I went to the Q-Cinema 12, Fort Worth’s Gay & Lesbian International Film Festival, to see Israel Luna’s (FRIGHT FLICK, THE DEADBEAT CLUB) controversial new grindhouse feature film titled TICKED OFF TRANNIES WITH KNIVES.
The film tells the story of 5 transgendered women, Bubbles, Rachel, Emma, Tipper, and Pinky La Trimm, who are performers at a local night club that are beaten and left for dead by 3 men, Boner, Chuy, and Nacho. Boner, convincingly portrayed by actor Tom Zembrod, has a thing for Bubbles – he finds her attractive and sexually appealing but, of course, as an obviously homophobic male is repulsed by her because she is a transgendered woman. In his homophobic need to hurt Bubbles he devises a plan with Nacho and Chuy to abduct Bubbles and her friends. However, the girls who survive get revenge. And I’ll say very little more for fear of spoiling the film for those who haven’t seen it.
The film includes some some standard grindhouse theatrical gags to include a missing film reel, burning film, and some film graininess. But, this film was shot professionally and the image quality is quite excellent. I’ve seen many low-budget films that use the old film grain and filters to attempt to cover up bad cinematography and lighting and that is not the case here.
The writing is appropriate for a film of this nature. Through the development of the characters Israel brings the viewer to a point where they care about the girls and truly hate the men. As the characters are developed much of the dialog between the girls is quite funny. However, the hateful dialog from the men was as disturbing as it needed to be. The confused hatred of the homophobic Boner was very believable and ugly. The scenes of violence (both towards the girls and their vengeful acts) were truly disturbing and distressing. In fact, just the blood and hair on the bat was enough to convince the viewer that Boner was not playing and intended to hurt these girls bad.
I enjoyed all of the actors’ performances. Each played their roles convincingly. However, Willam Belli as Rachel Slurr, was by far my favorite performance. Willam Belli is an incredible actor and every line was timed and delivered perfectly. His facial expressions, body motions, voice, and overall look contributed to the standout performance. Tom Zembrod’s performance was incredible too. I really hated Boner. Tom’s performance was on the mark at every point.
The effects and stunts were all well executed, especially given the budget the crew was working with. Cinematography and editing were used effectively to keep the budget low while convincingly pulling off some great makeup effects and some excellent fight scenes.
The film worked on every level and I’m quite sure that writer/director Israel Luna, who was in attendance at this screening, was pleased with the audience response and reaction throughout the the film. I will own the film when it becomes available and am looking forward to seeing it again.
As for the controversy created by a transgendered woman who feels that this film glorifies violence against transgendered women and has taken offense to the use of the word “tranny’ in the title, all I can say is that she has not seen the film. No more than films like I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE glorified rape and violence towards women, does this film glorify the violence that transgendered women experience in alarmingly high numbers around the world. And like I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE the audience is horrified by the violence against the women and find themselves cheering as each act of vengeance is carried out by the victims against the attackers. The comedic elements of the film provide character development and likeability of the victims but is not used to make light of the violence against the girls. Do not let the misinformation being spread by those who’ve never seen the film keep you from this film. Many transgendered people were in attendance at the screening and during the Q&A it was apparent that none were personally offended by this film.
If you enjoy the rape/revenge-grindhouse action sort of thing, this film should be right up your alley.
No distribution deal has been announced yet as the film is still making the film festival circuit but when it is, we’ll let you know here.
As the founder of GID Reform Advocates, I have worked for many years to refute defamatory stereotypes of mental illness that are inflicted upon trans and gender variant people. Trans women and men lose their jobs, homes, families, children, civil liberties, human dignity and physical safety as a consequence of these false stereotypes. Mr. Luna's depiction of transgender and transsexual women as mad, vengeful killers wielding blood drenched knives sends the most harmful message possible to employers, colleagues, neighbors, families and children of people who are denied fundamental civil rights in most states. Good people and loving families will suffer because of the way they are caricatured in this film, its title and its promotion materials.
I am the author of the review above.
If what you say is true, then surely the same must apply to all rape revenge films? But I don't think in the 40+ years films like I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE and LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT have been in existence that anybody has received the message that women, especially rape survivors, are all mad, vengeful killers yielding blood drenched knives.
Your argument bears no weight in fact or statistics. It's simply an argument created to serve your personal agenda. Furthermore, most sane people are easily capable of watching a film without drawing some generalization as they simply recognize that film is fiction.
