09/9/18

Is Passion Out of Fashion? The Bad Boy Charms of McQueen & McEnroe.

CoiledCorset 2004, ShaunLeaneforMcQueen.

“I want you to be repulsed or exhilarated,” Alexander McQueen offers viewers of his collection in the documentary, McQueen. “If you leave without emotion, then I’m not doing my job properly. I don’t want you to walk out feeling like you’ve just had Sunday brunch.”

You could say that Alexander McQueen and John McEnroe – born a decade and an ocean apart, pursuing distinct talents, and playing them out in completely different arenas – shared a similar passion. A zeal to be real.

With the simultaneous release of documentaries on both enfants terribles, I decided to chase down the theory one steamy summer weekend in Manhattan. (Bad boys are always persons of interest to The Male Harem.)

I worried that McQueen would be a sycophantic fashionista homage but directors Ian Bonhote and Peter Ettedgui have produced a stirring elegy to McQueen’s troubled genius. The film deftly weaves the details of McQueen’s life – distant father, fiercely supportive mother, Savile Row apprenticeship, gigs at Givenchy and Gucci – with rapturous footage of his collections.

The couture wunderkind didn’t need the anointing of established fashion houses to claim his glory. His innate urgency to express himself projected him forward. From his earliest collections, cobbled together on a dime, to the theatrical extravaganzas of his later years McQueen’s vision was utterly personal.

RobotArt. CreativeCommons, Ivanna9867.

His pure, raw, and eventually destructive passion produced collections like The Hunger, Highland Rape and It’s a Jungle Out There. He pushed beyond the limit without ever looking contrived. When he is asked in the film who might take on the brand if he stepped away, he is sincerely flummoxed. There is no ego in his reply. Only McQueen can be McQueen.

As he polishes his public persona – shedding the scruffy working-class kid for the svelte fashion magnate – one senses his denouement. McQueen isn’t wired to fit a mold – fashion or otherwise. He doesn’t care what other people think about him, he says in the film, or even what he thinks about himself. What freedom. The freedom of a true artist. And also the loneliness.

With the death of his close friend and advocate, the relentlessly eccentric Isabella Blow, the oxygen begins to seep out of his life. The death of his mother marks the final emptiness. The darkness he’s held at bay can no longer be tolerated. On the eve of his mother’s funeral, he commits suicide by hanging. There is no air left to breathe.

Yet the film captures more of McQueen’s light than his darkness. When he is in play creating and producing his collections, his joy leaps off the screen. It draws those around him to his flame. Makes them complicit in his lurid vision. His models don’t just swagger haughtily down the runway. They push against mirrored barriers, wring out emotions, breasts exposed and vulnerable.

McEnroe in Play, ‘09 USOpen, CreativeCommons,EdwinMartinez.

Where McQueen battled with darkness, McEnroe seemed to thrive on it. The French documentary, In The Realm of Perfection suggests that he needed to create a hostile environment in order to conquer it. If only the film could have left him alone to prove it.

LA Times film critic Kenneth Turan wrote that this “idiosyncratic, metaphysical meditation on tennis, cinema, human behavior … at times risks being too pleased with itself for its own good.” You think?

In the opening scene, a meticulous demonstration of a hand gripping a tennis racket is repeated. And repeated. We are then marched through an archive of vintage tennis instruction films, stick-figure renditions of McEnroe’s moves, and a tutorial with frames actually titled “A” and “B”.

McEnroeBallet, ‘79Rotterdam, CreativeCommons,Anefo/Croes,RC.

The Sultanette’s Francophilia might be near-fatal but I’m not completely blinded by the glow the French have bestowed on civilization since the Sun King. I even allow that some concepts can be explored without employing the words “paradoxical” and “ambiguity” and the phenomenon of John McEnroe is one of them.

When the drumbeat of analyzing lands on the keen observation that he “plays on the edge of his senses” we are at last treated to un-narrated footage of McEnroe in play. Whatever you feel about the prince of impudence, it’s his individual ferocity that dominates the screen – his inscrutable game strategy, balletic form, obsession to win every stroke.

Alexander McQueen and John McEnroe remind us that daring to be yourself isn’t for the faint of heart. Whether you play it out on the court, the runway, or life’s runway, it takes grace and grit, incalculable risk, and Olympian resilience. If that’s too much for you, there’s always Sunday brunch.

