What makes it different from others?

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

First, this movie has nothing AT ALL to do with Mae West. It is not even a veiled story of her life, and she did NOT "force the studio to pull it out of distribution and burn all the copies." Whoever made up that tale was an idiot. The East/West surname coincidence is ONLY a coincidence. You might as well say that East of Eden is about Mae West as say it about this movie. It's just stupid. This movie owes more to A Star Is Born than to anything involving Mae West.Second, this movie also is not meant to be campy or any of the other dumb adjectives people try to apply to it. Maybe campy people see themselves in it, but that's in THEM, not in the movie.True: it was made with very little money and with no talent AT ALL, anywhere, either before or behind the camera. But it was made with a huge amount of heart, and its sincerity, its openness and generosity of spirit are what make Dinah East well worth watching.This is a love story about two misfits, and despite all its flaws it is sweet and moving and honest. It's not a joke. Laugh at if you want to, but if you do you're depriving yourself of something a lot better than a good laugh.But if you do want to watch it, be VERY DILIGENT about which of the two DVD releases you buy. The DVD most earlier reviewers saw is a semi-pirated 2006 release of ABOMINABLE quality in a chopped-off 3:2 full-screen (old TV) format, almost surely copied from a VHS tape released briefly in the 1980s.It has a rather dull cover, with a photo of Diana East at the bottom and "A superstar actress is really a man... Hollywood's strangest story! DIANA EAST" at the top. That is the DVD you DO NOT want to buy. It's nearly unwatchable. Amazon in the US says it's currently unavailable, and let's hope it stays that way. But Amazon in the UK still sells that version; and it is the version the large American DVD-by-mail renter has, so don't bother putting it in your queue.There is a MUCH better 2010 DVD from Kit Parker Films, distributed in the US by VCI Entertainment and possibly other distributors in other markets. It has remastered video and audio and is in the original 16:9 wide-screen format. It has a more modern, glitzier cover, with "UN-CUT THEATRICAL VERSION" in a black banner across the top and "KIT PARKER FILMS" in a black banner across the bottom. That is the DVD you MUST buy if you want to see this movie. Amazon sometimes groups the two very different versions (and their reviews) together, so you have to be diligent about buying the right one.

Can't speak to the version pictured here as I'm not sure I've seen it but it sounds suspiciously like a bootleg version that's been floating around Internet for years.Several people who have reviewed it have commented on the atrocious transfer, which was case with disc I saw--everything reduced to fuzzy pastels, suggesting it was duped from multi-generational video that wasn't very good to start with. Plus, I may be one of the few people who actually saw this in a theater in 1970 and DVD version I viewed was obviously missing numerous key scenes, if not entire reels. "Plot" now simply lurches from one incomprehensible sequence to the next and makes no sense.This seems to be one of those movies that has been out of circulation so long that it has somehow built up a reputation way beyond its actual merits. Not even enjoyably cheesy, it's simply a totally amateurish sexploitation cheapie that can't begin to hold a candle to the campy heights of Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, Myra Breckinridge or The Christine Jorgensen Story, films to which it is frequently compared, usually by those who haven't seen it. Charm-free cross-dresser that plays Dinah is on sleepwalk mode, Warhol protégé Ultra Violet appears absolutely bored with her small cameo and most of cast looks like they were recruited from happy hour at a Santa Monica Blvd. hustler bar.Despite its rep, this curio is just not very much fun and is frequently flat-out dull. Not that this review will probably discourage anyone who wants to see for himself. But you've been warned.

