Marialy Rivas | Blokes (Blocks) / 2010

sex and politics

by Douglas Messerli

 

Rodrigo Bellott and Marialy Rivas (screenplay, based on a story by Pedro Lemebel), Marialy Rivas (director) Blokes (Blocks) / 2010 [15 minutes]

 

Both the characters of Marialy Rivas’ Blocks and the director herself, in different ways, are brave souls: her characters, living in Chile under the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in a world where even expressing human love is a dangerous thing, and Rivas for daring in this era of pedophilic panic to explore the subject of pre-adolescent homosexuality and his love for an older boy.

     The boy Luchito (Alfonso David) is not only at the age where young boys begin to wonder about sex, but is precociously aware of his own difference. Living in the blocks of urban apartments, Luchito looks out every day across the way into the window of a handsome 16-year-old Manuel Tapia (Pedro Campus), who sits on his bed, half naked, a site of absolute delight to the younger boy as he dresses for school. Luchito’s mother, a home-seamstress spends most of her day gossiping with her customers about their neighbors’ problems, a young girl becoming pregnant whose is having an affair with another girl, etc. She gives no thought to her own son’s sexual problems; in her mind he is clearly too young.

     The bus is crowded, and the older boy moves in behind him, leaning close against his body, his crotch riding Luchito’s ass, for much of the ride Luchito in suspended pleasure until the bus lurches forward, breaking the two apart, the time having arrived for Luchito to get off.

      Later that afternoon at home he attempts to masturbate to the memory of the experience; but his mother knocks on the door, uncomprehending why he has locked himself off, foils any possible release. Manuel, meanwhile, plays soccer in tight shorts with the other boys below, only increasing Luchito’s frustrations as he watches from above. Later, surrounded by girls and boys, Manuel puts his arms around one of the girls, pissing Luchito off. Obviously, he’d like his fantasy to be free of female complications.

     That night, it’s even worse, as Manuel brings a girl into his room, the two beginning to have intercourse with the light still on, Luchito watching half in delight, half in disgust. As she goes down on him, head out of sight, the boy begins to masturbate as he watches Manuel's expressions of pleasure. But suddenly, standing up, his girlfriend switches off the light.

     In frustration yet again, Luchito pulls out a large flashlight, turning it toward the dark window, spotting the now naked girl attempting to cover herself as she refuses to remain in the room, her flight halting their sexual pleasure as well—perhaps unintentionally on Luchito’s part but with some pleasure nonetheless since he now has Pedro all to himself. Pedro can be seen leaning out his window, ponderously smoking. 

     A day or so later, we hear helicopters roaring above the same complex, police entering apartment after apartment ordering everyone out. We see police pulling Manuel from his bed, and Luchito’s mother pulls him out of his own bed, insisting they must go. Down in the yard it is complete chaos, police with machine guns sorting out young men, shooting others dead seemingly at random as they title them communists. Manuel, his father, and others are made to stand with their hands beside their heads. Luchito, with a blanket around his shoulders, seeing his friend standing in only his underwear attempts to cover Manuel with the blanket, but the police immediately move in, pulling him away to demand that he too put his hands behind his head. A state of siege has been declared across the country, so we hear from a radio,.

     The next evening, Luchito is reading, and his mother demands he turn out the light. At nearly the same moment, he notices the lights go on and off in Manuel’s apartment. He sees Manuel at the window and the lights on and off repeating in Manuel’s apartment. Without even thinking Luchito picks up his flashlight and shines it upon Manuel’s body.

 

     Taking of his shirt and pulling down his shorts, Manuel begins to masturbate fully in the window, Luchito all eyes, as the older boy continues through to ejaculation.

     The next morning, as his mother sews, he hears the latest gossip. Manuel has been taken away by the police. “They say he was making signals, sending out clandestine messages with a light.” We know in hindsight, that many taken away in Pinochet’s era were never heard from again.

      Luchito goes over the window to see that the apartment across is empty, the place in chaos. Whether he feels guilty or not is not expressed on his youthful face. If nothing else, however, he now knows that sex is not just confusing but possibly deadly—as it is still in several countries around the world.

    Rivas’ film is one of the most remarkable of short cinematic works, combining as it does, near complete innocence and the knowing mania of power packed like a homemade bomb into a short cinematic work portraying how childlike innocence can easily explode into adult horror and hate.

