Wednesday, January 29, 2025

Kun-young Park | 정말 먼 곳 (Jeongmal Meon Gos) A Distant Place / 2020

an unforgiving landscape of beauty

by Douglas Messerli

 

Kun-young Park (screenwriter and director) 정말 (Jeongmal Meon Gos) A Distant Place / 2020

 

This film begins in a kind of quietude of country life with a sheep rancher, Jin Woo (Kang Gil-woo) living on a ranch with his seeming daughter, Seol (Kim Si-ha). Woo works for Joong Min (Gi Ju-bong), a tolerant rancher who appreciates his employee’s hard work and is sensitive to the fact that his own daughter, Moon Kyeong is sexually attracted to him. Furthermore, Seol, kept from kindergarten school by his father, who feels it beneficial for her to remain in the natural world in which they exist, has a close relationship with Jin Woo’s own aging mother, who is suffering from the early stages of Alzheimer’s Disease who can best relate with Jin Woo’s lovely and totally innocent child.


   The relationships between these individuals, accordingly, are constantly changing as represented through the film in their dinner-time activities in a manner that might remind other Asian enthusiasts of Japanese director Yasuijrō Ozu’s great films. But this Korean film presents an even more complex situation when we soon realize that the loving, responsible Jin Woo is also gay, and that his lover Hyun Min (Hong Kyung), a teacher of poetry, arrives from Seoul in order to be with his beloved friend. And it is not only at the dinner table but in the child’s own relation to the landscape is rapidly changing.


     Both Joong Min and his daughter Moon Keyong quickly assimilate to the situation, perhaps even pretending, despite their own visual evidence, that it does not truly exist. The two men, moreover, quickly escape away for a truly bucolic relationship on an island retreat encampment. In fact, much of this film, with its beautiful countryside images that include both Seol and the grandmother, and the two lovers reveal the absolute delights of this world, despite what we soon recognize are the surrounding society’s dark limitations. The grandmother attempts a near-suicide as she disappears into the nearby woods. But she is eventually discovered and is brought back into this basically loving and accepting world of what one might describe as coherent and necessary relationships, the longing Moon Kyeong, the admiring older Joong Min, the links between the older grandmother and the young Seol, as well as the truly loving commitment of Jin Woo and Hyun Min. Indeed, this intensely loving private world might have continued on quite nicely, particularly since Hyun Min has now been hired as a quite popular poetry teacher—who unlike so many such professorial and teacher roles in US films which I find utterly unfamiliar and even hostile to my own teaching methods, seems to really have something to offer his mostly older students.



    Yet this “distant world” is soon visited by the serpent, Jin Woo’s twin sister, when Eun Young (Lee Sang-hee) enters the scene, demanding back the daughter Seol, who she has abandoned so many years earlier and has never before even bothered to visit.

     She has now resurrected her life, so she claims, found employment, and insists that she is finally ready to assimilate the young girl back into her life. Jin Woo is not at all assured by her declarations, and is generally troubled by her intrusion into what might be described as an idyllic life.

     The already strange gender and social relationships these people share—Seol describing Jin Woo as her “mommy,” are further tortured by the new “real” mother and her not-so-very-subtle intentions. Seol’s deep relationship with the grandmother is also put into jeopardy, as the old woman finally winds her way into death.

    Jin Woo is clearly not receptive to his twin sister’s attempt to “reclaim” a daughter who she’s basically abandoned, and Eun Young is not at all truly accepting of her brother’s sexual relationship with Hyun Min. In a terrible public expression of her anger, she destroys the gay couple’s possibility of maintaining a hidden love affair, and turns the entire rural community against her own brother, forcing the gentle and lovely Min out of his job and, basically, out of Jin Woo’s life.


     But even Eun Young also realizes that she can never replace the young Seol’s love for her “mommy,” as the two, finally, remain as a kind of warring couple in the “distant place” in order to provide protection to which Jin Woo remains, and from which his lover Hyun Ming has understandably retreated. The film ends in yet another adjustment that the always accepting and innocently loving Seol must yet again endure, even if she has now been cured of he female/male gender recognition of her loving father and her now returned mother.

     And soon after, Seol herself goes missing in the forest in search for the missing “grandmother” who has sustained her connection with the older generation.



     There is no true happiness to be found in the location in which both siblings and their child reside. It represents, rather, a truce, a world in which Jin Woo’s sexuality is put on permanent hold, an absolution for his sins of preferring a man in a world that that cannot comprehend his love.

