Friday, June 26, 2026

Ira Sachs | Love Is Strange / 2014

private lives/public lives

by Douglas Messerli

 

Ira Sachs and Mauricio Zacharias (screenplay), Ira Sachs (director) Love Is Strange / 2014

 

Most of the nearly unanimously positive reviews of Ira Sachs’s Love Is Strange portray the film as being about a gay couple, Ben (John Lithgow) and George (Alfred Molina) and their relationship during a period of time when the couple suddenly discover that they can no longer afford their condominium and are forced to move in with others, Ben to his nephew’s Brooklyn home where he lives with his family, and George to the nearby apartment of two gay cops. And most critics have highly praised the film’s portrayal of the couple’s relationship by its two leads. Los Angeles Times critic Betsy Sharkey, for example, summarizes this critical respect: “…in the hands of two of the craft’s best, the most ordinary of moments become illuminating, penetrating.”


     In fact, I’d argue—although I’d agree that Lithgow and Molina are both very good actors in this movie—that there are so few moments in this film that truly reveal the nature of their actual relationship that we have to make a great leap in simply assuming that after more than 30 years this couple is deeply in love and barely able to survive without each other. Only in the very few scenes—in an early gathering after their marriage ceremony, as they joyfully sing a Broadway standard together in their living room amongst friends; in a second scene where the two cuddle up with each other in a transitory gathering in the bunk-bed in to which Ben has been assigned to share with his nephew’s son, Joey (Charlie Tahan); in a nearly speechless encounter at a concert after which they joking spar about Ben’s Romantic sensibility; and in a penultimate scene in which the two gather for a quick drink at a Village gay bar (once a favorite of mine, Julius’ on the corner of 10th and Waverly) during which the two briefly hint at Ben’s occasional unfaithfulness and George’s more steady support of his companion and his art—does the film give any evidence of what their life together might have been like. As my husband Howard, complained: “We don’t really get to know them very well, do we?”

      Although we do get to know a little more about each of them than I have just suggested, we discover very little about them as a couple, or even why they have decided to marry. Sachs leaves it to our imagination to fill in how these two might have behaved in their “private lives.” What we do perceive is that Ben and George, in fact, are very private people. Neither of them—so we discern through Ben’s “lie” to the bartender about being involved with the original protest against Julius’ original discrimination against homosexuals—has been particularly politically active. For many long years, George, a religious believer, has quietly taught music at a Catholic school where, although his sexuality has been an “open secret,” he has clearly never ruffled any sensibilities. As an artist, Ben has seemingly spent more time as an observer of art than as a painter whose work has been shown anywhere—a man who, visiting all the major galleries, has apparently lived his life dreaming of someday being “discovered.” Although they live comfortably in their condominium, they apparently have not been able save much for the days of retirement (willingly in Ben’s case and enforced in George’s) which they now face. Although they have regularly entertained in their home, their closest friends appear to be family members and gay friends who live nearby. And although it is apparent that those friends clearly love and enjoy the company of this couple, they seemingly know little about just how much their separation will affect the two, and how different their own patterns and behaviors are from the quieter pleasures of George and Ben. In short, they have lived an utterly normal life that, as do so very many gay couples, have remained under any “cultural” radar.

      These two men have lived a life not so dissimilar to that of Howard’s and my life in which we, after 45 years of living together, have few gay friends, living openly in a world which our relationship does little to intrude on or question the relationships of others.

      Only when the two men in the film marry—the event that sets all the concerns of the film into motion—does their life suddenly become “public.” And that moment changes everything, beginning with the unstated (and by the movie unchallenged) homophobia of church doctrine, as George is fired by the priest who has been a life-time friend. His excuse is that of all those who shirk moral responsibility: it’s the fault of the higher-ups—and besides, had George signed away his life by committing to the values of the Church when he joined the teaching staff?

      That decision suddenly catapults them, living in a world of exorbitantly outrageous real estate prices, into a kind of homelessness as they engage—as if they were embarking upon a hunt for the holy grail—in a search for an affordable rental space, something that, as the movie progresses, seems more and more like perusing a technical manual written in governmental agency doubletalk.

