Mark Hogencamp is an amazing person. He has overcome so many obstacles and brings much joy into the lives of those who know him. I am so proud of you Hogie!!! And a big shout out to Jeff for taking his time to get to know and film Mark. I can't wait to see this movie. Hogie is a true artist!
XOXO ~ GI Julie
Dream for a while...of the things that make you smile ~ RJD
I saw this film today. It was fantastic! I can only hope to see it again sometime soon.
"When did the future change from being a promise to a threat?"
I saw this film tonight and I was deeply touched and intrigued. What an amazing and brilliant man. He's a true inspiration.
shareOf all the scenes in all the movies this year, nothing has slapped a goddam ear-to-ear grin on my face like hearing that Mark walked the toy jeep 160 miles (or something like that) so the tires wouldn't have that new look to them. But yes, beyond that it was a fantastic movie about a fantastic individual, definitely one of the year's best.
-Who do you think you're trying to fool?-
Agreed. Just saw this at the Lightbox in Toronto and was utterly engrossed, fascinated and, finally, uplifted by it. What an inspiring tale about one of the most unique individuals ever caught on film.
shareWhen I didn't think the movie could impress me anymore, something else would happen that would make my jaw drop. What an incredible story!
shareMarwencol Blu-ray will be out on Apr 12, 2011.
Director Jeff Malmberg has done a beautiful job sharing Mark's gifts with the world.
[deleted]
I found out about this from the Spirit Awards show and couldn't wait for it to come out. What a treasure this man is! I hope Mark finds the love he so truly deserves. Great documentary.
share[deleted]
....so are you saying you think he deserved the beating? You're an idiot. If they had said that at the beginning, I still would have watched the movie and felt he didn't deserve that, but in some way this *is* his second life now, as a brand new person.
No matter what you say, Marwencol is art. It is amazing and the way he sets up his shots is so organic. I don't know if the town is all that great for him psychologically because it is a bit of a crutch.
Did you also miss the part where he said that he couldn't afford therapy? What are you going to pay for it for him? No? I didn't think so.
[deleted]
You don't understand that the filmmaker learned of the cross dressing midway through the making of the film, because you seem to only want to see what you want to see. Example: there is no homosexuality to defend in this film. It looks like you are the one with the agenda. I hope you can afford some basic therapy for hateful self. Thanks!
share[deleted]
You are absolutely incorrect. This film took four years and the twist only became apparent midway.
You stated the film carried a homosexual agenda and now you want to wiggle out of it. You have no clue as to what you are talking about you only apply what you want to anything. You probably say that homosexuality is a choice even though every single homosexual will tell you are wrong. But you think you know better. Who's the effing fascist now? Who's the hog now? You a punkassbitch.
critics rate this film 100% positive on rottentomatoes, so I guess maybe some of us feel there is a hell of a subject for this film. I'd love to see a follow up. The world doesn't revolve around you.
bluesdoctor: "Does this movie have a hidden a agenda, the defence of homosexuality?"
bluesdoctor: "No one said there is homosexuality to defend. But it is inarguable that Hog has not come to terms with his own homosexuality and that he projects his troubled internal conflicts about it unto his diorama."
Live with your own bull. The closet is so painful, I imagine. You are a monster.
[deleted]
Many cross dressers are straight. It's pretty apparent that Mark is a straight man and does not suffer from the pseudo-medical "femininity" crisis conservative homophobes like to talk about. He was a cross-dresser before his attack and still is one after. You're trying to read too much of a Christian homophobe narrative into this. His father is irrelevant and the dolls are dolls he just found that he thinks resembles people. He is damaged because several men kicked his head around, not because he has sexuality issues. Plenty of healthy people have foot fetishes and cross-dressing fetishes.
share[deleted]
Not one person in or commenting on this film has ever contended that Mark Hogencamp is normal. He is obviously brain damaged and suffering from PTSD, but those (and the doll play) are a direct result of the savage beating, not a function of his kinkiness. You have got to be trolling.
share[deleted]
No, probably they're more likely to be trolling the imdb forums. Do you know so many men with brain damage that you can make any generalizations about them?
shareAre you kidding me? Dishonest?? What, so you require all the significant information up front and THEN you can finish the film? You don't think anyone is capable of building sympathy for a character after learning they cross-dress right off the bat? I didn't realize the format of the documentary was to be aimed toward you.