05/26/17

Love And Marriage? Or … Lovers And Marriage?

Marriage Bared, José Reyes Guillén, 2007.

I almost abandoned The Lovers at the AMC Loews Cinema when I learned I had to choose a designated seat. I stared at the offerings on the screen the ticket-seller swiveled at me. How would I know, I asked him, if the seat I chose was not behind the woman with big hair, or next to the guy smacking down a tub of popcorn, or in front of the ladies offering continuous commentary on the action? He looked at me blankly.

Choose! I had to choose! Is nothing left to chance? To his relief, I chose Seat B3 and headed up the escalator. I told the friendly girl who looked like she would have preferred any option to ripping tickets on a sunny afternoon in New York City, that if I’d known this was a seat-assignment theatre I wouldn’t have come here and I was never coming back.

All Seats Reserved! FernandodeSousa
Melbourne, CreativeCommons.

With that I entered Theatre Number Four with my ticket marked Seat B3 and settled into Seat C7. The Sultanette has never been a fan of taking orders. Good news is the seat was a cushy leather affair with electronic adjustments. I buzzed into reclining position and settled in for the ride.

As it turned out, the AMC venue offered the perfect foreplay to The Lovers because it is all about choices – the ones we make, the ones we avoid making, and especially the ones we think we’re making.

Out of Tune, Allen Lai, CreativeCommons.

Mary and Michael, played with comedic precision by Debra Winger and Tracy Letts, are long-married. Long past the resentment stage, the disappointment stage, the passion stage – too indifferent even to be bored with each other – they are tethered to the baggage of a remote past. In a reference to the piano parked in the living room that he once played back in the day, Michael says, “It’s way too heavy or it would be long gone.”

Instead of playing the piano, Michael has cultivated a pot belly. Mary’s neck is showing crepey signs of withdrawal from youth. Their house in Anywhere, California is decorated with framed memories, neatly grouped on vast blank walls. Every morning they dash around each other, separately slurping coffee before rushing off to work in cubicles. Michael stares at graphs on a computer and Mary sorts out stats for meetings in a glass-walled conference room, dressed for success but bored to death.

The Stolen Kiss, Jean-Honoré Fragonard c.1780, Hermitage.

Sound like fun? Or even familiar? Don’t abandon The Lovers yet because Michael and Mary are both involved in juicy illicit affairs with legitimate hotties. Michael does pliés with a supple ballet instructor, Susan, (Melora Walters). Mary tumbles with Robert (Aidan Gillen) a writer of impish charm. Can anyone blame them? (Well the New York Times did but that was just another of the paper’s retrograde cultural rants dressed up to look politically correct.)

When Mary and Michael aren’t indulging their libidos, they are concocting the intricate lattice of lies required to keep from getting caught – excuses that seem unnecessary since they both prefer to avoid each other’s company at all costs. This is brilliantly portrayed in a scene when fate brings them together for an evening.

TV Stattic & No Signal, Liz Sullivan, Creative Commons.

To his surprise and horror, Michael arrives home early to find Mary on the couch, staring at the TV with a glass of wine. After an awkward exchange – both searching for excuses to cover up for the lies they had originally made to see their lovers that night – Mary half-heartedly invites Michael to join her for a glass of wine. Their awkward attempt at mingling resembles kids on a first date. Except these two have spent a lifetime together.

No spoilers here, I promise! To see the provocative resolution you’ll have to go to the movie which The Sultanette highly recommends. For now let’s just say that director/writer Azazel Jacobs doesn’t let you take sides. None of the four lovers are bad or callous. They’re just lonely people with big, needy hearts. The lines between passion and a shared past, love and loyalty, promise and predictability are not neatly drawn. The affairs are more than sex. The marriage is more than routine.

Three Lovers, Géricault c.1820.

“Let’s do something normal,” Michael tells Susan one night, and next scene they are cuddling at a movie. When Robert and Mary playfully seduce one another, the sexual frisson is delicious. When feelings between Michael and Mary begin to stir, it’s more than a desperate attempt to make things right again. The comfort of normalcy, the delight of sensuality, the pulse of consistency – don’t we crave it all?

The beauty of The Lovers is that as in life, the choices aren’t always clear-cut. Sometimes you just have to sign up for Seat B3 and settle into Seat C7. When I left the movie, the friendly ticket-ripper said, “Have a nice day.”