How Gay is it?


This movie is opening in Boston next week 1/6/2006.
Since it's obviously being pitched to a queer audience with the marketing and poster, I am just wondering "How gay is it?"
The marketing I saw made it look like a German ANOTHER COUNTRY, but I have the strange feeling that the homoeroticism is a ploy to get viewers to go see a film they normally wouldn't.
Can anyone who has seen the film tell me if the homoeroticism is just that or if there is a gay relationship. To be vulgar, is there nudity? Is the queer element a subtext of the film or acknowledged by the film.
I don't have much interest in the film other than the gay element and so I am wondering (like a lot of people I'm sure) whether that is a big enough facet of the film to get my ten bucks or whether I will leave the theater feeling duped.

reply

[deleted]

Nothing gay about this movie at all. IMHO one of the best films ever made about a subject which in Germany was more or less taboo until recently. imdb-9380 is 100% correct.

reply

Thanks. Surely, you realize the film is being pitched too a gay male audience with the poster and marketing? In fact, the prompt for my post was reading an article lamenting the fact that in America all the marketing was targeted at the "gay angle" which was doing the film a disservice.
There has to be "something gay" about the movie since all the critics mention the homoerotic friendship and longing between the two protagonists.
However, from your comments, I can tell that it's subtext rather than explicit which is exactly what I wanted to know.
I don't want to see it. I am not that interested in its subject matter.

I think it's probably sad that more people would be interested in a gay boarding school romance than a dark look into the evil of Hitler youth, but it is true nevertheless. The film should market itself as what it is, not try to lure in larger demographics with Abercrombie-like beefcake pin-ups.

reply

Thats the problems...most americans i know talk about how bad nazism is..but they dont know anything about it and why people followed hitler...my grandpa died at stalingrad and the other one was on such a NaPolA bording school...I know many old people who lived in that time...its all about camaraderie which is a EXTREM big thing in germany...!

in most aspects the movie is correct except the relationship between the teachers and the kids...they are shown a bit to strickt! those people were like you and me...and ALL OF YOU GUYS here would do the same!! read the following article... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

look at the american history...its the same or what did they do to the indians? the SAME!..i'm sick of seeing people all over the world pointing the finger at germany...what did the romans do..? the same...what is going on in africa? the same...but the germans are the bad guys....what did the russians do...the same...even cruwler...the film is realy good but there are to many german movies which are reminding us....Sophie Scholl, Der Untergang(The downfall), Napola,..

there should be more movies about how the germans rebuild the country after 1945..today we are at the top of the world again after germany was FULLY destroyed! thats making me realy proud..

reply

On a side note: I fully agree with Lukas-Kuenzel's thoughts here. I think that films such as "The Downfall" (not sure if that was the same title in Germany) and "Napola" would serve to remind us that history is neither 'black' nor 'white'. As with most everything, the truth is always somewhere in between. I think it's important to consider how things are for other people, in other places, and in other times. Consider this: For those of us who are Ameircan, what will we be telling our grandchildren about the times we are living now? Personally, I don't think there's so much to be proud of right now.

Napola's a 'thinking' film. I hope other Americans can open their minds enough to enjoy it as much as I did.

reply

I'm just after watching "Napola" in Polish public TV station. The recent wave of German films raising the subject of Nazism and World War II caused lots of controversy in my country. The main reason for this is the common tendency for excusing the German society for what they did during the war.

I find your post Lukas-Kuenzel outrageous.

Poland was among the countries who suffered the most during the conflict. More than 6 millions of its citizens and soldiers died, although Poland, contrary to Germany, Japan and Soviet Union did not belong to Axis or was not an agresor state. The number of casualties is smaller only than in the case of Germany(7 millions), Soviet Union(20-22 millions) and China(approx. 10 millions), although the biggest as a relationship between casualties and nation's population(1/6). Another 6 million Poles were forcibly ressetled or had to migrate both as a result of German and Russian actions. In effect, the population of country felt by 1/3 between the years 1939-1945, from 36 to 24 millions. The enormousness of destruction was ubiquitous. The infrastructure and industry were totally demolished being a witness of three different fronts(September Campaign, the Invasion of the Soviet Union, as eastern part of Poland was incorporated to USSR in 1939 and the Soviet contr-offensive). Its capitol was razed to the ground by Nazis after the fall of Warsaw Uprising. Left broken, Poland was not able to defend itself against the communistic threat, which was eating it away for the next fourty years leaving the country economically crippled. From this perspective it is hard not to blame Germans for what they did. I find any attempts of excusing or underestimating this futile. Furthermore, I'm even more enraged hearing about foreign(not only German, but also French and British) press describing Auschwitz, Treblinka, Majdanek as "Polish death camps". This is not just a simplification describing the location of those places, but a dangerous ignorance. Having met many Germans and discussing this topic with them I can understand how difficult it is for German post-war generations to take any stance on this delicate issue. However, in my opinion World War 2 and Holocaust left a mark on the German nation, one which can't be errased. Excuses even scientific ones as developed by Milgram are pointless.

