Beefcake

Watching a doco about male physique models whilst eating a bag a chips makes you think twice. That aside, this is a reasonably interesting film that blends original archive footage, interviews and places them along side recreations of events of the AMG Studios, set up by Bob Mizer to capture the male physic. The recreations are okay to a limit, there is too much flipping between black and white and colour and some of the actors playing the models have less than defined bodies which goes against all the images we are bombarded with that show strong ripped muscular bodies. Some of the acting is also heading to Hamsville. There are some clever scenes where they have melded archive footage with new scenes and this works very well.

There are some interesting, if brief, interviews with some of the people that came through AMG: models including Joe Dallesandro, as well as other photographers and fans. Then there is a vast array of archive footage of models-and yes there is plenty of flesh on display-and it does have a sense of beauty to it, because despite the obvious homoerotic nature of some of the photos and films made and the fact that these were taken for publications that were really the beginnings of pornography, there is an innocence to some of it and perhaps that was the 40/50/60's backdrop which was an all together different time.

The film wins on its old footage and the telling the story of an age gone by, but is let down by trying to have too many ideas at once. Now I have to go do some sit ups.

More of my reviews at my site iheartfilms.weebly.com

This film is a huge departure from Thom Fitzgerald's first film The Hanging Garden. Beefcake is a loosely woven docu-drama of photgrapher Bob Mizer's Athletic Model Guild. The style of the film will look very familiar to anyone who's seen the NFB's "Forbidden Love" where interviews with those who knew Bob are blended with a storyline about a court case involving an alleged prostitution ring. Good use is also made of archival footage from AMG and others. The interviews are quite well done- Joe D'Allesandro and Jack LaLanne in particular but the new footage seemed a little 2 dimensional and predictable.

The makers of this film set a bit of a challenge for themselves. How to make an interesting movie about the world of magazine photography. The subject in this case is one that hasn't been comprehensively covered before: male physique photography. Generally speaking, in 30s the emphasis was on art, in the 40s on fitness, in the 50s on sensuality, and in the 60s on sexuality. The film explores all aspects of this industry by focusing on a few of the top photographers and their models. Surprisingly, not all participants had the same ideas or experiences about their work, nor the same recollections. In fact, these folk seemed to rather enjoy their work, which did emphasize a healthy, fit body. The relationships of the models emerges as congenial and brotherly, and the photographic activity as engaging. As in any "entertainment type industry" there were some over-the-top kibitzing, which in some cases digressed into rather kinky goings on. Still, the makers of this film manage to remain light hearted about most of it, while allowing some top models and fitness stars to share their memories in short commentary episodes.

For those who were not into this area, they could simply not buy the magazines nor be concerned about the whole matter. For those who found this an area of interest, they were free to make their own choices. What caused problems were conflict with the law, which itself may be controversial. These clashes are also presented here in enactments. It was interesting to see Joe D'Allesandro, well remembered from some of Andy Warhol's films, being interviewed--and what a candid, down to earth personality he is.

The fellows, though, come across as having a good time. While it may not be the most ambitious of professions, modeling at least keeps one off the streets -- that is, almost everyone.

Very entertaining and often funny, this re creation - with selected, astonishing genuine footage - of the AMG he-man 'studio' of the 1950s BEEFCAKE is best seen with a large (gay) crowd in a big cinema. That's how I first saw it and enjoyed the reactions as much as the movie. However the dramatic aspects of BEEFCAKE disappoints or falls short for several reasons: some of the casting is really terrible. Throughout BEEKCAKE, we see genuine footage made in the 50s by Bob Mizer. Parts of the production of these films is dramatized. The actors in these re created scenes are far from physically right. The actor who plays 'Red" has a podgy body, unlike anyone in the real footage, and this is jarring against the photos and film strips screened. Also, one stupid scene with what is supposed to be "Ramon Novarro" with a massive black fake phallus, the old man actor looks like Montgomery Burns from The Simpsons. I cannot fathom the point of having really inappropriate looking actors play parts of well known handsome and athletic men. Even the actor playing Mizer does not look like the real Bob Mizer. BEEFCAKE has some excellent interviews with original AMG talent, especially Joe Dallasandro whose early work is astonishing and humorous. However, the recreated scenes often lurch into territory only seedy gay guys want and it is somewhat alienating from what is basically a fascinating part of Hollywood history. There is actually a good story and better movie unmade (yet) here that is half way successful in this production of BEEFCAKE

This film is about the struggle of gay porn in the 50's USA, in the disguise of "physique magazines". It is based on a book of the same name.

This film cleverly mixes archive footage with new footage shot for the film. The film flows seamlessly between the past and the present. The interviews with the physique models are very insightful. I am particularly impressed by these interviews, and the effort to hunt these men down.

There is a lot of male nudity in the film, and yet it feels fresh and healthy, without a erotic or pornographic feel to it. I also liked the acting, Bob Mizer is portrayed very well in the film. The pleads for understanding and tolerance in the film is also very effective.

The sexual controversy is toned down a lot in the film as compared to the book. In addition, the book has more history in it, while the film strips all of these away. That's my only complaint.

As one of the models states in the interview, if these events are not written down, they will be lost forever. I am hence very glad that this piece of history is transcribed (albeit dramatised) from the book into a film.