Trailer Official Site

Director: Jim Tushinsky Producer:  Lawrence Helman, Jim Tushinski Stars: Peter Burian, Robert Boulanger, Rick Castro, Guy Clark, Lawrence Helman, John F. Karr, Armistead Maupin, Daniel Nicoletta, Wakefield Poole, Robert W. Richards, John Waters, Jack Wrangler MPAA Rating: NR Year of Release: 2005 Running Time : 80 minutes

A film review by Sara Schieron Directed by Jim Tushinsky, the documentary THAT MAN PETER BERLIN, seeks to explore the intrigue of Peter Berlin, the 70's San Francisco Street Personality, Porn Star, and Icon. Examining Berlin's wealth of self-portraits, illustrations and, of course, the words of fans who "knew" him from the era of his greatest popularity, the documentary precedes its more predictable status as a "great man" film, to go deeper into the origin myth and self-construction of this immigrant American god. Punctuated with title cards (oddly reminiscent of power point presentations), the film is organized in classical categories like "beginnings" and "sightings".  Occasionally we hear the voice of Berlin, offering narrative counterpoint to the comments interviewees make about his work. Insights such as "I liked to be in the gutter, by choice" reassert this uncanny sense of fantasy that pervades Berlin's persona. Making the most apparent and provocative observation of Berlin's persona, John Waters described Berlin: "He was always in sexual settings but he was never campy and he didn't have any irony about him...he had this crotch. It was Jayne Mansfield with the ice man's block of ice melting while she walked down the street carrying two jugs of milk." What seems most evident about the persona of Berlin is his use of objectification, yet the complexity of this results from the fact no external salesman was responsible for Berlin. His photographs were largely self-portraits, he directed one of the two porn films (THAT BOY, this film's namesake), he never participated in any art that didn't suit him, and "selling himself" was not part of his modus operandi. Yet, interviewees talk about what "he might have been selling" and the most astute answer to that question is "he's selling himself" - and though this had everything to do with sex, it wasn't sex he was selling. The film takes the tack that Berlin "the man" was his own work of art. Called "a shining example of self-identity and self potential" by one interviewee, the film compiles these worshipful musings about Berlin into a film essay about a gay male star/icon from an era where the gay male had no icon to speak of. Porn Reviewer John Karr mentions the work of Tom of Finland, a recognized illustrator who drew the provocative male in ways that challenged the uniform clad appearance of the gay male as it had been established by the mid-70's. Three times drawn by the artist, Berlin appears as something of a Tom of Finland body incarnate. And the "street personality" which Armistead Maupin explains is not new to San Francisco, was unique, in that it "turned everyone into voyeurs". Just looking at him changed you. Reminiscent of the work of Kenneth Anger in HOLLYWOOD BABYLON, this mining of an icon postures more than just an anecdotal history of the "great Peter Berlin", it also explores the ineffable nature of the star, and shows that the star is more a question than an answer - which is perhaps why we are compelled to watch.