Comparing this to Ancient Roman times or the situation in Africa is just ridiculous. Of course, you can find similarities with other 20th century genocides such as Armenian ethnic cleansing, Ukrainian Holodomor or mass murders in Communistic China, but what makes it even more cruel and unthinkable is that it was committed by one of the most culturally and technically advanced nation on a mass, industrial scale in the heart of European continent for a mad purpose born in a mind of a single person.
My advice is to ead about "Historikerstreit".

One more thing: the great German economic miracle was largely possible thanks to Americans(Marshall plan).

Film about post-war Germany? Commercial: "Das Wunder von Bern" more ambitious: Trier's "Europa".

Thanks and sorry for being such an *beep*

reply

Toadi you nailed it.

reply

Well, usually I never write on the board, but I think that post needs a reply.

I think you miss the point toadi0. Lucas-Kuenzel was not denying any of the facts about WWII, he was just saying that the German history contains a message for everybody - german or not. Of course he is not right about making everybody a nazi, but neither am I as German any closer to being Nazi than you are.

It's abolutely legitimate to search for parallels between the history of Nazi Germany and developments in other countries. Of course Germans have a special responsibilty for working up their past, but it's not that only the Germans should learn from it and the rest of the world can leave it behind as a 'german thing'.

It's strange when you're trying to impress with numbers in this context. You want to count the guilt or the suffering? Such an argumentation runs danger of striking with too much awe. It means putting things on a pedestal, making them incomparabale and stopping further analysis. It leads to nothing more than stating again and again how evil the Germans were/are and how sorry we are or have to be. It allows other people comfortably pointing a finger at the Germans.

You say there is no point about excuses, and you're right. It really is absurd in a certain way. (When you've just tried at committing a genocide, you cannot buy a bunch of flowers and try to say you're sorry.) No matter what anybody says, it will never be enough, it cannot make up for what has happened. But it seems, excuses are just what you want hear. It seems you really want the "mark" to burn on 'our German skin'. Your resentments towrads the Germans are somehow understable, the whole situation is really sad. But I'm sorry I feel no mark on my skin that should be erased, no personal guilt and I don't feel to be blamed for what my grandfather may have done. I feel resonsible to deal with the past in sensitive way and to keep it's message conscious. I want the German institutions and authorities to be deeply rooted in the knowledge of our past, to presuppose that it shall never repeat again, here or anywhere else. But nothing more. I don't think a rhetoric that generalizes too much about the people of a nation (especially when judging nations in a positive or a negative way), that talks about "marks" (or guilt that is inherited through blood) is adeguate in this context.

Personally, I think it's better to try to confront our past(meaning not only the Germans) on a sensitive and rational level. Starting with your picture of pre-War Germany - it's just not right. Germany was a country had just turned from monarchy to democracy, it didn't have a democratic culture. There were dozens of parties with different ideas. Many people wanted moarchy back or just didn't know what to think. As well the economic conditions for establishing a new democratic state were bad because Germany had to pay tremendous debts for WWI. There was inflation, the country was poor and large regions were unindustrialized... Your picture of Germany here seems to derive from post-war Germany.

The fundamental lesson I've taken from our history is not that our predecessors were monsters, but that such horrible things as the Nazis and Holocaust are always threateningly close. The scary thing is, you're right, how fast nazi thought seduced and infected a civilized country, how easily the regime came to power and it's crimes were supported, tolerated or overseen. But you have to consider the historic circumstances in your evaluation. The scary thing today is the ignorance of just this. In the states somebody once asked me, wether Hitler was still our chancellor. I hope that is just one extreme example of ignorance. But it seems many people still have not gotten the point about the past.

reply


PS to my post below - Nazism and Hitler only came about due to poverty and mass resentment of perceived past offenses against the German nation. It might be a good lesson to learn for the poor, nationalistic and historically offended amongst us...