I don't think their intent was to deceive the viewer, but to set up the film in such a way as to really leave a mark on their audience the best they can while filling in pieces along the way. Tons of movies wait until the very end to fill in the pieces of the puzzle/story or add that "wow-factor" (and it's not like they threw it all in at once, they hinted at it with his closet full of shoes about exactly mid-way).
His alter-ego side story is explained and shown with stills of the dolls throughout the entire film. If I remember correctly, it ends with a bunch of SS guys beating on him and then the witch lady shows up and saves him and says something like, "Oh, my love, why would anyone do such a thing to you?" which serves as a perfect segway into the full explanation and motive behind the real-life attack (which, if completely explained in the beginning, might not be as grasping as it was near the end). I think they were just trying to set it up in an interesting way and because you didn't get all the important info. right away, and because it happens to be a controversial subject like cross-dressing, you're taking it personally.
I agree with you on the proper therapy though. My heart goes out to this guy and I wish he could afford to get some professional help. But again, I think you're completely overreacting. I don't know about anyone else, but if a film dumps all the vital details on me in the beginning and I'm left with no more mystery and there's nothing left to learn... then it's typically pretty boring to watch play out.
[deleted]
I see what you're saying, but I don't think a film (be it a regular movie or a documentary or whatever) needs to be hardcore suspenseful to play with the order in which they reveal things if it's going to have a more dramatic effect in doing so. I would agree with you if I felt it didn't add to the entire experience, but I honestly think it was perfectly placed, so we'll have to agree to disagree I guess. Who cares if they backtrack and add onto something they already discussed if saving this information for later is going to have a stronger effect on perhaps a large majority of the viewers? Not all, but many. I dunno.
Regardless, I just checked up on this guy's blog and it seems he's staying active and updating his site every couple of days with new stuff, so I hope this is a sign that he's doing well. Also, hopefully his recent success has allowed him to be able to afford some more professional help because god, it would do him some good. What a terrible thing to have happen, poor guy.
[deleted]
Who said it is inarguable? You did. You think you write the rules but you are just another fascist. "A common enough device." Give me a break, that is a human being. You aren't.
shareUm, you do know that not all crossdressers are gay, right? The majority are heterosexual men who have a fetish for women's clothing.
share[deleted]
Bluesdoctor,
I actually made an account to address this issue. Having a fetish does not = homosexuality in any way shape or form. Both heterosexual and homosexual men have fetishes.
Mark's fetishes are clearly cat fighting and women's clothing. Transvestic fetishism, the paraphilia of being turned on by wearing clothes associated with the opposite gender, is the most likely case for what Mark has. This is a paraphilia found in heterosexual men. Think about it...most men are turned on when a woman wears a particular article of clothing. Some men take it to more of an extreme where the piece of clothing is more of a turn on than the girl...he may only be able to find a woman attractive if she is wearing rubber, or boots, or whatever. Men with transvestic fetishism are simply more extreme and focus on the piece of clothing so much that wearing it becomes the thrill...they no longer need the woman to be turned on. But at it's core it is being turned on by a feminine aspect of the spectrum and is virtually exclusively for heterosexual men and women (and I only say virtually because you can never be 100% sure, but I'd be shocked if a gay man or woman would be able to be that turned on by something so heavily associated with the other gender).
If Mark had homeovestism, which IS present in homosexuals, he would be turned on by wearing a piece of clothing that is very symbolically male (ie work boots, a fireman outfit, baggy jeans, etc). But he is clearly turned on by things that represent the female edge of the spectrum. That combined with the neverending display of female sexuality he uses with the dolls (come on, the guy is rubbing a Barbie's breasts half the time), the fact that his emotions develop from crushes on girls, the fact he is "married" to a female doll, the lack of any even subtle sexuality for the male dolls besides ravaging the girl dolls, etc., the man is clearly heterosexual.
I'm not arguing against your opinion of the film, but please note that there is a vital difference between a heterosexual man with a fetish and a homosexual. Gay "drag queens" do not get a sexual thrill from wearing woman's clothing, straight men who like to wear women's clothing do.