     Park Kun-young’s film is a sad reflection of yet again another gay relationship not permitted by the society at large. Any kind of family connection, outside of heteronormative traditional values in this isolated world is basically rejected. A father’s love for his adopted daughter, an errant mother’s love for her previously rejected daughter, a gay lover who seeks a local farmer’s sexual commitment, even a woman’s secret admiration for a lonely farmer, a fatherly bond established between a hard-working employee, a lonely old woman’s love for a young girl and that young girl’s innocent love of the elderly woman are not permitted in this restrictive world of isolation. Love is a punishment for all those who do not fit into the narrow confines of a heterosexually-defined society. “A distant place,” despite its deep beauty, is not somewhere caring and loving people should want to commit their free-minded lives. Such a beautiful word is not a society of openness and forgiveness.

 

Los Angeles, January 29, 2025

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog (January 2025).

Christopher Ashley | Jeffrey / 1995

pilgrim’s progress

by Douglas Messerli

 

Paul Rudnick (screenplay based on his stage play), Christopher Ashley (director) Jeffrey / 1995

 

Like so many young active gay men, Jeffrey (Steven Weber) absolutely loves sex, as he declares almost simultaneously with the titles, “I love sex. It’s just one of the truly great ideas. I mean just the fact that our bodies have this built-in capacity for joy—ohh, it makes me love the body.” The only problem is that it is 1994, the culmination of AIDS-related deaths. If in 1992 AIDS had become the number one cause of death for men in the US aged 25-44 years old, by 1994 it had become the major cause of death for all US citizens of the same ages.


     The film begins with Jeffrey having incredibly good sex—that is until he announces that the condom he is using has just broken. His sexual partner suddenly goes into torturous reaction of horror and hysteria. His next date demands that they “just cuddle, like rabbits or babies.” Another date requires medical tests to prove that Jeffrey has not been HIV-positive within months, days, and even hours before their sexual get-together. Another comes wrapped totally in cellophane. These are just a few of writer Paul Rudnick’s wildly humorous cartoons that fill the screen with metaphors of the difficulties of gay men sexually enjoying themselves in the tenth decade of the 20th century. As the fears grow exponential by the day, the man who evidences that he might even be oversexed suddenly grows so frustrated that he spins out into another hemisphere, determining to become celibate.

     Many of the critics have argued, as Roger Ebert puts it: “Now Jeffrey (Steven Weber) finds his sex life so frightening that he decides to swear off—to become celibate, and find other interests. It's not so much that he fears becoming HIV-positive himself, although he does; it's that he fears falling in love with someone who will die.” But to stop his sexual desires, it seems to me, misses the whole point of Rudnick’s movie—a film that in its devotion to dialogue and incident, belongs far more to the actor, in this case, than to director Christopher Ashley’s.

      Although the author does put AIDS front and center in this film—who could not in a gay movie being shot in New York in 1994?—Jeffrey is not a film about AIDS, not even a comedy about AIDS, which is how it bills itself. AIDS, which probably transformed the LGBTQ community more than any other event, even more than Stonewall, is here simply a metaphor for all the things that are beginning to make gay men like Jeffrey unable to understand their community and their role in life.

        Before AIDS everything had been so clear. Mythically speaking, gay men were outsiders, hated or loved, free to behave in a manner that was unthinkable for other men, the overtly expressiveness of their emotions to admit to disappointment, joy, and the feelings about others. Unlike most heterosexual men, they permitted themselves to go on the prowl, to have sex every day, several times each day if their stamina might let them, along with partying just to have fun. Work was simply a necessity to pay the rent. Gay men had few other major responsibilities except to their lovers and friends, free of the restrictions of husbands and children, and the rows and rows of other activities that forced heterosexual men to take shelter in their offices and cozy houses. Gay men, primarily an urban phenomena, lived in apartments and cozy cottages while heterosexuals were defined by the suburbs and small towns in which gay men pretended they all lived. The major responsibilities left to gay men, other than to have fun, was to keep the body fit and dress as best as the pocket book permitted.



