Wednesday, September 17, 2025

Amara Cash | Out of the Closet / 2014

back into the closet

by Douglas Messerli

 

Amara Cash (director) Out of the Closet / 2014 [5 minutes]

 

Damien Diaz and Daniele La Leggia are the arguing gay couple in this truly amateurish short film by Amara Cash.

     The two have been having a hot relationship which we know through the tropes running through the flashbacks that possibly could be fitted into a five-minute narrative: running at the beach, riding a Ferris-wheel together, picnicking on the Santa Monica, Los Angeles promontory, and, occasionally kissing and rolling around in bed.


    But today on Damien’s visit, Daniele evidently has not time for him. Evidently he doesn’t feel the freedom to openly come out since he’s Italian and he lives 20 minutes away from the Vatican. Moreover, he’s about to get a leg up Hollywood through a new script he’s written, and he’s not going let Damien fuck it up.

     Finally, he has forgotten to tell Damien: he has a new fiancée, Victoria, who will be visiting him at any moment. Desperate to silence his suddenly ex-boyfriend, he shoves Damien into the closet of his bedroom and locks the door.

     In short, no one is out of the closet in this work. Even if Damien has fought his own father for his freedom, he has now been recloseted by his boyfriend, now clearly former boyfriend. And by film’s end he can’t even open the bedroom door to escape.  

     Poundingly bad music is used to create a sense of drama since neither of these young men can act and the dialogue, moreover, presumably written by Cash (no screenwriter is listed) is so embarrassing that it’s no surprise when at one point in the YouTube version online the sound goes mute. No need to explain what’s going on. That was established in the very first few minutes. This is a toxic situation that Damien should have immediately run from just as the viewer should have turned away from the screen.

      But then, given the political situation these days, perhaps this little vignette, no matter ineffectual, has shown us the future of the queer world.

 

Los Angeles, September 17, 2025

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog (September 2025).

 

Elliot London | 306 / 2010

working his way through school

by Douglas Messerli

 

Elliot London and Gregory Phelan (screenplay), Elliot London (director) 306 / 2010 [10 minutes]

 

In its promotional statement on IMDb and other such services, this short film directed by Elliot London claims to explore what is normal in one’s life. Or rather, who is normal. Its example is a student, Eric Hays (Brian Estel), who evidently works at a bar most nights, begging a friend to take his shift for the evening.


    As he showers and shaves, dresses up in a suit and enters an apartment hallway, we can easily guess that his alternative job that evening is as private call-boy. He enters the suite of an older man, (Scott Lynch Giddings) who serves him a glass a sherry before Eric stands, strips away his tie and shirt to be momentarily fellated by the older man before he quickly and quite forceable pushes Eric to the couch and fucks him, handing him a towel to clean off before taking a quick exit, all of this without a word.

 


    The music-laden film (with a heavily-influenced score by Debussy, posing as new work evidently by Mark Chiat) hints at a shocking twist: Eric returns home and after a long shower, moves into the bedroom where a woman (Raquel Houghton), the Sam of an earlier refrigerator door clue is asleep. He gives her a kiss.


   I suspect the scripters and director imagined we might be shocked, asking as they do: “Who is Eric Hays? Or more specifically: What is Eric Hays hiding?”

    Frankly, there’s absolutely no evidence that he’s hiding anything. And moreover, there are hundreds of such male prostitutes who claim not to be gay and live with a woman, often out in the open. Such relationships have been the subject of so many queer films that it seems as if the vast majority of young men working as male-on-male sex workers claim to be heterosexuals off the clock. Polish director Wiktor Grodecki’s trilogy Not Angels But Angels (1994), Body Without Soul (1996), and Mandragora (1997), among many other such films, long ago established that boys and men doing sex for hire general don’t prefer to be described as being gay.

