John Cameron Mitchell, of "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" infamy, has again attempted to produce a potboiler, a film that may ever so slightly push into the mainstream and shake up some square´s world. Some viewers will say after a viewing that it is a triumphantly mainstream film. They will laud it for using explicit sexuality artistically, not pornographically. They will applaud it for treating both homosexual and heterosexual sexual relationships evenhandedly and with a casual, humorous and witty display.
I cannot. This is just a niche film. It is a very low budget, independent piece, using homosexuality and explicit sexuality to snag a certain viewership. It is only special, or matters, or resonates to those who want it to resonate. The film will change few minds in regards to homosexuality, women´s sexual pleasure and even erotica´s place in cinema.
As far as I am concerned this is a cheap thrill film that seems relatively fresh (due to the spectacle of explicit sex) for the first half hour or forty-five minutes then falls apart. The script/story does little to challenge the viewer, the acting saves none of the scripts weaknesses, and the director seems to only excel at filming the spectacle that is sex.
First and foremost let´s examine the story. This may be one of the weakest and ridiculous plots I´ve had to endure in a long while. Here is the plot in a nutshell: a sex therapist, Sofia, cannot have an orgasm takes the advice of a gay couple she is counseling, James and Jamie, and journeys into some orgy filled Brooklyn lounge called Shortbus. There you go folks, the irony in this film is incredibly obvious and lacks any originality—a sex therapist who is "pre-orgasmic," please!
There are two main storylines, the first surrounds the gay couple James and Jamie and the second surrounds Sofia. James and Jamie are in a five year relationship that is healthy emotionally but not sexually. James and Jamie are considering whether to include a third man in their sexual relationship. Sofia spends much of the movie trying and failing to have an orgasm.
Each of these plots run very thin and the feel of the film is that it is much too long for such a weak set of plots. After the initial shock of explicit sex is gone, the audience must find humor in Sofia´s failed attempts to have an orgasm and connect emotionally with James and Jamie´s relationship problems.
The problem is the humor is stale and cliché—Sofia like a pinball bounces from one piece of advice to another—and the relationship between James and Jamie at times seems too odd—the attendance of orgies, the insistence on a third sexual partner, and an affair with a voyeur my just alienate few viewers.
The level of acting matches the level of the script. Sofia, played by Sook-Yin Lee, when not in the middle of filmed sexual intercourse or masturbation, gives a mixed performance. A number of her lines are delivered with an unnatural stiffness. It was obvious that her abilities as an actress could not overcome the poor script. James, played by Paul Dawson, and Jamie, played by PJ DeBoy, suffer from a similar fate. When in the sexual act they are natural and believable, but when they must trade dialog and intimate moments they fall short and are at best stiff.
I cannot. This is just a niche film. It is a very low budget, independent piece, using homosexuality and explicit sexuality to snag a certain viewership. It is only special, or matters, or resonates to those who want it to resonate. The film will change few minds in regards to homosexuality, women´s sexual pleasure and even erotica´s place in cinema.
As far as I am concerned this is a cheap thrill film that seems relatively fresh (due to the spectacle of explicit sex) for the first half hour or forty-five minutes then falls apart. The script/story does little to challenge the viewer, the acting saves none of the scripts weaknesses, and the director seems to only excel at filming the spectacle that is sex.
First and foremost let´s examine the story. This may be one of the weakest and ridiculous plots I´ve had to endure in a long while. Here is the plot in a nutshell: a sex therapist, Sofia, cannot have an orgasm takes the advice of a gay couple she is counseling, James and Jamie, and journeys into some orgy filled Brooklyn lounge called Shortbus. There you go folks, the irony in this film is incredibly obvious and lacks any originality—a sex therapist who is "pre-orgasmic," please!
There are two main storylines, the first surrounds the gay couple James and Jamie and the second surrounds Sofia. James and Jamie are in a five year relationship that is healthy emotionally but not sexually. James and Jamie are considering whether to include a third man in their sexual relationship. Sofia spends much of the movie trying and failing to have an orgasm.
Each of these plots run very thin and the feel of the film is that it is much too long for such a weak set of plots. After the initial shock of explicit sex is gone, the audience must find humor in Sofia´s failed attempts to have an orgasm and connect emotionally with James and Jamie´s relationship problems.
The problem is the humor is stale and cliché—Sofia like a pinball bounces from one piece of advice to another—and the relationship between James and Jamie at times seems too odd—the attendance of orgies, the insistence on a third sexual partner, and an affair with a voyeur my just alienate few viewers.
The level of acting matches the level of the script. Sofia, played by Sook-Yin Lee, when not in the middle of filmed sexual intercourse or masturbation, gives a mixed performance. A number of her lines are delivered with an unnatural stiffness. It was obvious that her abilities as an actress could not overcome the poor script. James, played by Paul Dawson, and Jamie, played by PJ DeBoy, suffer from a similar fate. When in the sexual act they are natural and believable, but when they must trade dialog and intimate moments they fall short and are at best stiff.