    Since Jeffrey is still uninfected and in good health, why not turn his attention away from sex by focusing on his own body: “no sex, just sweat.” Joining a gym, the slim-built man asks for some help with lifting the weights. The man who immediately comes forward is a strikingly beautiful specimen of the species, Steve Howard (Michael T. Weiss), who so totally wows our hero that he can hardly speak without going up another octave. Standing with his well-endowed pants crotch over Jeffrey’s head, Steve encourages the groaning first time weight-lighter, to pump it, to want it, to keep going, just a little bit more, further and further until those gay men sitting in the audience might wish to cover their erections. Just at the moment of his greatest need of fortitude, Jeffrey meets the man that might possibly make him happy for the rest of his life.

      He escapes from the gym with hardly enough energy left to stumble on to a visit with his best friends, Sterling (Patrick Stewart) and Darius (Bryan Batt), a gay couple who have been together for several years and, upon hearing with shock about the change he plans to make in his life, advise him to settle down with someone as they have, which certainly is a better and safer way of having sex. Being a couple, you don’t, even evidently, have to think about sex.

      That, in fact, became the solution for thousands of gay men who before that period would not even have imagined their lives being restrained by monogamy, but who soon began fighting for marriage which finally resulted in the official acknowledgment of the rights by the government and society at large, another significant alteration in the previous world of gay men.

      Sterling is an interior decorator who, a bit older than Jeffrey and his own younger lover, who purposely maintains the stereotypical behavior of his profession, tittering and camping his way through life, in part, to entertain others and hide his own fears and sorrows behind a shield of irony and wit that also will soon become a relic of the past.

      Darius plays the air-headed gay boy who, as a dancer in Cats, has found a delightful job that will keep him employed for most of the rest of his lifetime and, again true to type, has nary a worry in his empty head—although in one of Ashley’s many moments of stop-action camera, Darius turns to his audience to argue the fact that he is as not stupid as they might think, and by the end of the film becomes the voice of wisdom. Moreover, what this perfect couple don’t yet make apparent is that despite their would-be protections of monogamy and wit, Darius is HIV-positive, and before the movie closes will die of full-blown AIDS and a cerebral hemorrhage. Obviously, we later discover there was something on his mind.

       Hearing of their friend’s meet-up with Mr. Right, they spend most of the rest of the movie attempting to bring the two perfect lovers together, mostly without success.

       Unable to get any acting roles other than small parts of just a few lines playing gay characters, Jeffrey continues to work as a catering waiter, once again meeting up with Steve, who it is now revealed works primarily as a bartender at a celebrity cowboy and Indian celebrity gala  headed up by Ann Marwood Bartle (Christine Baranski) where the film’s writer and director get  to play out Steve’s gay fantasy which turns into a musical hoedown with the catering boys performing choreographic wonderments that suggest Hello, Dolly!, gay male strippers such as the boys in Montreal’s Stock Bar, and sexual couplings that might have been played out by the gay disco singers of the Village People. Didn’t I mention that this movie is also a musical romance? This time around Jeffrey can’t quite escape Steve’s lasso, agreeing to a dinner date.


       Regretting his decision, Jeffrey turns to an evangelical-like gathering headed by Debra Moorehouse (Sigourney Weaver) who as the love evangelist demonstrates how to hate nearly everyone unlike your beloved self, freeing her congregation from their traditional habits of loving and forgiving. Despite the fervor of her congregants, it simply doesn’t move our doubting Thomas, particularly when she begins to suggest that disease is the result of the absence of love, which quickly comes close to sounding very much like the traditional evangelical community’s blame of the gay community for the AIDS that had infected them. Either way, loving or failing to love, it appears that the LGBT world had it coming.

      But even more disconcerting is the fact that Steve has revealed to Jeffrey that he is HIV-positive, although not yet showing any signs of disease. But once more the news sends Jeffrey reeling as he leaves a message of Steve’s answering machine that he can’t meet him for dinner, lying that he has another catering event, an act which devastates the man who loves Jeffrey most. The anger Steve feels for Jeffrey’s behavior threatens any chance for either of their happiness’ for the rest of their lives.

     Only more than a third of way through the movie, we are left for nearly other hour of Rudnick’s and Ashley’s weaving through fascinating variations of the gay community in the manner of Woody Allen movies, the Saturday Night Live comic sketches, Leo McCarey’s An Affair to Remember, and Rob Reiner’s When Harry Met Sally, to which Rudnick’s script tips it hat.

      In his attempt to wipe away any footprints of his previous gay life, Jeffrey seeks out a self-help group, Sexual Compulsives Anonymous, who like AAA members testify about their behaviors as a first step to their cure. Dave (Ethan Phillips) who is the first up readily admits to his obsession, the group responding in unison before he reveals that it’s probably caused by the fact that he has a constant 24-hour erection and his penis is 14-inches long, the group responding,  “oooooo. Hi, Dave.”