Nobody will watch this film and mistake it as a documentary.
Thank you for your response, Mr. Rose. If by my personal agenda you are referring to my advocacy for dignity and civil justice for oppressed people, including trans people; then I offer no apology for the work that I do, and I invite you to join me in these efforts.
Media often plays a pivotal role in the perpetuation of false, defamatory stereotypes against minorities, and these stereotypes fuel fear, intolerance, discrimination, and ultimately violence. Organizations such as the National Organization for Women, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, the Anti-Defamation League, and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People tirelessly respond to media degradation of vulnerable populations. Susceptible individuals do internalize defamatory and dehumanizing media depictions, and the consequeces are all too often tragic.
I can assure you, Mr. Rose, that the bullies who battered me as a child made no distinction between factual human diversity and fictional media stereotypes. Nor have those who have denied employment, housing and civil justice to trans people. Nor have real-world murderers who took the lives of more than 500 people since 1970 because of their gender identities or expression.
In fact, Mr. Luna seems to have himself conflated fiction with documentary by exploiting the names of real-world murder victims in the film and early versions of promotion materials. To those of us who have survived violence and offered support to families of victims, this is not entertainment. It is simple exploitation. Moreover, Mr. Luna's promotional image of a transwoman licking blood off a knife blade, a tag line ridiculing the genitals of pre-operative or non-operative transwomen, and the title itself cross the line between distaste and contempt — a line he would likely not have crossed for any other minority.
On the contrary, Mr. Rose. There ARE those who see women in rape revenge movies (and what a curiously fine-focus genre that is) as blood-spattered vixens whom, as in the image of the 'tranny' licking blood off a knife, are violent, psychotic and ultimately as vicious as their attackers. Turning the tables on their oppressors? Yes, certainly. Wouldn't anyone?
No, Mr. Rose. Many of us wouldn't. Signification, Mr. Rose. Surely you've heard of it? No? Take a media analysis class. The teacher will explain it to you, very simply if you ask nicely. Mr. Luna (and others, including you) have signified trans folk as bloody, violent, deceptive, pathetic, psychotic and generally no better or even worse than those who would take their lives. You are avoiding responsibility for your bigotry and hateful attitude by using the ol' standby: "It's just a movie!"
Yes, and to many, what is seen in a movie is real and contains real content. To those unsophisticated thinkers who literally do not comprehend the subtle and insidious process of signification, movies are life reflected in the silver screen. In the case of a well-written drama, that may be true, to some degree. Art does indeed mirror life. To SOME degree. But both the manifest AND latent content of TOTWK indicates that trans women (ALL trans women EVERYWHERE. The movie makes no such distinction that there are different trans women other than what is depicted in the movie) are violent psychopaths. Sane movie-goers? Um, not to point out the obvious, but insane folk go to movies, too. And how are we to know who is sane or insane? Not until they commit a violent act. Statistics? Must I remind you of Mark Twain's comment regarding statistics?
But if you'd paid attention in media class or film school, you'd realize or at least admit that violence in the media does indeed encourage violence in real life. It does, Mr. Rose, despite your feeble protestations to the contrary. There are…statistics. Studies; most of which are ignored by you and people like you who make these movies and celebrate the dehumanization of our culture. Ignoring this allows you to satisfy your curious obsession with blood, violence, death, pain and the degradation of the human spirit.
Personally, I think you need a counselor and a long regimen of anti-depressive drug therapy. And I wouldn't allow you to own cutlery of any kind.
You both nothing about me yet assume because I wrote a positive review for a rape revenge film that I'm oppressive, hateful, and bigoted. Michelle goes so far as to even call me crazy. I paid no attention to media class or film school as I attended neither. But I have done much personal research and read many articles that argue both sides and I honestly have always found the argument that music, film, etc., are not responsible for violence in the majority of normal and sane people to be more credible. And to blame real world violence on entertainment and media (be it fictional or non-fictional) further allows this shirking of personal responsibility for ones personal actions which is so prevalent in today's society and in our culture. No more than the PMRC was able to blame heavy metal, punk, and rock music for the woes of society 30 years ago will anyone ever be able to blame horror and exploitation films for the woes of society now or ever.
