November 18, 1977: Harvey Milk’s Audiotape

575 Castro St. from FilmInFocus on Vimeo.

Review: Penn as ‘Milk’

Review: Penn’s portrayal helps ‘Milk’ soar – San Jose Mercury News:

Sensitively directed by Gus Van Sant, ‘Milk’ is a moving biopic about the late Harvey Milk, who, in 1977, became the first openly gay man elected to a major public office in the United States.

As the late gay activist, Sean Penn is the perfect actor in the perfect role. Revealing his tender side for the first time since ‘I Am Sam,’ he delivers an Oscar-caliber performance. Penn (wearing a prosthesis that elongates his nose) imbues the charismatic Milk with warmth, wit and vulnerability which, combined with the compassionate Van Sant at the helm, lends the film an intimacy lacking in other biopics.

Metrognome, Hipsters, and Muppets

Jezebel writes about the “Metrognome,” a furry version of a Metrosexual

The metrognome transformation, by contrast, is completely inorganic and owes nothing to actual appearance. As ‘metro’ implies, there is an element of deliberate grooming and styling involved.

The metrognome will often claim a beard is for warmth. But there is also an element of dandified defiance to it: the metrognome says: I am not part of ‘the system.’

Meanwhile as furry cheeks and chins have come back in style this year, I’ve been noticing a certain type of guy, often a hipster or very close to it, but that I call a “muppet,” with due apologies to Jim Henson. A muppet often has glasses or big eyes. A muppet often has at least a shadow of a beard, but more often has neglected shaving completely, with scruffy cheeks and neck. Muppets are goofy. Muppets are cute. Muppets are attractive enough to be in a commercial for yogurt or computers, but with the notable exception of Seth Rogen you won’t usually find a muppet sex-symbol at the movies. (Yes, I said Seth Rogen is a sex symbol.)

Prop 8 – Only the Beginning?

Prop 8 was a tipping point:

In normal political campaigns, election day — win or lose — signals the end.

Not so with Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment defining marriage as only between a man and a woman that was approved by 52% of California voters Nov. 4.

Instead of settling the question of gay marriage in California, the election merely ushered in a new, and in many cases more heated, phase of the campaign, with both sides looking ahead to 2010, when the matter could be back on the ballot.

This could happen no matter how the state Supreme Court rules. The court announced this week that it would review the legality of Proposition 8 in response to several lawsuits filed by cities and gay couples.

If justices uphold the proposition, gay marriage backers plan to put their own measure before voters perhaps as soon as 2010 to re-amend the state Constitution to allow the marriages.

If the justices toss out Proposition 8, some gay-marriage opponents have talked of putting something on the ballot themselves, either to again ban gay marriage or to oust Supreme Court justices or both.