In & Out (1997) 4K UHD

[WonkaBedknobs83]

Bob Newhart in 4k is a cause for celebration. Debbie Reynolds, too, and if they're doing her movies, may we please have Charlotte's Web in 4k with dual aspect ratios?

Joan Cusack's Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actress was to make up for the fact that they couldn't bring themselves to nominate her for Addams Family Values. She was at least as good there as here, and Paul Rudnick knew it, which is why this is a mini-reunion for that. However, considering that was the year Anna Paquin got the award for The Piano, that would not have been good PR to beat a little girl for an Oscar even though Tommy Lee Jones won for another adaptation of a 1960s TV show, The Fugitive.

Originally Posted by PowellPressburger

I recall not liking it much, it came across as a gay themed film to make straight people feel comfortable, and thus it felt false.

I liked it better than the movie whose (IMO undeserved) Oscar win actually inspired it, and this from the guy who saw Forrest Gump six times in theatres, which is why I don't buy the "creative accounting" excuses Paramount invoked when the author of the book wanted his share of that presumably very profitable box of chocolates. Even the in-universe fake movie looked better than the real deal. It's also funny because Kevin Kline won an Oscar for A Fish Called Wanda the same year Tom Hanks lost one for Big. The ending was what it was: a goof on Spartacus in a movie that couldn't have been made at all in 1960, at least not in the US.

[Grinningcat_o3]

Of all the movies in the world… We bring you… In & Out

[WonkaBedknobs83]

Since 90s comedies are in season, I'll also have the OG Good Burger in 4k.

Originally Posted by Losey

Saw it in theatre at the time; just turned 19. Kevin Kline and Tom Selleck sharing a long, funny and sweet kiss in a star-studded Hollywood movie: it warmed my heart, made me smile, gave me hope. Remember, only a few years earlier, Tom Hanks and Antonio Banderas didn’t even share a quick kiss in Philadelphia despite playing longtime loving partners. In & Out was important also because it was nice, for once, to have a main gay character who’s not dying, who’s not tragic (independant cinema at the time, even with great films, knew nothing else). Again, the breeziness of Paul Rudnick’s screenplay was welcome. Also, I was out at the time, but I’m sure many guys could relate to a main character who’s both in the closet and in denial. My only real problem with the film is its somewhat uneven pacing. I will certainly buy.

Well-said, and I was 14 at the time, a drama student, and not out yet, so this film was at least somewhat beneficial in that regard as by next year, that would change. You also articulated one of my biggest problems out of so, So, SO many with the movie that inspired this one. It traded anything suggesting intimacy between them for the same tired stereotypes about divas and voguing. Between that and the movie Paul Rudnick wrote in 1993, I'll take my chances at Camp Chippewa. The keyword is camp. But the spoof here has less in common with that and more with the TV movies of the era. Based on that, it would have worked equally well as the Emmys, but the days when TV had eclipsed movies in hype and prestige were just around the corner. In 1997, the year of King of the Hill, movies were still the king of the hill in Hollywood.

Even if one may feel individual jokes are too, well, 90s, the overall message of the movie is sound and even more necessary now. There's nothing unmanly about liking musicals, disco, or men. Showing more than what they showed would likely cost them their PG-13 rating. Even that was a bellwether of progress if it proved open homosexuality (minus the naughty bits) didn't automatically make a film rated R. Tom Selleck should have known the drill by that point if not long before since he started his acting career in a little movie called Myra Breckinridge, whose cast members also ended up populating G- and PG-rated movie musicals in the ensuing years and by the time he was Magnum PI. Selleck's character here deconstructs a lot of the Magnum mythos simply by being Gay without conforming to those same Gay stereotypes the film's non-Gay characters assume are automatically part and parcel with same-sex attraction. Without him, there is no movie. And quite frankly, he owed us after participating in that ripoff of that Queen Latifah sitcom. She, too, went from in to out long after that.

[Pieter V]

Available Date : 07/23/2024

https://kinolorber.com/product/in-out-4kuhd

[that1guystudios]

Originally Posted by Pieter V

Available Date : 07/23/2024

https://kinolorber.com/product/in-out-4kuhd

Got my copy today.
Looks and sounds great. The new interviews are informative and recently shot.

There is a behind the scenes reel where the sound is completely out of sync with the picture. (Not even close to being synched.) Not sure what happened there.

4K Dolby vision version looks great - no major compression issues - color and clarity is very nice and much improved. I found the presentation to be a little darker when in HDR than I expected - but putting on Dolby Vision Bright did alleviate slightly. All in all it’s very nicely rendered.

[TXMoviebuff77]

Well a very subtle looking 4K, not the best, thought I was watching the Blu instead of the 4K. I figured this forum would be dead due to the subject matter. It’s still a funny movie really and shouldn’t really be considered a “gay” movie.

[Moviefan2k4]

I haven't seen this from start to finish in quite some time, so I don't know if I'll buy the 4K disc or not. I could very easily delve into Dennis Miller territory with my thoughts here though, and a few years ago I did exactly that with a long venting post on IMDB. But in an effort to be more succint, I'll just address my favorite parts from the on-site review...