...because you may just be voting for the next Hitler at elections. Think about it.

reply

I rarely read something about that subject I can so totally agree with!
Thanks for posting your well reasoned opinion!

reply


Have you heard of a country called BELARUS?! It's your neighbour, by the way...And, yes, at that moment, it was one of the Soviet Socialist Republics...

...but I doubt that that excuses the fact that Germans slaughtered ONE THIRD of its CIVILLIAN population, especially considering the fact that the republic was overrun so fast that the first major combats occuring on its territory were a) during the soviet counteroffensive, and b) mostly NOT envolving Belarussian combatants, since that republic did not have the time to mobilize (although heavy guerrila action occurred throughout German occupation)

One of the unknown reasons for the fact that Belarus has some of the cleanest major cities in the world is that most of them had to be fully re-built from the ground up in the forties and fifties. It is a historical fact that the Belarussian people suffered more from the war than ANY other nation/nationality (INCLUDING the over-rated extermination of the jews - I'm not justifying it, I'm just saying that Hitler's, pardon the pun, hit list contained a lot more nationalities than just the jews, but only the jewish-american diaspora was either amoral or practical enough to capitalize on their nationality's extermination, making it into a BRAND even... most of the world now actually honestly believes that Hitler's concentration camps were for jews only, while, in fact, lots of nationalities, including both my and YOUR countrymen were being exterminated or exploited for hard labour there).

As to your resentment of anything Soviet, I can understand that, BUT:

1) it was the Soviet Union, not Germany, that funded the rebuilding of your country after the war
2) Poland was not the first or the last country to suffer due to the scheming and conflicts between continental or world powers - that is just how the world worked (and still does work, as can be seen on any news channel)
3) Poland's population is about the same as Germany's, which meant that, had your country worked to defend itself properly, it could have; as to the Soviet occupation and use of your country as a buffer between the USSR and Nazi Germany, that would NOT have happened if your country stood a fighting chance against the Germans, as standing by and watching your powerful neighbours annihilate each others armies and potentials is ALWAYS more politically profitable than throwing your own armies into a war
4) GET OVER IT ALREADY... look around you - do you see the French, the British, or the Russians hating the German people for events 60 years past?!
5) LEARN THE RIGHT HISTORICAL LESSON - hate only breeds death and destruction... hating your neighbour for the conflicts of your grandfathers only leads to further strife between your children or granchildren, and I doubt anyone would want to have their children killing and being killed in the name of historical enmity

reply

A-a-d wrote that "it was the Soviet Union, not Germany, that funded the rebuilding of your country after the war". This is a misrepresentation of history. The USSR did not 'rebuild' Poland. It annexed Poland, forced it to become a puppet state, and installed its own puppet regime. Only then did the USSR build some (rather poor) infrastructure and housing, BTW after making sure that eastern Poland was stolen and incorporated into Belarus, and eastern Germany was annexed and added to vazal state Poland. The 'funding' that you claim the USSR did, was little else than forcing the Poles to economiccaly pay for their own 're-building'. Which was no re-building of course, because pre-war Poland was never re-built. At least not by the USSR.

A-a-d- also wrote that 'Poland was not the first or the last country to suffer due to the scheming and conflicts between continental or world powers'. This is true, but utterly nonsensical in this discussion, because no one claimed what you contest. The Polish nation and its people suffered enormously from the war, first and foremost because the killing of one sixth of its population, and then because of the loss of their pre-war autonomy. Poland was no 'socialist republic' as was Belarus, but was 'rewarded' at the end of the war by a forceful occupation of the USSR (with Belarus as its accoomplice).

A-a-d goes on to write that 'Poland's population is about the same as Germany's', which means that A-a-d has not checked an encyclopedia.

Next, A-a-d puts the blame for the occupation of Poland on Poland itself, by writing that 'had [Poland] worked to defend itself properly, it could have'. By the same reasoning, it is my fault if my bike has been stolen or my daughter raped, because I should have protected them better. This is a barbarian's argument.

A-a-d has some good advice: 'GET OVER IT ALREADY... look around you - do you see the French, the British, or the Russians hating the German people for events 60 years past?!' It is always a good idea to get over something. Yet it is quite ridiculous to compare the French and Brits with the Poles. The Brits hardly lost *any* civilian population and were never occupied, the Poles lost 6 million civilians, were brutally occupied during the war and brutally occupied up to 45 years after the war. The French had their own Vichy-regime meaning that its government was on Hitler's side during the war. Meaning that the Brits have less problems in overcoming the war and the French have good reason to overcame the war so they won't be reminded of their dark past. The world still has to make up to Poland - and thankfully the EU has already started to do just that. But what has Belarus done for Poland? No wonder you are keen to 'get over it'.

