Hard

A serial killer terrorizes and kills young gay men, urban drifters whom society couldn't care less about. And therein lies a clue to the killer's motivation, at least in part. "Hard" is not a whodunit, although, as a result of the film's editing, the identity of the killer is not revealed officially until almost halfway into the film. Up to that point, the killer, at least in theory, could be any of several people. There's also some intentional plot misdirection with regard to another character. Indeed, I think the film would have been stronger as a full-fledged whodunit, with all kinds of plot twists and turns. As is, the film reveals too much, too soon and, as a result, forgoes a sense of mystery and some suspense.

Even with a less than ideal plot, the film does a great job of conveying a sense of danger, especially toward the end. The visuals are dark, and when combined with sinister background music, create a tone that is menacing and foreboding. The finale takes place in an old, unused theater, and its creepy basement with wet floors, a holding place for previous victims. Here, at night, the cops close in. A beam of flashlight, a dilapidated stage, some rickety scaffolding, all that inky darkness, the perfect lair for a psychopath.

The film has suffered some bad press because the subject matter is not politically correct. There are lots of violent images, though very little in the way of violent action. The film also has a lot to say about police attitudes toward gays.

Edgy and cinematically risky, "Hard" grapples with difficult images and ideas. It isn't for everyone, in the same sense that the 1980 film "Cruising" was not for everyone. But even on a shoestring budget, "Hard" is a well-made film. It's an intriguing film, one that's best seen late at night, when all the lights are out.

Being a new detective can be hard. And surrounded by a group of narrow-minded, homophobic cops, Detective Raymond Vates finds it even harder. Deciding to keep it a secret to his fellow men, he and his new partner Tom Ellis starts to investigate the murder of a young boy. Pretty soon it becomes clear that they have a serial killer on their hands.

Hard portrays one of the most realistic serial killers I've ever seen in a movie. There's no doubt that they borrowed a lot from Jeffrey Dahmer (especially one scene in a car is very similar to something Dahmer did), because Malcolm Moorman's Jack is intriguing, manipulative and extremely self-centered. Sure, he doesn't run around with a chainsaw or build enormous killing machines. No, Jack is just like any other guy, which makes it even more frightening.

The mere fact that we get to see so much of the killer lends a new perspective to the story where one has to admire his manipulative games. The acting for this side of the story is very impressive. Moorman is fantastic and Michael Waite is very convincing as the insecure man who lets Jack into his family's home, and his bed.

While these characters are very well developed and easy to relate to in one way or the other, I do feel something is lacking in the police department, so to speak. The gay detective, played by Noel Palomaria, is somewhat hard to relate to and even though he's going through, basically, all the circles of hell there is, you don't really feel that bad for him.

Even so, this is a brilliant movie that any fan of thriller and drama should watch. It's not predictable, it's very interesting and never boring. It has been labeled a gay movie, and while there's a lot of just that, this is by no means close to anything coming from the gay-cinema movement. It's not a gay movie. It's a thriller. And, quite frankly, one of the best and most interesting I've come across so far.

A gay serial killer preys on young men that are in rough situations. A closeted cop gets promoted to detective and takes on this case. Unfortunately, after a night out at the bar, he ends up going home with the killer! You have to give it to this one for its original premise. It sounds a tad like "Cruising," but it is not as offensive as that film. Considering "Hard" had no budget (apparently, it was financed on a few credit cards and everyone involved worked for free), the average acting is (sometimes) forgivable and it is a well-made film. The violence is mostly implied and you see the nasty resulting images, which are certainly creepy enough. I saw the R-rated version (damn it!) and was annoyed that the screen faded to black during most of the sex scenes (except the one heterosexual one, of course).

"Hard" makes several attempts at social commentary, some of which are muddled and not entirely successful. The serial killer's motive is severe internalized homophobia. On the outside, he doesn't seem to have a problem with being gay, but he can't stand that American society treats Queer youth as disposable. So instead of doing something to change this, he disposes of the kids himself to save them from the abuse they'll face throughout their lives. Yeah, it is pretty ridiculous, especially considering he tortures his victims, many of which aren't even Queer youth. Related to this, but explored much more satisfactorily, the film portrays how difficult it is to be a gay cop, and the extreme homophobia that goes on in police departments. Much of the tension and suspense in this film, interestingly enough, comes from whether or not the lead character is going to out himself or be outed. Once he finally is, he is subjected to hatred and violence from his coworkers. I've read several accounts of things like this happening, but have never actually seen a film portray it, so "Hard" gets kudos for that. While it isn't always effective or successful as either a serial killer thriller or a social commentary, Hard does have its moments and is an admirable no-budge film.

My Rating: 6/10

If it weren't for the outraged conservative gay groups who made such a stink about films depicting homosexuality in a negative way, like CRUISING, more truthful films like this one, could have come along and had better budgets. For what is accomplished in HARD, with limited resources, is a very good, truthful, and thought provoking movie done with a lot more honesty than I expected. The acting, especially by the antagonist is dark and evenly good and sinister and succinct. It does not go into the area of having to justify his reasons for having become what he is. Some lines are incisive and brutally honest, while the obvious surfaces occasionally....but, life is just one great big background for clichés anyway. In its multi layered plot putting homophobia in second place, the director manages to make a psychotic thriller with some original twists and honest observations previously never employed for fear of upsetting the "gay moral majority". Too me, this is a sexy,violent and worthy of watching twice. To understand the amount of work it took to put this piece together, makes HARD all that more remarkable, and given a heftier budget,could have had some box office and made some bucks. This is definitely going to achieve "cult" status just for its daring.The lead actor is so good, he is probably responsible for holding the weaker cast believable.No "star" could have played him as well.

Hard is about a gay serial killer and the gay detective who is forced to go after him. It has an interesting story: the closeted gay detective is abruptly forced out of the closet after the killer handcuffs him to his bed and makes off with his badge. He then becomes a suspect himself... and all that.

The script needed to be revised one or two more times. The strong plot twist and themes are too muddled here to really come across well, and many of the main character's actions are STOOPID. (For instance, this man, supposedly a detective, who has just endured a long ordeal with a serial killer, opens his door for anyone who says "pizza"-- when he didn't even ORDER a pizza! It was like an unintentional parody of the Saturday Night Live "Land Shark" routine. I personally thought he should be killed). There is a good moment when he and his partner are under a bridge where they aren't supposed to be when a body falls out of nowhere-- but this is never really developed. And for every moment like that there are three lines like "Where does all the hate come from?" This film had a strong idea and good elements, just needed to tie them together better.

The second HUGE problem is that very few of the people on screen can act. The two leads are relatively good, but the rest-- whew. The worst is the detective's partner, who cannot utter one single convincing line. At first I thought he was just being ironic. But no. There are times in this film when you just hold the sides of your temples. THE performance of the film belongs to the guy who plays Tex. I want someone to make "The Tex Story" now. He was the funniest and most convincing character in the film.

This film CAN be lauded for not being overly politically correct, for showing butcher gay men (who seem to never show up in other films), and for generally being brave and different, but there ARE a bunch of hideous clichés. Naturally, when the detective comes out, he MUST be beaten up. It's just the way, isn't it? And a lot of the angst over coming out is a little too played up, I think.

I WOULD recommend that you see it, if you're gay and interested in keeping up with gay film-- because this is the first film of this kind that I have seen, and very different from the typical "two-schoolboys-in-love -- but-can-they-tell-his-mother?" fare. And the production quality is generally good. But... the gay Scorsese is still out there, undiscovered.

--- Check out website devoted to bad, cheesy and gay movies: www.cinemademerde.com