      More importantly, their sudden public identities require that they both truly engage with others, revealing perhaps how little we know—and as Ben, suggests, how little we really might want to know about the lives of our friends. Although they all struggle bravely to resist hurting each other, the family and their “life” into which Ben is thrust is fraught with filial, marital, and simply emotional tensions, as the father Elliot (Darren Burrows), mother Kate (Marisa Tomei), and son Joey work hard to ignore one another. Into their silent avoidance of each other, Ben tromps in like a buffoon, disrupting Kate’s work on her novel and Joey’s private adolescent searchings, while Elliot continues working (vaguely as a video producer of some sort) long hours before occasionally diving back into family life. Sharing his room with the odd intruder, Joey is particularly flummoxed. How are you supposed to discover who you are, intellectually and sexually, with an old gay man sharing your bunk bed each night.


      Joey has developed a rather mysterious relationship with a slightly older friend, a Russian boy named Vlad (Eric Tabach), an odd relationship in Elliot’s eyes and a fascinating one from Ben’s point-of-view, who quickly makes the whole situation more complex by Ben’s seemingly innocent recruitment of Vlad as a model for his roof-top painting. Joey’s hostile reaction when he discovers his friend’s temporary role seems out of proportion to any logical emotional response. Could it be, we are led to ask, that between the two boys something sexual is going on?

      We soon perceive that it is not that but might as well be. The two are in love, so to speak, with desire—the desire for something outside of their temporarily closed-off lives; in this case it is a love of all things French, including books in that language they cannot read which Vlad has stolen from their school library. How can parents be expected to comprehend such a complicated love as that which has suddenly obsessed these two bright boys, binding them momentarily, in a private commitment to another world and one another in the process? How can a distant relative possibly be expected to help the young boy with whom he nervously sleeps each night? Miraculously, Ben does open up the conversation to question Joey about his love life, and gives him the permission, somehow, the boy needs to approach the opposite sex. But Ben can have no answers, surely, for the parents who, in their self-centered activities, appear to be destined to destroy any marital ties they have left. Is it any wonder, living in the unstable world of such fraught loving, that Ben falls down a flight of stairs, betraying the early signs of a problem with his heart.

      At least George’s new public life is more transparent; but that is just the problem. Living with the two young cops who party late into every night, George’s life has become so thoroughly public that he has hardly any of his self to be inhabited. The pair and their friends, like Elliot and Kate, might also be said to be uncommitted to any deep relationships, but at least Ben can occasionally find a night of rest, whereas George must torturously wait out their noisy evenings before he can lie down upon their living-room couch. And it is he who first cracks, rushing off to Brooklyn just to hold his missing mate, revealing the impossibility of living a public life without his beloved other. Yet even within the din of noise and meaningless partying in which few of the guests even know their hosts, George also discovers another lost soul, a young man, Ian (Christian Coulson), who just happens to have an inexpensive apartment to rent!


      But in Sachs’s sad fable, the now public couple’s economic salvation comes too late. Through a narrative break in time, we discover George living in the new hospitable space, but now even more privately than he had before, Ben having died. Joey sheepishly shows up, in part to explain his absence from the funeral (he wanted to remember Ben, he justifiably explains, as he had been, not as a corpse) and to deliver up a special gift—the unfinished painting Ben had done of Vlad—a token of the past meant, clearly, to heal the broken present. Of course, it cannot mend the tear in George’s heart. Between that totally public roof-top encounter of the old artist and his young model and the now quiet entombment of his surviving mate, lies an entire unknowable world that no matter how much one tries can never be truly bridged. Between the private and the public self, perhaps, there can be no complete communication. That gap, between feelings and actions, between the regretted past and the redeemable future, between troubling desire and peaceful comfort is quietly expressed in Love Is Strange by the boy’s extended pause in the hallway outside of Ben’s new apartment, where he releases those built-up tensions in a gentle torrent of tears.

      A few moments later, Joey has hooked up with a girl who obviously is his new friend, the two of them skateboarding into the sunset and, just possibly, into a new privately-lived golden age of togetherness.