     If London means to surprise us he should have watched a few dozen films about the subject for embarking on his own work. Moreover, as a commentator named “Johnny” on Letterboxd argues: “If the absence of dialogue was an intentional artistic choice, it needed to be counterbalanced by a more daring visual or conceptual approach. Instead, 306 opts for safety: clean visuals, minimal risk, and ultimately, little emotional impact.”

     This film has some lovely cinematographical moments, particularly when Eric is being wined and fucked, but it has hardly anything else to offer us. No news here, and most definitely no surprises.

 

Los Angeles, September 17, 2025

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog (September 2025).

Bill Condon | Gods and Monsters / 1998

the peace to be himself

by Douglas Messerli

 

Bill Condon (screenplay, based on the book Father of Frankenstein by Christopher Bram, and director) Gods and Monsters / 1998

James Whale (Ian McKellen)—the often forgotten director of the highly successful World War I drama Journey’s End (1930), four of the greatest comic horror films of all time Frankenstein (1931), The Old Dark House (1932), The Invisible Man (1933), and The Bride of Frankenstein (1935)and what I believe to be the best cinematic adaptation of the musical Show Boat (1936)—has just been released from the hospital after having a stroke that has left his mind with overwhelming waves of interruptive memories that permit him little sleep as well as affecting his tastebuds which make it almost unpleasant at times to eat.


    His housekeeper, Hanna (a wonderful Lynn Redgrave) who, having worked for him now for 15 years, has always been protective but now behaves like a motherly-nurse in the manner of Elsa Lanchester to Charles Laughton in Witness for the Prosecution, scolding him about his forgetfulness of taking pills, expressing her dismay for inability to properly eat, and—as he peeks out the window at the new lawn boy, Clayton Boone (Brendan Fraser) she has hired in his absence—fearing that he might regress to his old ways of hosting pool parties where he serves as voyeur to the dozens of gay boys he invites over each Sunday—a subliminal attempt, perhaps, to compete with director George Cukor’s notorious gay boy Sunday pool parties held regularly for several decades. Hanna is a devout German Roman Catholic, and is terrified that her beloved Jimmy will not be able to meet up with her in Heaven.

      Perhaps she needn’t worry. The hunky somewhat surly-looking lawn boy—endowed with Fraser’s muscular body, thick neck, and oddly proportioned head topped with a 1950s-style flat-top haircut that makes him look vaguely like Whale’s version of Mary Shelley’s monster—does not appear to be terribly friendly.


     Another fussy friend, Whale’s former lover David Lewis (David Dukes) stops by just to look in on him, reminding Whale also to live a more discreet existence and, of course, to take the pills which make him feel numb to his sensually-perceived life and, even when they are regularly ingested cannot slow down the overload of memories of his childhood, wartime, and directing days.* It also appears that despite their long relationship, an open secret in Hollywood during their time together, that Lewis has grown much more closeted and, given the current success of his film career, is terrified of being publicly outed. Clearly, it was far easier to be gay in the semi-public eye of Hollywood during the 1920s and 30s than it is in the 1950s, the fact of which Whale has not quite yet assimilated and perhaps, given his reclusive life, doesn’t care to take into account.

      Besides, he has an interview scheduled with a young nerdy horror film admirer, Edmund Kay (Jack Plotnick), a figure perhaps based on Whale’s real friend whom he met in the late 1940s, Curtis Harrington, who along with his own mutual friends Kenneth Anger, Gregory Markopoulos and others represented a new gay wave of homosexual filmmakers. It was Harrington who recovered Whale’s seemingly lost film The Old Dark House and promoted Whale’s works at time when he was largely forgotten.  


      In the film however, Kay is a creepily giggly gay boy who’s more than willing to go along with the director’s flirtatious advances, playing strip tease with him, giving up an object of his clothing for every honest question answered. By the time their interview is nearly finished—their conversation interrupted by a small medical episode which requires the sudden appearance of Hanna who speedily sends the visitor away—Whale has stripped him down to his underpants.

