Sometimes at my age a fella has to admit he’s not exactly up on things. Not exactly with it. Specially when it seems like every other weekend I’m writing a review for a sequel to some movie where I never even saw the first one. Hell I never even HEARD of the first one half the time how the fuck I’m supposed to seen it already. Cut me some slack buddy.
But I picked up the dvd for this one because of a certain powerful force – the force of young Chloe Sevigny’s eyes staring out at me from the cover. I think most of you know how I feel about this gal, ever since I first spied her in the Last Days of Disco picture where her eyes were able to cut through seven layers of postmodern bullshit spewing out of the mouths of the pretentious yuppies in the movie. This girl is a hell of an actor but the main thing I’m talking about here is the presence. She has the presence of a real movie star. In my opinion. So I’ll see any movie she’s in even if it has her with her hair slicked back, wearing a tie, like in this one.
And please people, I’m just saying she’s a good actor. I’m not trying to pull some Jerry Seinfeld/Michael Douglas/Harold and Maude type bullshit here. Unless she’s offering.
Now I’m not sure what happened in the first one but this seems to make sense even without having seen it. It is three stories of three generations of lesbians with one thing tying all of them together – they are all lesbians, from three different generations.
The best story is actually not the one with Chloe in it. It’s the one starring Vanessa Redgrave as an elderly gal in 1952, who has spent her life in a loving relationship with another gal, sharing a house, birdwatching together and what not. They are very nice and lovable and have a nice house full of antiques. They are like the ultimate grandma team.
But then one of them dies and wouldn’t you fucking know it, it’s the one who DOESN’T own the deed to the house. So what happens is the other gal’s nephew and his bitch of a wife and his cute little daughter end up being the next of kin. And the story is about the uncomfortable situation of sitting in the house with these people who think she’s just a friend, watching them decide who gets all of her stuff. And asking her when she’s gonna move out.
It’s a sad fucking story about the type of rights us dick-in-pussy types take for granted. I’m used to all the movie lesbians either being real hot or being real hot and a vampire. So it’s an interesting twist to see a hollywood movie about lesbians who we DON’T want to see in bed together. Don’t get me wrong I’m not complaining that in the next story you see Chloe Sevigny and the gal from Dick and Halloween 20 Years Later take their shirts off and roll around together. And I swear on my mother’s grave that I never WILL complain about that. All I’m saying is, if I was a lesbian, I would like to see a couple good lesbian movies where nobody’s gonna necessarily be getting a boner while they watch. Where they are just a couple of gals in love.
The second story, I believe titled 1974, is about the two aformentioned gals also in love. This brings up another lesbian type issue, the idea of feminine lesbians having a prejudice against the butch lesbians, in this case Chloe riding a motorcycle and wearing an undershirt. The one gal is part of a feminist clique and her friends make fun of her for wanting to get it on with a “man.”
I mean hell, I know where they’re coming from. Women don’t look good wearing ties. I don’t know why there are men that can pull off the whole chicks with dicks deal with shocking authenticity, but women almost NEVER can do the man look. There are dudes out there whose worst nightmare is to go looking for some pussy and accidentally find a dick in there. It’s a silly fear but at least it’s a possibility. NO woman worries about a Brandon Teena. It’s so rare a gal can pull that off it would almost be an honor. Get the girl’s autograph.
I mean you saw Charlies Angels. You paint a beard on a gal and it just doesn’t look right. Still, that’s no excuse to put down these butch gals. THere are alot of us who don’t look right. There are people with dandruff or bald spots. People with acne scars and boogers hanging out of their nose. People who never wash their pants or let their buttcrack show at the top or wear clothes that are too tight or too baggy. There are kids today who ride around on a little scooter wearing giant pants and with their face painted like an evil clown or wearing a mexican wrestling mask. There are guys who wear faded red dwarf shirts, women who paint on their eyebrows real phoney looking. there are guys who wear mambo socks for fucks sake. And there are women who like to dress like men. I mean jesus this is a not a serious issue, this is not a reason to be excluded from society or from feminist groups or from hot lesbian sex with the gal from Dick. I don’t care if it’s the ’70s or the 2000s let’s have some unity here people.
Finally there is the 2000 segment. This is the story of how Sharon Stone and Ellen Degeneres are planning to get artifically inseminalized or whatever. meaning, pregnant. They are a cute couple and what not but it’s kind of too cute. I didn’t like this one too much.
still, as a whole, part 2 was a good picture and I look forward to seeing these characters return in part 3. I especially hope things worked out for the two gals in the ’70s. I’m not sure they’ll be able to get vanessa redgrave’s character in there again though unless it’s a prequel.
VERN has been reviewing movies since 1999 and is the author of the books SEAGALOGY: A STUDY OF THE ASS-KICKING FILMS OF STEVEN SEAGAL, YIPPEE KI-YAY MOVIEGOER!: WRITINGS ON BRUCE WILLIS, BADASS CINEMA AND OTHER IMPORTANT TOPICS and NIKETOWN: A NOVEL. His horror-action novel WORM ON A HOOK will arrive later this year.