 

Los Angeles, August 25, 2014

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (August 2014).

Olivier Ducastel and Jacques Martineau | Théo et Hugo dans le même bateau (Paris 05.59: Théo & Hugo) / 2016

 on the town

by Douglas Messerli

 

Olivier Ducastel and Jacques Martineau (screenwriters and directors) Théo et Hugo dans le même bateau (Paris 05.59: Théo & Hugo) / 2016

 

Olivier Duscastel and Jacques Martineau’s truly exhilarating gay romance, known throughout the world as Théo & Hugo plunges its viewers immediately a world probably unknown to most of them, a Paris gay sex club named L’Impact where customers check in their clothes at the door and wander from the bar on the first floor downstairs to a warren of rooms where men engage in a kind of enthralling orgy, with some pairs engaging in sex, some men with threesomes, and other men at the edges looking on in masturbatory wonder; men change partners, ignore the attentions of others, engage and basically settle down to the best sexual ecstasy they can find for the night.


     The camera at first follows a hirsute and handsome middle aged man down as he watches and briefly attempts to engage with a beautiful young man with short, curly hair who we later discover is one of our two central characters, Théo (Geoffrey Couët). Another bearded man also kisses and attempts to engage with Théo. But the boy himself moves slowly closer to a fucking couple in the midst of others, attracted to another lean. black-haired youth, Hugo (François Nambot). Although Hugo is already involved in sex, Théo, now on floor level, moves closer and closer until the two lock eyes and suddenly feel a true mutual attraction. Just previously we have seen Théo put on a condom.


     Almost as in the dance at the gym in West Side Story, the ruddy others (the earlier scenes are filmed in mostly garish reds and blues) gradually fade away as the two young men, now bathed in white light, come together, at 4:30 in the morning, at first Hugo topping Théo and then sucking him before the flip, Théo finally fucking Hugo as the latter shouts out “harder, harder.


     I mention this with specificity since it does later matter, and commentators are generally vague or in some cases simply have reported the sex mistakenly (Godfrey Cheshire’s essay on the Roger Ebert site, for example, gets it backwards—excuse the unintentional pun).

    And yes, as Godfrey correctly reports: “It should be noted that this scene is hardcore, meaning it contains erect penises and sex acts that are shown explicitly. There are two things, though, that set it apart from most pornography. One is that it is very artfully filmed and doesn’t include close-ups of genitals. The other is that it’s not an end unto itself but a set-up for the story that follows.”

     This is the adult gay film we have all been waiting for, that doesn’t sever sex from the gay story. Unlike most US LGBTQ films today, this has nothing at all to with coming out or suffering over a boyfriend or girlfriend breakup. As filmmaker Jerry Tartaglia warned us as early as 1988, “gay men and the LGBTQ community have allowed AIDS to desexualize the gay experience.” And as Vito Russo argued, quite emphatically, “We do not have the responsibility of making gay life look good to straights so they will accept us.”

      Théo & Hugo unapologetically begins in a place where most straights, and even most gay men, have never before trod (I have been there when I was young), and which is perhaps shocking to many; but it takes us to a romantic world that we know, accordingly, to be quite real.

      In those few moments of intense sex, these two men have fallen desperately in love with one another, and, even if the voyage they take in the hour is filled with fear and worry—calling up through both its English and French titles Agnès Varda’s classic Cléo from 5 to 7 and the work of Jacques Rivette—they also commit themselves to one another in a manner that is totally believable.

      Once they finish sex and reclaim their clothes, they leap, now fully dressed, into the Paris night, literally running with joy as they begin a bicycle trip through the always glittering city.

      The two share their joy in each other's bodies. Hugo admits to having almost fallen in love with Théo’s cock, again quite daring subject matter for a film that lies basically outside the realm of pornography.

       Along the way, Hugo shares the information that sex with Théo was unusual, exceptional in that he felt they were producing love: “I think we made a big contribution to world peace.” They both agree that they need to “start over.” And again, they stop to kiss.

