Although I do not personally agree with this at all, there are suggestions out there that there could be homosexual contexts within this film. It has been proposed that Hammer takes a sadistic, yet sexual pleasure in beating up his stalker during the scene where he is followed by the man with the knife. I cannot find any other reviews of this kind than the one I was shown, but I was wondering if anyone out there has an opinion on this?
Thanks
Well, my opinion is that the guy had been tortured, nearly killed in the car crash and in hospital for quite a while afterwards. So some guy tries to kill him with a knife and he fights back hard. Go figure.
shareOnly a fraction of the homoerotic subtext of Spillane's Hammer books comes through in this film. The tough-guy author's Hammer not only takes a sensual pleasure in physically hurting bad guys, one gets the definite idea he'd rather punch a thug into a bloody pulp than squeeze a dame all night. Although Spillane certainly didn't intend it, it's difficult (given a contemporary view) NOT to see a repressed sadomasochistic homosexuality in the character.
shareSince when does sadism equate to homosexuality?
shareWell, Hammer seems more interested in the guy shadow boxing in the gym than in any of the women he meets in the movie, to tell you the truth...
"There's a midnight screening of The Rocky Horror on Friday."
"I don't like boxing movies..."
[deleted]
I just read all the comments on this thread re: homoerotic subtext and no one mentions the cigar in the mouth of the fight promoter that Mike visits! Watch that scene again, it is pretty funny.
I think there was quite a bit of homoerotic stuff going on. Everything in a movie is there for a reason, these are careful and deliberate choices. Mike could have been bound to a chair, or as others have pointed out, tied to the bed in another position. He could just have had his hands and legs bound together without attaching him to any piece of furniture...
I also think the knife at crotch level then forced out of the assailant's hand *is* significant here. That whole scene, first the obvious pursuit (the guy who was following was making no effort to hide himself, it was almost flirtatious)looking at each other in the mirror, etc. was interesting. And who knew popcorn thrown in the face was such an effective way of distracting someone who may be planning to attack you!
OT - did Mike's assistant have a stripper pole in her apartment???
The homoerotic subtext can be read into Spillane's work, but it isn't intentional. Spillane was a throwback to '20s and '30s pulp fiction, where lurid and sadistic violence was used to excite without any irony. The readers wouldn't have recognized homoeroticsm, and the writers certainly didn't intend it.
shareI don't know about the stalker scene, but I found the scene with Hammer tied to the bed, face down, to be a little on the homosexual side. Why would the villain have his victim lying face down just to administer an injection in his thigh? That was an odd scene when I first saw the movie, and I think so everytime I see the movie.
shareAldrich told Gaby Rodgers (Gabrielle) to play the character as a lesbian. The relationship between Christina and the REAL Lily Carver was that of two lesbian lovers. She has her hair cut very short, and in her final scene, she wears a black top with white lapels which suggests a man's tuxedo.
shareThe gay blonde was very apparent from the start. The guys, who knows? Velda was pretty mannish too. And why was she so greasy in every shot? Disgusting!
share@jwstewartii
I know this is 5 yrs late and off the "implied homoerotica" nonsense, but I may have an answer for your question, "Why would the villain have his victim lying face down?"
If someone tied face-up is able to get a hand free, he now has mobility in that arm. He could possibly untie his other wrist, then his legs, and make his escape or sadisticly stab you in a homoerotic manner. Even with only one hand free, he could still try to punch you in the pants.
However, if your captive is face-down and somehow manages to get a hand loose, he would not be able to reach his other extremities (or yours), quite as easily, if at all.
(This is also why you want him tied to the posts, spread out as far as possible, and not hands to feet, as suggested earlier.)
Either way, you should have tied him tighter.
Naked. With a ball in his mouth. And a blindfold.
It's not erotic, it just makes good sense.
You Fill Me with Inertia.
Thank you for the response even if four years later. Your reasoning does make sense. I have to admit, however, I can't help but wonder whether you have participated in such endeavors to have such extensive knowledge. :)
Again, thanks for the explanation.
-0-
Yes, but as we all know, "Greeks invented gayness!"
The box's sounds at the end are clearly there to represent an orgasm. Given that both leads are terrified by the box, and therefore by sex, this clearly implies that they are terrifies by the idea of sleeping with each other. So, she's lesbian and he's gay.
Now I want my professor post!
Ooh, I've written "post"! A phallic symbol if there was ever one! This makes me gay, too!
This thread is brilliant! Makes it look like directors had nothing else to do back then than hiding gay messages for 21st century's audiences in EVERY movie ever made.
--
Hmmm?
@meg
The box's sounds are just weird and off-the-wall as hell, which is another thing that stands out about this film, and why it was so unique & definitely ahead of its time. To me, it was like watching a '60's movie made in the mid-'50's, with some European influence thrown in (that's probably why it first found favor with French film critics, who thought KMD was off the hook, and rightly so.)