Long-unseen for over 36 years, DINAH EAST is a peculiarly entertaining little movie from the early-seventies that attempted to take on some then-taboo breaking subject matter. It may be nothing more than a long-forgotten exploitation movie to the majority of the public, but it is much more than that to me personally. My uncle, the late Matt Bennett, has a supporting role in the film as Dinah's chauffeur/love interest, and it is a role that he is quite likable in. While the movie would probably win a place in my heart for Matt's appearance alone, the film as a whole is a flawed-but-fascinating time capsule of a era when the film industry was just beginning to deal with then-unorthodox themes such as homosexuality and the social construction of gender roles.DINAH EAST is first and foremost an exploitation movie; it basically exists to showcase attractive actors in some sweaty sex scenes. However, this particular exploitation movie also has another, more serious agenda: it wants to treat its transgender character with respect and explore some of the more serious repercussions that come when an individual conceals his or her true identity. Most exploitation movies (especially of this era) handled such serious themes in a very campy and awkward manner, but this is not the case with DINAH EAST. In fact, this may be the only exploitation movie I have ever seen where the serious dramatic elements are significantly more effective than the more traditional exploitive elements.Although his voice can be rather monotone and inexpressive, Jeremy Stockwell's portrayal of this unconventional role emotes with warmth, intelligence, and even dignity. In a particularly memorable scene, Dinah comforts the widow of a man who had helped her out in her early years and she states, "If it weren't for your husband helping me the very first day I walked on the lot, there'd be no 'Dinah East.'" Even with his obviously limited acting experience, Stockwell manages to deliver this somewhat overwrought line with a startling degree of strength and credibility. Simply put, Stockwell gives a fully multi-layered performance in a film genre that typically portrays a one-dimensional world. The rest of the cast is also above average for this type of film, with everyone being well suited to their respective roles. Former Warhol model Ultra Violet brings some appropriate old-school Hollywood glamor to her memorable supporting role, and she displays a terrific sisterly chemistry with Stockwell during their one big scene together. The fresh-faced Reid Smith certainly seems to have had no qualms with film nudity, as his spends a considerable amount of his screen time sans clothing. However, Smith's contributions to the film rise above that of the mere flesh, and he emotes with touching "little-boy-lost" charisma that lends a sweet pathos to some of his more dramatic scenes.Ray Foster is likable as Dinah's faux suitor (and the pair share a charming dinner scene where Stockwell actually gets to incorporate an amusing West impersonation), but it is Alan Davis who really delivers a standout performance as the lug whose masculinity is assaulted when he discovers the truth about Dinah. Playing a character that is both unlikable and sympathetic, Davis gives a performance of considerable complexity and nuance that is almost unheard of in the bulk of films from the genre. Unfortunately, musician/stage actor Joe Taylor turns in a completely stiff performance as Davis' son, and he is the only true weak link in the cast. Taylor has greatly improved as actor of the decades, but his solemn delivery of the line "Love for a son that born out of rape?" is the only moment in this film where you catch a glimpse of the likable actor that he would eventually become.While I'm probably too biased to give a truly competent critique of my uncle Matt's performance, I will offer some general impressions that I had while watching his performance. I felt his first scene (which was his reaction to Dinah's death) is a little stilted, however, this is probably the most awkward scene in the entire movie in general. After this brief opening, all of Matt's scenes are near the end of the movie and are mostly depicted in flashback, and I was genuinely impressed with his work here. Even though he was a large and imposing hulk of a man, Matt was actually a very sweet and gentle guy in real life. The downtrodden boxer he plays in this movie is probably the closest he ever came to playing a character that was similar to himself.There are several well done scenes depicting the blooming love between Matt and Stockwell, my favorite of which is a tender scene on a lonely beach where Tank and Dinah first express their love to each other. In most exploitation movies, this scene would have been mawkish and cheesy, but, in this film, it is subtle and affecting. There's a similar scene a few moments later where Dinah reaffirms her love for Tank after he loses his last big fight. This is another scene that shouldn't work, but somehow does. In fact, these two scenes not only transcend the rest of the picture, but also the entire exploitation genre in and of itself.NOTE: There is a heavily-edited 60-minute version of Dinah East that is frequently sold online which leaves much of the film incomprehensible. The full 90-minute version was released on VHS in 1984, but most copies are in pretty bad shape and are often hard to watch. I really hope that somebody somewhere will master a new home video release in the near future.

I, too, saw this film in Boston in 1970. For many years I have sought out the film or even any mention about it. About a year ago, I read a footnote in one of the movie review books, that Mae West instituted legal action against the film shortly after its release. Apparently the settlement resulting from that action included the permanent withdrawal of the film from distribution. During Ms. West's lifetime there were recurrent, albeit ridiculous, rumors that she was a male. This film, in a kind of docudrama, relates the life of an actress, Dinah East, whose male gender was only revealed after her/his death. I had hoped it might reappear now that Mae West is dead, but so far that is not the case. I would like to receive more information on all of this from anyone who knows more than I do about it. Meanwhile, I eagerly await its reappearance.