here but the film does convey the sad fate many gay people suffer when homophobia is inescapable; when gay love and respectability in mainstream society conflict. The film conveys a common tragedy: Individuals compelled to live unfulfilling lives and sacrificing their happiness in order to appease the prejudice of others. A spirit of defiance has always existed alongside this tragedy. Many have opted to preserve their very being rather than conform, no matter the cost of social ostracism. But, if our own history is any guide, most will choose the closest rather than risk being an outcast. In the end, many queers simply lose their essence, and chance at lasting love, living a lie. It’s hard to tell this story (already related in many films and novels) without falling into cliches and a worn-out narrative. “Firebird” avoids those pitfalls and manages to keep its storytelling unique to its circumstances, which, in the end, gives the film an emotionally affecting quality. 

But “Firebird” is more than a beautiful film. It is politically relevant. This isn’t a film about the long-ago unjust reality gay lovers faced but a tale dramatizing the hatred, dilemma, and deep personal anguish that still haunt queer people today in many former Soviet bloc countries. Russia might be the most salient example. The nation’s law banning so-called gay propaganda has been infamous and, sadly, a model for other right-wing governments. Hungary recently passed a law prohibiting depictions of gay people for audiences under 18, precisely the young audiences that need positive gay role models. “LGBT-free” zones have popped up all over Poland, localities where homosexuality is ostensibly non-existent and unwelcome. 

The backsliding on human rights amongst EU member states and American allies cannot be divorced from former President Donald Trump’s devaluation of human rights. Fortunately, President Biden has spoken forcefully on human rights since his inauguration, and the words of the American president matter in those Eastern European countries dependent on American diplomatic and military support, such as Poland and Hungary (both NATO members). But the new administration faces many pressing concerns and gay rights can easily be forgotten. When Russia passed its anti-LGBTQ law in 2013, there was public mobilization in opposition. No similar outcry has greeted Hungary’s copycat law. Public attention needs to be refocused on the threat to LGBTQ+ individuals in Eastern Europe. 

Films have long played an essential role in raising awareness on issues that often seem too complex or too distant for concern. They can humanize injustice, underline the stakes, and present a vision for a better world. As Eastern European nations enact anti-LGBTQ+ laws, “Firebird” (a foreign film released in English) is a clarion call reminding us that for many gay people around the world, equality is still an aspiration. It would be a shame if we watched this film and walked out thinking that the past is past. The tragic love affair at the heart of the drama is the present, too.

Continue Reading

Movies

Wahlberg walks for redemption in disappointing ‘Joe Bell’

Bleak film’s tear-jerking tropes produce clunky results

Published

on

Reid Miller and Mark Wahlberg star in ‘Joe Bell.’ (Photo by Quantrell D. Colbert; courtesy Roadside Attractions)

If you’ve never heard of the real-life “Joe Bell,” you might spend the first third of the movie that bears his name thinking that you are watching an uplifting story about a father and son taking a marathon walk across America to raise awareness against bullying.

That’s not exactly what is happening, though.

Directed by Reinaldo Marcus Green, “Joe Bell” stars Mark Wahlberg as the title character, a rural Oregon dad who undertook a “Walk for Change” in 2013 after his teenage son Jadin was bullied at school for being gay. Intending to journey on foot from Oregon to New York City, Bell connected with people as he travelled, gaining a following on social media and speaking at schools, youth groups, and other community organizations about the devastating effects of bullying, as well as the need for parents to be unconditional in supporting their bullied children – something he himself had failed to do when Jadin’s ordeal was taking place.

Green’s movie puts that inner conflict in high focus by telling Joe and Jadin’s story in an intertwined narrative of past and present events. The domineering, short-tempered father we meet in flashbacks is contrasted with the humbler, gentler dad who engages in banter and sings Lady Gaga with his son on the road. It’s a structure that makes it clear that Joe, once a bit of a bully himself, is walking as much to make amends as to oppose intolerance.

Unfortunately, it’s also a cheat, because the real Jadin – spoiler alert – was never on that walk with his father. After being terrorized in the locker room shower by members of his school’s football team, Jadin ended his own life by hanging himself in an elementary school playground. Joe, who had never been willing to stand up publicly for his son while he was alive, walked alone.

