i love him more as a writer obviously. he wrote some of the most beautiful prose ever written but i was no expecting him to be a good director. usually when novelists direct movies they lack a visual sense and are very dialogue heavy but genet made a silent film! some of the black and white photography was really good. kinda like a cocteau film but i liked it better then the one i saw.
shareComparing this to Cocteau is blasphemy. This short has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever. It is pretty straightforward to summarise. Minutes 1 to 15 involve 4 inmates banging the bishop with a bit of voyeurism thrown in involving the guard plus some smoke being blown between two inmates in adjoining cells obviously some sort of gay metaphor. Minutes 16 to 17 involve the guard beating one inmate with his belt. Minutes 18 to 25 involve two inmates fannying about in some woodland. Right. Now tell me why that is exceptional? The reality is only a gay man can say anything positive about this travesty.
shareHaving not seen any Cocteau I cannot argue that point sufficiently. But I can say that your description of the film, though accurate, does not portray the beauty and sense of artistic value that the director lent to this film. You do not have to be a gay man to recognize the artistic value of this film, nor even to enjoy it for what it is. As a straight male I can say I was not personally aroused by any scenes in this film, but it was beautifully shot and well done. Of course you are entitled to your opinion, even if I think you are terribly wrong about this film having no redeeming qualities.
shareI thought the movie was beautiful too. Striking, meaningful imagery.
shareThis film definitely struck me as beautiful. There was a sense of being deeply tortured and a desperate striving to feel love, and the imagery made it come together in a rly beautiful way.
Tomorrow you're homeless, tonight it's a blast!