 


      As they head off to Hugo’s place, Théo admits that it was also a strange experience for him. He admits it was his first time at L’Impact, having previously had a boyfriend. He agrees also that it was unusual, special. When Hugo queries him on what he means, he suddenly realizes that what Théo is telling him was that he fucked him without a rubber.

     Suddenly their joyous, glittering night world comes crashing down as Hugo ditches his bicycle, shouting at his new friend, “What were you thinking? Fuck! You’re insane!” It turns out that Hugo is HIV positive, although with pills has most kept his condition safe, the virus almost undetectable. But now he demands they call the gay hotline who tells them both to check in at a nearby hospital immediately.

     Again, unlike the US medical establishment, who through political enforcement has basically ignored what remains of the AIDS crisis, France has smartly made it a primary concern, allowing someone who has just possibly been infected to get immediate care, pills for 28 days and a checkup, helping to stop the infection before it can even further develop.

      An immediate appointment is made. But the now startled Théo determines to visit the clinic alone, making it appear that the potential relationship between the two has suddenly come to an end.

     The worried Théo does not even bother to take the anxious Hugo’s phone calls as the former checks into the hospital, where, in fact, as a fussy older man reminds him, no phone use is allowed.

     But almost as suddenly Hugo does appear, ready to help his new friend through the process. The couple meet together with the intelligent and informative female doctor who explains the regimen, noting that there may be side effects, at least a first, but there all other alternatives. An appointment for a blood test is made for Monday. To the doctor, Théo more openly describes what happened, that he was wearing a condom, but in the act, it broke.

 


    Their relationship, accordingly, is reestablished, despite the possible catastrophe. Love finds a way even through the immediate fears. They run forward through the city again, realizing that nearly all the hospital staff and cleaning people were women, Hugo arguing the Paris nights belong to women and fags! And a black night watchman. All people without real power.

      Hugo explains that he has come from the provinces where the only gay spaces were large highway gas station bathrooms, where the straight men who also haunted these places for sex didn’t even imagine that condoms were meant for them. He was infected on his very first outing. He also reveals that he is a notary’s clerk working to obtain his notary license, explaining in a manner that one might find only in French movies, that his influences were Balzac and Mauriac, explaining that as they wrote of notaries, they encounter all types of people, helping the poorest to the wealthiest obtain what they need to survive.

    Suddenly both hungry, they again go on the run, this time near the canal, slowing down finally, when Théo asks about the side effects of the drugs.

     Hugo argues that the drugs are the not the problem; you can even live a relatively “normal” life. You even get over the “side effects.” The problem is the virus. “I mean even if it’s undetectable. Even if I’m not scared anymore that it will kill me. It’s there. I think about it. Often. They say ‘live with it,’ but I can’t. I live against it.” In short, even for those who might survive being HIV positive, the disease that killed so many gay people, has not come to an end. It haunts their lives every day they continue living.

     Almost out of the blue, but clearly in reaction to everything that has happened in this eventful night so far, Théo admits to having a sudden urge to both kiss and punch out Hugo. And just as suddenly he grabs him, putting him up against a light post before finally laying his head upon his shoulder. The two cannot resist one another. 


     Théo finally leads him to a Kebob shop where a Syrian immigrant, as he prepares their chicken kebobs, explains that he was an architecture student in Damascus, having survived 45 years of injustice. “I didn’t live there. I survived. …We couldn’t talk. Not to anybody. Not even my university buddies. A life without talking is unbearable. About politics, or even just what we feel. Out desires….”

     As our duo moves over to the canal to eat their early breakfast, we finally learn that Théo has a Masters in Industrial Design and interns for a large company. Both men, in short have roles far inferior to their capabilities, attempting still to prove their worth to the establishment.

     What Théo really wants to do, at least for a while, is to become an aid worker, but he without any cause or even country in mind in which he might wish to do such humanitarian work. But now his self-avowed sentimentality has no meaning. If he is HIV positive, he himself needs emergency care, unable to travel anywhere without “aspirin.” There is a bit of bitterness in the air.