 

Los Angeles, May 30, 2023

 

Connor Clements | James / 2008

nowhere to go

by Douglas Messerli

 

Connor Clements (screenwriter and director) James / 2008 [17 minutes]

 

James by Northern Ireland filmmaker Connor Clements is one of the most intelligent and emotionally engaging of short films I have yet seen that explore the need young boys have for older men who might explain and help them to explore their nascent gay sexuality.

     As many young gay boys feel about themselves, James (Niall Wright) perceives that he is an outsider both at school and at home. He has no close friends at school and at home his parents (Margaret Goodman and Gerry Doherty) are locked into never-ending battles with one another, his father even, somewhat unapologetically, declaring that he never wanted the familial responsibilities of which his wife constantly reminds him. He is so inattentive to his son that he doesn’t even notice the lost and confused expressions of the tortured boy, which his mother observes in frustration since James realizes he dare not express his fears to her.

      The boy perceives his gay desires, even going so far as to visit the local public restroom, where an older man (Louis Rolston) tries to lure him into a stall for a little sexual exploration or, perhaps even worse, into his car with whatever destination he has he mind, despite his assurances of safety to James; we can only imagine the worse.

     James’ only friend seems to be his literature teacher, Mr. Sutherland, who regularly loans him books. He previously has given him Electra to read, with which James is almost finished but admits to not enjoying it. Sutherland selects another book from his personal library, The Glass Menagerie, in that gesture suggesting, as the film clued us in earlier when the teacher was playing the piano for a chorus rehearsal, that the man may be homosexual. James promises to take good care of the loaned treasure.

      But at home the constant fighting of his parents gives him little time for reading or even studying. James stays late in the school library to read and, in part, to elude the school bullies; but when he forced to call his mother to come pick him up because he’s missed bus, incurs her wrath as well. He is in a spot where there is no way out, a place that the world in which he and so many other boys of his age live that he might as well be walled away in a prison created by people like us.

      When, the next day, he meets up again with Mr. Sutherland, he finally gets up the nerve to admit to him that he believes he is gay. The teacher praises his bravery if revealing something so many others, perhaps even himself, cannot. But he advises the boy not to share that information with others.

    The advice, however, is not only in connection with the boy’s best interest, but his own. Now that he knows for certain that the boy is gay, he must tell James that their meetings cannot continue, that he cannot advise him any longer. He can refer him to the school counselor—who even the boy realizes will offer him nothing but psychological and perhaps even medical solutions—or the help lines of church groups, etc. we all know to be worthless. Even James comprehends the situation, pleading with the teacher, “I need to talk with someone who ‘understands,’” giving evidence that James himself knows that the man is homosexual.

     But the “understanding” man can no longer be witnessed trying to consul the boy; surely endangered by the fact of his own sexuality and the inevitable suspicions of others that he may be grooming him for sexual encounters.

     It is a horrific catch-22 for James. The only person who can help him refuses for his own (and the boy’s) protection. We live in times like these, in which those males who might most be able to offer just what the boy is seeking, including perhaps their first sexual encounter, are denied that possibility by societal conventions and the suspicions of the prurient concerning pedophilia.  

     James has no other choice. We see him jump into the car of the man waiting outside of the public restrooms, asking the question usually asked of between two adult male lovers, “Do you have somewhere he can go?” The innocent has been thrown to the wolf. Even if the gentleman is caring and protective, his desires are clearly what dominate his behavior, and those will most certainly have sway over anything else he might offer. That may, alas, be the best thing for a child who has no other choices. But mightn’t we have wished a better guide, a most trustworthy and responsible being to help the boy come out? Yet we know, had Sutherland put away his fears, he would most certainly be without a job and possibly living out his life in prison.

     This is a frightening, but all too accurate portrait of what being a young gay boy often means in today’s societies.

