New Queer Cinema, the 80’s to early 90’s wave of LGBTQ filmmaking that cascaded upon the mainstream and and art cinema industry. This era of films was often characterized by independent filmmakers, queer stories, representation of subcultures, and an attitude of defiance, revolution, and sensuality. Though produced a bit after the peak of NQC, From the Edge of the City is a 1998 film that challenged the necessity of positive and palatable representation of queer identities, with its playful yet gritty aesthetics and production. Despite its later release, it absolutely could be considered as New Queer Cinema. Author Michele Aaron states that in regards to NQC filmmakers, they were, “No longer burdened by the approval-seeking sackcloth of positive imagery.” And according to Ruby Rich, the woman who coined the name NQC, what characterizes NQC is what she calls a “shared commitment to pleasure.” Similarly, this film we’re considering has a lot of themes of pleasure and hedonistic lifestyles, and refuses to adhere to the idea that queer identities must be enjoyable and digestible on screen for the masses. The combination of the genres of art and fiction film mingle delicately, yet loudly, with the element of documentary and non-fiction, with the realism of the untrained actors and eye contact with the camera. 

The film also makes itself known as a film about immigrants and their struggles. It considers the hardships of the young queer men in question, while also taking a more global and political perspective, discussing the isolation, discrimination, and loss of opportunity certain groups of ethnicities and language-speakers face. As Queer Cinema evolves, we are no longer simply producing intimate and personal stories of self identification and love. We are exploring the relation of queer identities with global politics and issues, especially those of migrants. It seems From the Edge of the City was perhaps ahead of its time, or possibly a trailblazer in the evolution of queer cinema.

When thinking of the subject of queerness, most people do not consider gender identity at first, as the word queer is more commonly associated with sexuality. Regardless of this notion, gender identity and expression have always been an ever-present part of the queer community. What I find to be an insurmountable shame is that the LGBTQ+ community and queer identities are commonly thought to be hyper-sexual and “dirty,” making it very difficult to allow people of all ages to have access to information and media about expressing their identity. However, once in awhile, films and media will make an effort to rebel against this harmful notion and showcase young queer stories. A great example of this is Céline Sciamma’s Tomboy. This film explores the concepts of gender fluidity and exploration, alongside the deeply ingrained gender stereotypes that much of the world has accepted as “normal,” such as coding colors and interests and hobbies as gendered. These things wouldn’t be considered “normal,” without the existence of Gender Performativity, a phenomenon that we are all familiar with, but may not have the words or the name to express. Gender Performativity is materialized in acts of repetitive speech or the enforcement of certain gender stereotypes and standards. For example, a woman on a billboard in full makeup, or someone asking a female child when they will get a boyfriend. The essay “Critically Queer” by Judith Butler describes Gender Performativity in further detail stating, “Performative acts are forms of authoritative speech: most performatives, for instance, are statements which, in the uttering, also perform a certain action and exercise a binding power.” These acts are often repeated enough through time that are accepted within the collective psyche of a society. 

(Google Images)

These acts do not go unseen, and are often the source of much pain and confusion for those who wish to rebel against societal norms. An example of this direct effect can be seen in many people thinking queer identities and media are inherently sexual and inappropriate, which makes it very difficult for children to find the information they need to explore their identities. In fact, childhood can be a very beneficial time for young people to have the freedom to explore their gender identities, with less pressures than grown adults may face. This is another reason why Tomboy was such an influential film, as it allowed visibility for children exploring their gender identity, and brought to light the struggles of children who are questioning their gender. Queer European cinema has been a good source of intimate and norm-challenging films, and Tomboy is a great example of the industry evolving to include more and more stories that many would not consider “easily digestible.” The truth is, queer stories deserve to be heard and represented ethically and fairly, without the need for constant hyper-sexuality and tragedy. As modern queer cinema continues to thrive with the help of the film festival circuit and the brave communities fighting for their voices, I believe queer stories will continue to prosper, and we will find more and more spaces to represent ourselves and show the world we are absolutely, apologetically, visible.