     Surely he knows, as do we, that the all-too compliant kid, is not the man for him. And the director turns his attentions for the rest of the film upon Clayton Boone, a slightly homophobic straight boy with an eager mind but a dumb innocence. And we know almost from the beginning, as Roger Ebert notes, that he will never completely engage in the gay sexual game that Whale willingly and sometimes unknowingly attempts to trick him into.

     It’s not that the hunky young man doesn’t fall for the most obvious of ruses. Before we can even get adjusted to the idea if their communicating with one another, Whale has already whisked the ex-marine off to his art studio to engage him in a sitting for a drawing, head only of course, assuring the dim-wit that he has utterly no interest in his body while quickly covering up a beefcake magazine on a nearby table.


     Ebert bemoans the fact that it is unlikely that the two will ever wind together in bed: “We never ever believe there's a possibility that anything physical will occur between them—and we should, I think.” But that simply reveals what I often have observed as Ebert's lack of understanding about gay life. For as any gay man of a certain age realizes, it is the witty art of verbal seduction that is far more important to someone like the central character of this movie than is their mutual ejaculation or even a good-old fashioned fuck. How close can he get to sexual contact without endangering his life is the issue at hand. Straight boys are generally more attractive than gay ones who go to bed with older men out a myriad of reasons that has nothing at to do with attraction of even the possibility of love—financial or social gain, a father compulsion, sexual compulsiveness, or simple pity—most of which would never draw someone like Clayton Boone into the fantasy of Whale’s sexual web. 

     Quite often Boone, played beautifully by the shape-shifting Fraser, has utterly no clue to what is happening. And he himself becomes fascinated with simply rubbing up with someone he might have imagined meeting in Los Angeles when he first moved there from Joplin, Missouri. And Whale, the perfect blender of pop culture and high art, is the ideal figure to attract the basically uneducated “monster.”


   Boone watches the Frankenstein films with the original wonderment and accepting humor of the early audiences as opposed to his mocking and anxiety-ridden 1950s friends who have replaced the movie’s explicit monsters with far vaguer ones such as the Communists or faggots, which Boone’s girlfriend and male drinking partners all immediately recognize Whale to be—not because they have any knowledge of him or of his films, but because anyone who is an artist seeking a male model just has to be a queer.

      Suddenly the adult child still cutting lawns for a living finds himself on the outside of his tough-talking bar friends such as his supposed girlfriend Betty (Lolita Davidovich) who suddenly rejects his sexual advances. He finds himself, for the first time, in the role of a cinema critic, attempting to speak about something of which he has never imagined he might. He still doesn’t have the words, but he’s already done some research at the local library about Whale himself. He has become a student of a world he can only grasp at, without ever fully comprehending. If he still can’t describe the art he observes, he knows what he likes. 

      Yet Whale, through his trance-like verbal expressions of his past—a poverty-stricken childhood in the British midlands, the stinking trenches of World War I, and his work on the Frankenstein films—all further engage the slow learner with a world he has never before even imagined. Particularly moving is Whale's description of his lover and his death to German shelling in the no-man’s land just a few yards away from him and fellow soldiers who are now all forced to watch his body spiked up against the barb-wired tangle for weeks before their transfer (in real life Whale was captured by the Germans and imprisoned in Holzminden Officers' Camp).


      And of course Whale is very much interested in his lawn boy’s body. Invited, surprisingly, to a lawn party by George Cukor given in honor of Princess Margaret, the director at first sees the event as nothing but a hoot, but eventually realizes that by asking Clayton to become his chauffeur he can finally best Cukor. The party is perhaps the most comic scene in the movie, moving close to camp when the Princess, standing beside Cukor, mistakes Whale for Cecil Beaton; Whale brilliantly allays her apologies by introducing her to his gardener (Clayton), suggesting that “he has never met a Princess, having known only queens,” simultaneously diminishing the Princess’ royal status while jabbing Cukor directly in the gut with evidence that he can still attract the likes of such a handsome young lad as Clayton. 