 

Los Angeles, May 31, 2023

 

Douglas Messerli | The Gap Between Desire and Apprehension: The Problem of Man and Boy Love [introduction]

the gap between desire and apprehension: the problem of man and boy love

by Douglas Messerli

Although I have breached the subject tentatively and more openly in my 2000 essay on “Crossing the Divide” which concerns young boys just shy of the age of sexual consent, I have not yet spoken directly about very young, prepubescent boys who have imaginary, willing, or unwilling relationships with boys and men of age. Indeed, I will perhaps save the cases of the unwilling, raped or coerced boys (mostly in documentary form) for a later date, particularly given the restrictions presented by such posting sites such as Google. The closest to such a film in this grouping is Uncle David, although the boy here seems absolutely willing if highly coerced and misled. Perhaps the most explicit sexual relationship of a boy with an older man is so far represented in these pages by Albert J. Bresson’s 1983 film Abuse, but there the so-called “abuser” represents an escape from the child’s far worse parental tortures.

 

    But any discussion of younger boys in connection with sexual feelings, imagined or acted upon, is dangerous territory in our current climate when any sort of pedophilic relationship brings up what I might describe near societal panic. We can easily explain why this is: the abuse of a young person, of whatever sex, is one of the most horrific crimes against youth possible and can have long-term negative consequences upon survivors of such acts. One can particularly comprehend why anyone who has children or truly cares about their welfare would find such acts indefensible and worthy of criminal punishment.

     Yet, if only out of interest in the long history of man/boy, woman/girl relationships from the Ancient Greeks to the present, we have to at least consider the reality that despite our social aberration of this behavior, our legal criminalization of these acts, and our notable attempts to prevent them, that they have continued in rather alarmingly large numbers. Moreover, many of the adults and the youths involved in sex declare that it was the younger individual who sought out the older or who, at least, was mutually involved in the act. While we perceive that children often do not know what they are doing with regard to sex, while adults should be rational enough to discourage such desires, the mutuality of some of these acts suggests that perhaps we have not explored either the intense desires or pressures of sexuality sufficiently enough to fully comprehend them and to recognize the reasons for their existence and evident commonness. As Alfred Kinsey long argued, if one finds a kind a sexual behavior prevalent though history in rather large numbers, we surely have the responsibility to more throughout examine it as objectively as we can.

      Let us begin with the presumption that any sexual actions regarding a younger person with an adult against the younger person’s desire is simply an issue of rape and abuse, and should be punishable to the full extent of the law—although the laws of many cultures, including perhaps our own, can be draconian. But that is another issue I shall not approach.

     Moreover, let us argue that just because a child appears to be willing and even desirous of sex with an older person does not give any adult the freedom to act. And it is the adult’s responsibility to control the situation by moving away from it and discouraging the younger person from pursuing such dangerous engagements.

 

    But then what? There still remain children who truly want and feel they need sexual engagement with an older person, particularly when they are gay or lesbian and cannot find anyone of their age with whom to even talk about their feelings let alone discover someone their age with whom they might engage in sex. By walking away from such young men and women we might possibility be putting them in danger in the way that director Connor Clements explores in the film I discuss below, James, in the movie I analyze in 2021, Softie, or even in Bressan’s 1983 work Abuse.

      First of all, we must remember children are now engaging in sex at ages unthinkable in earlier generations, in part because of the entire society’s perhaps unintentional encouragement of sexual openness through the internet and the media in general. For heterosexual children, it is now almost natural they will begin exploring sexual activity as early as 10 or 12, certainly by their early teens, no matter what our personal viewpoints, values, or religious beliefs. But what do homosexual boys and girls do at that age; what choices do they have to even discover their sexuality let alone to explore sex itself? Certain aspects of our society have long permitted straight young children to express their sexual feelings without ever imagining that gay, bi-sexual, lesbian, and transsexual children also have such emotional desires.

     I know that such desires of young boys exist because even in the late 1950s, I was just such a child. Living in the conservative, protected society in which I did, indoctrinated in the fears of even talking about sex, I was never abused and to my knowledge did not even meet someone who might have desired to abuse. But I would not have resisted, in fact would been overjoyed, I am certain, had some older person ever had such sexual desires toward me or wished to introduce me to sex. I truly believe I would have gladly left my innocent cocoon behind as I did the very moment when I finally realized that I was far enough from home that I need not report my behavior any longer to family or friends. I was the kind of child desperate for someone to talk to about and engage in sex. Without having anyone to help me into a sexual world, I remained painfully in a closed-off (closeted would have meant that I was hiding something or had had some experience whereas I had had none) world where I remained without anyone but imaginary future friends.

