"Cruising" - Love it or Loathe it?

[Kerry]

The 1980 Al Pacino vehicle, "Cruising," is about to make its DVD debut after 27 years. Do you love it or loathe it? Perhaps you're ambivalent about it. Do you think it's homophobic or homofriendly?

Tell us your thoughts. Tick as many boxes as you like.

At a time when gay and lesbian characters were virtually invisible in mainstream film and television, a movie like "Cruising" - about an undercover cop (Al Pacino) who infiltrates the hard-core S/M leather-bar scene in New York City on the hunt for a killer targeting gay men - was guaranteed to stir up anger in the relatively young pre-AIDS gay rights movement.

Besides its sleazy milieu and gay-on-gay violence, the movie features fairly explicit (by Hollywood standards) scenes of sex acts that even some purveyors of gay porn would consider beyond the pale. Gay protesters picketed the film during its production and again when it appeared in theaters in 1980. But now, 27 years later, as the film makes its DVD debut, is it time to reevaluate the place of "Cruising" in queer cinema history?

Director William Friedkin ("The Exorcist," "The Boys in the Band") reveals on the DVD's bonus features that he was drawn to the film because the New York fetish bars made a great setting for a murder mystery. He points out that there were plenty of gay men at the time who didn't protest - namely, the leather-bar denizens who happily participated in the film's production as extras.

The featurettes also include insights from producer Jerry Weintraub, actor and former police officer Randy Jurgensen and other cast members discussing matters such as the on-set protests (lots of the dialogue had to be redubbed later because activists blew whistles and made noise to ruin takes). But there are two gaping absences among the interviewees - Pacino himself and a single gay person.

One queer champion of the film its makers could have interviewed is filmmaker Bruce LaBruce ("Hustler White"), who says the film's dark tone influenced his own work.

"It was so far outside the comfort zone for Hollywood cinema, and it really had a big effect on me in terms of making me want to explore sexual boundaries and taboos in both my life and my films."

For gay audiences who still find the film politically incorrect, LaBruce adds, "I say if you don't like it, Dorothy, go back to Kansas."

(Thanks to planetout.com for story and pics)

[Kerry]

I thought it was very dark and extremely disturbing. It left an indelible mark on me, even though I only saw it once.

Some 27 years later, I can still sing the spooky little ditty sung by the serial killer, whenever he was about to take out his next victim:

"I'm here, you're here, we're all here . . . "

It still sends an icy chill up and down my spine to this day.

It was a very brutal, ugly movie, dealing as it does with the ultimate act of depravity - the taking of another human life for the sole purpose of sexual gratification. Having said that, however, I found it absolutely unforgettable.

Because it is about to be released on DVD, and also because I am aware of spoilers, I will not reveal the ending here. Suffice to say, however, that I consider the final scene to be one of the most ambiguous in film history.

I consider it a must see component of both the Homowood and Al Pacino lixicons.

What do you think?

[David In Indy]

I think I remember that movie Kerry. But I didn't see it. I think most of the movie theaters in Indiana banned that movie, so it didn't play here. That was a long time ago, and I may have my facts wrong, but I do remember a lot of uproar over that movie. I didn't see it.

[Shakesthecoffecan]

I got it on my netflix cue, I've been wanting to see it for years. Will let you know.

[ifyoucantfixit]

        Cant believe I missed this movie.  I was a giant Al Pacino fan in those years....I just missed it.  I will get it and have a look.

[Kerry]

I think I remember that movie Kerry. But I didn't see it. I think most of the movie theaters in Indiana banned that movie, so it didn't play here. That was a long time ago, and I may have my facts wrong, but I do remember a lot of uproar over that movie. I didn't see it.

It's worth seeing, for the reasons I mentioned.

Should you borrow the DVD, David, I would be interested in your interpretation of the ending. I saw it with a group of friends and we all interpreted the ending differently! 

It's not exactly what one would call an "entertaining" movie. In fact, it's quite disturbing. I had a similar reaction to the very first "Halloween" movie, when it was first released - darkly disturbing, yet unforgettable. Cruising is so chilling because the skill of the filmmakers seduces one into believing that it could possibly happen. If you liked "Zodiac," you'll like "Cruising."

I'll probably borrow the DVD when it's released here in Oz. But I'll be having a few drinks beforehand and will be watching certain scenes through my fingers! 

[huntinbuddy]

I recorded the movie Cruising when it was on Encore, or Cinemax several years ago.  I know it is boxed up with other VHS things I have never watched again.  Did watch it as I recorded it, and thought it was a bad, poorly scripted film.  I remember it as something about a serial killer of homosexuals in NYC, and Pacino as a cop going undercover to catch the killer.  Overall, I thought it was a waste of talent.   Even now after many years, I can't see the point of taking the time to watch it again, much less buy the DVD.

[dot-matrix]

It's such a dark gritty menacing movie, very scary almost repulsive in it's brutality.   I've seen it twice now and found it almost painful to watch both times.  I had the same reaction to Seven.

[Kerry]

P.S.  It's been a long time so I don't really remember the ending, but I think I do recall being confused by the ending, now that you mention it.

Beware Spoilers

I am about to reveal the ending, so do not read further if you don't want the ending revealed to you.

The Al Pacino character was painted as an overtly heterosexual NYC cop who goes undercover into the seedy gay S&M scene solely so he can track-down a serial killer.

After the threat presented by the serial killer is negated by Al Pacino, it is presumed that Al Pacino will return to the straight world from whence he came, and shrug-off all the leather S&M fetish accoutrement/clothing he adopted in his undercover role.

The mystery to me is why he is seen, in the final scene of the film, back to camera, fully decked-out in black leather, heading towards a gay S&M bar. Why? The serial killer is no longer a threat. There's no reason for Al Pacino to be there.

The worst possible scenario, as I see it, is that he set-up the other guy and that he is the real serial killer.

Alternatively, he could have had an Ennis Del Mar-like epiphany and found that, once he'd tried it, he found he actually enjoyed gay sex, and is going back for more.

I thought the ambiguous ending was one of the highlights of the film. Certainly, we all left the cinema engaged in very animated discussion.

My personal favourite interpretation of the ending is that Al Pacino is the real serial killer. I think this because the final scene is shot in such a menacing, sinister light.

[Lynne]

I haven't seen this, but it's in the netflix queue.  Should come this week when I return Buffy/Season2.