Kelly. I long ago joined the fight for equality for the LGBT community. I recently organized and held a Film Festival that donated over a thousand dollars to a local LGBT youth center and outreach club. On a day to day basis I advocate for equality in marriage for same sex and transgendered people. Since this film came out and the controversy surrounding it, I have had long conversations and dialog with transgendered people and have come to learn things I never knew. I'm straight, I'm married, and I have children. But, I'm far from a homophobe, a gay basher or baiter, or an intolerant person. I've come to learn that trannie, she-male, lady boy, and the other commonly used names for transgendered women are considered insulting by most transgendered women. I've come to learn that being transgendered is not the same as being gay. I've come to understand that the defense of "tranny surprise" often used in defenses by those who commit assault against transgendered women is most often inappropriate. I've come to learn that there's a difference between gay men who impersonate women and the women who were born a male physically.
But, being who I am and standing for what I do and knowing what I know, only helps me to understand your opposition to the film. I only hope that both you and Michelle have seen the film as you can't honestly oppose what you haven't seen. However, I'm not going to change my position on the film nor will I change my position that entertainment does not create violent people.
Michelle. Your response is insulting and indignant. It's written from a place of anger and nonsense. You have to be willing to act like an adult before you can expect to be treated like an adult and talked to like an adult.
Andrew:
Good for you that you have gone to the lengths you have to understand the landscape of transgender. I sincerely appreciate it and welcome your efforts to understand and assist.
But: if you're gonna review movies, you really should know what you're talking about. No, media does not conform the viewer's thinking. There is no 'magic bullet' and that theory was discredited decades ago. But media does indeed 'inform'. In short, it does not tell WHAT to think about, only HOW to think about it. This is the process of signification and you SHOULD study this. To assert that your own research and self-education is sufficient is naive and displays an underlying contempt for academic or even logical (read:truthful) rigor.
Long story short: your reasoning has holes big enough to drive a truck through it.
Andrew, it's naive to assume that every viewer is at least as sophisticated as yourself. Forty million people watch Fox News and take it for the truth and you have the stupefying innocence to say THIS?
"And to blame real world violence on entertainment and media (be it fictional or non-fictional) further allows this shirking of personal responsibility for ones personal actions which is so prevalent in today’s society and in our culture."
Uh, how many tragic mass murders do you need spread before us in the media to finally realize that not all people are particularly sane, not all are particularly sophisticated and not all can tell the difference between a lie and the truth or the grossly caricatured symbol of oppression and bigotry and a living, responsible, sane and normal member of society?
I support your efforts to learn about my community and your good intentions. I'm grateful. But I'm not grateful for your support of this film. If you are indeed an ally, then you'd better take another hard, cold look at this film to examine the latent (hidden) messages it conveys.
And please, please, please go back to school. Learn about the craft you practice. A critic is an analyst of media in one form or another. If you are to analyze, you must first learn how to do so effectively and accurately.
By the way, I didn't exactly call you crazy. I didn't even use that word. But you must admit to an obsession with La Danse Macabre. Not healthy, Andrew. Get help.
Sincerely,
Michelle Diane Rose
co-author: "The Color of Sunlight"
Troma's in big trouble
What is an obsession with La Danse Macabre? I am not obsessed with horror films, horror literature, or horror of any sort. I enjoy them. They entertain me. Even moreso than other genres of entertainment or literature.
And Michelle, seriously, I don't need help. I'm a perfectly balanced person who is completely capable of separating fact from fantasy and documentary from fiction. Again, the very fact that you'd suggest I need help is insulting.
Funny thing is: I would likely have paid very little attention to this film as the "rape revenge sub-genre" is not really my thing under normal circumstances. I find the notion of rape-revenge to be rather unrealistic and I'm not one to condone vigilante acts of revenge. I like horror films that are much more real life first and foremost and then tend to favor the creature features. The #1 reason I went to the LGBT film festival that this played at was to see what the controversy was about and found that I rather enjoyed the film. But, then I wonder where are all the protests against films like 2001 Maniacs and 2001 Maniacs: A Field of Screams that portray white southern state residents as backwoods, uneducated, incestuous, bestiality performing, savages? There are none. Why? Because it's not politically incorrect to make fun of rednecks and only when you feel personally slighted by a film will you stand up against it right?
Bizarre thing was there were many transgendered women sitting in the audience when I saw the film. And no, they weren't cross-dressing gay men, female impersonators, or drag queens. Not one transgendered woman in attendance opposed the film in the least. One woman stated she opposed it until she saw it but now has no issue with it.
And for the record: Yes, The use of Ms. Zapata's images in promoting the film was exploitative and wrong. But, I think even Israel has seen the error his way and has ceased using them.