To be clear, the movie does not try to rewrite the real story. Instead, it sets up an end-of-first-act plot twist where we find out that Joe has been talking to a figment of his imagination all along. We get clues, of course, like the fact that other people never seem to engage with Jadin, but these only become apparent in retrospect, after the big reveal.

It’s also after this too that the movie’s tone begins to change, rapidly. Gone is any pretense that we are seeing a feel-good story of family bonding and social advocacy, or that the grim tale of small-town bigotry being spun in the flashbacks is going to lead to a triumphant conclusion, and what we now get is a deeper dive into the soul-searching of a man who recognizes, too late, how his own attitudes and behavior may have played a part in his son’s decision to end his own life. Joe’s walk is a bid for personal redemption, and it’s a difficult journey in ways that are much more painful than the blisters on his feet.

Unfortunately, while it may make for an interesting narrative device, this sudden turn in the movie feels a little like a bait-and-switch. It doesn’t help that “Joe Bell” works overtime to tug our heartstrings with its swelling, elegiac score or its reliance on tear-jerking tropes, nor that the focus on Joe’s inner turmoil effectively upstages Jadin’s torment. Indeed, by making the teen into an otherworldly companion, the movie essentially turns him into a gay saint, cheerfully responsible for shepherding his father toward redemption. While it may not be an intentional effect, it can’t help but feel a little akin to the “magic Negro” cliché that has turned so many well-meaning movies into unintentionally offensive perpetuations of stereotype – to say nothing of begging the question of why the victims of cultural oppression should feel any responsibility at all for helping their oppressors forgive themselves.

Adding still another layer to the vaguely bad taste “Joe Bell” leaves in one’s mouth is the fact that its star once famously revealed in an interview that he had been considered for a role in “Brokeback Mountain” but was glad when he didn’t get it because he was “creeped out” when he read the script. Add to this Wahlberg’s history as a convicted perpetrator of racial violence when he was growing up in Boston – a record that has haunted him for his entire career and for which he has spent a great deal of time and energy trying to atone – and one can only wonder if the actor might be aiming for a bit of redemption himself.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that, and as far as his performance goes, Wahlberg certainly seems sincere. The famously conservative macho action star delves to a level of depth and vulnerability we haven’t seen from him since “Boogie Nights,” and it’s hard to imagine an actor who would be a better fit as the conservative, blue-collar Joe Bell. In charting the character’s evolution from toxic alpha masculinity toward a more compassionate world view, he is clearly guided by self-knowledge, and he deserves credit for his bravery in bringing that to the table.

There are other reasons to forgive “Joe Bell” for its clunky and vaguely tone-deaf presentation, most of which come from screenwriters Diana Ossana and Larry McMurtry – who also penned the script for “Brokeback Mountain,” ironically enough – and their keen understanding of human nature. They sculpt believable, identifiable characters with a few deft strokes of dialogue, which not only permits us to empathize with them but gives the cast a boost in making them all into fully formed, three-dimensional human beings.

Among the actors who benefit from this are Connie Britton, wearing the patiently weary wisdom of a long-term survivor as Joe’s wife and Jadin’s mother, and Gary Sinise (another actor known for his conservative offscreen views) as a local sheriff who forms a brief friendship with Joe in an intimate and touching scene that is one of the movie’s highlights. Most impressive of all, however, is young up-and-comer Reid Miller, who gives a charismatic and refreshingly unaffected performance as Jadin. It’s largely thanks to him, in fact, that the movie doesn’t come off as just another “gay issues” movie designed to make straight people feel more enlightened.

Yet even if “Joe Bell” avoids that trap, it doesn’t quite rise above the layers of Hollywood sentiment with which it drapes itself. Despite the many small moments of authenticity peppered throughout, there are too many others that are either too precious or too perfunctory, and that makes it hard to care as much about the ones that work. This is especially true in light of its bleakness. Like “Brokeback,” it’s a movie in which the tragedy is unrelenting, and we are left to find whatever scraps of happiness we can find in the ending – but while “Brokeback” had the beauty of an epic love story to transcend its sadness, “Joe Bell” can only leave us to contemplate a senseless waste of a human life.

Faced with that handicap, even with good writing and performances, it’s hard for a movie to be anything but a bummer.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Follow Us @washblade

Sign Up for Blade eBlasts

Popular