      Jeffrey runs into Steve on the street in what appears to be their final acrimonious meeting, where Steve finally calls him out on his failures to get together: “I can understand about the HIV thing. It’s not easy. But I don’t like lying about it. Not anymore.” Jeffrey’s being sorry has no weight for him. “I can take being sick. I can fucking take dying, but I can’t take this.” Soon after, he sarcastically provides him with “all the information” that Jeffrey argues was previously withheld: “I’ve been positive for almost 5 years. I was sick once. My T-cells are decent. And every once in a while, like 50 times a day, an hour, I get very tired of being a person with AIDS, a red ribbon. So sometimes I forget. Sometimes I choose to forget. Sometimes I choose just to be a gay man with a dick. Can I forget again?”

      But Jeffrey’s sad answer says everything, “No.” It is at this point we almost lose interest in the man who lost his way so completely that we are fearful that he will ever find his way home.

      Wandering off again, increasingly severed from his own world, Jeffrey meets up with a trio of

thugs who beat and rob him, somewhat ironically, because he’s a fag. One has to wonder if a celibate homosexually-inclined human being can truly be described as being gay.


       Disconsolate, our dumb Pilgrim enters a cathedral, gets down on his knees and prays. A priest (Nathan Lane), moves up beside him, also kneeling, and begins to goose his butt. Startled by the act, Jeffrey rises as the priest, Father Dan, signals for him to follow, our hero needing spiritual  guidance, following after. Once he gets him in the chapel, Dan jumps him demanding sex. When Jeffrey escapes his clutches, claiming he doesn’t understand what’s going on, Dan makes it clear: “Maybe you didn’t hear me, I’m a Catholic priest. That falls somewhere in between a chorus boy and florist.” Before long Dan is showing Jeffrey his confession box wherein the walls are covered with Broadway musical album covers, his answer to the question of where is God and why He is allowing evil into the world.

      In the meantime, Darius collapses on the stairwell after the ballet he’s attended with Sterling and Jeffrey. Things are getting worse.


     When taking a run through Central Park, Jeffrey once more meets up with Steve, who’s evidently the manager of the Pride Day Parade, which Jeffrey has forgotten about despite the floats and people all about ready for the start. We imagine now finally this lost fool might come back to the fold, many of his community having gathered in the same spot. The occasion creates some other rather comic situations as Olympia Dukakis, playing the mother of a transsexual female lesbian who asks where they should go for the start of the parade. Jeffrey is asked to take a group photograph. But instead of having come to his senses, he seems more lost than ever, telling Steve that he is moving back to Wisconsin. Steve meanwhile introduces him to his new boyfriend, Sean. The opportune time for their romance seems to have forever passed.

      More than anything, however, what this scene achieves is a magnificent Arthur J. Bressan-like compilation of clips from the Pride Parade, which in the context of all the other types we have encountered so far in this movie, makes it transparently clear just how wonderfully crazy, confused, conflicted, yet utterly beautiful and ebullient the LGBTQ community is in its messy amalgamations. I realized more than ever just what a remarkable world we have created that is so very different from everything else around us. And indeed these scenes brought tears to my eyes for its celebration of difference and waves of anger for many in that same community seeking today to totally assimilate and smooth out the differences as someone like Jeffrey and so many  other post-AIDS survivors have attempted to do. Would those who, like Bressan, fought so hard for that identity and died, in part, because of it, even recognize the LGBTQ+++++ world of today, the gay and lesbian bars nearly empty or filled with straight girls and boys, the often self-righteous outrage of some of its members for sexual excesses and outré demonstrations of public nudity, the continued ostracization of the effeminate despite the near-universal acceptance of drag behavior, now performed by as many heterosexuals as homosexuals? It is for some of those very reasons why I am writing these pages. A great deal of our current acceptance has come at the cost of our heart and souls, as well as our collective identity. 


     Rudnick even in 1993-94 when he produced his play and worked on this film, clairvoyantly perceived, I would argue, what filmmakers like Bressan, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Bill Sherwood, Jerry Tartaglia, Derek Jarman, David Wojnarowicz, and many others realized: that sex and gender is at the very heart of the LGBTQ world, not tangential issues requiring us to imagine we are no different from heterosexuals. We are different and that’s what makes us interesting and important in the larger society. Realizing that our difference has do with our bodies and behavior, does not mean that we need or even can abandon our intellects or spiritual values. It is a life lived through those differences that often accounts for our intellectual and spiritual acuity, and most certainly our empathy for all others.