Michel Couzijn

reply

[deleted]

Congratulations! You won the award for Today's Stupidest Post by a landslide. If you don't know where the Polish army was when Germany and Russia 'camed', if you suppose someone is Polish without any warrant, if you address him as 'you Polish folk', if you 'doom' nations to be slaves and write more utter rubbish - if you do all that, I would highly recommend that you keep writing under an alias. Else, your primary school teacher might recognize you and might spank you for posting this drivel on-line.

Michel Couzijn

reply

To galdau88:

Don't mean to bother you but...
You're sure you have that thing commonly known as brain somewhere up in your head?
Also I hope you were born in 1988, else be grateful this is a virtual conversation!

To everybody else: Sorry for not containing this aggression of mine! I just have to face Neonazis, the pest plant this nation can't seem to get rid of, on a daily basis.

reply

After just viewing the movie "Napola" - "Before the Fall" in English, your post is, in my opinion, excellent.



I'm just little ol' me on my little ol' WebTv box.

reply

lukas-kuenzel has an interesting point of view that I'm certain most Neo-Nazis would appreciate. I study World War II in Europe and the Holocaust (two completely different subjects) quite extensively, both in books and film, and being an American I am also acquainted with quite a few Americans. Most Americans with whom I speak have no idea what Nazism was like and say nothing about how bad it was for Germany. However, the few Germans with whom I speak, including an exchange student from Berlin who is living with my family right now, tell me that Nazism was the worst thing that ever happened to Germany.

As far as what the U.S. government did to Native Americans, I have never heard of anyone here being proud of that, as you seem to be about what the Nazis did. There have numerous films, documentaries, and television series portraying the atrocities committed against Native Americans. As far as what the U.S. did to Native Americans being the same as constructing facilities whose sole purpose is to exterminated human beings after taking their valuables, that's a stretch for any logical mind, and should be even for you. What happened in the 19th century was wrong, but at least it was consistent with the general culture of the world at that time. What the Nazis did in the middle of the 20th century was wrong for that time, and they knew it. They invaded countries to take their valuables and land, and to exterminate their Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, and others. We took the land away from the Native Americans for our own greed and tried to resettle them, but we did not have a policy to wipe them off the earth.

If you think Nazism was great, that's your right, but don't try to defend it by comparing it to things that happened in other countries. You won't convince many people here how great Nazism is, or was, by using this approach.

reply

What you're missing here is what many Germans (myself included) react (sometimes strongly against) is the shadow of the past. I was born after WWII, but I still need to carry around this great shame. I would say most all of us do not deny the atrocities committed during WWII, but its something that we would like to get past (but not forget, of course). I can understand where Lukas-Kuenzel is coming from, because there are still many people who are biased on the subject and want to continue to put us down. Believe me, we all know that what the Nazi's did was one of the most horrible things that has happened, its just frustrating perhaps at times when Stalin was a monstrous man as well (estimates about 10-20 million), but recieves much less attention. I am in no means trying to downplay the actions of Hitler, but just take certain remarks of this nature with a grain of salt. That is of course unless l-k really does laud nazism, then oh well.

reply

The Germans were the Spartans of the 20th century. Both made slaves of their conquered. Both were the best soldiers of their age. Both ended up destroying their own states (Sorry '300' fans...the post Persian story is about a Greek civil war that did far more damage to Greece than the Persians could have)Say what you will, Germany is to be admired. Should humans survive, in 2,000 years the only name that will be remembered from the 20th century will be Hitler, as most common people today recognize the name Attila. Not bad for a down-and-out from Austria.

reply

You should be proud, but let's not pretend that Germany did it all by itself. Without the *enormous* financial assistance of other western nations - including the U.S. - it's not likely that you would have made it. Japan, too, would still be struggling.

While it's true that many U.S. citizens like to forget the past, the U.S. NEVER did to the Indians (400 years ago...) what the Nazi's did to Jews, homosexuals, communists, etc. Those camps have a special place in Western Civilization. Stalin's atrocities are the only contemporary parallel that can be drawn.

So, maybe a movie about how Germany rebuilt itself by receiving financial assistance? That might be interesting.

reply

I am an American and I found this film to be very well done. It may not be completely correct but the feel was very realistic. I loved this film.

