“In the Summers” won the Grand Jury Prize for Drama at the 2024 Sundance Film Festival. Its theme is summarized this way on IMDB.com:
“On a journey that spans the formative years of their lives, two sisters navigate their loving but volatile father during their yearly summer visits to his home in Las Cruces, New Mexico.”
The film is the directorial debut of Alessandra Lacorazza Samudio, who also wrote the roughly autobiographical story of her summers spent with her divorced father. The film follows two sisters, Violeta and Eva, as they visit their father in Las Cruces, New Mexico, four times over a span of approximately 15 years.
THE GOOD

Three sets of sisters play the girls as they grow up, and that, alone, would be a difficult thing to handle as a first-time director. The young Eva is portrayed by Sasha Calle and the young Violeta was Dreya Cad. The lead, who plays their father, Vicente, is Residente. Residente is a member of the rap group “Calle 13” and has won 4 Latin American Grammys. The 46-year-old was born on February 23, 1978 in San Juan, Puerto Rico. He was exceptional portraying a father who seems more scumbag than superhero. As an actor and director, he is known for Old Dogs (2009), Miss Bala (2019) and Residente Feat. Ibeyi: This is Not America (2022).
“In the Summers” won the U.S. Grand Jury Prize for Drama at Sundance, 2025. Handling the three sets of actors who portrayed Eva and Violeta from young to older as a first-time director was quite an achievement. Young Eva is portrayed (well) by Luciana Elisa Quinonez and young Violeta is portrayed by Dreya Castillo. Middle Eva is played by Allison Salinas and middle Violeta by Kimaya Thais. Teen-aged Eva is Sasha Calle and teen-aged Violeta is portrayed by Lio Mehiel. All did a great job.
The cinematography by Alexandre Mejia is top-notch and the music, as handled by Eduardo Cabra is also good.
THE BAD
One fan praised how the film was able to show how complex people can be without using a lot of expository dialogue. Agreed. This viewer went on to say, “I want to see more films like this that represent Latinx folks! And queer Latinx folks!”
I don’t want to see 1,000,000 more such films that represent constant insertions of queer/gay/transgender folk of any ethnic identity. It’s getting as predictable as the horror movie trope that tells the teenagers not to go into the attic or the basement. It permeates every film, it seems.
I have nothing against films with lesbian, gay or transgender themes and nothing against lesbians, transgender, or queer folk. I applaud their struggle for acceptance and “equal” treatment. But shouldn’t the presence of these themes more-or-less reflect reality? Everyone should have the right to love whomever they want to love. The rest of us don’t have to gather round and watch them coupling, however,no matter whether they are shown with a person of the same gender or a mate of the opposite sex. Pretending that there aren’t both homosexual and/or heterosexual individuals present in society or ignoring those themes is wrong. But over-emphasizing those themes is just as tiresome. Every other romantic film doesn’t need to (continue to) spoonfeed us a steady diet of gay/queer/transgender romance. Can’t the films simply represent the approximate reality of such relationships in the real world?
A recent Pew Research study said: “At a time when transgender and nonbinary Americans are gaining visibility in the media and among the public, a new Pew Research Center survey finds that 1.6% of U.S. adults are transgender or nonbinary – that is, their gender differs from the sex they were assigned at birth.” The article goes on to say that younger people are more likely to identify as transgender or non-binary and the % rises to 5% in adults younger than 30, while the % of 30 to 49-year-olds drops to 1.6% and the % of those over 50 identifying is .3%.
This means that 95% of the U.S. population (roughly) is not transgender. Yet 100% of movies today seem to have the “obligatory” gay/ lesbian or transgender romance. Movies today routinely and persistently depict trans, lesbian or gay love scenes/themes. This is the demand for “equal time” between the sheets, since heterosexual romances were forced down everyone’s throats for so many years. Frankly, it gets old. The % of films exploring this topic in such graphic detail should more accurately reflect reality, and the reality is as noted above by the Pew Research study.
I am not offended by non-mainstream romantic couplings. I’m just weary of watching so many of them, inserted in nearly every film at every opportunity. I won’t say “Enough, already!” because I understand that this cause is important to the generation under 30 who represent the future, but, again, 95% of that generation is not transgender, according to the latest Pew survey, so why is this theme everywhere all the time seemingly, especially at indie film festivals? Yes, it’s a young crowd at film festivals, but isn’t the goal of film to depict the real world with skill and honesty? These themes deserve a place, but dominating every festival simply to appeal to young filmmakers seems somewhat disingenuous and dishonest.