      Finally, that is the lesson of the celibate-in-training Jeffrey learns. When Darius dies, Sperling is no longer in the mood to hear of Jeffrey’s sympathies or attempts to ameliorate his suffering. For the moment, Sperling reveals, he hates Jeffrey for his unspoken betrayal of his own self. As Sperling argues, “You’re not a part of this. This has nothing to do with you.” Behaving differently in terms of both sex and gender has been the manner and matter of his life, if perhaps the cause of his current pain which is also the source of all his joy and meaning.

      Sperling tells Jeffrey that Darius once said: “You are the saddest person he ever knew.”

      Jeffrey, taken aback, asks, “Why did he say that?”

     “Because he was sick. Because he had a fatal disease. And he was one million times happier than you.”

      “You loved Darius. You want me to go through that with Steve?”

      “Yes.”            


       It takes a hallucination of Darius returning to life for Jeffrey to finally comprehend, as Darius puts it, in the vulgate, “Go dancing. Hate AIDS, Jeffrey, not life. …Think of AIDS like the guest who won’t leave. The one we all hate. Hey, it’s still our party.”

    Jeffrey, finally ready to party again, invites Steve to dinner via a phone message. He has booked the entire dining room of the Essex Hotel. Improbably, Steve shows up but, even though he has broken up with his boyfriend, is still cautious about Jeffrey’s seeming change of heart. Jeffrey must convince him that he will return the next day after safe sex, that he will risk his life for love.



     I have to admit, I wasn’t convinced by Rudnick’s metaphor of a balloon which, earlier in the film was explained: when someone lets it loose there is always another who strives to catch it and protect it from its inevitable bursting. I more fully believe his assurance that this time he will not leave, “Because I’m a gay man, and I live in the city. I am not an innocent bystander. Not anymore.” He has returned to us.

 

Los Angeles, November 13, 2022

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2022).

Luiz DeBarros | Hot Legs / 1995

THE LIVING DOLL

by Douglas Messerli

 

Luiz DeBarros (screenwriter and director) Hot Legs / 1995

 

The short film (27 minutes) Hot Legs begins—after its color credits and an eerily nervous musical score by Dean Hart—somewhat like a gay noir, one of the first of a slew of such works after, that also toys with being a kind of existentialist mind teaser:

 

“Imagine waking up...naked...in strange place, say like a motel room (wakey wakey)...find yourself sitting up facing a man with a rather large gun (fuck). I’ve been thinking to myself. What would be the first words I would say? Like in the movies...what the...or where am I or some shit like that. So think carefully because I’ve giving you a chance here to come up with something a little more...original.”


     The stuttering answer of the victim to whom these words are spoken are even less interesting...”I...where am I....” He has clearly failed the test.

      But these are obviously not your typical noir figures. The man, clearly awakening from drugs, is a stunning beautiful young blond, completely naked and, yes, with “hot legs”—as his tormentor comments—his hands tied with rope behind his back. This young man makes Bogie look like a monster.

     Who might have been a goon in the typical Hollywood movie is a trim handsome man smoking a cigarette, a well-educated figure whom we later discover is a medical doctor who was educated in the same private boarding school as the “pretty boy”—this South African director Luiz De Barros’ earliest film from 1991 was titled Pretty Boys—sitting in the nude before him. Unlike most Hollywood films, the present action of Hot Legs is in black-and-white, with only the short flashbacks in color.

      Over the six episodes, representing the days the doctor Tim (David Dukas) holds the boy beauty Dave (Gerrie Barnard) we gradually discover that the two were lovers at school, who, perhaps from peer pressure or the mockery of Dave’s athletic friends, were turned into enemies, as the now naked hostage in those olden days suddenly turned on his friend, beating Tim and later mentally traumatizing him throughout the rest of his school years. As Tim late in the film attempts to comprehend it, he enquires: “You know what I want to know. I mean I understand how your macho ego had to find a way of proving you’re a man, beating the shit out of me. But what I never understood was, why did you have to carry on after that? Why did you have to fuckin’ torment me, terrify me, humiliate me in front of the whole school? Why Dave?”