It seems like the only reason anyone has any problem with this film is because it involves transgender women. If the main characters were anyone else (say the title was "Ticked Off Strippers with Knives" or "Ticked off Cheerleaders with Knives" to put it in a teen horror genre), would any one be throwing a fit or would anyone think, "oh, all cheerleaders are unstable murderers!" Doubtful. And if it were just about strippers, would the film maker also have a responsibility to show, "well, here are some strippers who take revenge. But here are other strippers that just strip and then go home and watch TV." Why does this director need to show a comparison? The movie is about revenge, a theme that is universal. Does it matter who is doing the revenge? I agree with the writer of this review– if you claim that this film creates a broad generalization that will be believed, as FACT, by viewers, then the same has to be said about believing the generalizations of ALL films ever made. Do those who oppose this film oppose ALL cliché stereotypes, or just the ones about minorities? You can't make a horror/comedy/satire about someone who is transgendered, but it's completely acceptable to watch a young white girl get raped and tortured? That's being biased.
Defense lawyers would love the world to believe that movies and music are responsible for heinous acts and hate crimes. "That movie made me do it! Marilyn Manson made me do it!" Art should not be held accountable for others deeds. It isn't the job of the artist to hold the world by the hand and baby everyone. Art is free, art is often controversial.
I haven't seen this film, so I'm not defending it. I'm also not going to criticize it. It could be the most degrading bigoted piece of crap ever or it could be the most brilliant piece of cinema ever made. But the film maker still has a right to say what he says through his art. It seems, through the author's review, that many people from the transgender community enjoyed the film at the screening. If the people who should be the most offended aren't and like the product, where's the controversy? I'm not saying that there aren't members of the LGBT community who will be offended, but the fact that this film was screened at a Gay and Lesbian film festival seems to tell me it was reviewed by members of the LGBT community and that they found it had merit enough to be screened and enjoyed by the public.
Miranda, I think your reasoning is flawed by ignoring the issue of false media stereotyping of oppressed minorities. Instead, you shifted the subject to cheerleaders and strippers. However, your red herring examples could be made relevant to Mr. Luna's movie and promotional materials if his title were, "Slutty Strippers with …" or "Bimbo Cheerleaders with…" and he caricatured all women with misogynist stereotypes of sluts or bimbos. Those would be fairer analogies to his stereotyping of transwomen here, but he didn't dare to offend cisgender (non-trans) women. Nor did Mr. Luna dare to entitle his film with an offensive racial, or antisemitic or ethnic epithet. Instead, he targeted a community far less empowered.
I'll add that this movie was screened and reviewed by a very reputable GLBT advocacy organization, Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD). They voiced these same concerns, as did an advocacy group for children, TransYouth Family Allies. It is very inaccurate to say that people who should be offended by the title and stereotyping of this film like the product. As transwomen and men, we do not ask to be "babied" or "hand held" by anyone. We ask to be treated with dignity as human beings.
Mr. Luna indeed has a first amendment right to offend and degrade innocent people through his films and promotional materials. However, I have that same right to speak out for the basic human dignity of those marginalized because they are born different. I am far from alone in my concerns and hope that more people of conscience will speak out as well.
I'd like to raise my hand one more time on this blog and then I'll move on to the next reviewer-critic who is willing to dialog about this.
First: the women portrayed in the movie are not typical of trans women. Period. Entertainers? The implication (the latent message) is that they are sex workers. No, it is not stated as such. The viewer is left to reach that conclusion, inescapably if one is not capable of unraveling the many threads of signification wound through this. The manifest message is that they are outcast; fringe-dwellers and marginalized through a 'life-style choice' They are in fact lower-class and therefore suspect.
Their behavior is atypical of trans women: they are predictably shallow, obsessed with body mods and makeup, shrill, uneducated and, most important: respond to violence as a man would, not as a woman. They respond to violence with violence. This is not to say that most women will not fight to defend themselves from an attacker. On the contrary, they will when possible. It is also quite probable that SOME women will indeed plot revenge against someone who has brutalized them. It's not unheard of, certainly.
