Outrageous!

At first I reacted against the sentimentality of the madness-as-nonconformism theme, which is really mostly down to Hollis McLaren; as Craig Russell's heavily medicated roommate, she gets more than a little familiar when she expresses her downturns with hushed gibberish or staring through her fingers. But in between episodes she really gets to articulate the bill of outsiders' rights, and Russell is right there with her. No comparable clichés in this film's depiction of the Toronto gay scene, a diverse yet claustrophobic enclave that places transvestites on the bottom of a depressingly rigid hierarchy - an economic threat to closeted hairdressers, stealth patriarchs to the second-wave dykes. At a time when cinematic queerness was synonymous with effete self-loathing, this sympathetic and detailed depiction of a complex, vital skid-row subculture was decades ahead of its time, and has real time-capsule value today. All of which to say is that they're far from just marking time between Russell's impersonations, which are definitive even if he did steal them from Mae West herself. Put the two together and you've got a film that synthesizes social engagement and entertainment value with almost unprecedented verve.

... has made me think of this movie thousands of times since I saw it (and marveled at Taylor) at the old Playboy Theater in Chicago on a particularly nasty winter night. This was when it (and I) first came out, and I've not seen it since, so pardon my fumbles on the details, but.... One character is *waaay* down in the pit of despair toward the end of the film, and second character basically delivers a get-over-it slap: "You're just like everybody else. You're alive and sick and living in Toronto...." The audience roared. Who needs "alive and well"? We all *are* alive and sick and living wherever. And alive and sick (or sick of heart, or sick of it all) and living lots of places since, it's slapped me back into a smile more times than I can count. It was quite a gift, in its sweet neurotic way.

["If a caterpillar was afraid of wings it would never become a butterfly, and people would say, 'Look, there's a worm on the tree....' But they'd never seen it spinning colors into the air......"]

I first saw "Outrageous" 22 years ago, (this will sound strange) I was so moved by it's greatness and at the time didn't have a VCR that I recorded it with a hand held tape recorder-audio-and that was how I 'watched' the movie for years til I got it on video. That is how incredibly touching, and GREAT this movie was and is! In it's unique way it almost reaches out and literally touches your heart if you let it. (And maybe even teach you a thing or two about life, love, people, and most important, FRIENDS!!)

Outrageous is a very special film. Imagine you live in the 70s and you were in a club or theatre anywhere in Canada or the USA. The announcer says: Ladies and Gentlemen. Mrs. Judy Garland. You think by yourself. Judy Garland? I thought this woman is dead. But the women on the stage is not Judy Garland but Craig Russell (a Canadian), one of the best female impersonators of our century. Because he was not only able to imitate the look of his idols (many great actresses and singers from the 30s to the 60s). He could also imitate the voices of the women. In the film he plays a gay character (which he really was) who shares a flat with a schizophrenic woman and makes his unbelievable shows at the evening. Craig Russell died too early of AIDS and he made only two films: Outrageous and the sequel. Craig Russell was a unique person and after his death Canada and the world had lost one of its greatest idols.

It's low budget shows in its grainy print and poor sound, but the quality performances by the entire cast make up for the films shortcomings.

The late Craig Russell pulls out all the stops as he displays his talent for female impersonation. Hollis McLaren is the ideal nut case. And Helen Shaver, in one of her earlier roles, is ideal as the friend who is accepting of people for who they are, embellishing their positive traits.

My one criticism of the film is the costuming. Not Russell's drag apparel, which matched each of his impersonations perfectly. But other wardrobe choices in the film were distractingly awful, especially during the Christmas party scene. Russell's jumpsuit was about 3 sizes too small, and Shaver's dress was something out of Ringling Brothers' clown reject closet.

Still, students and lovers of independent film will admire this one for its style, its daring, and its overall effort.