     They walk to a lovely place near the canal to eat their kebobs, but even odder questions arise. Why does Théo have a 70 phone connection, an older, unusual one in Paris? No answer is provided.

    They begin to kiss, but Théo now wants to know, since Hugo is a regular at L’Impact, whether anything like this morning has happened to Hugo before, have there been others infected in the past? Despite the fact that he carries condoms with him at all times, something happened between them that was bigger, exceptional that made him lower his guard, as he attempts to explain. Théo now believes that they may have been others. “What do you usually tell them? How does it go?”

      But now Hugo is very much on guard, and can’t comprehend what Théo is asking him, to where are his questions leading?

      And he suddenly grows somewhat angry: “What do you want?. For me to tattoo HIV+ on my ass? Because idiots like you don’t take precautions?”

      Théo reminds him of his sexual delirium, when he demanded, “Harder, harder.”

      Hugo shrugs with the weight of the world on his shoulders. “It’s always our fault.”

      And once more the two are at a standstill. Hugo reiterates that he promised to be at his appointment on Monday with his results, and walks off, reminding that he has his number.

      Yet, almost immediately they make-up, Théo admitting that he immediately felt safe with Hugo, that everything made sense at the time. Hugo agrees, everything made sense, “we got careless.”

     In their newfound love, they once again now rush off to catch the first metro of the morning, entering a car at the last second and asking an older woman if this is the first metro. A cleaning woman working at a fancy hotel reassuring them that it is the first, the one she takes every morning, and sharing that she knows everyone aboard, that it must be their first time. She also has stories to tell, how too many loves in her life did not permit her to keep a first rate job, and now without a substantial pension, she must work as a cleaning woman. But she too is not bitter, but recalls with perfect memory a few of her experiences, joyfully sharing a conversation with our two young lovers.

     The couple finally end up in Théo’s very tiny flat, a maid’s room, where once again Hugo undresses his friend. As Hugo proceeds to disrobe him, Théo finally explains the “707” connection. “My parents separated when I was a kid. My father’s psychologically unstable. When I did my coming out, he freaked. He’d call me all the time.” The calls were evidently not homophobic, just raves (“fags, the end of the world, martians…") that lasted a long time. To cease the calls both he and his mother changed their codes.

     By the time he finishes his own story of the hurt and pain that he, like Hugo and most other gay men have suffered, he stands entirely naked, almost returning us to a very intimate and private version of what we encountered in the first 20 minutes of this film. Here is love at the opposite but not so very different end of the impetuous desire of the first scenes.

 


    Hugo explains just how much he loves Théo’s body, part by part going down from head to cock expressing his appreciation of the other. No one could ask more of a lover, and the camera takes us through that delicious delectation without a blink. Théo asks him if they should make love all over again, but Hugo suggests they wait. They ready, finally, to depart for the night, Hugo promising to join him at his next-day doctor’s appointment.

     It’s now 5.56. And in the last three minutes of this remarkable film something almost miraculous happens. Hugo returns, insisting that Théo come with him to his slightly larger apartment. Théo dresses, asking as he does so, “Then what?”

     “You’ll take your treatment, and I’ll be there.”

     “For 28 days.”

     “It’s not long.”

     “Then what?”

     “You’ll do the test…and we’ll wait for the result. And after 3 months and 28 days together, we’ll be strong enough. Even if I’m sure you’ll be negative. After that, if you still want to have sex, if you’re not scared, we can keep going.”

      “Then what?”

      “We’ll keep going. There’ll be no reason to stop. We’ll stay together. For a long time.”

      “How long?”

      “A long time. I don’t know. Let’s say…20 years. In twenty years, we’ll do so much. We’ll go to the supermarket. Or maybe something huge. We’ll save whales, or just a kitten. A cause, or a world-changing invention. I don’t know…something.”

      “And then?”

      “After that, we’ll break up I guess. Like everyone else. And we’ll be sad, but that’s life.”

     Like all young men and women, these two cannot even imagine a longer future, but it doesn’t matter; Hugo has proposed a life together.