(Google Images)

Simply by coining the phrase “queer cinema,” we are informed as audiences that to be queer in film puts you in a different category than mainstream cinema. Queer films have historically had very specific spaces in cinema, we see examples of these spaces listed in Queer World Cinema by Rosalind Galt and Karl Schoonover, such as film festivals, art-house theaters, mainstream theaters, community centers, pornographic theaters or stores, in underground film markets, and the internet. While mainstream cinema can be found in these same places, the difference is that queer cinema and mainstream cinema do not thrive in the same environments. It has formed a sense of community and intimacy with queer cinema, especially at European film festivals such as the Berlin Film Festival. It is interesting to consider how queer films have become more mainstream, and thankfully have improved visibility somewhat. But it is unfortunate that with more visibility and opportunity to showcase queer stories, comes the misuse of stereotypes that could be harmful for audiences. Especially considering that societies often have a “collective psyche” of sorts, which affects the norms of the civilization. This collective psyche is heavily affected by our media and culture, and the film industry is perhaps the most influential. Therefore if the mainstream cinema shares queer stories in an irresponsible or stereotypical way, this could affect how LGBTQ+ communities are viewed and treated. 

(Google Images)

The visibility and acceptance of queer identities has always been sought out by LGBTQ+ members, though the manner in which we go about it has changed and evolved throughout the years, and varies between societies. However, for most Western societies, the act of “coming out” has become an act of bravery and confidence in one’s sexuality, which in the past has been a source of fear and contention. It is a form of rebellion against normativity and an act of revolution against the long-standing homophobia that is present in our history. It is common for queer individuals to attack stereotypes by being self aware of these false identities given to them by heterosexual media, which is present in the film Law of Desire, directed by Pedro Almodóvar. The film’s self awareness and teasing of itself alongside its purposeful and vibrant aesthetics makes it a brilliant film, as it is the epitome of visibility, the same voice that queer communities wish to maintain, saying, “see me for all that I am.” 

(Google Images)

Like the word “queer” itself, gay identities in cinema have been reclaimed. The word queer originally existed to create a label of difference, to attack men who showed emotion or feminine mannerisms, to create outcasts out of the LGBTQ+ community. While this word has not been reclaimed by all, and for some is still uncomfortable, but it is fantastic that we have been able to reclaim at least a portion of painful history and evolve it into something beautiful and unique. It goes to show that language and linguistics play a major part in our identities, and in cinema, as queer cinema has become an extremely successful and impactful subgenre of the film industry. I am always curious to see how the film industry evolves, and hopefully American queer films will become as intimate and challenging as European queer cinema has become.

(Google Images)

When we are learning about queer cinema, we are exposed quickly to the concept and word, “queer.” To be different, or to be of the LGBTQ+ community. These two concepts coincide in our modern world, where to be queer is to not be the collectively accepted “norm.” Though strides have been made towards LGBTQ+ rights and spaces, there is still a stigma present in most societies. Because of this, those of us who find ourselves in this category, feel as though we are outcasts, and find solace in those who are like us. We want a place to call home; a place where we are accepted for everything we are. This is a normal human reaction, and there’s no shame to it. However, when a group of outcasts come together after a lifetime of being taught to “fit in,” we find new rules superimposed onto a community that should be a safe space. This is where we find the issue of, “gay culture.” There is something beautiful about a group of like minded people finding happiness and virtue in their own activities and events, but where this poses a problem fro “gay culture” is when there becomes a standard, or an expectation, to be an “authentic queer.” We find this outline in an excerpt from Culture of Queers by Richard Dyer. The author writes, “Being into beauty was also part  and  parcel  of  the  mechanism  of  self-oppression,  because  I  defined  my cultural  sensitivity  as  a  compensatory  product  of  being  queer” (Dyer, The Culture of queers, p. 20). We find that the community that prides themselves on being a safe place of uniqueness and self expression, is directly affected by the heterosexual stereotypes of queer individuals. Gay men are expected to be emotional, have keen and pristine senses of style, and enjoy the finer arts, by their own community. We must consider how the community pressures queer individuals to be a certain way, and that there are endless facets of what it means to be “queer.” 

(Google Images)

A film that directly considers what it means to be a queer-identifying man is Loose Cannons (2010), directed by Ferzan Özpetek. In this film, an openly gay man plans to come out to his family, but his plans are derailed as he must take over his brother’s place in the family company. What was initially a short trip home, became a life sentence. Leaving behind his partner and gay friends, he found himself unable to express himself in the ways his friends are shown to do, reciting show tunes and fashion labels on a whim. He even has a strangely intimate relationship with his female business partner, which perhaps means the film questions self exploration and bisexuality, a concept often considered taboo when one already has roots in a specific identity for many years. Identity is fluid within ourselves, but the outside world prefers we conform to one label for the rest of our lives, because it is easier for them. This idea has no regard for our personal journeys. Though there could be many interpretations of this film, but I think that the film attempts to question what is necessary to be considered gay in our society, and the question of, “What does it mean to be authentically queer?”