      In the following discussions of the six films I’ve chosen, accordingly, I make no prescriptions and do not argue for any particular solution to the dilemmas revealed, but simply try to observe the problems faced by the younger individuals and point to the difficultly of their situations. In at least one of the works, I find the solution despicable, even as a kind camp fantasy statement which it may have intended to have represented, and cannot forgive the horrific influence of the adult upon the younger boy. But in the other 5 works I can only proffer my deep sympathy for the youths who cannot seem to find a way out of the predicaments they face and for the adults who themselves can offer no way to help them without endangering their own lives.

      The six films I discuss come from many different cultures: James by Northern Ireland director Connor Clements, released in 2008; Blocks, directed by Chilean filmmaker Marialy Rivas of 2010; Uncle David, an “improvisation” by British performer David Hoyle and porno film star Asley Ryder, also from 2010; US director Evan Roberto’s 33 Teeth of 2011; US filmmaker Tony Garcia’s Discretion from 2015; and Hunt by Norwegian director Gjertrud Bergaust from 2018.*

 

*The films about which I’ve just written are obviously not the only films that deal with the complex subject of love between younger and older gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals. I’ve already discussed some of these issues over about 50 essays on feature and short films, all of which—and I’m not even including the numerous older and younger “brothers in love” films or the several movies and documentaries on young gay male prostitutes—concern themselves in one way or another with love between two beings of significantly different ages. For a more complete, although not exhaustive list, see my discussion of Margien Rogaar’s Breath in 2007.

 

Marco Berger and Mariángela Martínez Restrepo | El reloj (The Watch) / 2008

outside time

by Douglas Messerli

 

Marco Berger (screenplay), Marco Berger and Mariángela Martínez Restrepo (directors) El reloj (The Watch) / 2008 [15 minutes]

 

It’s getting dark on the rural street where Juan Pablo (Nahuel Viale) and Javier (Ariel Nuñez Di Croce) meet up in Argentinian director Marco Berger’s quite visually beautiful short film, The Watch. Both are waiting for a bus to take them back to the neighborhood where they live, although they’ve only met once before, Javier recognizing Juan Pablo because of the seemingly coincidental incident, at both the movie date he had with a girl and now in the street, Juan Pablo taps his watch since it has apparently stopped running.

     Juan Pablo decides to take a cab home and asks if Javier might wish to join him. When they reach the boy’s home, he asks if Javier might want to come in since his parents have gone off to Rosario.

      Inside the small house, Javier encounters Juan Pablo’s nearly naked cousin sitting on the couch watching TV. The cousin (Javier Morea), almost oblivious of the world around him, makes no movement to greet or even invite Javier to join him on the couch, and hardly attempts to move his feet to accommodate the stranger. But Javier nonetheless finds a space and sits, Juan Pablo having immediately gone off elsewhere.

      Juan Pablo finally brings his guest a coke and sits on the other side of the unresponsive cousin who claims Juan Pablo’s mother has called, but fails to repeat the message she left. There is something humorous and even absurd about the ever-present cousin, and, far more importantly, his undressed existence becomes another homoerotic element.

      But Juan Pablo himself behaves oddly, in the next frame having gotten up again to washing off his face and chest, calling out to see if Javier plans to stay over. Surprised by the invite, Javier responds, with some look of surprise, “ok.”

      The cousin rises for a moment to look into the refrigerator for something to eat, the light outlining even more clearly his tight pair of red shorts as he puts his hand under the underwear band for an itch, a view we presume that Javier observes. In the next moment, Juan Pablo has joined the trio on the couch in a clearly uncomfortable and slightly disconcerting silence.

       Finally, Juan Pablo suggests they go to sleep, and Javier joins him in the bedroom. Both strip down to the their underwear and crawl into bed together where they lay on top on the covers.

 

    There is a long pause, neither of them closing their eyes. Finally, Juan Pablo reaches over his friend, almost as if he finally might sexually engage him, but instead grabbing up a small red stereoscopic viewer to show off to Javier. But as he hands it over for Javier to view, he clearly also notices the outline of the boy’s cock. Just as suddenly Pablo gets up to check whether his cousin has gone to sleep.

       It begins to seem like a possible prelude to a sexual encounter. But he returns to say that his mother is home and that the room is her room, although he claims, without fully explaining, “It’s okay anyway. We always sleep here.”

