Plot Details: This opinion reveals major details about the movie's plot.

In honor of the Oscars coming up later this month, I thought I would examine Hollywood's greatest legend, a director without peer, a visionary that dared to dream far beyond his scope. Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm talking about Edward D. Wood, Junior.

Wait - what the hell are you talking about?!?

Consider this. Ed's movies have lasted for nearly a half century now. If he had been some no-talent hack producing putrid films for a quick buck, his work would have sunk beneath the waves of cinematic history without so much as a ripple. But here we are, in an entirely new millennium, talking about, and analyzing his work in a state of the art medium.

Ok, I'll freely admit that nobody would ever mistake his films for professional or even competent, but the love Wood pours into each frame, the nearly palatable passion for story telling, is very tangible indeed. That alone puts him heads and shoulders above people like Uwe Boll, who spits out bad video game movie after bad video game movie one after another. Let's see how many people are talking about BloodRayne in the year 2057.

It's fitting then, that we begin with one of Ed's earliest works. Ok, it's not THE earliest one - that would be a TV play called The Sun Was Setting, but since it's not actually on DVD, I'm not going to count it. Glen or Glenda tells two stories: Glen (played in a semi-autobiographical nature by Ed, under the name Daniel Davis), who secretly dresses as a woman but is afraid to tell his fiancee. The other is about Alan (Tommy Haynes), a pseudohermaphrodite who undergoes the sex change operation to become (a really ugly) woman.

We open with Bela Lugosi, acting as - well, it's hard to tell. Is Bela God? Is he some disembodied voice acting as narrator for the audience? His commentary on the movie is more philosophical judgment than relating the facts, and he never actually interacts with the characters (aside from one brief hand wave)you’re your guess is as good as mine. The credits call him Scientist, and he does have one of the Mad Scientist laboratories that you would expect to see in these sort of things - so that's as good as any.

Bela goes on, delivering golden lines like "Man's constant probing of things unknown, drawing from the endless reaches of time, brings to light many startling things. Startling? Because they seem new? Sudden! But most are not new. The signs of the ages!" in his wonderful Hungarian accent.

We then meet Inspector Warren (played by the long running television bit player Lyle Talbot), investigating a suicide of a man wearing women's clothing. Entering a strange new world, Warren seeks to know more about transvestites and transsexuals. He goes to a psychiatrist, Dr. Alton, for the facts.

Alton then goes on to describe the case of Glen, one of his patients. Guess the good Doctor slept through the classes about doctor/patient confidentiality or something - if he even went to medical school. Given the amount of times he screws up and confuses transsexuals (people who feel trapped in the body of the improper gender) and transvestites (people who are compelled to wear the clothes of the opposite sex), even this claim is dubious.

(Of course the real reason was that Wood was charged with making a film based on the sex change of George/Christine Jorgensen, but Ed wanted to tell the story of a transvestite - and the resulting mis-mash is a big wibbly wobbly mass of sexual confusion)

The Doctor outlines Glen's case, going on how man can now fly and roll about on wheels - despite hicks saying that "If god wanted us to fly, he would have given us wings!", and that trans-sexuality is just an extension of that. He then rambles on about an explanation for baldness (Men wear hats, which cut off the blood flow to their heads), native cultures that wear fancy masks while the women are plain and so on.

Somewhere around here, Ed abruptly cuts to a shot of stampeding buffalo as the Scientist shouts "Pull the string! Pull the string! A mistake is made. The story must be told!"

I have no idea what the hell THAT means either. It must have made sense to Ed, tho.

Then the film doubles up on itself as a flashback-within-a-flashback to another flashback, with Glenda rushes into her house and then collapsing in a heap on the floor as the Scientist says "Bevare! Bevare! Bevare of the big green dragon that sits on your doorstep. He eats little boys! Puppy dog tails and big, fat snails! Bevare! Take care! Bevare!"

Love that accent!

