LGBT People Responding to World Need: Rainbow World Fund
TLA Video

Home | About ClaudesPlace | About Claude | Claude's Resume | David's Resume | Donate | Feedback Forum | Contact Us | Privacy Statement


Radio Stations: Air America Radio   ClubFM  Gaydar Radio (London)  Pride Nation (Palm Springs)  energy 92.7 (SF)  WQXR (NYC)

Search for    in    
Hard: Special Collector's Edition
Hard: Special Collector's Edition
Click for a closer view


List Price: $39.95

Availability:


Product Details

  
  • Starring: Malcolm Moorman
  • Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1
  • Audience Rating: Unrated
  • Audio Format: Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo
  • Binding: DVD
  • EAN: 0827912007763
  • Format: Color, DVD-Video, NTSC
  • Label: Rev Releasing/Global Marketing
  • Language: English
  • Manufacturer: Rev Releasing/Global Marketing
  • Number of Items: 1
  • Product Group: DVD
  • Publication Date: 2004
  • Publisher: Rev Releasing/Global Marketing
  • Release Date: 2005-10-11
  • Studio: Rev Releasing/Global Marketing
  • Theatrical Release Date: 2005
  • Title: Hard: Special Collector's Edition
  • UPC: 827912007763
Avg Customer Rating: 4 stars

Product Description: The Special Edition DVD of "HARD" is loaded with six hours of bonus materials: Unrated Directors Cut Actors Commentary with Noel Palomaria, Malcolm Moorman, Charles Lanyer and Michael Waite Director / Writers & Technical Advisors Commentary with Dir. John Huckert, DP. John Matkowsky, Sgt. Dennis R. Herrera and Sgt. Mitchell Grobeson, LAPD (ret.) Deleted and Extended Scenes with Commentary by Dir. John Huckert Film Festival Q&As with Mitch Grobeson, John Huckert and Noel Palomaria Audition Tapes Widescreen Format Scene Selection New 35mm Digital Transfer Dolby Digital Sound Previews & MORE


Customer Reviews


5 stars Cabinet, closet or cupboard, C.C.C. ?
This is a film that goes deeper than it says and that hurts our consciousness a lot. The film shows what anti-gay feelings can lead human beings to. They first lead a lot of men to marry and then hide in some cupboard hoping the marriage will be enough to cover up reality. This hurts the wife and of course the kids who cannot accept that reality: a man is not only attracted by women. They then lead cops to some awful carelessness and even criminal sloppiness as soon as some homosexual is concerned: gay men have only one future in their minds, to die for their crime, only one crime, gay sex. Then they lead some people to get involved and even systematically active in the perspective of serial killing with a reasoning that can vary a lot but that always come back to the idea that serial killing is more or less good for the victims that are saved from their trashy lives, from their lives that are trashed by their being gay. The film tries to capture the horror of these murders from inside the mind of the serial killer, and from inside the mind of the young cop who has not come out of the cupboard yet and is confronted to the serial killer courting him, including with his murders, then to the hostility of his fellow cops when he comes out to enable the investigation to move on, and finally to the guilt he feels in himself as for his gayness, as for his attraction for the serial killer, as for the victims of this killer who he believes his following his love and his desire for him encouraged into performing more killings, proving himself through the deaths he stages and executes. Then what is left after the film? Not much except that it has revealed the hatred "normal" people and cops feel and express against gay men, it has revealed that this hatred will survive any kind of horror though no explanation is provided, and it stages up at the end the come back of the killer who was killed on the scene of his crimes, and it can start all over again. And that is the pessimistic lesson of the film. There is no hope. It will always be with us. It will always haunt us. It will always possess us. What? Our hatred for non-standard sexual behaviors.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines


3 stars Gets a "C" for effort
About twenty-seven minutes into this film, and after several exchanged glances of rolling our eyes at each other, my roommate said, "This is the worst movie I've ever seen." And so we went on to something else, and while I didn't think it was the *worst* movie I'd seen, it certainly was swirling around the bottom of the barrel. It worked fairly well as a police procedural - better than *some* larger budgeted movies, television, or cable shows - but the dialogue written to carry the film sounded like a training video, rendering this positive null.