       Both boys get up and dress, Javier returning momentarily to the couch with the cousin. Juan Pablo introduces him to his mother, who seems happy to have to stay over; but her son is already putting on his coat, clearly intending to escort Javier out or perhaps even home for the seven blocks where he lives. 

       Outside, Juan Pablo suggests that he will walk himself home alone, but also asks where he dances, adding “Maybe I’ll see you there.”

        Javier turns to go, and Juan Pablo looks down at his stopped watch, amazed to find it working. For a moment he even calls back Javier, but on the second thought, as Javier turns, calls out “Nothing, nothing.” Javier disappears into the dark.

        Seated on the walkway, Juan looks down at his watch, lays it out in front of him, picks ups a rock and slams it into the watch, shattering it.

        What it clear is that both times he met Javier the watch stopped, and that Juan Pablo would like to return to that world where time had stopped. His action further hints that he had hoped his cousin would fall to sleep and his mother remain away for the night, and in that timeless void he might make love to his handsome new friend. But time and all of restrictions returned ending his plans. Now perhaps, with the clock permanently stopped, he might be able to find his way back to that possible idyll.

        Without any sexual action of even mention of it, Berger, I argue, has created a highly homoerotic work about the attraction between two neighborhood boys, the results to be played out off stage and out of the range of the film’s carefully clocked flickers.

 

Los Angeles, October 2, 2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (October 2023).

Josh Kim | 엽서 (The Postcard) / 2007

the postcard rings twice

by Douglas Messerli

 

Josh Kim (screenwriter and director) 엽서 (The Postcard) / 2007 [15 minutes]

 

Heterosexuals do indeed presume they rule the world in this gentle comedy about a young male postcard writer (Suh Inwoo), who regularly visits the local post office to mail out his cryptic open messages about desire.

     The first we read, “Your eyes, your hair, your smile, your uniform are nice,” through the snooping eyes the two female postal workers (So Yun Park and Sun Zoo Park) who read the open message after they encounter its “cute” deliverer. Both are attracted to the young man and vie for his attentions.

     But we soon discover, as the postman (Simo) delivers the card back to the sender’s own mailbox, that the message was actually meant for the postman himself, who when he reads it, realizes it is an odd sort of love letter. A stamp collector, he awards the writer by enclosing a sealed stamp within the mailbox.

      Our shy postcard writer runs down to the mailbox every day as the postman arrives and secretly observes him as he reads his posts. Later we see him showering with a kind of quiet sense of future bodily pleasure, knowing that his letters have reached their true destination. 

      From the stamps that we see the boy has now collected, we perceive the passage of a couple of more days.

       A few days later he returns to the post office again with a package to Japan and another postcard. This time, in the fight over who will get to serve him the other Park girl wins, explaining to him that he will have to put his return address on the international package, which he vaguely resists, but finally does. After we leaves, the girls again check out the postcard, this time even more intrigued when they discover that the card has been addressed to the very address which the boy has put on the package as his own street, building, and apartment number. He is mailing the postcards to himself!

     The new postcard reads: “Yesterday, I saw you smile when you read the postcard. If it’s OK with you, it would be nice to meet up. You wanna come over?”

 

     Realizing that they have nice smiles and wear uniforms, the girls presume the invitation has been sent to them, and the more recent recipient of his package and postcard determines to meet up with the young man. Meanwhile, the postman, delivering the mail, also reads the message and immediately begins to climb the stairs to meet up with his secret admirer.

      But when he reaches the hall, he discovers Miss Park standing at the open door, the cute boy facing her, and presumes that perhaps all the messages were for the two postal clerks, not for him.

     That evening, the Postman seeks out a public sauna to soak out his sorrows, wondering how he might fill the emptiness he now feels. Fortunately, the young man—so South Korean director Josh Kim shows us—is on his way to the same bath.

 

Los Angeles, February 26, 2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (February 2023).

