I agree with bhaktigirl: both.
But it seems to me the issue was more complex than that. At the time of the film (both the period depicted and the year of making) homosexuality was a very dark secret indeed. Mike, I reckon, may not have been entirely aware that his attraction to Jim was more than a lucrative friendship. Or if he was, it was something he kept very suppressed.
The scene where Jim locks Mike out while he makes out with the twin singers: Mike sulks over that, but is it because he missed out on the girls, or because he missed out on some sort of sexual encounter with Jim?
When Mike watches Jim performing, and Danielle slyly asks "Is he not... beautiful?", Mike's discomfort and shock is perfectly balanced. Is it the shock of realisation, or fear of discovery? His protestations when she follows up with "Come on, you can tell me." are weak and unconvincing. "Don't be stupid," he says.
During their period in the castle they come to hate each other in many ways, but they're still bonded together by long acquaintance and shared experience. When Jim dies in the ambulance, all Mike can find to express his loss is "You can't die - I own fifty percent of you!" But is he only talking about money?
I thought this was a very cleverly-handled thread of this excellent film.
reply
share