[deleted]
Jesus Christ this is making me furious. NO. NO NO NO. You have literally no idea what you are talking about. Your whole post defies everything in the published scientific literature on the topic. Everything.
First of all, transvestic fetishism has no correlation to Gender Identity Disorder, and the overwhelming majority of men who have it indicate no discomfort with their gender.
Second, it is not a grey zone between heterosexuality and homosexuality. It is so far from "outright homosexuality" I cannot even begin. Homosexual men a) do not feel like a woman, that is somebody who is transgender or has gender identity disorder, and b) are not turned on by anything remotely feminine. And furthermore, it is clear Mark did not have any sort of Gender Identity Disorder. People who have gender identity disorder do not sexualize their "true" gender like Mark did, they put on women's shoes and feel at home instead of horny.
A person who wants to *beep* women, as he clearly did given that he had several female relationships prior to his coma and spent the majority of his time post-coma having crushes on women, fondling Barbie breasts, using dolls to have sex and having his dolls have fake cat fights and rip off each others tops, does not suddenly become more homosexual if women's clothing turns him on. He becomes more homosexual if he starts having sexual feelings for men, or if he had a fetish that was tied into masculinity (like I said earlier, if he was turned on by men's shoes). Like the scientific literature shows, men who are turned on by wearing women's clothing are not any more likely to think they are really a woman than any other man.
Men adopting female roles is NOT a "very homosexual thing to do" and is not a "common homosexual practice". In the cases it IS such as a drag show, which is participated in by a relatively tiny portion of the gay community, it is cultural based on a long history of essentially saying "*beep* you" to people BECAUSE of people like you who associate femininity with homosexuality.
I'm glad you have some inside knowledge from a homosexual cousin of a very close friend of yours, but as a homosexual myself I'm pretty sure I have a little bit more intimate knowledge of all this. Associating "weird" and "kinky" acts with homosexuality just furthers the untrue and ridiculous statements that homosexuality is this abominable and strange act that does not occur in nature (au contraire, virtually every complex organism involves in it) and that heterosexuality is this vanilla, penis in vagina thing. News flash: most heterosexual men have kinky fetishes, and wearing woman's clothing is one of them.
[deleted]
Hat's off to jwsteele for being smart and right. As BS has been rightly called on the narrow-minded ignoramus, attention may be turned back to the film.
I appreciate the skill with which the film shares Mark's creative approach to dealing with his trauma. We get a keen sense of the world he has created with his diorama. The sensitivity and humanity of the filmmaker makes for a strong documentary that never seeks to sensationalize its subject nor reduce him to a "type." Very well done.
Your 'homo sexual' cousin wears womens clothes because he is A FEMALE IMPERSONATA!
And fixation on trauma..Have you heard of PTS? Plus it wasn't just mental trauma he suffered....he was brain damaged...or did you miss that part?
How is the film deceiving? A documentary like any film tells a story. For the story to be interesting its needs to keep you in suspense, throw in surprises.
And the introduction of the fact he likes to wear womens clothes comes logically into the story.First he introduces his fantasy world to close friends, then the documentary makers, then the public at the gallery. As he progresses through his recovery he gradually reveals more of himself to others.
As for the violence. There are countless war films and documentaries, its one of the biggest genres. Are you worried about all artists that represent war or just ones who like to wear womens shoes?! Just the ones who you think are in the closet?!
You must not watch many documentaries then, because there is a huge variety of ways documentaries present information and many different sub-genres of documentary filmmaking. Next thing you're gonna tell me how dishonest Land Without Bread is and how it's just a bunch of pathetic starving people and not worth anyone's time.
share[deleted]
Troll, straight up, no foam.
shareYou cannot be that ignorant. Did you watch the commentary? Todd LIppy confirmed the timeline. You speak as though you have information, but it's just in your mind. Research next time, you just embarrass yourself. You are the incompetent one, you have no information to impart.
share[deleted]
Hola.
I just read this thread and haven't posted in years. I finished the film about thirty minutes ago and felt compelled to comment on this discussion.