Daniel Ribeiro | Café com Leite (You, Me and Him) / 2007

the perfect warmth

by Douglas Messerli

 

Daniel Ribeiro (screenwriter and director) Café com Leite (You, Me and Him) / 2007 [18 minutes]

 

Brazilian director Daniel Ribeiro’s first film of 2007, Café com Leite (You, Me and Him), released seven long years before his acclaimed The Way He Looks, is clearly an apprentice work—although it won the Crystal Bear for best short film at the 2008 Berlin International Film Festival and played in numerous international film festivals. Certainly, part of its appeal is the quiet gentleness with which it tackles its quite difficult subject of how to develop and sustain a gay relationship when suddenly faced with new family responsibilities that the central character of this work imagined he was just about to escape.

      The short film begins with two lovers, Danilo (Daniel Tavares) and Marcos (Diego Torraca) in bed, evidently after having just enjoyed a sexually satisfying night. Having made enough money to finally leave his parents’ home and rent his own apartment, Danilo invites his lover to move in with him which Marcos correctly interprets as a marriage proposal which he quickly accepts, the two engaging in pleasurable kisses and planning to convert their previously planned anniversary vacation into a honeymoon.

      By the time Danilo reaches home, however, he discovers that his parents have just been killed in an accident, leaving his young brother Lucas (Eduardo Melo) home alone, hunkered down in the hallway in tears as he awaits his brother’s arrival.

      If there is something inexplicably clumsy about this sudden switch of fate, the results it brings are all too realistically portrayed, as suddenly Danilo, having little time to adjust to becoming a father to Lucas, must not only endure their mutual suffering—on that first night Lucas crawls into Danilo’s bed while pleading that he keep his shoes on, surely a kind of mixed message of needing his brother’s love while still not sure if he might not want to get up and leave his comfort—but must learn to cope with the boy’s dining whims including such simple tasks as making sure Lucas is washed and properly dressed before he drives him off to school. The film’s title, in fact, is taken from Lucas’ demand for chocolate milk properly heated to just the right temperature in the microwave.

        For the first week there is hardly time to think about his relationship with Marcos, let alone to find a way to engage in sex with him in their shared bed next to Lucas’ bedroom. And both men, along with the film’s viewers, fear that their deep love may not survive the radical changes in Danilo’s life, who insists that his brother remain in his care instead of being shipped off to a distant uncle and aunt.

       There are, as well, the unsaid issues of the two men’s past that Lucas is well aware of. Apparently, although Danilo’s father loved Marcos as his son’s friend, upon discovering the true nature of their relationship, he turned against him within the confines of home, perhaps not witnessed by Danilo but certainly not lost on his little brother.

      Ribeiro handles this material nicely by having Marcos pick up Lucas from school one day when Danilo is busy at work. As the two warily greet one another, Lucas, like most children who are openly honest in expressing their feelings, admits that his father did not like Marcos and wonders aloud whether or not he must take the same stance against his brother’s “boyfriend,” a concept which he just vaguely comprehends. As Lucas explains, “He was always arguing with my mother about you.” Having just having had a discussion with the boy about Lucas’ girlfriends, most of whom, for adolescent reasons, no longer like him, Marcos suggests that what he is expressing is the reality of change, the fact that things can be altered either by one’s own decision or by circumstances. Before their almost magical meeting ends, Lucas has decided that indeed does “still like” Marcos despite his father’s disapproval.

       Yet we still sense the boys’ resistance to the change when that night Lucas asks if he might sleep between the two, but clings to his brother entirely while ignoring the “boyfriend.”        

       It is clear, as Marcos rises inordinately early to leave the house, that the intimacy he previously had with Danilo is no longer possible given the need for the two brothers, still in grief, to bond. Soon after, he decides to use his “honeymoon” ticket that Danilo now cannot. 

       Nearly all the blurbs and small commentaries about this film suggest a positive ending, positing the possibility that they simply will need to learn how to all live together.

      The film ends with a beautiful attempt at just that, as Danilo, with several glasses of milk set out before them works with Lucas to test various microwave temperatures to bring the boy’s chocolate milk to the perfect warmth.

      But there is no assurance in Ribeiro’s tender film that Marcos may, upon his return. restore that the same “warmth” with his lover. As Ribeiro reveals in The Way He Looks his sensibility is so sweet that it is hard to imagine things will not work out in the end, that people can change their feelings and readapt. Yet in this small gem, the director gives us no assurances while still buoying up with his fragile film with hope.

 

Los Angeles, December 1, 2020

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog and World Cinema Review (December 2020).