Residente, who plays Vincente in “In the Summers.”
In this case, the filmmaker has been recounting experiences growing up as a transgender youth with a father who seems anything but exemplary. Since it is the writer /director’s own personal story, (and one that was so well executed), I’m just going to say this briefly and move on. I applaud the young daughter who stands up to her father when he is attempting to drive drunk. I/we loathe the drunken father’s macho man reaction to his realization of his daughter’s sexual orientation. The film portrayed the situation in a way that was real and honest and representative of the way the United States reacted to trans, gay and queer folk over the centuries. It was well done by this first-time writer/director on so many levels, and the actors deserve much praise. I did think that the mother of these young girls deserved more time, but I understand that it is difficult to fit everything into a 1 hour and 35 minute movie.
I remember when watching Jim Brown and Raquel Welch pose together for “100 Rifles” in 1969 was a huge scandal because she was white and he was Black. Now, nobody thinks twice about an inter-racial romance. That was a good thing. I applaud the acceptance of inter-racial romances that now exists in society. I started reviewing the very next year (1970); I’ve been at it ever since, accepting of films that depict inter-racial romance and, now, accepting of films that portray the romantic entanglements that once were kept under wraps and hidden from society’s view.
It will be a good thing when there isn’t a need for every single film to climb up on a soapbox and subject viewers to the familiar story of how prejudiced we, as a nation (and a world) have been for so long. In the meantime—like the explosion of horror movies that launched the splatter craze (that still exists), or the Marvel Universe (that Director William Friedkin called “spandex movies”) we are going to have to applaud this repetitive theme, graphic or subliminal, in film after film after film until the formerly unacceptable or aberrant is unremarkable in its ordinariness.
(Stepping down off soapbox.)




While taking in “Tommy: The Rock Opera” on my birthday, I became aware that “M.J.: The Musical” would be opening soon at the Niederlander Theater (formerly the Oriental Theater) on Aug. 1st and running only until September 3rd.
I secured tickets to the musical online and it said we were in Row B to the right side of the stage in the Orchestra section. It turned out that Row B was actually the first row and the musicians were playing almost directly beneath us, which means that we had an unobstructed view and our seats actually vibrated to the beat and pulse of all of the Michael Jackson hits through the years.
All of the actors were fantastic. It sometimes became a wee bit confusing to have multiple actors playing the same role and to have one actor portraying two parts simultaneously. For instance, the very talented actress playing Michael Jackson’s mother held down a couple of roles, as did the burly gentleman portraying Joseph Johnson, who had a great voice.
It was a wonderful uplifting play, if slanted to highlight only the positive P.R. of Michael Jackson.

Another source pointed out that the film’s release in competition against “Avatar” was not great marketing.
It’s hard to grab an audience’s attention in 15 minutes. The attention span of the average audience member is about that of a gnat, especially these days, with so many things competing for our attention.
Two Black performers wait backstage to perform in a white establishment in a Black neighborhood. The two are Adryan Coogan Jr. (played by Ty Norwood Jr.) and Leilani Drakeford (played by J.C. Willis). Leilani did a credible job with a not-very-riveting script. Her inability to get the white usher to bring her a drink of water is our clue that she and her accompanist are victims of oppression, along with a less-than-welcoming white doorman who opens the club door for the duo.
This struck me as a poor way to launch a singing career (or any career). I was not overwhelmed at the logic of the two getting a shot at performing in front of an audience (that will be mostly white) and simply walking out, leaving the club owner to deal with the fall-out.
This Harriet Tubman quote from the press notes is prominent: “Every dream begins with a dreamer who dares to dream.” I don’t want to get into a debate with Harriet Tubman, but the quote made me think of that other oft-used quote (author unknown): “Every journey of 1,000 miles begins with one small step.”
My own father (born in 1902) refused to support me in my desire to go to law school after completing my undergraduate degree, because there was a perception that there were “women’s jobs” and “men’s work. One male interviewee on the street articulated it this way in the documentary: “They (women) should do feminine work.” In the 60s, feminine work was being a nurse, a secretary, or a teacher. Other fields were not “suitable” because we women would just be taking up space that should rightfully be occupied by a male head of a family. (Oh, how time have changed!)