User Comment: A clarification

I'm trying to understand blake8880's incomprehension or downright rejection of this film. After all the first film of Fassbinder's that I saw was "The Merchant of Four Seasons". It left me puzzled. When viewing an eccentric director's first film, It's hard to decipher whether the artist is a fraud or the real thing. If we can't connect with the artist it may be for a good reason, i.e. he or she really is a fraud or not our cup of tea. Well, after viewing his other films Fassbinder is my cup of tea and I've learned to appreciate "The Merchant of Four Seasons" as one of his master strokes. It then goes without saying that Almodovar is most definitely my cup of tea and that "Law of Desire" is his best film.
It tells the story of a celebrated film director who has at his command the love of any person he desires. He lives in a world which is sophisticated, liberated but very glib. Add to the mixture the fact that it is Spain just after Franco's death and the protagonist is a homosexual in a very machismo world. But the beauty of this film is that the two main characters, the director and his transexual sister, however complicit in this jaded world, yearn for true love. Their journey is frought with irony. An innocent is murdered over a grotesque mistaken identity and finally at the end, our film director must live with the tragic fate of having been most desired by the psychopath capable of bringing about all destruction. The supreme artist meets the Devil.
"Law of Desire" is riddled with humor, tragedy, irony, missed chances and most of all, for a homosexual like myself, homoerotocism. If this be not enough to sooth blake8880's resolve, then I must assume it is not a cup of tea from which he or she will sip. But that is also fine.

CinemaScopeRulz