Most Americans just seem to want the standard fare of crap. I hope I don't speak for all of them.

reply

its all about camaraderie which is a EXTREM big thing in germany...!


No, it is nothing like that. To everyone who is not from Germany: This user does not speak for a majority of Germans! Only a small group of morons thinks the way he does. I feel embarrassed to read stuff like that on an international forum.

I, for once, don't feel like the world hates Germans - I feel like we have a rather good reputation with different topics, and nobody begrudges us any more for our past. Except, of course, we begrudge ourselves. Germans will always feel unconscious and uncomfortable about it and maybe that's ok. I don't think "ALL OF YOU GUYS" would have done the same. It was a matter of personality then and it is one today. There were people who secretly or openly were against and/or took actions against the nazis. Others behaved like in this film. Nobody can ever say for sure what they would have done, us having grown up with mass media and TV and internet, we are wired totally different compared to the ones who grew up around 1900-1930. But I'm very certain some people would go for it, some would go against it, no matter what.

reply

I wondered if you (Jason69850) eventually saw the film?

No doubt that Napola was marketed as a gay film, and seeing it in Boston last Monday proved that it was not necessarily Gay or a skin fest. I nonetheless liked it on its own. For one thing, there was the friendship between Friedrich and Albrecht. There was Friedrich's total pride and eagerness to be appointed to the Napola academy. That goes someway towards showing why many German youths gladly went along with the Nazi program and indoctrination, which we UK and American lads failed to understand, being on the outside.

This film is similar to the film version of Borstal Boy (World War II youth in a boarding school, the outcome for one character), but the love story is a lot clearer in Borstal Boy. I liked both films.

reply


The star, Max Riemelt, is an attractive German hunk, takes his shirt off many times and you get to see his butt for a few seconds at the end of the movie. The relationships are not gay nor is there a suggestion of gayness. But that opinion probably rests in the eyes of the beholder. The movie is excellent and you should see it. Many movies exploit the sex appeal of their stars and the promoters are certainly aware that hunky males appeal to both women and gay men. This is not being false or misleading. Attractive males are attractive males and if you are gay, the perception is homo-erotic. Men can be passionate friends and love each other dearly without being homosexual, something understood better in Europe than homophobic America. The recent German films analyzing the Nazi past are a healthy phenomena. Americans, in particular, should pay close attention. So many have fascist attitudes and do not even know it. The Germans have been there and done that in regards to both the extreme right and left, and the more thoughtful among them of this new generation are moving beyond those extremes. Authoritarianism (fascism) is well understood by those who have experienced both Hitler and the Stasi. Sex is fine, but matters of the mind will bring you more real pleasure in the long run. Guess it must be your young hormones.

reply

[deleted]

this film isnt gay at all and theres no hints of a gay relationship in fact the film even shows that they warent gay when they become a peeping tom!

does the movie really have to be gay for you to watch it?
this was a great movie.

alot of the scenes show that the main character isnt any more special then any other people.. the hand grenade scene shows this as i expectedhim to throw the grenade away but no he was just like everyone else.

reply

Well, to be honest i thought there was some gay relationship between Friedrich and Albert (if that's the other young men's name). But after seeing it for the second time, i think it's more towards kameradenschaft/comradenship. But yeah...you know how human minds are capable of changing some facts and put some action in their heads...heheheh! But there are nudities in the movie. But not gay nudity...

reply

Saw this film last evening in metro Boston, and I recommend it to all who are interested in strong, intelligent films.

[spoiler alert] My only criticism is that the story ends up playing a bit like DEAD POETS SOCIETY in a completely different context.

I agree that the USA marketing appears geared towards an audience that would be receptive to purported homoeroticism [that's what grabbed me] and I also noticed that it has appeared at, and won awards from, a number of LGBT film festivals, which further supports the marketing concept. However, it is not a gay or even suppressed-gay romance. The two young leads--both of them beautiful to look at--deliver powerful and affecting performances, but the tender and touching closeness of their friendship really is not about sexual expression at all.

There is some nudity in the picture--coupla very nice bums for those who enjoy that. I know I did.




"Thank you, thank you--you're most kind. In fact you're every kind."

reply

There are a few scenes (especially the one with the fight on the bath floor) when the friendship between the two boys could be seen as gay attraction, but is never clearly showed.