     But Cukor’s current male “secretary,” it turns out, is none other than Edmund Kay, the creepy horror fan, who in fact has been behind Whale’s invite, mostly for the opportunity a photographing Whale with both Boris Karloff and Elsa Lanchester, the creator with his monster and the bride. One can only wish that such events happened in real life!


     In the film, a sudden winter rain wipes away the Beverly Hills sun, and Whale and his still mystified driver are forced to return home, Clayton now so wet that he has no choice but to don a loose sweater from his host’s closet and remain with a towel around his waist. 

    Finally having his prey almost nude while caught up once more in his youthful memories, the creator of Frankenstein attempts to do away with his monsters by forcing Clayton once again to pose, this time in a gas mask from World War I, totally covering up what Whale has proclaimed to be the perfect head. Finding it difficult to breathe in the mask, and beginning to truly fear for Whale’s sanity, the young man demands the mask be taken off, as Whale moves in for the metaphorical kill, putting his hands upon Clayton’s naked shoulders and grabbing for his suddenly exposed cock.


   Predictably, his young friend explodes into violence pushing the old man to the floor, jumping upon him, and preparing to slug him into unconsciousness—precisely what Whale is seeking, someone to help him into death.

     The boy, however, is no longer the ex-marine he used to be, having admitted just previously that he never served in Korea, his appendix bursting in camp, after which he was sent home. At the moment of this battle, Clayton pulls back and breaks down into the tears of a horrified child, even the slightly bruised Whale describing him as being simply a pussy-cat.

     To calm him and to help explain his situation, Whale shows him all the drawings he has “done” over the weeks of Clayton's “modeling.” The large sketching pads contain nothing but broken lines. Just as he can no longer eat or sleep, Whale can no longer draw or paint, or, most importantly, coherently think. He seeks death since nearly of the pleasures of this sensualist’s and intellect’s life have been diminished, lost in the electrical storm in his brain recreating his past.

    Clayton, like the monster, picks up his friend, his would-be creator and tucks him into bed.

    In the morning, Clayton, who has stayed the night on a living room couch, awakens to find an envelope addressed to him, inside the original drawing of Frankenstein by the head designer of the film, a gift from Whale to his beloved lawn boy.

    A few moments later, Clayton discovers Whale’s body in the swimming pool, face down, where he has apparently drowned himself in the night. Clayton attempts to rescue him, removing the body from the pool to no avail, Hanna running toward him to protest, knowing that her Jimmy in fact is dead. She suggests that Clayton leave immediately before she calls the police so that he will not become a suspect. But he observes that they will surely wonder how she got his body out of the pool.   

    Accordingly, in grand Guignol manner, they are forced to toss their Jimmy back into the water, where this time his body floats into position face up. 


      In real life, the police actually did seek out whether there might have been foul play, but ultimately listed his death as accidental. In truth, Whale had left a suicide note, but ex-lover Lewis, obviously truly nervous at this point about public scandal, withheld it, revealing the message only near his own death decades later. The note read, according to Kenneth Anger:

 

“To ALL I LOVE,

 

Do not grieve for me. My nerves are all shot and for the last year I have been in agony day and night—except when I sleep with sleeping pills—and any peace I have by day is when I am drugged by pills.

     I have had a wonderful life but it is over and my nerves get worse and I am afraid they will have to take me away. So please forgive me, all those I love and may God forgive me too, but I cannot bear the agony and it [is] best for everyone this way. The future is just old age and illness and pain. Goodbye and thank you for all your love. I must have peace and this is the only way.

 

— Jimmy”

 

    I wish this otherwise moving film might have ended with that quote instead of a scene decades later with Clayton Boone is his living room with his wife and child, the boy watching Frankenstein for the very first time before being sent off to bed. In the film, Clayton leaves the house and stomps through puddles of a rainy backstreet in the manner of Boris Karloff’s monster as if he were performing the dance without music from Singing in the Rain.