Reading BluesDoctor's posts, I can't help but feel like he felt "tricked" in to enjoying the film only to find disdain for the protagonist's sexual orientation (or ambiguity). I also note that he has general hatred or frustration with the main character, basically tearing everything he does to shreads.
Yes, we understand the guy has mental problems homeboy. If you remember, he got the crap kicked out of him and has severe brain damage. Yes, Blues, we get it that he is emotionally fragile, that his diorama serves to remove him from reality. We get it. Seriously.
The difference between yourself and myself is that you do not have a sense of empathy for the individual, rather, you'd feel more accomplished finding the problems with the individual and making a case for why he is not "relevant" or interesting. Like somehow the fact that he is mentally handicapped and embarrasses himself in public makes him less of a human being and thus, not worth your breath. Do you spit on handicapped people because they can't think like you when you're walking around? There's some retards at the elementary school down the street that have social problems - maybe you can go pep them up by telling them they're worthless in their conversational skills.
You say his art is not art - by that definition Van Gogh is not art either as his emotional wellbeing was essentially insanity to say the least. Art comes from different perceptions - if that means that this perception is a ambiguous, fragile, cross dressing homosexual, then terrific.
If only I could be a saavy intellectual like you Blues! Smooches. I'm a handsome 27 year old straight male but lets get together and make out on the couch. Maybe we'll learn some things about each other.
[deleted]
It's hard to feel empathy for someone who is as arrogant & intolerant as you.
shareCould Mark benefit from some real clinical psychological help? Absolutely. Is the city of Marwencol the emotional and psychlogical "crutch" of a man who is living with PTSD, as well as an amazing artistic endeavor? Yes indeed. But...
Mark was beaten because 5 animals at a bar heard him at the bar talking about being a crossdresser and decided to scamble his brains. In my eyes Mark was beaten for NO REASON other than alchohol and testosterone fueled rage on the part of his attackers. Maybe that is why the director doesn't mention it right away. I feel like maybe Mark was too nervous/intimidated to bring up his lifestyle to the director, and maybe it wasnt revealed until later in the making of the movie.
Maybe I'm wrong, but if you're trying to say that the director delayed revealing that Mark was a crossdresser to retain sympathy from the average viewer, its tantamount to saying that you feel he did something to deserve the beating and that we all feel the same way. This is ignorance, bluesdoctor. I thought the guy who does nothing but bash Rosario Dawson on here was an idiot but you just took the crown.
[deleted]
I know people who liked "Marwencol" say it stuck with them for a long time after they saw it, but apparently the haters feel the same way, only more so.
We really should thank bluesdoctor for paying this movie the huge, if backhanded, compliment of obsessing over it for months after seeing it. Who knew the trauma of being duped into relating to a person who turns out to have some unusual clothing preferences (oh, the horror!) could be so severe? Maybe poor blues should seek therapy to deal with this shattering experience.
[deleted]
And yet, you can't resist getting the last word in.
Do you realize you've posted more to this message board than anyone else here? It's like you're so desperate to convince others that this (yes, tiny) movie is not worthy of their attention, you can't stop thinking about it. Seriously, what's it to you?
[deleted]
You do certainly misunderstand the filmmakers when you accuse them of deceiving their audience. They did not see him being a crossdresser as a defect of character, not as something of great relevance to his case.
You speak of people who "probably find something of themselves in the twisted Hogancamp", and I would like to add that anyone who does not find something of themselves in a human being so peaceful, natural and courageous should ask themselves what good their life really is.
Two criticisms have been levelled against the film and, indeed, the person. Firstly, the violent nature of his scenarios. In case you missed it: not only did he recreate his fatal night through the scenario in the church, but he recontextualised it in the execution of the Nazi character. That, too, was an alter ego of himself, one that he needed to be rid of in his mind.
Hogancamp's scenarios are escapism, but they are an outlet for emotions that are natural. If you had been in his position, certainly you would wish to enact revenge on those that did you harm. No matter who you are, believe me - somewhere in the world and indeed the USA, there is a place where and people who would do this to you. Do not think that you are in any way better than this man or any other because of your sexual preference.