But the reality of trans women who have been raped or assaulted or abused does not intersect believably with this film. Yes, Boner is a hateful character and yes, there are indeed men whose wiring leads them to think and act as he does. (If Boner can be said to think at all, that is.) On that point and that point alone, this movie comes close to the real truth. But it is not enough to save the rest of the content. Were this about a group of trans women who work in an office or a retail store and were assaulted on their way home from work, then that might be closer still. But, from a dramatic standpoint, that's not very exciting. It turns the excitement of seeing slutty, overly made-up perverts being beaten to death into something else entirely; something far too close for comfort. IF this movie had been made about ordinary trans women (the ones who pass because they look nothing like the women in TOTWK) and IF the brutalization had been as impersonal and self-assured as it almost always is in real life, then the story would have been…familiar. It would have granted the equality of experience to those trans women because that sort of horror happens to women, every hour of every day, everywhere in the world. By the rules of signification laid down by both the movie's premise and by the existing rules of our society, the empathy we feel for a natal woman's rape and brutalization does not extend to a trans woman. We are expected to feel pity for them but not empathy. In fact, we are expected to feel, on some level, that they deserved it due to their outcast status and appearance.
I do not criticize this movie on the basis of its title (hell, I've used that term to describe myself on occasion. But never in reference to another trans woman.) or even its content. Yes, this is a 'grindhouse' film. (Uh-huh. Just what we need.) As such, it does not embrace an artistic aesthetic in the way that a true drama might. But, as an artistic or social statement about the brutalization of trans women, it falls far short of its goal. It is, unfortunately, a reinforcement of nearly all of the negative stereotypes the trans community has been fighting to rid itself of for the past half-century. As such, it is an abject failure, both as a statement and as a representative of anything artistic.
Luna screwed up. Period. He made the wrong kind of film, one that reinforces the wrong stereotypes and ignores the truth and the reality. If he'd wanted to show the horror of trans folk being murdered and abused, then he should have made a documentary. Truth is considerably more potent than a male sexist fantasy. Had a better writer created the script, he or she might have written a scenario wherein the attackers own violence would be turned against them; entrapped in a web of their own bigotry and hatred. But violence is the simplest (and most male-effective) way of resolving conflict, at least on the silver screen and on the tube. That's why we see the 'hero' kill his adversaries at the end of an action flick or a cop-show. It's a quick resolution. It's short-term satisfaction. It's instant gratification.
And THAT'S why it's a dangerous, inaccurate and utterly unrealistic message. THAT'S why we trans women are so 'ticked-off'. (But you won't find us carrying knives. The pen, my dear Andrew and Miranda, is mightier than the sword. Believe that if you believe nothing else.)
Miranda, I'd like to point out the flaws in your reasoning, I really would. But it's late and I'm tired, having worked all day. Instead, I will gently direct you to your statement about exchanging the word 'tranny' with 'cheerleader' and say, simply, that you made my point for me. Think about it, will you?
Andrew, once again, I'm not really implying that you are mentally unstable. Far from it. 'La Danse Macabre', loosely translated, means 'The Dance of Death'. More precisely, it refers to a medieval allegory on the concept of death uniting us all. Just so you know where I stand, I would much prefer to celebrate life. You state that you are married with three children. It might be illustrative, from a sociological perspective, to have a neutral party ask your children and wife what they really think about your work and hobby. Do let me know what they report, won't you?
Sincerely,
Michelle Diane Rose
Michelle. I have spent entirely too long defending a film as nothing more than entertainment. It is nothing more than entertainment but nothing we say will ever convince you because, this time, you are part of the group who has been offended. Had the film been titled to reflect that the characters were gay female impersonators or just gay men we wouldn't be having this discussion. You say you are moving on to another reviewer-critic that will have dialog? Is it just that you consider it productive dialog because that person is coming around to your opinion? The closed-mindedness seems to be much more from your side here than mine.
I do not celebrate death Michelle. As for my wife and children, ha, nice try my dear, but my wife watches and enjoys the same films I do. Oh, and before you think she's just joined me in la Danse, she was watching and reading horror when we met (it was one of the common interests we shared). My children, well the two that are old enough to know the difference, do not perceive me negatively because I watch horror films. Not in the least, in fact my 13 year old, watches much of the same stuff. My 23 year old does not watch horror films but does not have the same obvious distaste for them that you do. And truthfully, you know deep down inside, that your biggest objection to the film is that it's a horror or exploitation film. It really bothers the hell out of you that female impersonators and transgendered women are the lead characters of a horror film.
michelle you're an idiot. it's never implied that the girls are sex workers and it's been refuted all over the web. i took the job portraying one of the girls on the BASIS that she WASN'T a hooker.
lame brain.