And when the heck did Annette Bening get so damn hot?!

In my opinion, it’s a fine piece of work by a fine, (happens to be lesbian, parent) writer-director. About the complexities in a mature lesbian relationship. And, I hasten to say, THE KIDS IN THE FAMILY THEY MADE. To whom the affair is an offense, primarily on terms of its being an affair, period. Their investment is in their family remaining intact as a family, rather than the sexual self-identification of one of their moms remaining fixed in place. Which of course [SPOILER!], as all know by now, it actually does. Remain fixed, that is. Her self-identification.

I appreciate the trust, or even the suspension of disbelief, that you’re extending the film. It seems to me as if Cholodenko extended some trust as well: that (enough of) the viewing audience would meet it with the same thoughtfulness she put into it.

I gather some perspective from the fact that homophobes are incensed at the sympathetic portrayal. Andrea Peyser, reviewing it in the New York Post a week ago (here’s a GLAAD piece on this review), said that Kids is:

…sort of a cross between “Leave it to Beaver” and “Kittens With Whips.” Choose your lifestyle wisely, moviegoers. For this film is set to go down in history as the first major motion picture to make a family led by gay women — A-lister Annette Bening, as the control-freak doctor Nic, “wed” to A-lister Julianne Moore, as the weepy, infantilized Jules — seem not just normal, but close to godly.

It reaches further than the gay-cowboy romp “Brokeback Mountain,” whose characters maintained a sense of otherness while shielding the kids from their shenanigans. In this movie, exposing kids is the entire point.

And this is how Hollywood does an end run around morality.

So there we go. That kind of response to this film is as critical a part of our conversation as are the valid concerns about the treatment and proper (enlightened, artistically spacious) dismantling of wrongful stereotypes about women’s complex sexual identities.

I think you’re absolutely right about the characters’ well-written and well-acted complexity being the things that makes the movie work, and I agree that we didn’t get enough background on why Jules felt so alone, so unappreciated. Still, anyone who has been in a family can probably fill in the blanks. Also, Paul was made out to be a sexy womanizer who didn’t really think twice about long-term consequences, something that left him outside alone in the end (as men like that so rarely are in movies, a welcome outcome in itself). I, too, wish he had been “better,” as Joni says, but as the reviewer in my local paper wrote, “the movie never surmounts its distrust of him.” I’m okay with that. It’s not about him. It’s about the family.

Something about this movie means so much to me, and I can’t quite figure it out. I’m a woman, married to a man, not planning on raising children. And I was raised by straight parents. But I have a queer identity, bisexual I guess it would be called, though I always have preferred to simply say I’m not a gender discriminator. Still, it’s not the possible bisexuality of one of the characters that makes me so glad for this movie (sex is no fun when somebody’s heart is getting hurt because of it). I just want to take certain of my own family members and co-workers down to the cinema and say “See? It’s fine. It’s normal. It’s family. Those kids are way more than all right. No more voting against love.” I feel bolstered by the visibility.

The crux of the local-paper review amounts to, “eh, like that other movie last summer, but entertaining nonetheless.” And my response to that assessment vacillates between, “How can you say that? It’s a lesbian family! And that’s only kind of the main point but not really and that in itself is so different!” and “Yes! Calling this same old same old means we are winning” (moving the 10-15%, if you will).

I’m desperate for love to win, and I think in the end, that’s what the film is about, just like that’s what this website is about. Love is not a thing to have or to hold, but an action to take, over and over again. I learned once (and I may be remembering incorrectly) that Confucianism demands of people to understand their identity as it relates to others. I am daughter, wife, aunt, colleague, etc., but nothing by myself. LD, it breaks my heart that some people would deny your family the right to call itself such. There is already enough sadness in basic human failing and weakness (as the movie shows so well). Why not embrace people loving wherever they can be found taking that most profound and necessary action?

Thank you for sharing your real-life family with all of us, and as others have noted, for being such a true and vivid and honest writer. The Kids are All Right has big names and big budgets and big screens, but it’s got nothing on Lesbian Dad when it comes to family portraits, social commentary, and gorgeous, poignant imagery.

(2) I got childcare tomorrow AM! I will try try try to transcribe & write up. Unfortunately I can’t get my 3 yr old to operate the digital voice recorder for me and the 5 yr old refuses to touch-type, so I’m stuck having to do it myself on my own time.

In the meantime, am waiting on more Annette Benning stories!

I’ll try and be disciplined and wait to rev up some click-to-enter post jobbie for the rest of the chat. Most of the most feverish conversation is elsewhere, where (ironically!) fewer lesbian parents dwell. I could be wrong about that (hell, I ALWAYS could be wrong; ask The Mrs). But it’s quite interesting to me what has been drawing the attention.

Daggone, get a winkie in the room (*cough*) and all eyes are on it, seems to be the sad conclusion here, even within our own community. When I first saw the film and the launch of that subplot, I winced, and then, as the plot progressed and consumated itself, realized: oh. Right. Ploy. Got it.

[added later:] Not to dismiss the worries. Or even some folks conclusions, after seeing the movie. I just really see so much in the film and its import and who it’s getting to think about what, that I put that winkie and its funciton in the plot into proper perspective. Which winds up minimizing it quite a bit.