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Kauffman

Now all of the following is merely hypothetical and meant to explore an admittedly "alternate version" of the film, but what if it had turned out that Howard wasn't gay? In other words, was it somehow a "requirement" that Howard had to be gay in order for Rudnick's spot on commentary on misperception and "being true to yourself" to resonate? In other other words, would In & Out have been materially different had Howard been revealed to be actually straight, if perhaps slightly divergent from "normative" gender behaviors? And could it have possibly have been even more affecting and perhaps less trifling feeling at times had something along those lines been followed, since it might have allowed even more insight into how people are often judged unfairly or even victimized in a way by being pigeonholed in some category or the other?

This is a very good observation, because for years I saw the film as a purposeful mockery of those who disagreed with the subject matter for any reason. A number of scenes illustrate this, such as Howard's exasperated response to Peter kissing him, Father Tim's advice for Howard to have premarital sex with Emily, his failure regarding the "manly men" audio test, and of course the finale where Howard's parents, students, and even the whole fire brigade imply that homosexuality must be both innate and socially acceptable (throwing in the related implication that folks with opposing views are inherently wrong human beings).

Originally Posted by Jeffrey Kauffman

The world may not have been ready for it at the time, but I frankly think In & Out would have been even more provocative and potentially even funnier if Howard had turned out to be a misunderstood straight guy.

I agree, because it would've shown that appearances do not always indicate the truth of a situation. I'm fairly effeminate myself, often gesturing when I speak and emotionally relating more easily to women in particular. But that doesn't automatically mean I'm gay, and the film tries to do exactly that with Howard as a character. From the moment of that fateful TV broadcast, he's always being closely examined for what he wears, his body posture, whether he wants to dance, etc. And at the film's end, instead of being brave in the face of adversity, he gives into the pressure and breaks Emily's heart by declaring himself gay. Her immediate reaction was rightfully freaking out, bringing up the fact he'd had her watch Barabra Streisand's movie Funny Lady multiple times. In the stress of the moment, his only defense was saying "it was a sequel, she was under contract", which only escalates Emily's anger. And what should happen, when the credits finally start to roll? Howard is dancing to the Village People song "Macho Man", while Emily snuggles up to Cameron Drake...the same man who played the crucial role in wrecking her future with Howard.

[growly]

All I needed to know.

I found the improvements over the 1080 version to be rather minimal overall.

And

This is another shot on film release where tolerance for sometimes rather heavy grain fields may be needed.

I would have considered it if it was really inexpensive, but the heavy grain that is common to 4k kills it. In my opinion grain should be fine and unobtrusive. I appreciate many 4k lovers are fetishistic about grain but then if they’re not seeing improvements in other areas they’re being short changed too.

[Nepenthe]

I’ll be grabbing this in my next Amazon order, I don’t think it’s ever had a region B release (though, having just checked it, the site does say the old blu was region free…)

While not exactly Kevin Kline’s best movie, still an enjoyable comedy, even if it does have some unfortunate implications.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

I haven't seen this from start to finish in quite some time, so I don't know if I'll buy the 4K disc or not. I could very easily delve into Dennis Miller territory with my thoughts here though, and a few years ago I did exactly that with

[Show spoiler] a long venting post on IMDB. But in an effort to be more succint, I'll just address my favorite parts from the on-site review...

This is a very good observation, because for years I saw the film as a purposeful mockery of those who disagreed with the subject matter for any reason. A number of scenes illustrate this, such as Howard's exasperated response to Peter kissing him, Father Tim's advice for Howard to have premarital sex with Emily, his failure regarding the "manly men" audio test, and of course the finale where Howard's parents, students, and even the whole fire brigade imply that homosexuality must be both innate and socially acceptable (throwing in the related implication that folks with opposing views are inherently wrong human beings).

I agree, because it would've shown that appearances do not always indicate the truth of a situation. I'm fairly effeminate myself, often gesturing when I speak and emotionally relating more easily to women in particular. But that doesn't automatically mean I'm gay, and the film tries to do exactly that with Howard as a character. From the moment of that fateful TV broadcast, he's always being closely examined for what he wears, his body posture, whether he wants to dance, etc. And at the film's end, instead of being brave in the face of adversity, he gives into the pressure and breaks Emily's heart by declaring himself gay. Her immediate reaction was rightfully freaking out, bringing up the fact he'd had her watch Barabra Streisand's movie Funny Lady multiple times. In the stress of the moment, his only defense was saying "it was a sequel, she was under contract", which only escalates Emily's anger. And what should happen, when the credits finally start to roll? Howard is dancing to the Village People song "Macho Man", while Emily snuggles up to Cameron Drake...the same man who played the crucial role in wrecking her future with Howard.

For quite a while Dana Carvey had a character on SNL in the '90s called "Lyle, The Effeminate Heterosexual" (hilarious and probably non-PC as hell these days) - so maybe they were trying to avoid being compared to that.

[meremortal]

Thought this was pretty funny back in the day and kind of an offbeat supporting role for Selleck. Also rare to see him without the stache.