     I’d like to imagine, even if it may be unlikely, that Whale might have changed Boone’s life in ways far more significant than such a campy gesture to the still neglected giant.

    But ultimately I see this film as being not centered upon the education of a straight bumpkin nor Whale’s flirtation with him, but about a gay man who refused—no matter what the decades of his life put up as barriers before him—to lose his sense of sexual and intellectual difference. If his parents sent him off the work in a factory, he found a way to escape it through art. If the Great War, as he put it, wiped out nearly an entire generation, he found love in the trenches and survived its destruction. If the public sought out larger than life moral fables to demonstrate man’s folly in imagining himself to be a god, Whale managed to have his homosexual geniuses create monsters than revealed man’s inhumanity far more than their monstrosities. When age made him no longer as attractive to others, he brought beauty into his own backyard, enjoying it from the vantage of an unabashed voyeur. When his body began to fail him, he engaged in an imaginary romance with a man who finally did in fact hold him in something that at least gestured toward love. When there was nothing left he straightforwardly greeted death. The peace to be himself was all he ever sought.

 

*In real life Whale broke up his 22-year romance (1930-1952) with Lewis when—after a tour of European museums and visit to a Paris gay bar where he met a young gay “hustler” (as director Curtis Harrington described him), Pierre Foegel and hired him as his chauffeur—he determined to bring Foegel to the US to live with him. He did so, eventually installing Foegel as an attendant at a gas station he owned. Indeed Foegel seems very close to the character played by Brendan Fraser in Bram’s fiction and in the film.

 

Los Angeles, November 11, 2022

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2022).

Àlex Aguado | Barcelona des de dalt (Barcelona from Above) / 2017

actor and director

by Douglas Messerli

 

Àlex Aguado (director) Barcelona des de dalt (Barcelona from Above) / 2017 [9 minutes]

 

David (Àlex Bonavia) is planning to shoot a short film and his friend, an actor, Marti (Pau Matheu) joins him. He has chosen a spot among the old bunkers of Barcelona, but before he can even begin to snap pictures of the location, Marti has grabbed the camera away from him and demands to know the plot of the short film.

     David, who clearly hasn’t thought his story over that carefully, is a bit embarrassed, particularly since it’s about a guy who turns invisible. Regaining the camera, David takes his friend to a high point overlooking the city, suggesting that this is where he wants one of the shots.

     Finally, David takes out the script and hands it to Marti, and together they do a short scene about a scientist and a magic potion. Finishing the scene, Marti suddenly moves toward David and kisses him on the lips. David pulls back violently, Marti arguing that it was in the script. Still David takes umbrage for the act.


      David asks why Marti has insisted in joining him in the first place, but Marti refuses to respond, instead leafing briefly through the script, surprised and even angered that Frank, the invisible man, turns out to be the bad guy, when everyone knows it has to be the scientist.

      Even more angered, David pushes the script out of Marti’s hand as the papers go flying, Marti admitting that he isn’t quite sure why he has joined David.

      David eventually walks up to the old bunkers, which Marti keeps describing as an anti-aircraft site. Marti, having gathered up the pages, follows.

      The two boys sit side by side. David admits that he wanted another ending, Marti describing it as “a bit cheesy, badly written.” David says that directing is his thing.

      Marti announces that he won’t let David do the film because the bunkers are anti-aircraft positions, not bunkers, while David argues they’re bunkers to him. Call them what you like, Marti argues, but they still are what they are, just like Frank, even if invisible, still exists. “He’ll be as tall, skinny, as much of an asshole as he is, and even being invisible won’t change him.”

      David turns away. But it is Marti who apologizes for having become so invisible. David takes away the script and tears it up. He puts his hand on Marti’s shoulder as the credits rise.