      Théo follows his love out of his little hell-hole, but threatens to turn back since he has forgotten his cellphone. But like Orpheus insisting that his Eurydice not turn back, Hugo urgently demands that Théo simply follow him without returning for his phone:

       “If you go back, I’ll leave. I mean it. If you turn back, if you look behind you, you lose it all. Everything I promised.” He kisses him again. “Let’s go forward. We’re not afraid.”

      Banality returns, almost as a joke: “Can I use your phone to call my mom? I call every Sunday.”

      This Eurydice presumably survives his voyage out of Hades, both the small maid’s room and the life of L’Impact, and faces a lovely future even if the two young men don’t quite know what that future might mean. Howard and I did same without any expectations and discovered one day that we woke up still here after 56 years together.

      The film won the Audience Award at the Berlin Festival's 2016 Teddy Awards. And it is one of my very favorite gay films, not because of any epic statement or even an incredibly innovative or experimental presentation of LGBTQ+ life, but because of its total embracement of humanity and its declaration of love and hope. 

 

Los Angeles, June 26, 2026

Reprinted from My Queer Cinema blog (June 2026).   

 

Art Arutyunyan | Christmas Coming Out / 2021

visions of sugar plums

by Douglas Messerli

 

Armand Petri (screenplay), Art Arutyunyan (director) Christmas Coming Out / 2021 [17 minutes]

 

I love Christmas, and I suppose Christmas now will always include a parcel of packages of Christmas films, several of them now gay. Gay or straight I’m not fond of Christmas movies, the gay ones generally even more sentimental and unbelievable than the straight ones. Most of them, thankfully, are just about the stress that gays feel for coming home and having to pretend they’re  straight or bringing home their unsuspected boy and girl friends. But a coming-out Christmas has got to be the worst! The dilemma of Christmas celebrated by closeted gay boys is bad enough on just a normal day, but add to it all the hoopla, decorations, fruitcake, dinner recipes, and all the other nonsense that Christmas brings with it, one simply doesn’t want to hear the whimpers, whispers, and fears of family abandonment of a too timid gay boy who has somehow decided to spill the news to Santa Claus.


     A frustrated boyfriend, such as James (Arthur Marroquin) who is convinced this Christmas celebration is finally the time to throw the hot plate onto his in-law’s laps is someone, moreover, I can never appreciate. And his lover Patrick (Ford Nelson), having been a wimp for all these years is someone you can easily despise, particularly when in order to bring himself up to the challenge he imagines his childhood ranger character, “Courage,” (Tyler Horn) come to life as a full-size naked human being to help him stay true to the course.


      It doesn’t help that James has chosen this Christmas to award his lover a ring, presumably in an attempt to finally bring him closer to marriage, and that Patrick’s parents, Mom (Katryn Schmidt) and Dad (Timothy McKinney), perhaps as usual, pop in at their son’s beautifully decorated and Christmas attired house each year at this time, requiring that he pull down dozens of pictures of him and his lover from the walls which evidently make up the vast majority of their everyday artistic expression. Howard and I do have a couple of pictures of the two of us dotting our walls, but really an entire wall devoted to our self-portraits would be unthinkable. This couple, unlike almost all TV gay couples I’ve encountered, have evidently never seen the inside of an art gallery.

      James, in his own hysterical breakdown, “just can’t do this anymore, meaning pretend they are not a couple for the 4th or 5th year in a row. Can you blame him, particularly when he goes to buy a pecan pie, Patrick’s mother’s favorite, and Patrick asks James to exit through the back door? In retribution, James decides to finally open the front door, greeting the O’Malleys, who seem shocked to find that Patrick’s roommate is still in town.

      Patrick pretends to be sick, which of course brings out the deepest feelings of protection for their son from the O’Malleys. To say James is pissed is the inane drama’s major understatement. Mr. O’Malley, observing all the packages under the tree from James to Patrick, and occasionally even from Patrick to James, observes that “the boys” sure love Christmas.


      A photograph the O’Malley’s have brought along on their E-phone shows their favorite photograph of their son as a child with his toy soldier Courage, which he wouldn’t go to bed without. Unlike Barbie, Courage was apparently fully atomically correct under his plastic, removeable soldier uniform, because when he soon shows up, proving that nothing is lacking in his physical assets.