       Dave hardly even recognizes the individual who, turning the tables so to speak, is now tormenting him, and even when reminded that Tim was his boyhood friend, can only repeat that it seems so long ago. Why is he being so obsessed about something so far in the past, Dave wonders.

       It’s clear that the now heterosexually-inclined Dave is not the most intelligent of beings, claiming that he deeply loves his wife who provides him with good sex, although as Tim reminds him, he has regularly had sexual encounters with other beautiful women.

     As Tim attempts to dig into his hostage’s past, to comprehend how and why his once homosexual lover so radically shifted his sexual desires, we eventually perceive that Dave has not given those painful events or any of his other actions much thought. Like Maurice’s friend Clive Durham in James Ivory’s film version of E. M. Forster’s novel, he has almost effortlessly abandoned his homosexual life when faced by the normative demands of South African society.

       Although Tim has clearly plotted out his actions to enact a revenge fantasy, as the subtitle of this film suggests, that will end in his ex-lover’s death, as he teasingly and at times brutally feeds, strokes, toilets, washes, and shaves the now “doll-like” figure he has raped (using that word in its original Latin meaning, “the act of seizing and carrying away by force”), he eventually shifts his intentions.



      It is almost as if DeBarros’ central character—as well as his audience—has become so attracted to the slightly dimwitted but hot-legged Dave that he cannot bear to do away with him, imagining the possibility perhaps of keeping him around as, if nothing else, as a loving-hating diversion that might even result in a few moments of intense kisses.

       But it is at that very moment of shifting when we sense a different balance occurring between the two. Earlier, despite his claim that he can never remember his dreams, Dave manages to reveal a particular dream in which the two of them went hiking and it was “really beautiful as we walked around the mountains. It was hot, the sun dancing on my back. It was so hot. ...As we set up camp for the night I remember it being very quiet. Just the sound of wild animals. As we were lying next to the fire you came close and you started touching me and I...well I started spitting in your fucking face, you asshole.”

       As he spits now into Tim’s face, we cannot but wonder whether the memory itself has been a creation simply to taunt his captor. But if so, we suddenly recognize that Dave may have some inner resources of survival and with those an inner life that all these years he has worked intensely to sublimate.

       There is an almost Harold Pinter-like quality about this narrative shift, as the seemingly unfeeling Dave admits that he had beaten Tim because, with regard to their sexual involvement, because “he liked it too much,” an admission of homophobic guilt that absolutely terrifies Tim, who gradually loses control, his captive suddenly spinning out of his chair to beat him just as he had as a child. With the shaving knife he is able to cut the rope that binds his hands.

        When he turns back to the fallen Tim, he sees the now equally naked Dave once standing erect, holding the gun aimed at his body. After attempting to calm him, to reassure him that he will not go to the police, that they should just “forget” all that has happened—a true reversion, I would argue, to his simplicity of thinking. When that fails, he lunges again toward Tim yelling out, “You want me to fuck you?”

        The gun explodes. When the police arrive, in what the “epilogue” describes as 40 minutes later, we see Dave once again sitting in the chair, his hands still tied behind his back just as in the very first scene, except this time with blood rubbed across his face.

        “He killed himself,” he insists to the police. “He kidnapped me. He’s dead.”

        There are several ways of interpreting this ending. Perhaps, fearing the rape and not being able to face the trauma of his youth yet again—in the short flashback clips we briefly observe a previous rape, perhaps one of the torments Tim was forced to suffer—the doctor truly did kill himself. The blood on Dave’s face, according to this scenario, is Tim’s blood that splattered upon the attackers’ cheeks.

        But how to explain the bound hands? It is far more likely that the gun went off accidently, killing Tim, or that Dave actually shot and killed him. Within the 40 minutes before the arrival of the police, who presumably Dave telephoned, he returned to the chair and retied his hands, in so doing obviating any guilt that might be attached to him, and allowing himself the possibility of denying any knowledge about the logic of his own abduction.

        Yet, in so doing, he has once more been forced to shut himself off from any emotional or intellectual consciousness, to play the role of the complete passive innocent whose outward beauty is the only thing he has to offer others. Perhaps Tim realized that, after all, he did not need to kill his “living doll” since inside it was already dead.

 

Los Angeles, November 29, 2020

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

 

 

My Queer Cinema Index [with former World Cinema Review titles]

Films discussed (listed alphabetically by director) [Former Index to World Cinema Review with new titles incorporated] (You may request any ...