      Clearly these two boys have been in a relationship that has broken up, the film a kind a possible metaphor for what has taken place. But now that they’re back together again, apparently there is no need for art, as they see the situation anew from “above Barcelona.”

      Inevitably, Spanish director Àlex Aguado’s short film has, with its evocative ending, lost all purpose as well.

 

Los Angeles, October 13, 2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (October 2013).

Chad Hylton | Love You Thank You / 2017

face in the pillow

by Douglas Messerli

 

Chad Hylton (screenwriter and director) Love You Thank You / 2017 [27 minutes]

 

In this short comedy-drama gay boy Lance (Tim Torre) spends most of the time arguing with his inner self (body double Michael Nicolo) about his previous relationship with Adam (Donovan Mendelovitz) who, long after their breakup, has asked Lance to attend his first major art opening.


      Lance is about to obsequiously return the man he once loved, while his inner self attempts to force him to remember all the unpleasant occurrences which resulted in their breakup. In fact, despite the rather bitchy and often outright nasty Lance 2, what we witness in the film’s ongoing series of flashbacks of Lance’s and Adam’s relationship, the couple’s first encounter at a coffee shop, is rather charming, as the frustrated would-be actor Lance first introduces himself to Adam, who has secretly been drawing picture of him from afar. Their affair seems almost destined as, having swallowed some peanuts to which he quickly discovers Lance is allergic, Adam tosses them out stating that he regrets having eaten them. Lance responds, “You really want to kiss me.” “I do,” continues Adam, Lance countering it would literally kill him. “I’m that good,” jokes Adam.

     Back to Lance’s learnèd conscience: “He was molasses smooth and sugary sweet like a snicker-fuckin’ doddle and you chowed down on that shit like a thirsty little bitch, but you know what, too much sugar and you know what you’ve got, a rotten tooth….” So much for love at first sight.

     When we witness more flashbacks, Lance’s and Adam’s early sexual encounters also suggest some problems. Adam apparently sees himself as the top, but has difficulties in finishing the job, whereas Lance would actually enjoy that position. They have been evidently talking about the shift, with Adam resisting. Does he somehow see the position as something essential to his control, a macho role? The film doesn’t precisely suggest that, but we discern something is a bit amiss. He claims he’s simply stressed out about the how his art show is going, but his comments, “I don’t know what I’m doing,” suggest a far bigger issue that lies underneath his doubts.


     Adam soon admits to a very dark high school experience, “lots and lots of black Crayolas, boys and boys of black Crayola.” He had no one to even invite to the Prom. In the midst of Adam’s conversation, Lance admits that he loves him, which stops everything for a few moments as if a time warp had swallowed them both. He apologizes, suggesting that his love was not something which he even had permission to mention. “I know we haven’t been dating that long and I know it’s kind of crazy, but I had to say it.”

     Adam’s response, gives meaning to the film’s title, “Thank you, really.”

     Even the densest of audience members must surely realize there are some serious problems ahead.

     Lance is forced immediately to back off, describing his feelings as not suggesting that he is “in love with Adam,” but simply that he loves spending time with him. It is apparent, however, that he’s now saying something he doesn’t really mean: covering up the lie that he truly loves someone by pretending he does not. Dangerous territory lies indeed.

     The two make passionate love, but all Adam has to offer is “Hey, I appreciate you too.”


     Even Lance’s conscience has to admit that he didn’t actually run away like a sociopath. Perhaps he should go see him at the opening, explaining his decision to agree with his softer self as has having to do with his back molar tooth pain—caused probably by the oversweet lies Adam has fed him.

     Back into history, we discover that their relationship is truly disintegrating. Their game of “Perfectly perfect” has seemingly been forgotten by Adam, who also refuses to let Lance see the drawings he’s doing of him. Alcohol is more prevalent. Adam seems to suddenly wonder about his lover’s capability of even getting home safely, and refuses to accompany him upstairs into the room where presumably they might have sex. When a lover suggests, “You know yourself better than I do,” it’s clear the personal involvement between the two men in a deep relationship has evaporated. He no longer even pretends or apparently even wants to know the “other,” as writers such as Eudora Welty have long made clear is the mania of early romances, involving the absurd attempt to even become the other.