      Meanwhile, even the parents realize that the place could use a little art, and decide to bring in some of their son’s childhood posters the next time they visit.

      The rest hardly matters, after time and again of losing courage, his naked soldier puts Patrick’s heart into the matter, finally bringing the young childhood plaything into adulthood as Patrick gets up the nerve to admit that he and James are a couple. The worst of it is that Patrick’s parents knew it all along, and were just waiting for him to come round and admit to them.


      What kind of parents pretend to accept their son’s lies for year after year, torturing him and his partner, without being able to acknowledge the truth of their own perceptions. Forgive me, but these parents are worse than a homophobic nightmare. One word over the years might have freed their son from his fears, but they chose to keep their total acceptance a secret. Fortunately, director Art Arutyunyan hurries them off back home, with an invitation for the two boys to come visit them any time. James seems delighted, but if I were him, I’d stay away at Christmas and maybe even other holidays. And thank heaven they’ve now turned their son’s room into a gym!

 

Los Angeles, September 10, 2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (September 2023).

 


Peter de Rome | Daydreams from a Crosstown Bus / 1972

conjuring up romance

by Douglas Messerli

 

Peter de Rome (director) Daydreams from a Crosstown Bus / 1972

 

De Rome’s Daydreams from a Crosstown Bus—along with Underground of this same year— might be described as one of the earliest of the numerous “cruising” movies, which I more fully describe as a gay film genre in my 2008 contribution.

 


     What begins as actor Joe Leone simply taking a crosstown bus across Manhattan shifts very quickly when at stop he spots Richard Perez leaning against a tree, dressed in a white shirt and black pants. Leone leans further toward the window to get a better look, and at that moment their eyes meet.

     Within seconds de Rome, through Leone’s imagination, conjures up an entire day when the two of them, beginning with a bicycle ride and walk through Central Park filled with beautiful male bodies as it often is on a summer day. They move to different spots in the park including the Lake, the Great Lawn, Bow Bridge, the Ramble Arch by 76th street and elsewhere.

     They end up, it appears, at the Museum of Natural History in front of the fish tanks where, totally nude, they have a long fuck-and-suck session, the camera catching as much as the action as it can without full lighting.

 


     After a quick trip down lower end of Manhattan with its famous 1972 skyline, they seem to end up back on the West Side, briefly at Lincoln Center before looking over the Hudson River, and then retreating from a balcony into an apartment where they again have sex twice, once on the bed and later in the shower, enjoying every orifice of their lean and handsome bodies.      

     Back on the bus, Leone’s character again locks eyes with Perez as the bus door closes and the vehicle begins to move off. Leone rushes forward, getting out at the next stop and running back to meet up the beautiful boy he’s just had hours of daydreams about. But no one is any longer to seen, even the bus stop is empty, the wall and tree nearby without a being in sight. 

     Although this film is highly erotic and sexually explicit, it actually represents nothing more than a highly romantic sexual fantasy that cannot really be described as pornography any more than we might describe women’s romance novels or even love passages from classic fictions as such. The original was accompanied by music by Michel Legrand. I know many are offended even by viewing a penis, an anus, and, even more troubling for them, the two organs engaged; but it is all truly beautiful under the camera lens of Peter de Rome; and after all, as many of a gay film has observed, “It’s just sex.”

 

Los Angeles, November 14,2023

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (November 2023).

Stefan Haupt | Der Kreis (The Circle) / 2014

the far side of paradise

by Douglas Messerli

 

Stefan Haupt, Christian Felix, Ivan Madeo, Urs Frey (writers), Stefan Haupt (director) Der Kreis (The Circle) / 2014

 

Stefan Haupt’s 2014 film The Circle is not yet another story of how homosexual life was squelched by the culture of the 1950s as much as how it was betrayed.

