Powerful

Excellent but underrated film

Best movie ever!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

re of the Moon... The Hook Up Generation Claire of the Moon: 2 out of 10: This is why women's studies majors shouldn't be allowed to write and direct films. Of course woman's studies does not actually study all woman as woman have opinions and accomplishments as varied as men. Woman's studies courses as pointed out by Professors Dapne Patai and Noretta Koertgein 'Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies' are more interested in "the political mission of training feminist cadres to override educational concerns. The strategies of faculty members in these programs have included policing insensitive language, championing research methods deemed congenial to women (such as qualitative over quantitative methods), and conducting classes as if they were therapy sessions." Woman's studies is an exercise in a particular group-think that attacks freedom as a whole and the freedom of woman in particular. Claire of the Moon is full of long anti-woman diatribes basically claiming straight woman are undermining the feminist movement (this is assuming there are any straight feminists left mind you). The movie was directed by a woman, so of course so this anti-woman point of view is okay. This is the Precious rule where as long as you are a member of a group you can make a film that drags out every horrible stereotype about said group and will be praised for it. Now had the exact same film had been written and directed by a straight white male, people would have burned the theater down.This politically correct nonsense really should not effect the enjoyment of a film as one can be pro nuclear power and still enjoy Godzilla as an example. Claire of the Moon however has much bigger problems than its absolutist point of view.Claire of the Moon's plot consists of two woman who become roommates at an all woman writer's retreat (one would think a writer's retreat would have individual rooms. This however is never examined.) Our titular protagonist Claire Jabrowski (Trisha Todd) is a drunk woman (Think Sherrybaby) who is sloppy, sleeps with creepy men at the drop of a hat and passes for a writer in the way that Tara Reid is convincing as a brainy anthropologist in Alone in the Dark. Playing Felix to Todd's Oscar is Karen Trumbo who plays a successful lesbian writer who is very butch and a neat freak. They hate each other on sight so it's going to be a long tedious ride before the inevitable hook-up sex.Claire of The Moon tells this story in the form of three films mashed together: A haranguing lecture, A romantic novel and a soft core porn film.The haranguing lecture is easily the worst part. The actresses are all amateur and read their overwrought screeds with a talent that varies from awful, to god awful, to good God make it stop I will join your cult and renounce my evil heterosexual ways awful. The romance novel bits consist of endless shots of sunsets and driftwood on various Oregon beaches while a piano tinkers in the background. You remember how seemingly every movie in the early seventies would stop the story outright and go all soft focus while a folk song played in your ears? Claire of the Moon is kind of like that but without the warbling.The soft-core sex is what hopefully attracts both enlightened females and straight males to the movie. (I say hopefully because if you came for the acting or the story you are in for a world of hurt.) Our hook up sex partners (sorry romantic leads) are as stated above Trisha Todd who never made a another movie, teaches drama at Grant High in Portland, looks a little like Laura Dern, she is easily the best actress of the bunch, and whose nudity is the sole reason the film wasn't rated one out of 10. The other main lead Karen Trumbo has found some roles since Claire, she looks a little like Sigourney Weaver if Sigourney had a breast reduction and a little boy's haircut, and she convincingly plays a butch lesbian.The sex scene comes in the last ten minutes of the film and it is decent as these things go (though it certainly not worth watching the rest of the film for). It also has the great advantage however of having no dialog, and is more enjoyable if you don't know the characters. In other words this is the reason God created the fast forward button.

A badly written, tacky script. The lowest of low production values. Acting so wooden it defies belief. An utter absence of charm, intelligence or ability at every level. This film is excruciatingly bad, and yet it has been described as 'a lesbian classic' for the sole reason that it was made by, for and about lesbians. Aaarrgh! This film should be seen by every lesbian just once, to illustrate the terrible dangers of low self esteem and isolationism. Hopefully, we'll reach the point where we can look back and laugh at it without cringing, but that day has not yet arrived.A symbol of gay self-oppression. Should be ritually burned in large piles on Stonewall Day. 0/10

Forget the lesbian story line. This movie works and is interesting because the two main characters, who at first are repelled by each other, have the maturity, strength and intelligence to stick it out and probe deeper into each others personalities. Certain aspects of each other they will continue to dislike but are able to reach a place of understanding and even intimacy. That's the beauty of what transpires in this film. Watching this process take place, handled with intelligent dialogue, is what makes the movie intriguing.It's always refreshing to see a low budget film pull it off, proving once again millions of dollars are not necessary to make a captivating film. A good story and writing are and this film has it. I have to say the blatant stereotyping of a couple of the supporting characters really distracted from the overall effectiveness of this film.Still a 7/10.

With the continual release of GOOD lesbian films, it confuses me why this film is still so highly recommended and touted as a "lesbian classic." To put it bluntly, this movie is terrible in every way. The story line is contrived, the sound is bad, the direction is flat and the characters are unrealistic and unlikeable. Not to mention the film is terribly dated. Although it was released in 1992, it feels more like a film that was made in 1985. Although I am all about lesbian movies, I can not comprehend this addiction to bad film. Try something good: Better Than Chocolate, Fire, or But I'm A Cheerleader are worlds better than Claire of the Moon could ever pretend to be.