Related to this message:
You described very well one of the things, that make the world so unpleasant place to live in - "the implications". A guy touching physicaly other guy (even giving him massage), being jealous of his wife => implicates he is gay.
I won't discuss how uptight is american culture (seen form the screen) in some issues (nudity, sexuality) and what hysteria is being done about absolutely natural things or situations...
Yes, gay undertext maybe. As the contemporary science says, there is no "gay art", there are at best gay artists and gay audience. You can have a piece of a gay/straight artist that doesn't address sexuality of anyone, a piece of gay artist that straights never read as sexual or even gay (even if gays do it), but there may be a piece of a straight artist, who tells some simple straight story of friends, soldiers training, or guys bathing or whatever, that is regarded as strongly homoerotic in the eyes of a gay audience. But the key phrase for understanding this is to say "It affects/stimulates/addresses ME sexually." The artist - the art piece - and the art's audience are the active triangle. There is not (only) "artpiece meaning someting" that needs to be correctly created and correctly understood.
Another point is, that more than for a half century, there is the idea of Kinsey, that the sexuality is continuum. There is no set of things that implicate you are gay and set of thing implicating you are straight. Arab straight guys (or those who sleep exclusively or mostly with women) hold each other hands, russians kiss the cheeks, americans cannot even hug without compulsory manly dancing around, some eastern-europeans even cannot stand seeing the same sex around them... it differs and unveils that many of sexual borders are just superficial poses, not natural to the human.
In the case of this movie, a guy might be jealous of the other guy's life, family, Home, not of his wife and in the sexual context. The massage is not a gay scene, or gay act of one guy upon the other guy... at most it reveals the hidden fears of the other one (who cannot relax) in the scene, that might not be sexual at all. And for me, this was the only scene of the movie, that somehow exposed/discussed the sexuality of the characters. Otherwise I would call it asexual.
And finally, not to be in debt to the movie:
I found it slow, going from nowhere to nowhere, a bit drumming on my nerves. I found the Kurt character verging on the "lost but boasting" feature, stimulating in me the suspiciousness of "is the guy I talk to really spiritually questioning, or is he just full of vain spiritual word in his mouth?", kind of "marijuana, hippie-appearance and eeeenergy" type of spiritual pose.
However, the scene of finally finding the hot spring and all the bathing, listening to the forest and water - despite its slowness - woke me up from the half-sleep. A few pleasures of life crossed in one moment - a magical moment known only for those, who have already experienced it. It was worth for itself - maybe it could be a nice short film. With a "beautiful" counter-point: "The XY hot springs do not allow nudity or alcohol." It reminds me of an old american phrase: "sexandviolence".
reply
share