John Cameron Mitchell, of "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" infamy, has again attempted to produce a potboiler, a film that may ever so slightly push into the mainstream and shake up some square´s world. Some viewers will say after a viewing that it is a triumphantly mainstream film. They will laud it for using explicit sexuality artistically, not pornographically. They will applaud it for treating both homosexual and heterosexual sexual relationships evenhandedly and with a casual, humorous and witty display.
I cannot. This is just a niche film. It is a very low budget, independent piece, using homosexuality and explicit sexuality to snag a certain viewership. It is only special, or matters, or resonates to those who want it to resonate. The film will change few minds in regards to homosexuality, women´s sexual pleasure and even erotica´s place in cinema.
As far as I am concerned this is a cheap thrill film that seems relatively fresh (due to the spectacle of explicit sex) for the first half hour or forty-five minutes then falls apart. The script/story does little to challenge the viewer, the acting saves none of the scripts weaknesses, and the director seems to only excel at filming the spectacle that is sex.
First and foremost let´s examine the story. This may be one of the weakest and ridiculous plots I´ve had to endure in a long while. Here is the plot in a nutshell: a sex therapist, Sofia, cannot have an orgasm takes the advice of a gay couple she is counseling, James and Jamie, and journeys into some orgy filled Brooklyn lounge called Shortbus. There you go folks, the irony in this film is incredibly obvious and lacks any originality—a sex therapist who is "pre-orgasmic," please!
There are two main storylines, the first surrounds the gay couple James and Jamie and the second surrounds Sofia. James and Jamie are in a five year relationship that is healthy emotionally but not sexually. James and Jamie are considering whether to include a third man in their sexual relationship. Sofia spends much of the movie trying and failing to have an orgasm.
Each of these plots run very thin and the feel of the film is that it is much too long for such a weak set of plots. After the initial shock of explicit sex is gone, the audience must find humor in Sofia´s failed attempts to have an orgasm and connect emotionally with James and Jamie´s relationship problems.
The problem is the humor is stale and cliché—Sofia like a pinball bounces from one piece of advice to another—and the relationship between James and Jamie at times seems too odd—the attendance of orgies, the insistence on a third sexual partner, and an affair with a voyeur my just alienate few viewers.
The level of acting matches the level of the script. Sofia, played by Sook-Yin Lee, when not in the middle of filmed sexual intercourse or masturbation, gives a mixed performance. A number of her lines are delivered with an unnatural stiffness. It was obvious that her abilities as an actress could not overcome the poor script. James, played by Paul Dawson, and Jamie, played by PJ DeBoy, suffer from a similar fate. When in the sexual act they are natural and believable, but when they must trade dialog and intimate moments they fall short and are at best stiff.
I cannot. This is just a niche film. It is a very low budget, independent piece, using homosexuality and explicit sexuality to snag a certain viewership. It is only special, or matters, or resonates to those who want it to resonate. The film will change few minds in regards to homosexuality, women´s sexual pleasure and even erotica´s place in cinema.
As far as I am concerned this is a cheap thrill film that seems relatively fresh (due to the spectacle of explicit sex) for the first half hour or forty-five minutes then falls apart. The script/story does little to challenge the viewer, the acting saves none of the scripts weaknesses, and the director seems to only excel at filming the spectacle that is sex.
First and foremost let´s examine the story. This may be one of the weakest and ridiculous plots I´ve had to endure in a long while. Here is the plot in a nutshell: a sex therapist, Sofia, cannot have an orgasm takes the advice of a gay couple she is counseling, James and Jamie, and journeys into some orgy filled Brooklyn lounge called Shortbus. There you go folks, the irony in this film is incredibly obvious and lacks any originality—a sex therapist who is "pre-orgasmic," please!
There are two main storylines, the first surrounds the gay couple James and Jamie and the second surrounds Sofia. James and Jamie are in a five year relationship that is healthy emotionally but not sexually. James and Jamie are considering whether to include a third man in their sexual relationship. Sofia spends much of the movie trying and failing to have an orgasm.
Each of these plots run very thin and the feel of the film is that it is much too long for such a weak set of plots. After the initial shock of explicit sex is gone, the audience must find humor in Sofia´s failed attempts to have an orgasm and connect emotionally with James and Jamie´s relationship problems.
The problem is the humor is stale and cliché—Sofia like a pinball bounces from one piece of advice to another—and the relationship between James and Jamie at times seems too odd—the attendance of orgies, the insistence on a third sexual partner, and an affair with a voyeur my just alienate few viewers.
The level of acting matches the level of the script. Sofia, played by Sook-Yin Lee, when not in the middle of filmed sexual intercourse or masturbation, gives a mixed performance. A number of her lines are delivered with an unnatural stiffness. It was obvious that her abilities as an actress could not overcome the poor script. James, played by Paul Dawson, and Jamie, played by PJ DeBoy, suffer from a similar fate. When in the sexual act they are natural and believable, but when they must trade dialog and intimate moments they fall short and are at best stiff.
No comments:
Post a Comment