Secondly, the cross-dressing thing. I pretty much addressed that just now. The thing you seem to miss however is that they address a much greater problem with his pre-attack persona at the beginning of the film: his alcoholism. Why do you think that liking to dress the other gender's clothes is worse than poisoning yourself and destroying other people's lives? One of these things does no harm. It is a thing he does for himself; whereas the latter one of these examples affected the people around him in a bad way.
In a way, Marwencol is the same. If you feel personally insulted by this man's fantasy - which, it is no secret, he built for himself - more than you do by the violent events that led to him needing this therapy in the first place, you yourself might want to consider reflecting on who the greater menace to society is. A man and his dolls, or a person without respect and tolerance towards their fellow beings.
[deleted]
I agree that the persistence of this discussion says something the personal issues of the posters. Particularly yours, bluesdoctor, since you are by far the most persistent and prolific poster here.
You've been told several times before that you analysis is simply wrong on a factual level, but I'll try one more time...
Hogancamp did not start "playing with dolls" because he knew he had been attacked for being a cross-dresser. He didn't know what provoked the attack until couple of years into the making of the film, when the filmmakers turned up the audio tape of one of his attacker's statement to the police, which we hear in the film. The following scene shows Hogancamp reacting to this new knowledge. (A deleted scene on the DVD, obviously filmed earlier, shows him talking about not knowing what provoke the attack.) So, Hogancamp had been working on his town of Marwencol ("playing with dolls" as you put it) for a good five years before he found out what provoked the attack.
In fact, he played with "dolls" -- also known as scale-model figures -- before the attack, although this was mentioned only briefly and indirectly in the film. From what I've read elsewhere, before the attack he worked mainly in 1:35 scale, but after the attack he didn't have the coordination to work on such a small scale. Since he could no longer draw (or play guitar), either, he took up 1:6 scale modelling as his primary artistic outlet and all-purpose self-therapy. Hence, the movie.
And guess what? Loads of other people like working with these 1:6 scale figures, too. From what I've gathered, this pastime attracts mostly men -- mostly slightly nerdy, gearhead-type guys, often with ties to the military, as military figures are a major genre. (All the above seems like a fair description of Hogancamp, before and after the attack, btw.) The military angle aside, picture the kind of guys that might be into model trains, or ham radio, or woodworking, for that matter. I don't get the impression that many of them are cross-dressers or have gender-identity issues. And, yes, some do use Barbie dolls as their female figures, because the scale is right and they're a lot cheaper than the higher-end, more-articulated dolls. Which is probably he same reason Hogancamp used them, along with the better-quality dolls he acquired later.
When you say Hogancamp projects himself onto female Barbie dolls, that's just flat-out, factually wrong. He projects himself onto a MALE doll that he named after himself. He uses Barbies and other female dolls to represent WOMEN, often women he's been in love with or had crushes on in real life -- his ex-wife, a married neighbor, a co-worker -- as well as some purely fictional female characters he invented. Since it's already been explained to you at length that an interest in wearing women's clothes does not necessarily mean a man is homosexual or has gender-identity issues, I doubt anything I say will convince you of it. But suffice it to say that if Hogancamp has gender-identity issues, the inner female identity he's struggling with is, by all evidence, a total lesbian. A lesbian who digs straight girls, at that.
Now, I think reasonable people might debate whether it's truly healthy for a grown man to invest his romantic and sexual desires onto 12-inch plastic female dolls (although, as it happens, that's exactly what the original predecessor of the Barbie doll was intended for; look up "Bild Lilli" some time), even if he has suffered a disabling brain injury. But the idea that Hogancamp is somehow "sick" because he needs to "accept his own identity" (as what?) is just something you pulled out of your own orifice. That's your damage, bluesdoctor, not Hogancamp's, not the filmmakers', not anybody else's here -- just yours.
Finally, the film shows Hogancamp suffers and is crippled on account of having been the victim of a violent crime from which he sustained a fairly serious traumatic brain injury, plus a case of PTSD. Why you think otherwise is a mystery to me. But, like I said, you clearly have some issues you need to work through. I suggest you do that elsewhere.
[deleted]
Talk about striking a nerve! Looks like I hit a raw one, here.