     Zürich, Switzerland, the city in which most of the film takes place, unlike Germany, reeling from its Nazi days, was a country which permitted gay activity. While the US was prosecuting homosexual behavior through the paranoid activities of figures such as Joseph McCarthy, Roy Cohn, and John Edgar Hoover—the latter two self-hating homosexuals themselves—Zürich was a seemingly welcoming city, with gay bars, and, at the center of this film, home to an active gay magazine and its subscribers, Der Kreis (or The Circle), each subscriber having a code name.


       Yes, gays still had to hide their identities. Even the young hero of this tale, Ernst Ostertag (Matthias Hungerbühler), a teacher at a girl’s school, is advised that it might be better not to subscribe to the magazine, headed by the wise and open-minded Karl Meier (who hid his true identity under the name Rolf) until after gaining his teaching certificate: it would be more difficult, Meier suggested, to then fire him from his job.

     Yet the magazine, heavily censored for its contents, founded in 1932, when the Nazis had wiped out Berlin’s former gay activity, was able not only to publish regular issues, but had gained an international reputation, attracting numerous gay figures to the city, and even sponsoring various gay balls,  which, so this film’s director suggests, allowed open sexual activity, including bathroom sex with the so-called “rentboys,” for who elderly clients, including Ernst’s conservative school principal, Dr. Max Sieber (Peter Jecklin) paid for sex. Meier himself sought to present a “high-minded view of homosexuality,” and tried to encourage long-term relationships, views against which some of his promiscuous associates chaffed.


      At the first ball he attends, Ernst is overwhelmed by the performance a drag-queen performer, Röbi Rapp (Sven Schelker), whom he cannot believe is truly a male. He loses the bet, and quickly falls in love with the 18-year-old boy, daring to visit him at the barber’s shop where the boy works.

       Fortunately, Röbi’s mom, the always wonderful Marianne Sägebrecht (remember her in Sugarbaby and Bagdad Café?) has no problem with her son’s sexuality nor with his new friend/lover. Ernst’s parents, however, are another matter, and even though he finally allows Röbi to meet them, it is a painful event and he remains—at least to them and his school colleagues—quite closeted.

       The film does not deeply explore his reasons for becoming more and more involved in Kreis circle itself, but Ernst gradually devotes more and more of his time to the magazine and its organization, even daring to courier a new issue into the dangerous German environs, where his friend, Emil, is arrested.

       Worse, however, is that another of their friends is murdered in his bed by a “rentboy;” and when yet a second event occurs, involving, tangentially, the school principal—who, when his wife discovers his sexual identity, leaves him children in tow—commits suicide, the police close down the balls and intrude into the “Circle” member’s lives. A local gay bar event, at which Röbi again performs, is raided, with most the attendees arrested.


     Despite these terrible events, however, Röbi and Ernst’s relationship survives, as the director reveals through real documentary interviews with the actual figures and others who live still today. The elderly, nicely tailored Swiss couple, retelling the story that is replayed by the younger actors gives this film a completely different dimension, allowing us to imagine them as the beautiful young people they were and the adventurous lives they lived even as they appear as the frail older figures from another era. It’s even more wonderful to hear that they were the first Swiss gay couple to be married after the country allowed gay marriage.

      Surely, most countries might reveal far more terrifying tales of gay prejudice and brutality. But the fact that even the far more enlightened Switzerland had its own dark days demonstrates the difficulty of gays everywhere, and the problems facing gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people even today.

       Der Kreis, finally, ended in 1967 when Danish and other Scandinavian countries began publishing far more provocative nude-oriented gay magazines in the mid-1960s. I was there at the age of 16. In Copenhagen in 1964, I ogled the gay magazines at the newsstands, marveling at their totally open expression of gay sexuality. In Zürich a few days later, with my parents, come to bring me home from year abroad, I remember seeing posters—which may have been created by The Circle group—inviting one and all to another of their balls. My eyes certainly were opened, although I didn’t quite want to admit it to myself at the time! It would take me two or three years to realize just what I had witnessed.

       So, finally, watching The Circle the other day, I recognized just how many had worked and suffered to take me where I was destined to go.

 

Los Angeles, July 2, 2016

Reprinted from World Cinema Review (July 2016).

Index to My Queer Cinema A-H

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.