The next day I went back to the movie. There was only an hour left, so I thought I would see it through to the end. Everything was still sub par, but I noticed one thing. This was an earnest attempt to make a good movie. And that set it apart from others that might fall into the category of a B (or F) movie where actors toss out lines to get a buck, and the directors can the film to get their name listed. That wasn't happening here. It was apparent to me that everyone involved really wanted it to work. Everyone was giving their all.

However, an earnest attempt doesn't make a good film, and it still had the same problems. Logic was chief amongst these. For example, a detective, regardless of how new he is to the badge, would never - unless he was looking for a reason to be kicked off the force - agree to meet a potential witness at a gay bar based on a ten second phone call received in the middle of the night. Especially when the detective in question isn't "out". That phone call has red flags all over it. Also, a killer would never - unless they were looking to be caught - use a wash-it-yourself car wash to clean themselves and their clothes of blood from a fresh kill in broad daylight. I mean, seriously. And cops, when pulling someone over who doesn't have plates, proper registration or ID, generally wouldn't ignore a bleeding, obviously drugged out kid in the passenger seat who is mouthing "Help Me" unless they themselves were intoxicated or dumb.

Yet I saw merit. Unlike typical low-budget B films, there were themes present, mainly how a police officer deals with being outed, and the concept of expendable life. But while I appreciated the thematic content, the manner in which it was dealt was unsatisfying. I didn't learn anything new about what it's like to be outed as a cop that I haven't from watching Law & Order or movies that have dealt with the outing of military personnel. (Soldier's Girl comes immediately to mind as a 5-star example.) Some of his fellow cops harassed him, prancing around like, well, fairies, and they beat him to a bloody pulp while their Captain watched from his car with a disapproving look on his face. That perhaps said the most: the Captain wouldn't have anything to do with it.

The serial killer himself isn't a particularly scary guy, but he is probably the best acted character. That is, until the end when they unwisely have him laugh like a raving lunatic (what is it with bad guys laughing at the end of books and movies...I wish that authors and filmmakers would get it into their heads that a laughing villain is not a scary one). The problem I had with the serial killer is that we don't get a motive for him until the very end, and he gives that motive to us. I think it would have made for a more interesting film if his motive had been discovered, or deduced. If he left fingerprints somewhere, they could have done a background check, found that he was ... whatever ... and started to put together a profile. But they didn't have much of a profile, which in itself was odd.

My intention was to give this a one-star review. Then I watched some of the Extras, and let my emotion get the better of me. One of the actors in the film was also a technical advisor, an LA detective. He introduced the film at a screening, and explained that the film was made without a budget, that everyone donated their time and even producers did double or triple duty. When they were finished filming, they had trouble getting it printed because of the gay content. (Which, by the way, is not at all graphic. It's just there.) This detective emphasized how much of the filmmakers hearts went into the film, and that never before had a movie addressed coming out as a cop (I don't know if that's true) and especially the concept of expendable life. That gays or lesbians, if killed, are collateral damage. A coroner had a term for it that escapes me - it was abbreviated C.C. If anyone remembers, put it up as a comment?

Having myself felt that there was an earnest attempt to make a good movie, and then to hear that 7 credit cards financed the making of the film and the rest of the back story, I couldn't help but appreciate their effort more. They truly started with nothing. Not bad for starting with nothing and a trusty Visa.

2½ stars, rounded up to 3 for an earnest attempt.


3 stars tough times for hustlers
i toyed with the idea of being a hustler but reneged after seeing this. if you like seeing nekked twinks snuffed & porked, this movie's for you (the red room scene is especially hot). noirish atmospherics, moody soundtrack. this was pretty good save for the bad acting & excessive use of the F word for no apparent effect.


5 stars Very good film!!!
This film had me on the edge of my seat the night that I watched it. It is a great detective story and murder mystery which is gay based. It is unusual in it's own genre and very enjoyable. There is also a good twist in the end of the movie. Highly recommended to anyone that likes a good murder mystery that is also a gay movie.


1 stars Uh, Really not good
No Offense, but just because a movie is gay themed does not make it good or worthwhile anymore. The acting is atrocious - really and it looks really cheap. A couple of good nude/sex scenes, but really an exploitative piece of crap. This makes Cruising look tame and masterful.


  





Hosted by SeekDotNet

Copyright 2003-2006 ClaudesPlace.com

Vote for this site at Freedom Forum