     Lance nonetheless lures him upstairs and the two engage in great sex. But when your lover suggests that he’s not ready—pausing seemingly forever—for a show, anyone with even a bit of common sense knows it’s not just his art show about which he’s speaking, particularly since, as we suspect, his art is focused on his lover.


     When Lance suggests that he believes his boyfriend is certainly ready for the show, Adam counters with a legitimate question, “How would you know me better than I do.” Lance has taken the leap that Adam has not dared to, attempting to insert himself into his lover’s life. And when they fight soon after, Adam screaming out “I never know with you,” Lance rightfully responds, “Know what?” We realize that what he doesn’t know has to do with Adam’s own inability to fully come to terms with himself emotionally and sexually. As Lance perceives, what he really doesn’t know is whether or not he truly loves Lance.

      The metaphor, strangely, becomes the “cum on his chest,” still dripping from their sex, a moment when Adam has been forced to actually realize that his semen involves another human being, instead of a body turned away from him facing into the pillow. The fact that Lance has demanded the act as a face-to-face encounter seems to have changed everything.

       Lance, pairing up with his double yet again, determines it’s time to take a walk.

       He recalls another meeting with Adam, perhaps their final one, in which Adam describes, again in metaphoric language, the dilemma he faces.

 

 “I feel like someone has built a replica of my house across the street from my actual house, the one I grew up in. An exact replica with all picture frames and bookshelves and furniture and my grandmother’s urn, and just moved it across the street. And in this new house there’s a comfort, a familiarity, but still everything’s different. You know?”

      Lance perceives the issue: “Yes, because you’re across the street and the mailbox is on the wrong side.

      But Adam puts it somewhat differently, “I’m not in the house I’ve always lived in, but I’m home. I’m home.” The second emphatic insistence that he has returned to the world Dorothy believes she has in Kansas, makes it clear he’s still mentally in Oz.


      The recognition that he might be able to live a life outside of his internalized sense of self seems to promise everything, and the two kiss. But it also suggests a sense of possessiveness, as if the other in that house did not have his own world, his own furniture, his own vision of home.

      Lance attends Adam’s opening. There he is greeted joyfully by Adam, whom he hugs. But he is also greeted with a wall of pictures of himself, from that first day of their meeting to their first dance and their intimate moments in bed, including his face in the pillow. The smile on his observing face gradually turns to a scowl, as he realizes that if the artist feels that Lance has created a world just like his own in his house, that Adam has actually stolen his image and the intimacy of their own love, putting it on public view, an act which many visual and other artists reveal their lack of true respect for their private lives.


      When Lance encounters the final piece revealing their breakup, he rushes out of the gallery. Back at home he confronts his “toxic” self who has made him question everything, telling him “I hate you.” But his other, rational being powerfully reacts, “Wow, maybe that’s your problem.” Lance puts on Greg Atkinsons’ song “Only Me” and gently dances with his own other.

       I have to admit, when I first saw this short film, I simply perceived it as yet another example of the numerous works of the “failed gay relationship” genre. But after watching it yet again, I was struck by director Chad Hylton’s quite sophisticated dialogue, and realized that, not only was it highly original but it fit very nicely in a kind of subset of that genre, the narcissistic relationships between visual artists and their lovers, films which include Armen Kazazian’s Gold (2005), Tami Ravid’s Boy (2012), James Fanizza’s Sebastien I discussed above, and Stillman’s Portrait directed by Joshua Davy just a year before this film, in 2016.

 

Los Angeles, November 3, 2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2023).

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

https://myqueercinema.blogspot.com/2023/12/former-index-to-world-cinema-review.html Films discussed (listed alphabetically by director) [For...