You know, bluesdoctor, when I suggested you needed therapy before, I was really just making fun of you. But now you're coming off as genuinely unbalanced (as in chemically). Maybe it's time to ask a real doctor to adjust your dosage.
It's embarrassing to have to explain this to you, but the movie you've been railing against for nearly a year is a documentary. That means the people in it are real. Mark Hogancamp is a real person with an existence outside the 83 minutes of this movie. Therefore, it is possible to know factual things about him that do not appear in the movie.
I'm sorry if some of these facts put a dent in your precious misinterpretation of the film and misapprehension Hogancamp himself. Reality is a bitch sometimes.
To wit:
a.) According to the makers of the film, neither they nor Hogancamp knew what provoked the attack agianst him until well into the making of the film, which was years after he started working on his town of Marwencol. You might get this from the film itself, but you probably have to already know it to pick up on it.
b.) Hogancamp did indeed "play with dolls" prior the attack. In fact, he was a well-regarded scale-modeller, at least locally, amongst people who paid attention to that sort of thing. This was alluded to a couple of times in the movie, but you had to be quick to pick up on it.
c.) I guess you are trying to say Hogancamp projects himself on all his female characters, even though most of them represent specific women in his real life. By that logical, he also projects himself on all his male characters as well. You could say that about anybody who creates any kind of stories with characters. So what? As far is who gets to put a hurt on the SS: Sometimes it's female characters, sometimes it's male characters, and sometimes it's the Hogancamp character himself. As Hogancamp's real-life friend says in the movie, there's always a lot going on in Marwencol. The filmmakers simply included Marwencol stories that resonated best with the real-life story they are telling. For example, in real life, Hogancamp's life was in fact saved by a woman: a female good samartian driving by saw him where his attackers had left him to die, stopped, and called 911. In the movie, when he is talking about the story in which the green-haired witch character roars up in her time machine and saves his alter ego from the Nazis, he says something like, "This is like how I imagine it happened in real life." A deleted scene on the DVD connects the dots. So there's that reality thing again. A harsh mistress, I know.
d.) Why would you try to claim Hogancamp isn't part of the community of 1:6-scale hobbyist? How would you know? You didn't even know there was such a thing until I told you about it, five minutes before you typed that. The fact is, he is well-known, well-liked, as well-respected in that community, and has been ever since his work appeared in Esopus magazine is 2005, the same article that attracted the filmmaker's interest. Want proof? Look no further than the first post on this theard. Unless I'm mistaken, "LadyJewell" is one half of the husband-and-wife team who run a big website devoted to 1:6-scale modelling, mainly military figures. She certainly seems very fond of Hogancamp. He has plenty of other supportive friends and fans who frequent that website. If this is "excruciating isolation", we should all be so "isolated".
And that was before the movie came out. Since then, the number of his admirers has exploded. Now people sign up on a waiting list to buy his art. They send him 1:6-scale dolls, props, and vehicles, or donate cash to the hobby shop where he gets his supplies. Long lost friends have gotten in touch. Female fans post mash notes to his website and Facebook page. And you know what else? He seems really happy and at ease with it all.
So, no, I don't pity Hogancamp at all, despite what he's been through. I admire him, repsect him, and feel happy for him. Who wouldn't, really?
[deleted]
So long, troll. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
shareBluesdoctor: "The internet is overflowing with types like you, those incapable of independent critical thinking and deeply resentful of anyone who is."
Umm, isn't that the point of this argument? That people have independent critical thoughts about your theory and you are deeply resentful because nobody is agreeing with you?
If you weren't able to enjoy this film, I pity you, if you don't find Mark an artist, I kind of think you're an idiot. I don't understand why it matters so much to reveal instantly that he's a cross dresser, it's not dishonest, it's film making.
Great film, I wish there was a little more to it in the end other than a brief observation, but I guess you can only work with what you've got. Very interesting subject.
this film made me cry, what a great documentary.
ignore the BS people being ignorant, they are the ones with problems.
Do what you can in life, sometimes bad things happen, and this man isn't exactly sane, but who is in this world full of people that beat up transvestites into comas...
loved the film, will recommend it to my trans friend, really touched me.
ignore the BS people being ignorant, they are the ones with problems