Anyway, very good film, and very good actor in the main role.

reply

Albrecht was the second guys name, not Albert :-)

No, there was no gay nudity, but there was a relationship between the two guys that was - from my point of view - more than just a friendship or a comradeship or however you'd like to call it. In the scene in the bathroom - attention to those who have not seen the movie yet, spoiler ahead! -, when Albrecht tells Friedrich that he's send to the east front by his father and it almost ends up in a brawl, there was something in the air between them. The next step would have been a kiss. Maybe that would have saved Albrecht ...

Maybe it was just "Sommersturm" (Summer Storm) that left it's mark to me, I watched that one a short time before Napola and the lead actor of that movie, Robert Stadlober, played twice with Tom Schilling (Albrecht on "Napola") before.

In response to another posting from this thread, the german title of "The downfall" was "Der Untergang".

reply

Jason,
The movie really has no "gay" content. I also saw the movie advertised in a gay newspaper and was under the impression that it had a gay story line to it as well. Even though it wasn't what I was led to believe it was (a gay coming of age movie set in the Napola movement) it was still a fascinating movie and well worth the time to watch.

reply

All Germans suck. Holland rules! we're gonna kick your ass this summer at the World Cup!

reply

Oh, grow up, why don't you?

reply

I hope I'll never grow up




"Now that you've called me by name"

reply

I just saw it about 8 hours ago. There was indeed a gay subtext for those inclined to see such a thing. I doubt that was what was intended. Just because they were young, attractive males with a close friendship doesn't mean they wanted to have sex with each other. There was so much more to this story that to dwell on a non-existent sexual component lessens the importance of its portrayal of a little known aspect of the real Germany of those times.

reply

Weird marketingtactics across the ocean! Just a beautiful film, see it for what it is. In my opinion it's not gay at all. Or am I too Westerneuropean, too Dutch or simply not "macho" enough ....... Even discussing this feels very strange to me ..................

reply

hmmm

reply

> Even discussing this feels very strange to me ..................

Indeed. This thread is perplexing in the extreme. Those zany 'mericans! :(

reply

nothing on the topic, really, sicne I haven't seen it yet (just ordered it)
but if you wanna see a beautiful (German) gay movie then go for "Sommersturm" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0420206/

reply

This film is not actually gay at all. The two main characters really have a bond together in realizing, after experiencing the Nazis directly at the school, how cruel the Nazi agenda really is. The two characters cry together at one point from the stress of the school and their realization of its cruelty. I guess some people might feel this isn't "macho."

What they were doing in the poster/advertising was taking advantage of how attractive the two main characters are to promote the film. The boxer is the most beautiful man I've seen in film in a while. For this reason, the movie may have a certain homoerotic thrill for men who like those kinds of looks.
To tell the truth, I went to see the film because of this, but I didn't see any homosexuality, either actual or implied. I suppose a Freudian might see a sexual subtext to the two main characters' friendship, but then they'd say there's a sexual side to any close relationship.

I agree with the last message where the guy says that Summer Storm is a good German gay film. It's at imdb.com under "Sommersturm". It's supposedly coming to the States in March, although they've already moved the date forward a few times. We'll see if it really comes then. I saw it at the New York NewFestival last June. It's a funny film, and rather cute.

reply

The movie isn't at all gay, but please don't let that keep you from seeing it. Why see a movie just for the gay element? I like looking at hot guys as much as anyone else, but take a chance and go see an excellent movie that maybe happens to be of a kind that you usually don't see. To refuse to see a movie because it isn't gay is as limiting as the refusal to see a movie just because it is gay. Don't be like the nervous straight boys who are denying themselves the pleasure of seeing, say, "Brokeback Mountian," just because it happens to be about a different sexuality.

reply

I saw the film yesterday and there is no explicit gayness in it. However, I thought there might be a homosexual undercurrent in the character of the upperclassman cadet (I can't remember the character's name) Friedrich meets when he first arrives. There's a scene in the hallway where the cadet terrorizes the bedwetter Gladen, and there was a strong sexual tone. I think the point that the filmmakers were trying to make was that this was an academy for the training of killers. There was no place in society for anyone who couldn't kill. You could even be queer, as long as you could kill (and as long as you were discreet).

My opinion.

It is a very good movie with only a few false notes.

reply

[deleted]

The film isn't gay at all, at least not on the surface. If there is any gay message it's well-hidden and buried in the movie. I did, however, keep thinking to myself that the film was kinda gay during some scenes (like the one where Friedrich and Albrecht are hugging and crying. There is some brief nudity. But there isn't anything obvious that you could put your finger on and say "That! That right there is GAY!"

reply