Anyway, things really go weird here as we go into a dream sequence (inside of a flashback inside another flashback. We're in the equivalent of some kind of Escher painting!) where Glenda draws his girlfriend near while she breaks down in mental agony. Then the two get married, the preacher turns into Satan (!), we get more mocking from the Scientist, there's a close up of Glen tripping out, children mocking him, while the scientist watches some women engaged in various sado-masochistic activities.

Although to be fair - apparently this soft core porn stuff was inserted into the film by the producer and NOT Ed's idea.

Anyway, all the mocking and taunting and satanic majesty has a galvanizing effect on Glen, who stands up out of the crowd (in a style not to dissimilar of Clark pulling open his shirt to reveal his Superman uniform), and off he goes to tell his girlfriend his true nature.

Then we cut to Alan's story and how he carried his women's clothing with him through boot camp and into battle when he was deployed to The Big One. (Surely this was a Monty Python sketch somewhere, wasn’t it). Anyway, back home from the front, Alan gets his Willie whacked off and Alice is born.

Meanwhile Glen gets counseling, realizes that his mother was to blame and that the love of a good woman is all he needs to cure him of this transvestitism. Cut to the Scientist, and the last line of the movie: "Yes, but what of the others, the less fortunate Glens the world over?" he asks. "Snips and snails and puppy dog tails!"

Wow.

Glen or Glenda? is Ed Wood's most personal film, equal parts docudrama and biography - and the complete opposite of what producer Weiss wanted. He was looking for a quick shocker to titillate the audience, and Ed delivered a film that dealt with gender confusion in a more or less frank manner. Less grind house, more a personal plea.

Clearly the best thing of the film is Bela Lugosi, horror star supreme. By this time, Lugosi was broke, completely addicted to morphine and pretty much at the end of his film career. Despite all this, he looks like he's enjoying his part, chewing the scenery as befit of the first and best Dracula, delivering his lines with a bizarre authority. You may have no idea WHAT he is saying, but there's no denying that he says it with conviction and purpose.

Like I said at the top - Ed has all kinds of problems. He seems unable to write a story that actually goes anywhere beyond Glen fondling women's clothing, some stock footage segments and writing that comprises a Gordian knot of logic. But despite all that, Glen or Glenda? is a brave, landmark film that's actually pretty good in places. Goofy? Yeah, but that's just Ed for you.

BEST LINE -
Bevare! Bevare of the big green dragon that sits on your doorstep. He eats little boys, puppy dog tails, and big fat snails. Bevare. Take care. Bevare!
(Said in a Hungarian accent, of course)

THE DVD -
Being in the public domain, there are tons of copies of Glen or Glenda? of varying quality. The version I have, included in the Ed Wood Boxed Set comes to us from Image Entertainment. We get a full frame print filled with scratches, dirt, splicing errors, and the occasional video dropout. Considering the low budget nature of the film, this is probably the best you're going to find for a copy.

THE EXTRAS -
We get a trailer, and that's about it.

I should point out at this time that if you pick up this title in the Ed Wood box, you'll get a bonus documentary on Eddies life. So if you're really looking for your Low Budget fix, you would do well to skip on this single release and pick up the seven disc set for only a couple of bucks more.

BOTTOM LINE -
Is Glen or Glenda? a bad movie? Yeah, it its pretty dire. The writing is atrocious in places, the acting is non-existent or over the top and the story doesn’t go anywhere. That said, it's still pretty entertaining, even 50 years on.

-Other Ed Wood Reviews -
* GLEN OR GLENDA?
* JAIL BAIT
* BRIDE OF THE MONSTER
* PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE
* NIGHT OF THE GHOULS
* THE SINISTER URGE
* THE HAUNTED WORLD OF EDWARD WOOD JR.
* THE ED WOOD COLLECTION
* ED WOOD



Recommended: Yes

Viewing Format: DVD
Video Occasion: Good for Groups
Suitability For Children: Suitable for Children Age 13 and Older